PDA

View Full Version : Do people who deny the divinty/sacrifice of Jesus suffer eternal damnation?



Pages : [1] 2

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 05:00 PM
What do each of you believe?

Supporting verses may be used but they aren't vital.

Rullion Green
Jul 11th 2008, 05:29 PM
It pretty much boils down to is Jesus who he said he is ?

I believe so and if he is the Son of God and has made attonement of sins for his people and it is rejected...then i would not want to stand before the Lord on judgement day in my own rightousness as we know they are as filthy rags. It's not just that he was crucified and went through physical pain it was the seperation and crushing of his Son that took place and to reject that and stand on your own without the sacrifice that has been given for attonement..... were else can a person go.

what are your thoughts ? and is that Gene wilder as your avitar ?

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 05:31 PM
what are your thoughts ? Well, I'm not Christian. So it should be pretty obvious what my thoughts are on the subject.


and is that Gene wilder as your avitar ?
The one and only...:D

Rullion Green
Jul 11th 2008, 05:37 PM
Well, I'm not Christian. So it should be pretty obvious what my thoughts are on the subject.

The one and only...:D

i didn't expect you to agree with my Christian view :D just a small opinion on your question as i'm interested in your views.

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 05:39 PM
i didn't expect you to agree with my Christian view :D just a small opinion on your question as i'm interested in your views.Fair enough.

For the record, I am not going to answer my own poll question since it's the Christian perspective that we're discussing here.

Rullion Green
Jul 11th 2008, 05:42 PM
To be more specific your opinion of Isaiah 64:6. but you dont have to answer it was you who asked the question :)

Rullion Green
Jul 11th 2008, 05:44 PM
Fair enough.

For the record, I am not going to answer my own poll question since it's the Christian perspective that we're discussing here.

thats fair enough Fenris :D

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 05:49 PM
To be more specific your opinion of Isaiah 64:6. but you dont have to answer it was you who asked the question :)
Do you mean 64:5? And we are all become as one that is unclean, and all our righteousnesses are as a polluted garment; and we all do fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Isaiah lived in a generation that saw the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the Jewish people. Obviously that generation was very sinful, and God punished them for it. It was that generation that he was addressing about their sinful nature. Not all of mankind for all time.

Rullion Green
Jul 11th 2008, 06:06 PM
Do you mean 64:5? And we are all become as one that is unclean, and all our righteousnesses are as a polluted garment; and we all do fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Isaiah lived in a generation that saw the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the Jewish people. Obviously that generation was very sinful, and God punished them for it. It was that generation that he was addressing about their sinful nature. Not all of mankind for all time.

Yeah 64:6 in my bible ? anyway thanks for your answer, i wont take it any firther, it was your question sorry to but in :)

th1bill
Jul 11th 2008, 06:50 PM
... Of course you know that I answered to the affirmative and it is, in large, because as a Christian I do view the Jewish Bible known to us as the Old Testament in the light shed, by God, through the commentary, known to you as our New Testament. The Gospel of Matthew, was written to the Jewish believers in God and is therefore written to you. Dispite the fact that the Book of Matthew was not, primarily, written for my people one of my most loved passages from the Bible is Matt. 27:50-53.
... I'm sure that we will agree that the Jewish Saints were in Paradise before Jesus and I believe you would still place them there but I place them in Heaven with our Father, God. The entire issue hinges on the one statement that Jesus made that made the leaders of Judea so mad and He was either telling the truth or he was a liar or a mad man. The most amazing thing about this point is that unless you accept it on faith and faith alone there is never to be any affirmation that it is true. On the other hand, the very moment I believed, I was filled with the Holy Spirit of God and the LORD has been with me from that moment forward.
... Just as Abraham believed God, by faith alone, and was saved, so it is with God in the flesh, without faith in Him all is just lost.

BroRog
Jul 11th 2008, 07:05 PM
I voted no because it's a tricky question that deserves examination on a deeper level.

On the one hand, Jesus said,

But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.

This seems fairly straightforward until we come to Peter's denial of Jesus.

Jesus said to him, "Truly I say to you that this night, before a cock crows, you shall deny Me three times." Peter says to Him, "Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You." All the disciples said the same thing too.

I wouldn't be too careful to reserve judgment of someone who denies Jesus. As we see above, Jesus' emphatic statement about denial is mitigated in practice by his wisdom and mercy. I think the warning is strong, real, and significant. But I can't say the application of the consequences are automatic.

Brother Mark
Jul 11th 2008, 07:16 PM
I think the question is more about one who denies the deity of Christ for their whole life as opposed to someone like Peter who only did it at a moment in time. Maybe Fenris will qualify it for us so we know what he is looking for but sense I saw the thread that sprouted the question, I am pretty sure he is speaking of someone that dies while denying Christ's divinity.

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 09:13 PM
I think the question is more about one who denies the deity of Christ for their whole life as opposed to someone like Peter who only did it at a moment in time. Maybe Fenris will qualify it for us so we know what he is looking for but sense I saw the thread that sprouted the question, I am pretty sure he is speaking of someone that dies while denying Christ's divinity.
Let's say it's someone who lived their whole life and never once accepted Jesus's divinity.

doug3
Jul 11th 2008, 09:59 PM
Intersesting discussion :hmm:.

Denying Jesus Christ's sacrifice, denying He died for a person's sins thus allowing them to have access to God through Him (John 14:6), not repenting or one's sins, not seeking God's forgiveness and not accepting the free gift of salvation would condemn a person to eternal damnation.

I'm not so sure that a person is condemned for denying the divinity of Christ. After all some people hardly have a grasp of who Jesus is when they get saved, apart from finally believing that He died for their sins and through Him they have some sort of relationship with God. The understanding of His divinity has come later in some cases I know (and even then it is usually a first based on what others tell a person). Real certainty often only comes one
has allowed one's faith to be developed by personal bible study etc, by revelation (Rom 10:17).

Only God can really judge when a person is denying what has been plainly revealed to them by Him.

theleast
Jul 11th 2008, 10:00 PM
Let's say it's someone who lived their whole life and never once accepted Jesus's divinity.

