No. I believe Jesus was simply a Jewish 'Evangelist'. He had been brought up in the scriptures from the age of 5 - as were all Jewish children, especially the boys. By the age of 12/13 he was conversant with the Pentatuech (Torah) and the rest of the Tanakh (Oral Torah). He could see the hypocrisy of the religious leadership - read Matthew 23 - and see the burden of silly religious regulations placed upon the people. His desire was to return the nation to the ways of Jahweh. If you consider his teaching, his actions and adherence to true doctrine he was a Jew through and through. He weas a realist in the sense that he recognised that feeding the body was more important than supposedly 'working' on the Sabbath - the disciples picked corn on their Sunday 'jaunt' through the fields. The welfare of an animal trapped in a ditch was more important than getting it out on the Sabbath. I don't believe Jesus ever thought he was the Messiah. The Jewish Messiah was to be a human who would lead Israel to victory over its enemies with the sword. Jesus rejected that in Gethsemane. The Gospels have Jesus saying all sorts of things - to make him divine. I've said do many times there are things that Jesus would not have said as a Jew without losing his appeal to the people - and to his disciples. When he told his disciples to 'put the sword, this is not my way' in the garden, they fled. It wasn't what they expected their Messiah to say. Jesus was crucified for defying the religious leaders around 28 CE. The stories of his trial and crucifixion are full of anomalies. The type of cross we show today was only agreed upon in the 2nd century. The Romans used 5 different types of Cross which you can find on line. Almost certainly the 'cross' that Jesus is supposed to have carried was simply the crosspiece - if that was the shape used. The hill was so rocky the same holes were used for the uprights time and again, and the upright was also used time and again. Wood was not that plentiful to be wasted. The crucifixion stories were at least 50 years after the death of Jesus, and written by people who were not there. Even John's Gospel is questionable. There was, IMO, a Jewish evangelist who was crucified for defying the religious leadership. Remember the Christian martyrs down the centuries who suffered the same fate? No. Your visit from the Easter Bunny is safe. I've rung Watership Down and they're sending Fiver to visit you - if he can find you.
Try 'Trevor spends a lot of time attacking what others believe in'. Why? Because he's been through it all and found most of it wanting. A study of ancient history, culture, archaeology and religions shows that much of the Bible is merely an accumulation of more ancient beliefs etc. Archaeology does not necessarily confirm the Bible. Sometimes the Bible confirms archaeology. Like many people today I believe from study that the Pentateuch was written in the 7th century exile of Judah in Babylon. There are errors in the stories which indicate this. And their is no evidence for any Noah, Abraham, Moses, Exodus or invasion of Palestine. When the scribes wrote the stories they knew about places and events that had happened. They weren't ignorant. They had interacted with other nations. They wrote stories about place and events and included characters around these. An historical novel. Thus when they found the walls of Jericho had fallen - likely to an earthquake - they used 'Joshua' to destroy it. They used 'Moses' to place Abraham in 'UR of the CHALDEES'. Of course this was how the knew Ur - with Chaldeans in control. But Abraham was a thousand years in the past. The Chaldeans were a millenia in the future. Even 'Moses' would have died centuries before this. How could he know? Why did Abraham go into Egypt? How did he meet Pharaoh? Depending on the supposed date for Abraham the Pharaoh could be 800 miles south of the Delta where Abraham fed his flocks. Why would a 70 year old woman be of interest to a Pharaoh who had young princesses given him from tribe/nation rulers wanting to seal a deal with Pharaoh. This was a practise of the day. We even have Hittite and Egyptian letters between the two talking about this. We have an historical novel which gave Israel an origin. The only genuine history is that of the era of the Kings. That can be proved by archaeological findings. People are still being led to believe in fairy stories. Even children must learn to grow out of those. Over 50% of Jews worldwide no longer practise their religion many recognising the above. As one Jew, with tongue in cheek put it 'We don't practise our religion, but we still keep the holidays. But then how many in this country recognise Easter, Christmas except as a holiday. Many Jews who do still practise recognise the stories as allegories.
@trevorw2539 - You are a better study of this than I am, regardless of agreement. Si? So commentary is appreciated. The Passover Plot for dummies. What the Messiah must "accomplish" was written in the Old Testament way before Jesus. Such as being abused. Being of the House of David Jesus was a learned man and with the best core elements went about touching all those bases. Judas was maybe his most loyal follower for the role assigned to him. There were others at the time doing the same Messiah thing. Jesus just did it best. End: Passover Plot for dummies ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Not the Messiah. The Lord's Kingdom on Earth - Thank You No Heaven substitution!
That Trevor (hope there is not another one!) Someone needs to remind him ...AGAIN.. that this is not a thread on Christian Apologetics but a discussion of the Bible.. tell him to stay on topic if he must post (I can't respond to him 'cause it might be a sin! LOL) The Bible is not a history book, nor a science book, tho' it has much of both. It is a book of theology. Same go for you other hateful people here just to deride The Bible and Christians.. stay on topic.
