Do Jews and Christians worship the sa...
Cisco Kid

Sonora, CA

#1196 Mar 28, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
My point in asking that question is that if Israel believed The Eternal to be as what people call the old testament, then they WOULD NOT accept Jesus as being equal to their God nor that he came to die for their sins.
Yes, that was the grand failing of the Jews at the time. They failed to recognize their Messiah walking among them.

Funny though, they were aware of the plurality of God's nature, that's why they used the name Elohim.
Cisco Kid

Sonora, CA

#1197 Mar 28, 2013
Prophet of Jesus Christ wrote:
You see a retard,
I can't see you, but you do project the image of a retard.
Prophet of Jesus Christ wrote:
I don't speak just any words of bone people here.
No, you just speak the words of one bonehead, you.

“Born again atheist”

Since: Jun 12

Melbourne

#1198 Mar 28, 2013
Prophet of Jesus Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
The Lord just told me to tell you that house you live in. You are going to lose it.
I am amazed. How did you know I live in a house?

When will I lose my house?
Flygerian

United States

#1200 Mar 28, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, that was the grand failing of the Jews at the time. They failed to recognize their Messiah walking among them.
Funny though, they were aware of the plurality of God's nature, that's why they used the name Elohim.
Of course they wouldnt recognize Jesus. He didnt do the things the messiah was supposed to plus the notions you get from him (such as him being the Almighty in the flesh, dying for sins, being part of a trinity), contradict the Hebrew bible

If He is plural than there is more than one. Are you show you want to go this route?
messianic114

Calgary, Canada

#1201 Mar 29, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
I can not read Hebrew FLUENTLY
<quoted text>
I asked a question. Why is YOUR version correct but all other versions incorrect? Plus does the NT tell us of the two forsaken kings you speak of?
<quoted text>
No because I do not refer to the God of Abraham as god/lord/ lord god though the texts in the English/Jewish bible do.
<quoted text>
"BECAUSE NONE OF HIS CHILDREN WILL RULE ON THE THRONE OF DAVID"
<quoted text>
FIrst, No it is not OBVIOUS that Cain married his sister. You can INFER that but since the text does not say you cannot say it is OBVIOUS. Especially since as you said there werent any daughters of Adam and Eve mentioned.
Second, no you did not show anyone ruling on the throne of David. You showed someone chosen for a purpose. Or should we also say that King Cyrus of Persia ruled on the throne of David since he started the rebuilding of the temple?
<quoted text>
LOL Did you cut my post off? The FACT is that
1. They werent translated as FATHER
2. You cant just insert "FATHER" in there because its fits
3. You still have not shown any proof that aner was ever used as father. Of course a man can be a father at the same time. That doesnt mean that when man is used we translate it to father.
<quoted text>
See you said you came here to "help" the reader yet you're not being honest here. Thats not how we understand texts. Just because there are 13 generations does not mean we translate aner to a word the greeks never understood it as. If they did, surely you can display where aner IS translated to father? If the writer wanted us to know that aner was father why not use the same "father" he used in the 13 generations before?
.
<quoted text>
I can not read Hebrew FLUENTLY
.
This is obvious. What is worse is that you can't use a lexicon.
.
<quoted text>
Plus does the NT tell us of the two forsaken kings you speak of?
.
We don't need the NT to tell us this, we know from History, Herod the Great dies in 4 BC and Archelaus was deposed in 6 AD. So I have a child born to a virgin, who is known as "G-d with us" and two kings losing their thrones from the time he was born until he became a man (13).
.
What you lack is the Immanuel to test your theory against. You also don't have a land without a king to prove this prophecy, nor do you have the land forsaken either in the near future.
.
<quoted text> FIrst, No it is not OBVIOUS that Cain married his sister. You can INFER that but since the text does not say you cannot say it is OBVIOUS.
.
Since the bible tells us Adam named his wife as "the mother of all living", where did the wife come from if not from the mother of all living?
.
<quoted text> Especially since as you said there werent any daughters of Adam and Eve mentioned.
.
This is why an argument from silence is a bad one.
.
<quoted text> The FACT is that
1. They werent translated as FATHER
2. You cant just insert "FATHER" in there because its fits
3. You still have not shown any proof that aner was ever used as father. Of course a man can be a father at the same time. That doesnt mean that when man is used we translate it to father.
.
You were the one who says he doesn't follow men. So when you say I am relying upon a translation rather than use common sense, I can see you are following the traditions of men. I have consistently stated that "aner" means man. You on the other hand have tried to make me say it means "father". I have consistently stated that we understand who the man is, or what kind of man we are talking about by the context. You have consistently failed to give a reasonable explaination of why a husband who isn't the father is in a genealogy and why when the author goes to great lengths to tell us there are 14 generations that he gives us 13 generations.
.
<quoted text> Just because there are 13 generations does not mean we translate aner to a word the greeks never understood it as.
Cisco Kid