We do need to examine this even deeper before we can fairly answer what is a baited question.

This is the first question we must answer before we answer your question.

How does one deny Christ?

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 10:02 PM
We do need to examine this even deeper before we can fairly answer what is a baited question.Why is it a baited question? We're discussing a fundamental Christian doctrine..


This is the first question we must answer before we answer your question.

How does one deny Christ?
Let's say one does not believe that Jesus was the son of God, who subsequently died as a sacrifice for mankind's sins.

theleast
Jul 11th 2008, 10:13 PM
Why is it a baited question? We're discussing a fundamental Christian doctrine..

Let's say one does not believe that Jesus was the son of God, who subsequently died as a sacrifice for mankind's sins.

In that case I would rephrase your question. There are many who say Christ is their Lord and savior but don't reflect that belief in works.

As a matter of survival I have become quite adept at spotting and avoiding baited questions. :P

Fenris
Jul 11th 2008, 10:29 PM
In that case I would rephrase your question. There are many who say Christ is their Lord and savior but don't reflect that belief in works.
I'm not interested in people who claim to be Christian but don't act it. That's another issue entirely. This poll is about people who are not Christian.

Toymom
Jul 11th 2008, 11:15 PM
I voted no because it's a tricky question that deserves examination on a deeper level.

On the one hand, Jesus said,

But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.

This seems fairly straightforward until we come to Peter's denial of Jesus.

Jesus said to him, "Truly I say to you that this night, before a cock crows, you shall deny Me three times." Peter says to Him, "Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You." All the disciples said the same thing too.

I wouldn't be too careful to reserve judgment of someone who denies Jesus. As we see above, Jesus' emphatic statement about denial is mitigated in practice by his wisdom and mercy. I think the warning is strong, real, and significant. But I can't say the application of the consequences are automatic.
I think this is a good answer.
I also think there are more factors to consider as well, all of which I am sure I could not even think of.
If someone loves the Lord with all of their heart, soul and mind and has been taught that Jesus is not God and believes that because that is what they have always been taught, are they condemned?
Only the Lord knows our hearts and only He knows the answers to that.

Brother Mark
Jul 11th 2008, 11:20 PM
I think this is a good answer.
I also think there are more factors to consider as well, all of which I am sure I could not even think of.
If someone loves the Lord with all of their heart, soul and mind and has been taught that Jesus is not God and believes that because that is what they have always been taught, are they condemned?
Only the Lord knows our hearts and only He knows the answers to that.

According to Jesus, if one Loved God and knew the Father, they would recognize Jesus. So if we stick with Christian theology and the words of Christ, if one truly knows God the Father and believes Him, then he will know and believe Jesus.

theleast
Jul 11th 2008, 11:44 PM
According to Jesus, if one Loved God and knew the Father, they would recognize Jesus. So if we stick with Christian theology and the words of Christ, if one truly knows God the Father and believes Him, then he will know and believe Jesus.

I completely agree with you.

th1bill
Jul 12th 2008, 02:55 AM
I'm not interested in people who claim to be Christian but don't act it. That's another issue entirely. This poll is about people who are not Christian.
Fenris,
... I have a deep respect for you and your position on the matters of God. I do however, often, pray for your salvation and at the risk of upsetting my Christian Brethren here I'm going to make a statement that often draws voracious volleys of counter-fire whenever I make it. There are exactly 2 ways to get into Heaven.
... Most will cease to listen, right there. There was and there is the first covenant where-by one must keep the letter of the Law. If any man could ever keep the Law, in it's entirety, he could enter into Heaven, as I understand it. Instead, my former Jewish friends have told me that no-one could do it and the closest a righteous man could get was into Paradise to await the Messiah. As a Christian that is the position I hold on the matter also. The scriptures I gave you in Matthew, of the saints moving on the streets of the Holy City and also the Veil being ripped from the top down, not from the floor up, are to this believer proof enough that Jesus, to the Christian, the Son of God, emptied out Paradise and we believe that He locked that path from that day forward.
... For that reason there is only one path left to Heaven, through Jesus.

BroRog
Jul 12th 2008, 06:18 AM
Why is it a baited question? We're discussing a fundamental Christian doctrine..

Let's say one does not believe that Jesus was the son of God, who subsequently died as a sacrifice for mankind's sins.

Fenris,

Does the person in question, the one denying Christ, have an issue with Christian claims of Jesus' divinity, or does the person have an issue with Jesus' claim to the the son of God?

I see these as two different claims. Do you?

As I understand it, Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was not a claim to divinity. After all, David and Solomon, among others, were messiah and these were men. Jesus claim to be the messiah was slightly different in this respect. The ancients understood that God would send a Messiah, capital 'M' that would rule the world with righteousness and truth and restore Israel. He claimed to be THAT one.

From what I have read, the Jewish scholars were expecting a Triumphant Messiah, not a Suffering Messiah, interpreting the suffering messiah passages from Isaiah as applicable to Isaiah himself or someone else, but not the coming Holy One. Even Jesus' disciples had this expectation, requiring Jesus to teach them from the scriptures that the Messiah must suffer and die for the people. In other words, the concept of the Suffering Messiah isn't prominent in the scriptures, but it is there.

I think the First Century Jews were more offended by the idea that a humble carpenter was claiming to be the Triumphal Christ, more than they were offended that a mere man was God incarnate. They were offended at both obviously. But it was Jesus' popularity and his challenge of the established order that drove the authorities to seek his death at the hands of the Romans.

brakelite
Jul 12th 2008, 07:14 AM
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Yet I voted no to the poll. Not that I disbelieve in the above quotes, but rather that I do not accept everlasting torment in hell. I belong to that much maligned group of people who believe that those who do not accept Christ Jesus is ultimately destroyed.

calidog
Jul 12th 2008, 01:29 PM
and is that Gene wilder as your avitar ?
That's kinda what I thought but I was afraid to ask:)I voted unequivocally yes.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 12th 2008, 02:12 PM
Just curious, why is there no I don't know option? :hmm:

Toymom
Jul 12th 2008, 02:36 PM
Here is a reply that I posted to a similar question elsewhere on this board.