@trevorw2539 - I guess I missed your other uploads @ToddWB Sez ? ? I found several of his upload worth reply and not of any snarky quality. Just the facts. Apparently he's got some. And there are so many facts we just may connect the dots differently. Si? And there are other frequent uploaders here who are much more deserving of a Troll Pin. Si? And no one took up Moi's Ruth upload although the whole movie is there
Since you appear to be a believer are you looking forward to killing Jesus, draining and drinking his blood, and eating his physical flesh so that you will gain eternal life?
Everything we have been discussing pertains to the Bible. The Bible contains History, early science and theology. It also contains much wisdom. Even the shape of the cross is relevant to the Bible story. If you are discussing the Bible then everything to do with it is relevant. Even the fact that Jesus cannot be in Nazareth and Egypt at the same time. Theology. Indeed. Both Christian and Jewish theology which are at odds with each other.
I'll go about this in stages. The above bold you've quoted are two different subjects. This is my reading of scripture and study of the OT. There is no reference anywhere in the OT to Jesus. Fundamentalists will give quotes from as far back as Genesis. As Genesis and the Pentateuch are simply stories, this is ridiculous. Most modern scholars and many Jews consider these stories allegoric since much of history disputes it. What the Messiah WILL accomplish in Jewish minds is the fulfilment of Isaiah 53. Let me explain. Isaiah 53 does not stand alone. It is one of 4 Chapters in Isaiah called the 'Servant Songs'. Isaiah 42, 49, 50. 53. In fact the OT is full of verses calling Israel God's Servant. Isaiah 41:3 and 8, Isaiah 49:3. 44:1and 2. 45:4. 48:20. Jeremiah 30:10. Jeremiah 46:27 and 28. Psalm 136:32. In some cases the term Jacob is used as a reference to Israel as Gods servant. Psalm 69 is another favourite related by Christianity as refering to Jesus. Anyone who has studied the story and life of David as recorded on the OT will see this clearly refers to the times and tragedies of Davids life. Given the above, and that the rest of the book is about Israel, why would the writer suddenly jump to another subject for 1 chapter and then back to Israel. Jewish Messianic belief is that the Jews have been through much trial and abuse as a Nation (Israel) that in the end times a ruler will come from among the people who will be a leader who can bring the world under Jahweh's control. In those final days the people of the world will look back and marvel at what Israel (God;s Servant) has suffered at the hands of nations. The idea of crucifixion in the chapter relating it to Jesus and Roman punishment just doesn't stand up. Crucifixion goes back into the distant past. The first reported crucifixion was around 500BCE when Darius the Persian crucified 3,000 political enemies. How much further back it goes isn't known but it could be based on earlier punishments like impalement. The Jews must have known about crucifixion and used it in their appraisal relating to suffering. In fact it is likely that the Philistines 'crucified' the bodies of Saul and his sons by fixing them to a wall. 'The next day, when the Philistines came to strip the dead, they found Saul and his three sons fallen on Mount Gilboa. 9 They cut off his head and stripped off his armor, and they sent messengers throughout the land of the Philistines to proclaim the news in the temple of their idols and among their people. They put his armor in the temple of the Ashtoreth and fastened his body to the wall of Beth Shan.' 1 Samuel 31.. This Messiah must be of the House of David. While the genealogies give this to Jesus, the genealogies are far from complete or correct. But that's another subject. If Jesus was of the lineage of David he does not fit the Jewish Messiah. If a prophet told you that in the year 2719 a man would come to change the world, what would you reply? My personal reply would be Why should I care? That's 700 years in the future. Well Isaiah was 700 years before Jesus, do you think people 700 in the future would even remember what had been said? So called Prophesy is for the time or foreseeable future - not the distant future. Most prophecies in the OT were written at, or after, the time. Some were simple appraisals of current events and warnings of their likely outcome. There have been 'prophets' all through history. In the UK we had a very wise man called Churchill. He summed up the situation in Germany with Hitler in the 30's, and warned about trusting Hitler. He was ignored, and the world suffered the consequences. . I think you have read what I consider Jesus to have been. A Jewish preacher/evangelist..
Minus the "killing Jesus" part, what you refer to is Doctrine of Transubstantiation, Catholics believe the Eucharist turns to blood and flesh in their mouths.. I'm not Catholic. It is symbolism , the Blood of the Lamb.. a final sacrifice to the Lord to last for all ages. One thing I have never been sure of is , did the Jews eat part of the sacrificed animals?