Sonora, CA

#1202 Mar 29, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course they wouldnt recognize Jesus. He didnt do the things the messiah was supposed to plus the notions you get from him (such as him being the Almighty in the flesh, dying for sins, being part of a trinity), contradict the Hebrew bible

If He is plural than there is more than one. Are you show you want to go this route?
YES! As you finally admit, our God has a plural.
Haven't you been reading my multiple posts explaining the trinity?

Isaiah told you about Jesus Christ beforehand.

Is 52:13—53:12

See, my servant shall prosper,
he shall be raised high and greatly exalted.
Even as many were amazed at him—
so marred was his look beyond human semblance
and his appearance beyond that of the sons of man—
so shall he startle many nations,
because of him kings shall stand speechless;
for those who have not been told shall see,
those who have not heard shall ponder it.

Who would believe what we have heard?
To whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
He grew up like a sapling before him,
like a shoot from the parched earth;
there was in him no stately bearing to make us look at him,
nor appearance that would attract us to him.
He was spurned and avoided by people,
a man of suffering, accustomed to infirmity,
one of those from whom people hide their faces,
spurned, and we held him in no esteem.

Yet it was our infirmities that he bore,
our sufferings that he endured,
while we thought of him as stricken,
as one smitten by God and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our offenses,
crushed for our sins;
upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole,
by his stripes we were healed.
We had all gone astray like sheep,
each following his own way;
but the LORD laid upon him
the guilt of us all.

Though he was harshly treated, he submitted
and opened not his mouth;
like a lamb led to the slaughter
or a sheep before the shearers,
he was silent and opened not his mouth.
Oppressed and condemned, he was taken away,
and who would have thought any more of his destiny?
When he was cut off from the land of the living,
and smitten for the sin of his people,
a grave was assigned him among the wicked
and a burial place with evildoers,
though he had done no wrong
nor spoken any falsehood.
But the LORD was pleased
to crush him in infirmity.

If he gives his life as an offering for sin,
he shall see his descendants in a long life,
and the will of the LORD shall be accomplished through him.

Because of his affliction
he shall see the light in fullness of days;
through his suffering, my servant shall justify many,
and their guilt he shall bear.
Therefore I will give him his portion among the great,
and he shall divide the spoils with the mighty,
because he surrendered himself to death
and was counted among the wicked;
and he shall take away the sins of many,
and win pardon for their offenses.
Flygerian

United States

#1203 Mar 29, 2013
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
<quoted text>
Plus does the NT tell us of the two forsaken kings you speak of?
.
We don't need the NT to tell us this, we know from History, Herod the Great dies in 4 BC and Archelaus was deposed in 6 AD. So I have a child born to a virgin, who is known as "G-d with us" and two kings losing their thrones from the time he was born until he became a man (13).
.
What you lack is the Immanuel to test your theory against. You also don't have a land without a king to prove this prophecy, nor do you have the land forsaken either in the near future.
If the OT has to mention Immanuel why doesnt the NT have to show the 2 kings? Thats was part of the prophecy as well. Not to mention Jesus EVER being called Immanuel in the NT.
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text> The FACT is that
1. They werent translated as FATHER
2. You cant just insert "FATHER" in there because its fits
3. You still have not shown any proof that aner was ever used as father. Of course a man can be a father at the same time. That doesnt mean that when man is used we translate it to father.
.
You were the one who says he doesn't follow men. So when you say I am relying upon a translation rather than use common sense, I can see you are following the traditions of men. I have consistently stated that "aner" means man. You on the other hand have tried to make me say it means "father". I have consistently stated that we understand who the man is, or what kind of man we are talking about by the context. You have consistently failed to give a reasonable explaination of why a husband who isn't the father is in a genealogy and why when the author goes to great lengths to tell us there are 14 generations that he gives us 13 generations.
Let me just ask it again. Why does the author use the SAME word for father in the first 13 generations but in the "14th" he uses a "different" word for "father"? lol
Flygerian