Jesus is God. However, before His incarnation, the Jews did not know Him as Jesus. Are they not saved then? If so, then how did Jesus speak to Moses on the Mountain? Jesus said that the only way to the Father is through Him. Therefore, if anyone gets to the Father, then it is through Jesus whether the people know His name is Jesus or not.

As was stated, Judaism is a race as well as a religion and many of us who are Jewish by race are saved.

There are some who are Jewish who are saved who practice the Messianic Jewish religion although most people in that religion are gentiles. Jews do not recognize Messianic Judaism as a form of Judaism and don't like the MJs using the word Judaism in their name or them using Jewish practices, but that is another topic. The Messianic Jewish religion is one that believes that Jesus is the Messiah. Some of them are trinitarian and others are non trinitarian.

There is evidence in the Bible that the Jews who are in Israel during the great tribulation will recognize that Jesus is indeed God.

And as someone else stated, we cannot judge who is saved and who is not - that is up to the Lord to know.

Practicing the Jewish religion, or any religion for that matter including Christianity and Catholicism and any of their variants, will not save anyone.
Only the Lord can save us.

I personally did not come to know the Lord as a Jew, but did come to know Him when I prayed to Him as Jesus.
Several of my Jewish friends and relatives are also now born again Christians.
We believe that Jesus is the way to know the Lord and the only way to be born again.
But, I would not condemn the entire Jewish race and religion.
The Lord did not.
I believe that there are some who remain Jews according to the Lord's purpose and He will care for them.

daughter
Jul 12th 2008, 02:44 PM
Fenris,

Does the person in question, the one denying Christ, have an issue with Christian claims of Jesus' divinity, or does the person have an issue with Jesus' claim to the the son of God?

I see these as two different claims. Do you?

As I understand it, Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was not a claim to divinity. After all, David and Solomon, among others, were messiah and these were men. Jesus claim to be the messiah was slightly different in this respect. The ancients understood that God would send a Messiah, capital 'M' that would rule the world with righteousness and truth and restore Israel. He claimed to be THAT one.

From what I have read, the Jewish scholars were expecting a Triumphant Messiah, not a Suffering Messiah, interpreting the suffering messiah passages from Isaiah as applicable to Isaiah himself or someone else, but not the coming Holy One. Even Jesus' disciples had this expectation, requiring Jesus to teach them from the scriptures that the Messiah must suffer and die for the people. In other words, the concept of the Suffering Messiah isn't prominent in the scriptures, but it is there.

I think the First Century Jews were more offended by the idea that a humble carpenter was claiming to be the Triumphal Christ, more than they were offended that a mere man was God incarnate. They were offended at both obviously. But it was Jesus' popularity and his challenge of the established order that drove the authorities to seek his death at the hands of the Romans.
Just wondering, BroRog... do you personally believe Jesus is God? Because you know, I'm pretty certain that He did in fact claim to be. :hmm:

Rullion Green
Jul 12th 2008, 03:30 PM
That's kinda what I thought but I was afraid to ask:)I voted unequivocally yes.

I get to the questions that really matter :rofl:

EarlyCall
Jul 12th 2008, 03:51 PM
Why is it a baited question? We're discussing a fundamental Christian doctrine..

Let's say one does not believe that Jesus was the son of God, who subsequently died as a sacrifice for mankind's sins.

Then such a person will spend eternity in hell and apart from God.

At one point Jesus angered the Jews because He used the phrase concerning Himself, "I AM". This speaks to His divinity and identity.

Jesus asked Peter once who he thought He was. Peter replied that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God.

In John 14:6, Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Jesus goes on to say in a later verse that if we have seen him we have seen the Father.

My two very best of friends are both Jews. Neither really believe in God; perhaps that He even exists. I think they would like it that God did exist, but they live as though He does not. I am free to speak with them concerning anything from my Christian perspective and they speak from their own. But I understood long ago they are not going to be convinced by any of my words.

Jesus said at one point in John chapter six that those that come to Him are only those that are drawn to Him by the Father.

In Jeremiah chapter 29, God says that He will be found by those that seek Him. But once Christ came to this earth, the manner in finding God is now only through Christ. There is no other way - these are the words of Jesus Himself in this matter. And only those the Father draws to Christ will find God.

Hope this is a suitable answer.

apothanein kerdos
Jul 12th 2008, 03:56 PM
If God is a God of justice
And if human sin is an injustice
And if God, due to His justice, must punish such action
And if our standard is God's standard, one we cannot meet no matter how many sacrifices or good deeds we commit
Then we cannot be forgiven.

If, however, we throw Christ into the mix as a payment for the sins we have committed, then forgiveness can only be offered through this substitutionary sacrifice.

BroRog
Jul 12th 2008, 04:28 PM
Just wondering, BroRog... do you personally believe Jesus is God? Because you know, I'm pretty certain that He did in fact claim to be. :hmm:

Yes, I believe Jesus is God. My point above was to highlight the fact that a claim to be the Messiah, which he claimed and I also believe, is not the same claim. Each is true but each is different.

The reason I brought it up is because Fenris appeared to understand the two as being the same thing. (Please correct me if I'm wrong Fenris.)

In summary the two concepts are:

1. Jesus' claim to be God.

2. Jesus' claim to be the Messiah.

The scriptures declare both to be true. And I believe both are true. But they are two different claims, not a single claim.

I realize this is a controversial subject. But often times we make controversial subjects more complex than they need to be when we (me included) fail to maintain clarity and precision in our language.

BroRog
Jul 12th 2008, 04:30 PM
If God is a God of justice
And if human sin is an injustice
And if God, due to His justice, must punish such action
And if our standard is God's standard, one we cannot meet no matter how many sacrifices or good deeds we commit
Then we cannot be forgiven.

If, however, we throw Christ into the mix as a payment for the sins we have committed, then forgiveness can only be offered through this substitutionary sacrifice.