@Trevor.. you live in Albion.. right? Horeb the Hittite was from Hattusa, not in Hattusa. Many books written on Jesus in the OT (David Limbaugh's comes to mind), so he is there.. that's how Christians see it. If he was a rabbi, he sure must of lied ..a lot.. thus negating his own divinity. and one of the most compelling evidence is after the death on the Cross, the disciples scattered, as well they should, their leader was just executed in a most horrible way, and since he didn't appear divine enough to save himself from that, why hang around to also be executed as subversives.. yet they did reassemble and became more convinced than ever of the divinity of Christ after He appeared to large groups several times. When I undertook my study of the Bible, I started with the proposition that it is the truth.. and in the prevailing years, there have been many times I almost decided to throw it and join your manner of thinking Trevor.. but I muddled thru.. because thru logic, I found there are some truths that just can't be ignored.
Specifically, how about the idea of implementing a "Passover Plot" since learned people knew of Isaiah, etc. Speak clearly and concisely into the microphone please
Don't follow your first part. I'm from the England. . Albion was the ancient name for the main island of the current UK by which it was distinguished from the island of Eire by the early Greeks. The Romans followed suit. Legend has it that the name actually came from a giant who was cast out of his homeland and came to this Island. Thus Albions land. Of course it is only used as a literary term today.. Horeb the Hittite was from Hattusa, not in Hattusa. ????????????? So? Hattusa was the last capital of the Hittite Empire. Horeb? I undertook my study of the Bible as a Christian. I progressed to preaching the Gospel. Through study I led many Bible studies in various groups. Had my studies approved by Anglican Church leaders. But I NEVER muddled through for the same reason you DID. Logic. If a thing did not seem right I pursued it until I understood it, whether it was right or wrong. I found so many questions and questionable Biblical statements that I eventually gave up preaching - and believing Do you really believe that all the words Jesus is supposed to have said came from his mouth. A devout Jew who was indoctrinated in the Tanakh teachings could not have said he was God;s Son. The Jewish public and disciples. would have turned away horrified. To proclaim he was to be a vicarious sacrifice for men's sins? They were themselves responsible for their own sin. If you study Judaism most of what Jesus preached was Jewish theology. His Baptism, supposed temptation (strange that we know all about the conversation when he was alone - as with other conversation) His preaching was from the OT. The Beatitudes came from the OT. His parables are often about scenarios in the OT. He spoke only to the Jews. He referred to God as his father as all Jews would do. Do Christians today not recognise God as their father? I don't think Christians were born under supposedly divine conditions. The Nativity and Trial /crucifixion are hopelessy contradictory in terms of Jewish religious Laws and Roman Laws. The prophecies used by the writer of Matthews gospel are nothing to do with Jesus - unless you believe Jesus commited idolatory. Hosea 11. Miracles. The feeding of the 5000 - men only? In one report Jesus went to a remote deserted place. Yet 5000 men from towns and cities found him. Does it not seem strange that 5000 men could . 1. Hear where he was. News travelled mouth to mouth. No modern communications between villages or towns. 2. If they were employed, get the employers to let them go. 3. Make the journey The average walking pace is 3-4 miles per hour on even ground. and this was - in some reports - a remote place. Please - a little realism is necessary in judging these stories. Miracles just don't happen. What really happened after the crucifixion. It's up to what you want to believe. I don't accept the resurrection and events after. The church today is not the Church that stemmed from Jerusalem. That gradually dissipated. The Church today is down to Paul. Surprisingly, or not, he adapts some OT. rituals and practises to Christianity. Paul was well versed in Greek philosophy and used it frequently in his teachings, Is Christianity a mix of Greek Philosophy and Jewish theology. . 1Cor 15:33 Evil communications corrupt good manners. Quote from Menander 3rd century BCE Titus 1:12 The Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. In writing to Titus Paul quotes a description of the Cretans taken from “Epimenides“. Acts 17:24-29 Words from a speech from Seneca - Roman Stoic Philosopher. 1Cor 9:24a Paul says, “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? Plato says, “But such as are true racers, arriving at the end, both receive the prizes and are crowned” There are a lot more. Reading and studying the Bible is of little use if you don't understand its background and the reason for which it was written. The OT was written by Jews and for Jews. Centuries before Christianity was even thought of. OT prophecies were for the Jews. They were never meant for any other religious group.
How is Genesis 22 not a reference to Jesus? It reads like a script for the coming Messiah; the Messiah of the New Testament.
That was a test of Abraham. When he passed, God promised to bless his family line into the future. How do you construe it as more than that?