United States

#1204 Mar 29, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
YES! As you finally admit, our God has a plural.
Haven't you been reading my multiple posts explaining the trinity?
Isaiah told you about Jesus Christ beforehand.
Is 52:13—53:12
See, my servant shall prosper,
he shall be raised high and greatly exalted.
Even as many were amazed at him—
so marred was his look beyond human semblance
and his appearance beyond that of the sons of man—
so shall he startle many nations,
because of him kings shall stand speechless;
for those who have not been told shall see,
those who have not heard shall ponder it.
Who would believe what we have heard?
To whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
He grew up like a sapling before him,
like a shoot from the parched earth;
there was in him no stately bearing to make us look at him,
nor appearance that would attract us to him.
He was spurned and avoided by people,
a man of suffering, accustomed to infirmity,
one of those from whom people hide their faces,
spurned, and we held him in no esteem.
Yet it was our infirmities that he bore,
our sufferings that he endured,
while we thought of him as stricken,
as one smitten by God and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our offenses,
crushed for our sins;
upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole,
by his stripes we were healed.
We had all gone astray like sheep,
each following his own way;
but the LORD laid upon him
the guilt of us all.
Though he was harshly treated, he submitted
and opened not his mouth;
like a lamb led to the slaughter
or a sheep before the shearers,
he was silent and opened not his mouth.
Oppressed and condemned, he was taken away,
and who would have thought any more of his destiny?
When he was cut off from the land of the living,
and smitten for the sin of his people,
a grave was assigned him among the wicked
and a burial place with evildoers,
though he had done no wrong
nor spoken any falsehood.
But the LORD was pleased
to crush him in infirmity.
If he gives his life as an offering for sin,
he shall see his descendants in a long life,
and the will of the LORD shall be accomplished through him.
Because of his affliction
he shall see the light in fullness of days;
through his suffering, my servant shall justify many,
and their guilt he shall bear.
Therefore I will give him his portion among the great,
and he shall divide the spoils with the mighty,
because he surrendered himself to death
and was counted among the wicked;
and he shall take away the sins of many,
and win pardon for their offenses.
Who did Isaiah call the servant at least 5 times?
Cisco Kid

Sonora, CA

#1205 Mar 29, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
Who did Isaiah call the servant at least 5 times?
Isaiah was not privy to the name Jesus Christ at the time.
Read the servant songs,...if the shoe fits.......

"Is 52:13—53:12

See, my servant shall prosper,
he shall be raised high and greatly exalted.
Even as many were amazed at him—
so marred was his look beyond human semblance
and his appearance beyond that of the sons of man—
so shall he startle many nations,
because of him kings shall stand speechless;
for those who have not been told shall see,
those who have not heard shall ponder it.

Who would believe what we have heard?
To whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
He grew up like a sapling before him,
like a shoot from the parched earth;
there was in him no stately bearing to make us look at him,
nor appearance that would attract us to him.
He was spurned and avoided by people,
a man of suffering, accustomed to infirmity,
one of those from whom people hide their faces,
spurned, and we held him in no esteem.

Yet it was our infirmities that he bore,
our sufferings that he endured,
while we thought of him as stricken,
as one smitten by God and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our offenses,
crushed for our sins;
upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole,
by his stripes we were healed.
We had all gone astray like sheep,
each following his own way;
but the LORD laid upon him
the guilt of us all.