Jesus death on the cross was not a satisfaction of justice. But that's an issue for another thread. :)

apothanein kerdos
Jul 12th 2008, 04:33 PM
Jesus death on the cross was not a satisfaction of justice. But that's an issue for another thread. :)



Then we're all going to Hell.

Feel free to start the other topic. :D

daughter
Jul 12th 2008, 04:47 PM
Aha! BroRog... interesting point.

There are two ways to deny Christ then... either you deny He was God, or you deny He was Messiah.

So, do you think denying He was Messiah is worthy of damnation, denying He was God, or both?:hmm:

th1bill
Jul 12th 2008, 07:40 PM
Here is a reply that I posted to a similar question elsewhere on this board.

Jesus is God. However, before His incarnation, the Jews did not know Him as Jesus. Are they not saved then? If so, then how did Jesus speak to Moses on the Mountain? Jesus said that the only way to the Father is through Him. Therefore, if anyone gets to the Father, then it is through Jesus whether the people know His name is Jesus or not.

As was stated, Judaism is a race as well as a religion and many of us who are Jewish by race are saved.

There are some who are Jewish who are saved who practice the Messianic Jewish religion although most people in that religion are gentiles. Jews do not recognize Messianic Judaism as a form of Judaism and don't like the MJs using the word Judaism in their name or them using Jewish practices, but that is another topic. The Messianic Jewish religion is one that believes that Jesus is the Messiah. Some of them are trinitarian and others are non trinitarian.

There is evidence in the Bible that the Jews who are in Israel during the great tribulation will recognize that Jesus is indeed God.

And as someone else stated, we cannot judge who is saved and who is not - that is up to the Lord to know.

Practicing the Jewish religion, or any religion for that matter including Christianity and Catholicism and any of their variants, will not save anyone.
Only the Lord can save us.

I personally did not come to know the Lord as a Jew, but did come to know Him when I prayed to Him as Jesus.
Several of my Jewish friends and relatives are also now born again Christians.
We believe that Jesus is the way to know the Lord and the only way to be born again.
But, I would not condemn the entire Jewish race and religion.
The Lord did not.
I believe that there are some who remain Jews according to the Lord's purpose and He will care for them.
... Your not going to like this picture but you must be more careful when answering questions like this for you have done what Iv have seen many of the false prophets of today do, you answered the question, it appears, off the top of your head. If what you state is true then there must be scripture to back your statement up.
... I do not seek to align you with the Benny Hinns of today but instead to keep you from falling into that trap. Fenris has even, in his question, begged for the scriptures that will back your statement. As for condemning the entire Jewish people, God forbid that I should ever even stray to think such a thought. On the other hand, in the scripture given by myself earlier, Jesus had just died on the cross. Just before that he promised the one thief to meet him in Paradise and by this we know that it was He and none other that released the Jewish Saints of old from that location.
... I do not seek a contest nor will I argue with you but just like my friend Fenris, I'd certainly love to see you prove me wrong, with God's own word for it is the ruler we must live by.

Toymom
Jul 12th 2008, 10:07 PM
Zechariah 12 - 14 indicates that the Jews who are in Israel and even the entire race of Israel who are alive during the great Tribulation will be saved. Here is one verse,

Zech 12:10 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=38&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=10) And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

but it is best to read both chapters.

There are other verses as well in both the old and new testaments that refer to Israel being saved and to some Jews being purposely blinded so that the gentiles could be saved - here is one verse:

Rom 11:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

theleast
Jul 12th 2008, 11:08 PM
Understand though, that the nation of Israel has changed. Some branches have been cut off, and new ones grafted on. There is no more Jew or Greek in Christ.

Yet holding true to scripture a remnant will be saved.

cnw
Jul 13th 2008, 12:15 AM
In John 14:6, Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

I don't think you have to believe he is God, though if you believe in Jesus, you will read that the claim is that he is the word, and the Word was God and the Word was with God....the same was in the beginning with God. You do have to believe he was the Sacrifice for our attonment. I believe the name Elohim meant God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. It is a plural form. Meaning mighty ones. I don't have to tell you this Fen, you know that.

which movie is your avatar from??

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 01:31 AM
(John 8:21-27 KJV) Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come. {22} Then said the Jews, Will he kill himself? because he saith, Whither I go, ye cannot come. {23} And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. {24} I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins. {25} Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. {26} I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. {27} They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.

The incarnation of Jesus is an essential doctrine of the faith. That He came from heaven to the earth as a man to redeem Israel is supported in Isaiah believe it or not. Isaiah is emphatic that only God can redeem Israel, the Holy One of Israel, her Savior, her King, her Redeemer - is God Himself. And it would be thru His arm (of flesh) that He would do this. Messiah was to be more than a prophet like Moses, which of course the Jews do not see. To die in one's sins is to remain under condemnation and unsaved. The eternal nature of the promises given to Abraham could only be accomplished thru One who would live forever. Both Moses and David died, but God raised up Jesus to His throne and gave the kingdom to Him, thereby showing the One whom He approved who would judge Israel - both the living and the dead.

(Acts 4:12 KJV) Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

And so God the Father sent us Jesus.

(Heb 10:5-7 KJV) Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: {6} In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. [Ps 40:7]

This is the faith which Abraham had which was accounted to him as righteousness, which the Pharisees seem to have lost hold of. That God would send him a Son whom He would raise from the dead to keep His promises to him. It is who Moses trusted in would come to redeem Israel. And even David called the One who would come from his seed LORD. This has always been the hope of true Israel.

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 01:53 AM
Fenris,

Does the person in question, the one denying Christ, have an issue with Christian claims of Jesus' divinity, or does the person have an issue with Jesus' claim to the the son of God?

I see these as two different claims. Do you?

As I understand it, Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was not a claim to divinity. After all, David and Solomon, among others, were messiah and these were men. Jesus claim to be the messiah was slightly different in this respect. The ancients understood that God would send a Messiah, capital 'M' that would rule the world with righteousness and truth and restore Israel. He claimed to be THAT one. Well, the major difference between our faiths is not whether Jesus was the messiah or not. It's about whether Jesus was human or divine.