Genesis is simply a series of stories made up in the 7th century by scribes in Babylon. The stories themselves are full of holes about the time and events surrounding the mythical Abraham and Moses. If you study the stories and ancient history Abraham could not have met any Hittites. Moses could not have known UR as Ur of the 'Chaldees'. Abraham would not have met any Pharaoh in the Delta. Neither would Pharaoh have been attracted to a 70 year old wife of Abraham when he would have had a harem of Princesses given to him by other rulers in trade for a deal. And, incidentally, had a chief wife closely related to him. Abraham is called the father of the Hebrew nation by those who still believe in him. A number that is decreasing steadily with the increase of our understanding of ancient history etc. Actually Abraham, had he really existed, would have been Sumerian, Akkadian or another race. Depending on his actual date. The scribes of the 7th century make him a 'Hebrew' to fulfil their story. Palestine did not fall to any invading Hebrew force. Palestine was ruled by Egypt anyway. History records it falling to internal tribes who threw out the Egyptians. One of those tribes was called Israel. Known to have been in Palestine for centuries and mentioned in the Merneptah Stele 13 century BCE. There is no reference to Jesus in the OT. It's purely Christian interpretation, Study Judaism. There is no case for a vicarious sacrifice in Judaism. There is no case for a 'Christian style' Messiah in the OT. Jews are responsible for their own sins. That's why Jahweh introduced Yom Kippur and the period of reflection before. Easter and Lent are the Christian adaptation - but with a get out. Jesus takes responsibility for their sins. And the supposed event you talk about would have been 2 millenia away from the birth of Jesus - the Jewish preacher. .Like prophecy, this type of thing is only effective for the time. Not the distant future. As someone once said 'there isn't a prophecy that has ever been made that someone/some group etc will claim to have fulfilled, or seen fulfilled.
How do we know that the supposed people that came out of Egypt were actually Abrahams family. According to the Bible they were there 400+ years. We have no genealogy for that period. It's just assumed. It's just a story. No evidence at all.
Midnight here. I'm off to bed. Which concubine will share my bed tonight? Oooops. I shouldn't have said that. Have a good day or restful night - depending on where you live.
I see it as a symbolic test of Abraham, designed to represent the true mission of God and his Son; that God, not Abraham, would provide his only begotten Son Jesus, not Issac, to be the sacrificial lamb on our behalf. To understand Gen 22 one has to read it symbolically, not literally. The "wood of the burnt offering" placed upon Issac symbolizes the cross put upon Jesus. The "mount of the Lord" symbolizes Calvary. Even the "donkey" symbolizes the donkey Jesus rode on his way to the temple, and of course the "lamb" symbolizes the slain lamb Jesus. The blessing began with Abraham, but it was fulfilled in the future Jesus. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+22&version=KJV
Nobody at that time could possibly have made such a connection. So, considering that a prophecy just doesn't make sense. It has a clear interpretation, spoken to Abraham by god - it was a test of Abraham, complete with the reward for passing the test.
That's the nature of a prophetic symbolism. It's like a puzzle, where unless you're the puzzle maker, no one can see the whole picture until all the pieces are put in their place; and that didn't occur until Yeshua the Anointed fulfilled his mission 2,000 years ago.
I wouldn't call it prophecy if there is nobody alive who could possibly figure it out until afterwards. In the case at hand, god gave a full description of what was meant. Abraham was tested. He passed. He and his family line were richly rewarded by god. Amen!
The crazy old coot Abraham was the perfect example of human scum. He does not have any redeeming qualities and is one of the oat despicable characters in the Bible. If any God likes that kind of person then he is a worthless God.
You are talking 2000 years if you believe Abraham actually existed. Let's suppose he did. 1. Abraham was a Sumerian/Akkadian. The Hebrews did not exist and only later is he given the title 'Hebrew' 2. His descendants spent 400+ years in Egypt - according to the Bible. 12 tribes go in - 13 come out. Or did they? We have no evidence that anyone came out - let alone Abrahams descendants. We simply have a story. The genealogies if Luke and Matthew both go back - one to Abraham and the other to Adam. NEITHER are correct and NEITHER include any genealogical evidence for the 400+ years. 3. His descendants did not conquer the promised land. Again no evidence 4. The evidence does show that the 'Promised Land' was actually conquered by indigenous tribes with possible help from the Hittites as mercenaries. Among the indigenous tribes was one called Israel who had been there at least since the 13th centuryBCE You believe because you have been told. 'Prophecies' of the OT are relevant to the Jewish nation. Christianity has used them for its own purpose and to anyone studying them in the Jewish context can see the mess that Christianity has made of them. Matthew substitutes Jesus for Israel in Hosea 11:1 and the Egyptian episodes. What he does not say is that the rest of the chapter says that Israel committed idolatry. So did Jesus? You can't wrench one verse from a whole context. Neither can you take one chapter - Isaiah 53 - and apply it to Jesus when the rest of the book is about Israel - God's son. Jesus was a Jewish preacher. Born of Joseph and Mary. He saw the hypocrisy of the religious heirarchy and spent his short time condemning them and trying to return the nation to Yahweh. They trumped up charges against him and he was crucified by a viscious Roman who had crucified others for less. .