Though he was harshly treated, he submitted
and opened not his mouth;
like a lamb led to the slaughter
or a sheep before the shearers,
he was silent and opened not his mouth.
Oppressed and condemned, he was taken away,
and who would have thought any more of his destiny?
When he was cut off from the land of the living,
and smitten for the sin of his people,
a grave was assigned him among the wicked
and a burial place with evildoers,
though he had done no wrong
nor spoken any falsehood.
But the LORD was pleased
to crush him in infirmity.

If he gives his life as an offering for sin,
he shall see his descendants in a long life,
and the will of the LORD shall be accomplished through him.

Because of his affliction
he shall see the light in fullness of days;
through his suffering, my servant shall justify many,
and their guilt he shall bear.
Therefore I will give him his portion among the great,
and he shall divide the spoils with the mighty,
because he surrendered himself to death
and was counted among the wicked;
and he shall take away the sins of many,
and win pardon for their offenses. "
Cisco Kid

Sonora, CA

#1206 Mar 29, 2013
Sorry about the redoux.

Is 49:1-6

"Hear me, O islands,
listen, O distant peoples.
The LORD called me from birth,
from my mother’s womb he gave me my name.
He made of me a sharp-edged sword
and concealed me in the shadow of his arm.
He made me a polished arrow,
in his quiver he hid me.
You are my servant, he said to me,
Israel, through whom I show my glory.

Though I thought I had toiled in vain,
and for nothing, uselessly, spent my strength,
Yet my reward is with the LORD,
my recompense is with my God.
For now the LORD has spoken
who formed me as his servant from the womb,
That Jacob may be brought back to him
and Israel gathered to him;
And I am made glorious in the sight of the LORD,
and my God is now my strength!
It is too little, he says, for you to be my servant,
to raise up the tribes of Jacob,
and restore the survivors of Israel;
I will make you a light to the nations,
that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."
messianic114

Calgary, Canada

#1207 Mar 30, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
If the OT has to mention Immanuel why doesnt the NT have to show the 2 kings? Thats was part of the prophecy as well. Not to mention Jesus EVER being called Immanuel in the NT.
<quoted text>
Let me just ask it again. Why does the author use the SAME word for father in the first 13 generations but in the "14th" he uses a "different" word for "father"? lol
.
You are grasping at straws. You won't accept history now. When are you going to show any fulfillment of Immanuel?
.
An author can use any word or words he wants to get across his meaning. He doesn't have to explain it to anyone. In the 13 generations the author uses begets, thats a verb in case you don't know. For Mary he states that Joseph is the man of Mary. Possibly because he was the father through levirate marriage. If so he wouldn't legally be the father, the dead brother would.
.
I'm still waiting to hear your explanation of why a husband who isn't the father of Yeshua is in his genealogy.
Flygerian

United States

#1208 Mar 30, 2013
Cisco Kid wrote:
Sorry about the redoux.
Is 49:1-6
"Hear me, O islands,
listen, O distant peoples.
The LORD called me from birth,
from my mother’s womb he gave me my name.
He made of me a sharp-edged sword
and concealed me in the shadow of his arm.
He made me a polished arrow,
in his quiver he hid me.
You are my servant, he said to me,
Israel, through whom I show my glory.
Though I thought I had toiled in vain,
and for nothing, uselessly, spent my strength,
Yet my reward is with the LORD,
my recompense is with my God.
For now the LORD has spoken
who formed me as his servant from the womb,
That Jacob may be brought back to him
and Israel gathered to him;
And I am made glorious in the sight of the LORD,
and my God is now my strength!
It is too little, he says, for you to be my servant,
to raise up the tribes of Jacob,
and restore the survivors of Israel;
I will make you a light to the nations,
that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."
You never answered my question Mr. Cisco. Who did Isaiah NAME as the servant AT LEAST 5 times in his book?
Flygerian

United States

#1209 Mar 30, 2013
messianic114 wrote:
<quoted text>
.
You are grasping at straws. You won't accept history now. When are you going to show any fulfillment of Immanuel?
.
An author can use any word or words he wants to get across his meaning. He doesn't have to explain it to anyone. In the 13 generations the author uses begets, thats a verb in case you don't know. For Mary he states that Joseph is the man of Mary. Possibly because he was the father through levirate marriage. If so he wouldn't legally be the father, the dead brother would.
.
I'm still waiting to hear your explanation of why a husband who isn't the father of Yeshua is in his genealogy.
1. See what Im saying? You want me to show you the "fulfillment of the birth" (though the birth wasnt an important figure) yet when I ask you for the fulfillment of the EVENTS in the NT text you cant show me. Nor could you show me where Jesus was called Immanuel. Nor could you show me how Isaiah 7:14 applied to Jesus in the first place using the context of Isaiah 7.