From what I have read, the Jewish scholars were expecting a Triumphant Messiah, not a Suffering Messiah, interpreting the suffering messiah passages from Isaiah as applicable to Isaiah himself or someone else, but not the coming Holy One. Even Jesus' disciples had this expectation, requiring Jesus to teach them from the scriptures that the Messiah must suffer and die for the people. In other words, the concept of the Suffering Messiah isn't prominent in the scriptures, but it is there. Well, if you're talking about isaiah 53, then yeah, Jews did not view that as messianic.


I think the First Century Jews were more offended by the idea that a humble carpenter was claiming to be the Triumphal Christ, more than they were offended that a mere man was God incarnate.
First century Jews look at the person, not the package. Rabbi Akiva was the son of converts and he was an illiterate shepherd until he was 40 years old. He became the leading torah scholar of his generation.


They were offended at both obviously. But it was Jesus' popularity and his challenge of the established order that drove the authorities to seek his death at the hands of the Romans.
I don't believe that's how things happened, but that's another discussion.

BroRog
Jul 13th 2008, 07:44 PM
Aha! BroRog... interesting point.

There are two ways to deny Christ then... either you deny He was God, or you deny He was Messiah.

So, do you think denying He was Messiah is worthy of damnation, denying He was God, or both?:hmm:

Jesus said, "If you deny me, I will deny you before the Father." If Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, this statement is a big deal. If he isn't, it's an empty threat.

This reminds me of a passage in Second Kings, which I find both funny and tragic at the same time. In that context, Ahazah accidentally fell out of a window and was severely injured. He sent servants to Baal to inquire whether he was about to die. Instead, Elijah the Tishbite met the servants on the way and told them to relate a message from God. Since he did not think God existed, Ahazah was not going to survive his injury.

In response, Ahazah sent a contingent of fifty men from the army after Elijah to summon him.

We pick up the story here. (quoting from the NET Bible)

"The king sent a captain and his fifty soldiers to retrieve Elijah. The captain went up to him, while he was sitting on the top of a hill. He told him, “Prophet, the king says, ‘Come down!’” Elijah replied to the captain, “If I am indeed a prophet, may fire come down from the sky and consume you and your fifty soldiers!” Fire then came down from the sky and consumed him and his fifty soldiers."

It's sad that 51 men had to die, especially because Elijah had already demonstrated to Israel that Yahweh was God and that Baal didn't exist as it is written in 1Kings 17. It's tragic also that it had to happen a second time. The third Captian of fifty pleaded for mercy for his men and himself.

I wonder if James and John had this event in mind as they traveled with Jesus through Samaria one day.

"Now when the days drew near for him to be taken up, Jesus set out resolutely to go to Jerusalem. He sent messengers on ahead of him. As they went along, they entered a Samaritan village to make things ready in advance for him, but the villagers refused to welcome him, because he was determined to go to Jerusalem. Now when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do you want us to call fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” But Jesus turned and rebuked them, and they went on to another village."

Why did Jesus rebuke them? Was Jesus any less a "man of God" than Elijah? I don't think so. In fact, Jesus had every right, as the son of God, to call down fire on this village for the kind of disrespect they showed him.

Apparently, it wasn't the right time since it was time for him to be taken up. It was time for HIM to suffer and die for the people, not to put people to death. He was going to die so that they might live. To call down fire on them at that moment would have blown his mission.

At the final judgment, things will be different. If God brought fire down on a Captain of fifty and his men because they did not accept Elijah to be his prophet, how much more will God punish those who rejected his only son?

BroRog
Jul 13th 2008, 08:04 PM
Well, the major difference between our faiths is not whether Jesus was the messiah or not. It's about whether Jesus was human or divine.

Those who affirm the Hypostatic Union (a technical term in Christian theology) would say that Jesus was both human and divine. I personally don't think the Christian Bible teaches that doctrine.

However, are you familiar with Jesus' statement to Philip in which he said, "If you have seen me, you have seen the father"? Or perhaps you have read in the Epistle to the Hebrews that Jesus is "the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence"?

But I wonder if you might agree that Jesus is the son of God who sat down at the right hand of God to await the restoration of Israel as foretold by the prophets? That is, even one who does not affirm the divinity of Jesus might believe him to be the Son of Man as foretold in Daniel 7.

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 08:35 PM
However, are you familiar with Jesus' statement to Philip in which he said, "If you have seen me, you have seen the father"? Or perhaps you have read in the Epistle to the Hebrews that Jesus is "the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence"?Well, just because he said it doesn't make it so.


But I wonder if you might agree that Jesus is the son of God who sat down at the right hand of God to await the restoration of Israel as foretold by the prophets?
Uh, there is no prophet who says that as Jews read it.


That is, even one who does not affirm the divinity of Jesus might believe him to be the Son of Man as foretold in Daniel 7.

You're going to have to specify the verse.

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 08:53 PM
Moses and Elijah were 2 prophets of God anointed by the power of His Spirit to perform signs and wonders in Israel as a testimony to the presence of God amongst the people. Moses predicted that another prophet like him was to be sent to the people whom they would be required to hear. Jesus came doing these same miracles in Israel - right on schedule according to Daniel's prophecies. And Israel was expecting Messiah to appear at that time because of those visions given to Daniel.


Fenris: Well, just because he said it doesn't make it so.Of course not, neither would Moses have any credence if all he did was speak about things he didn't actually do. In which case God would have no just reason for punishing the people when they broke covenant. But Jesus also came bearing this testimony that God was with Him - showing many signs and wonders to the people which even the Pharisees did not deny when He raised Lazarus from the dead. So perhaps Israel has revised her history somewhat since these things were not done in a corner. It wouldn't be the first time her leaders tried to keep to their own agenda...

When did the Lord ever punish Jerusalem without first specifying and warning them what the coming judgment was for? Where is this prophecy to be found for the events of 70AD?

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 09:05 PM
Moses and Elijah were 2 prophets of God anointed by the power of His Spirit to perform signs and wonders in Israel as a testimony to the presence of God amongst the people. Moses predicted that another prophet like him was to be sent to the people whom they would be required to hear. Jesus came doing these same miracles in Israel - right on schedule according to Daniel's prophecies. And Israel was expecting Messiah to appear at that time because of those visions given to Daniel. If that's true, there would be no Jews left today-only Christians. The fact that most Jews in Jesus's day did not accept him means that the prophets were not read as you claim they are. That doesn't make Christianity wrong, of course, merely unexpected.


Of course not, neither would Moses have any credence if all he did was speak about things he didn't actually do. In which case God would have no just reason for punishing the people when they broke covenant. But Jesus also came bearing this testimony that God was with Him - showing many signs and wonders to the people which even the Pharisees did not deny when He raised Lazarus from the dead. So perhaps Israel has revised her history somewhat since these things were not done in a corner. It wouldn't be the first time her leaders tried to keep to their own agenda...Deuteronomy 13:2 specifically states that just because someone can perform miracles doesn't mean that they are to be followed.


When did the Lord ever punish Israel without first specifying and warning them what the coming judgment was for? Where is this prophecy to be found for the events of 70AD?The various warnings for not following the Law were not fulfilled in their entirety until after 70AD.

BroRog
Jul 13th 2008, 09:06 PM
Well, just because he said it doesn't make it so.

Agreed.


Uh, there is no prophet who says that as Jews read it.

How do Jews read Daniel 7, for instance?


You're going to have to specify the verse.


Jesus often referred to himself as the son of man, I believe, in reference to Daniel 7 in which we read "And with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him." His Apostles affirm this took place in New Testament passages such as this one.

Acts 2:34

For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, "The Lord said to my Lord, "'Sit at my right hand . . .'"

None of these assertions depend on the doctrine of Jesus' divinity. And so, I'm really asking two questions. 1. Is it possible for someone to affirm that Jesus is the coming one, without affirming that Jesus is divine? 2. If so, would it be possible for you to consider that Jesus might be the Coming One as predicted by the prophets?

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 09:15 PM
How do Jews read Daniel 7, for instance?
It's messianic. But where do you find Jesus or a timeframe?



Jesus often referred to himself as the son of man, I believe, in reference to Daniel 7 in which we read "And with the clouds of the skyone like a son of man was approaching. He went up to the Ancient of Days and was escorted before him." His Apostles affirm this took place in New Testament passages such as this one.I don't see how this has to refer to Jesus.



None of these assertions depend on the doctrine of Jesus' divinity. And so, I'm really asking two questions. 1. Is it possible for someone to affirm that Jesus is the coming one, without affirming that Jesus is divine?
Well, Christian view him as divine. So in my mind it renders the question moot. Either the messiah is a human or he isn't. Jews are expecting a human.


2. If so, would it be possible for you to consider that Jesus might be the Coming One as predicted by the prophets?

No, becuase it doesn't mesh with my reading of the prophets. On the other hand, I do see why you do view him as the messiah.

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 10:04 PM
If that's true, there would be no Jews left today-only Christians. The fact that most Jews in Jesus's day did not accept him means that the prophets were not read as you claim they are. That doesn't make Christianity wrong, of course, merely unexpected.If Messiah was anticipated according to the 70 weeks that Daniel was given, then the "wrong reading" must have been for some other reason. It makes me wonder how Israel could still be looking forward to a messianic figure to arrive now that that timetable is long past.


Deuteronomy 13:2 specifically states that just because someone can perform miracles doesn't mean that they are to be followed.

What false god would Jesus have been referring to whom He spoke of and claimed to be speaking for and called men to repent and worship Him in Spirit and in truth that He described thusly:

"My Father which is in heaven"?

Is there another LORD God in heaven?

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 10:34 PM
Well, Christian view him as divine. So in my mind it renders the question moot. Either the messiah is a human or he isn't. Jews are expecting a human.

No, becuase it doesn't mesh with my reading of the prophets. On the other hand, I do see why you do view him as the messiah.There are a few clues in the prophets that Messiah was to live forever:

(Psa 89:3-4 KJV) I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, {4} Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah.

(Psa 89:26-29 KJV) He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. {27} Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. {28} My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. {29} His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven.

(Psa 89:35-37 KJV) Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. {36} His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. {37} It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.

(Psa 110:1-4 KJV) A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. {2} The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. {3} Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. {4} The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

(Ezek 37:25 KJV) And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.

(Isa 9:7 KJV) Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 10:40 PM
If Messiah was anticipated according to the 70 weeks that Daniel was given, then the "wrong reading" must have been for some other reason. It makes me wonder how Israel could still be looking forward to a messianic figure to arrive now that that timetable is long past.
Because it doesn't say the messianic prophecies will be fulfilled in 70 weeks, which don't correspond to Jesus's timeframe anyway




What false god would Jesus have been referring to whom He spoke of and claimed to be speaking for and called men to repent and worship Him in Spirit and in truth that He described thusly:

"My Father which is in heaven"?

Is there another LORD God in heaven?
Jews have reffered to God as 'our father' in prayer since long before Jesus

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 10:43 PM
There are a few clues in the prophets that Messiah was to live forever:

(Psa 89:3-4 KJV) I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant, {4} Thy seed will I establish for ever, and build up thy throne to all generations. Selah.Seed, yes.


(Psa 89:26-29 KJV) He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. {27} Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. {28} My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. {29}His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven.
Seed ,yes


(Psa 89:35-37 KJV) Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. {36}His seed shall endure for ever, and his throne as the sun before me. {37} It shall be established for ever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven. Selah.
seed, again.


(Psa 110:1-4 KJV) A Psalm of David. God said unto my master, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Mistranslation fixed.


(Ezek 37:25 KJV) And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
david was long dead by Ezekial's day. Obviously this refers to his descendants.