2. LMAO So the author uses the ACTUAL word for father 13 times in a row then uses a different word? Why?

3. What do you mean Joseph was the father through levirate marriage?

4. I've already told you two things about your last statement

A. Isaiah 7:14 doesnt connect with a future prophecy. Which is why you NEVER displayed how the context fit with a FUTURE messiah. So the "virgin birth" did not happen because the author wouldnt have tied it to a prophecy that wasnt about Jesus.

B. I dont have to explain why YOUR TEXT makes no sense lol.Just because man CAN be synonomous with FATHER doesnt mean we interchange them when we feel like it. If Matthew wrote "the father of" or "begat" 13 times in a row then uses "MAN OF MARY" Im 100% sure he didnt mean that Joseph begat Mary. Because he would've put that like he did in the first 13 generations. But you cannot explain why he changed it up
Prophet of Jesus Christ

San Antonio, TX

#1210 Mar 30, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont have to explain why YOUR TEXT makes no sense lol.
Why not? What determines when you have to explain something or do not have to explain something to anyone?
Flygerian

United States

#1211 Mar 30, 2013
Prophet of Jesus Christ wrote:
<quoted text>Why not? What determines when you have to explain something or do not have to explain something to anyone?
You tell me
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/christian...
Prophet of Jesus Christ

San Antonio, TX

#1212 Mar 30, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
There's many things posted on that thread. Please be precise to exactly what you are referring to on that thread. Cut and paste it for me thank you.
Flygerian

Oklahoma City, OK

#1213 Mar 30, 2013
Prophet of Jesus Christ wrote:
<quoted text>There's many things posted on that thread. Please be precise to exactly what you are referring to on that thread. Cut and paste it for me thank you.
What for? You're just going to pass the things you say that you can prove (but dont) on to me to prove they are wrong lol Whats the point of that?
TheWingsOfWisdom

San Antonio, TX

#1214 Mar 30, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
What for? You're just going to pass the things you say that you can prove (but dont) on to me to prove they are wrong lol Whats the point of that?
If you do not present the proof that proves anything you say, that is alright with me.

You just prove what I've been saying about you, is true.
Flygerian

Oklahoma City, OK

#1215 Mar 30, 2013
TheWingsOfWisdom wrote:
<quoted text>If you do not present the proof that proves anything you say, that is alright with me.
You just prove what I've been saying about you, is true.
Blah blah blah. Pass it off so you do not have to do anything yourself. If YOU claim to be able to prove something I DO NOT have to do anything but come in and listen to you PROVE it. Not you say "well now that you're here YOU prove me wrong" lmao. Is that how your brain is wired?
TheWingsOfWisdom

San Antonio, TX

#1216 Mar 30, 2013
Flygerian wrote:
<quoted text>
Blah blah blah. Pass it off so you do not have to do anything yourself. If YOU claim to be able to prove something I DO NOT have to do anything but come in and listen to you PROVE it. Not you say "well now that you're here YOU prove me wrong" lmao. Is that how your brain is wired?
I don't think that God is going to accept this unless he accepts it as proof, that you are a retard.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bible Interpretation 1 min Gary Coaldigger 491
Why the Earth Was Created in Six Days 1 hr Jesus Is 83
Intelligent People Question Everything 2 hr Jesus Is 33
Personal Cleanliness (Hygiene) in ISLAM (Aug '08) 2 hr Demon Finder 23
Poll The Greatest Threat to America's Security (Sep '15) 2 hr Demon Finder 4,143
Mother Teresa a Saint? What a cruel Joke!!! 2 hr Demon Finder 190
gen 49: 27 2 hr Demon Finder 95
More from around the web