(Isa 9:7 KJV) Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 10:51 PM
Then there is this in the prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the temple

(1 Ki 8:27 KJV) But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

He goes on to describe this temple he has built as a house of prayer for the God who dwells in heaven. If the man made temple on earth is not where God will dwell amongst His people, then what can a temple made without hands be?

(Psa 40:6-8 KJV) Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, {8} I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.

The writer of Hebrews understands this psalm like this:

(Heb 10:5-7 KJV) Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: {6} In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

A holy dwelling in which the Lord will dwell that He makes - IS divine.

(Mat 1:20-23 KJV) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. {21} And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. {22} Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, {23} Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 10:58 PM
Then there is this in the prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the temple

(1 Ki 8:27 KJV) But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

He goes on to describe this temple he has built as a house of prayer for the God who dwells in heaven. If the man made temple on earth is not where God will dwell amongst His people, then what can a temple made without hands be? There was no temple from 586BC to when, 516BC? How to do you explain that gap?


(Psa 40:6-8 KJV) Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, {8} I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.meaning what?


The writer of Hebrews understands this psalm like this:

(Heb 10:5-7 KJV) Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: {6} In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.Right, but this person oviously already believed in Jesus.



(Mat 1:20-23 KJV) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. {21} And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. {22} Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, {23} Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
There are several issues here.

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 11:01 PM
No surprise here, I just wanted to show you the enduring or everlasting nature of what Abraham's initial hope was about. The Seed he was to bring forth was Messiah. And seeds too would multiply upon the earth in order to accomplish this (Israel). And we see how God made His election known among them until David's line was chosen. I suppose you are content with dwelling in this earth for your three score and ten, but Abraham looked forward to eternity. A succession of kings in this life is not what eternity is about.

Fenris
Jul 13th 2008, 11:12 PM
That's one way to look at it. But it isn't the only way.

Mograce2U
Jul 13th 2008, 11:37 PM
That's one way to look at it. But it isn't the only way.Unfortunately that is true. It is possible to tire of manna...

BroRog
Jul 14th 2008, 06:41 AM
Well, Christian view him as divine. So in my mind it renders the question moot. Either the messiah is a human or he isn't. Jews are expecting a human.

Never mind about Christian Tradition. What does the New Testament actually say? How does it read to you?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 11:35 AM
Never mind about Christian Tradition. What does the New Testament actually say? How does it read to you?
Honestly?

It reads with Jesus as a messiah candidate who fell short.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 11:45 AM
Unfortunately that is true. It is possible to tire of manna...
It's so easy to compare modern-day Jews to biblical Jews and say "Aha! They are evil after all!"

It's also a weak argument.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 14th 2008, 11:48 AM
Honestly?

It reads with Jesus as a messiah candidate who fell short.He was the conquering Messiah too, Fenris. He was victorious over the most destructive enemy man has ever known....death! He defeated death and the grave and gave us victory over them as well! :pp That's the Conquering King for you Fenris! :D He was just conquering a different foe than was expected. :)

God Bless!

Studyin'2Show
Jul 14th 2008, 11:53 AM
It's so easy to compare modern-day Jews to biblical Jews and say "Aha! They are evil after all!"

It's also a weak argument.No more or less evil than anyone else, Fenris. One thing that's important to understand is that we believe that we ALL have fallen short. So, no "Aha!" :)

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 11:53 AM
He was the conquering Messiah too, Fenris. He was victorious over the most destructive enemy man has ever known....death! He defeated death and the grave and gave us victory over them as well! :pp That's the Conquering King for you Fenris! :D He was just conquering a different foe than was expected. :)

God Bless! Well, that's your perspective. Mine is obviously somewhat different.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 11:56 AM
No more or less evil than anyone else, Fenris. One thing that's important to understand is that we believe that we ALL have fallen short. So, no "Aha!" :)Uh...maybe no more or less evil than anyone else. But it really gets tiresome of being compared to biblical Jews as an argument about how Jews today are evil or else simply blind to the obvious. The implication is that Jews throughout history are bad, and it strikes me as vaguely antisemitic.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 14th 2008, 12:07 PM
Uh...maybe no more or less evil than anyone else. But it really gets tiresome of being compared to biblical Jews as an argument about how Jews today are evil or else simply blind to the obvious. The implication is that Jews throughout history are bad, and it strikes me as vaguely antisemitic.I think that's a misinterpretation, Fenris, but I understand that is the way you think it's being portrayed but really it isn't. I compare myself to biblical Jews. I've had my time in the wilderness, spiritually speaking. So, no, Jews are no more or less evil than any other group. We all need to be forgiven for our sin against God. Those who portray Jews as more evil are missing the point of the Gospel message.

God Bless!

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 12:12 PM
Well, that's your perspective. Mine is obviously somewhat different.

Yours is different because you won't open your heart to the idea that he was Messiah.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 12:22 PM
Uh...maybe no more or less evil than anyone else. But it really gets tiresome of being compared to biblical Jews as an argument about how Jews today are evil or else simply blind to the obvious. The implication is that Jews throughout history are bad, and it strikes me as vaguely antisemitic.

The implication that Jews throughout history are bad is antisemitic. I think a lot of that comes from their own scriptures, and their own view that they over and over again fell short. But there is nobody who HASN'T fallen short. We also know that God is not a respector of persons, nor should we be.

That doesn't mean we can't look at the biblical Jews and see similarities to Jews today.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 12:37 PM
I think that's a misinterpretation, Fenris, but I understand that is the way you think it's being portrayed but really it isn't. I compare myself to biblical Jews. I've had my time in the wilderness, spiritually speaking. So, no, Jews are no more or less evil than any other group. We all need to be forgiven for our sin against God. Those who portray Jews as more evil are missing the point of the Gospel message.

God Bless!
So you wouldn't mind being compared to...oh, say the Christians who carried out the crusades? Or the inquisition?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 12:38 PM
Yours is different because you won't open your heart to the idea that he was Messiah.
That's right. Because he didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies as expected. So I have to 'believe' that he was the messiah because it can't be proved to me.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 12:43 PM
The implication that Jews throughout history are bad is antisemitic.
I'm glad someone agrees with me!



That doesn't mean we can't look at the biblical Jews and see similarities to Jews today.
Well, you're finding similarities because it vindicates your own beliefs. That doesn't mean that you're wrong, of course. Just be aware that you're doing it.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 14th 2008, 12:53 PM
That's right. Because he didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies as expected. So I have to 'believe' that he was the messiah because it can't be proved to me.Look at what you said, Fenris! I bolded the 'as expected' because that is key. I know you've read the Hebrew scriptures. How many things happened 'as expected'? Just one more question, can God be proven or do you have faith to 'believe'? :hmm:

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 01:39 PM
That's right. Because he didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies as expected. So I have to 'believe' that he was the messiah because it can't be proved to me.

But he did fulfill all the messianic prophecies, which ones didn't he fulfill?

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 01:40 PM
I'm glad someone agrees with me!


Well, you're finding similarities because it vindicates your own beliefs. That doesn't mean that you're wrong, of course. Just be aware that you're doing it.

I'm not sure what you mean by it vindicates my beliefs. Which beliefs might you be referring to?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 01:48 PM
Look at what you said, Fenris! I bolded the 'as expected' because that is key. I put the words 'as expected' in on purpose. Because I know you guys believe that Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies. But Jews didn't at the time time, and don't now.

I know you've read the Hebrew scriptures. How many things happened 'as expected'? This isn't the random machinations of life we're talking about. It's God's promises. And those promises were very specific. Christianity concedes that some things prophesized are yet to come, and has to rely on a 'second coming'. So for a Jew waiting for the ingathering of the exiles, the rebuilding of the Temple, world peace, and the universal knowledge of God, we would say that we're still waiting.


Just one more question, can God be proven or do you have faith to 'believe'? :hmm:
I don't think that God's existence can be proved, at least not in the way to convince someone who doesn't already believe. On a personal level, one may consider the matter 'proved' to themself. But that's not quite the same thing.

mouse1992
Jul 14th 2008, 01:52 PM
I believe that people who denied Christ and His suffering will be damned not in Hell but rather in a lonely place which is much worst than that of Hell........"Nothingness" it is called, I think. The believe in nothingness, to nothingness they will go!

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 01:53 PM
But he did fulfill all the messianic prophecies, which ones didn't he fulfill?
As I already stated, rebuilding the temple, gather the Jewish exiles, world peace, universal knowledge of God...

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 01:55 PM
I'm not sure what you mean by it vindicates my beliefs. Which beliefs might you be referring to?
The Jews in the bible were lacking in faith in God, the Jews in Jesus's time didn't have faith in him, ergo, Jesus was God.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 01:56 PM
I believe that people who denied Christ and His suffering will be damned not in Hell but rather in a lonely place which is much worst than that of Hell........"Nothingness" it is called, I think. The believe in nothingness, to nothingness they will go!
Just because someone doesn't believe in Jesus, it doesn't mean that they are an atheist you know...

LadyinWaiting
Jul 14th 2008, 02:00 PM
I'd be more interested to know what prophecies he didn't fulfill as detailed...

2 Samuel 7:16 - Davidic line of kings would endure forever (in spite of there not being an actual king from the Davidic line since the Babylonian conquest)

Isaiah 7:14 - Virgin birth as explicated by Isaiah

Isaiah 9:6-7 - Being the "son of God"

Isaiah 40:1-5; 9 - The messenger who would preceede the Messiah in the wilderness (John the Baptist who prepared others for the advent of Christ)

Isaiah 50:6 - His beating and scorning

Isaiah 53:1-3 - Isaiah said he'd be brought up right in front of his own people without a place of position and that his own would reject him (those in Bethlehem vastly rejected as many still do today); granted...many think this refers to Israel as a nation, but many commentators of the Christian and Jewish world also agree this refers to a Messiah specifically.

Isaiah 53: 4-6 - Messiah as being punished for us all in order to bring about our salvation by taking on our sins.

Isaiah 53:7 - He would not go against his accusors.

Zechariah 9:9 - The entrance of the Messiah to Jerusalem on a donkey


These things are all fulfilled according to the gospels. Considering the few Christians of the time, the vast amount of all relgions counter to them in that area and beyond...if the gospels are nothing more than a fable or a fairy story, how would it have survived as scripture? I don't think it would have happened (any many tried to squelch it and drive it out over the years).

I'd have to question what was more important...God doing what people expected or what He wanted under divine plan. I doubt Moses expected to hear from a burning bush or that a donkey would talk. Nothing in the prophecies are typical or "expected" under normal experiences...that's part of what makes prophecies so incredible - that they are not expected to be normal; they're expected to be fulfilled. And based on the scripture we have...I think it's fair to say that Christ met all the requirements of prophecy.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:18 PM
I'd be more interested to know what prophecies he didn't fulfill as detailed...

2 Samuel 7:16 - Davidic line of kings would endure forever (in spite of there not being an actual king from the Davidic line since the Babylonian conquest)Well, Jesus wasn't born during the Babylonian conquest either...

Also, no king from the descendants of David from 586 BC until the rebuilding of the Temple. Then, the Hashmoneans made themselves kings after the Chanukah story about 150 BC..

It's read to say that when a legitimate king sits on the throne, he will be from David. Not that there must be a Davidic king at all times.



Isaiah 7:14 - Virgin birth as explicated by IsaiahThe word is read as 'young woman', not virgin.


Isaiah 9:6-7 - Being the "son of God"Jews read the verse differently: For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace."


Isaiah 40:1-5; 9 - The messenger who would preceede the Messiah in the wilderness (John the Baptist who prepared others for the advent of Christ)This is only true if you already believe that Jesus was the messiah...


Isaiah 50:6 - His beating and scorningThis appears to be Isaiah, talking about himself.


Isaiah 53:1-3 - Isaiah said he'd be brought up right in front of his own people without a place of position and that his own would reject him (those in Bethlehem vastly rejected as many still do today); granted...many think this refers to Israel as a nation, but many commentators of the Christian and Jewish world also agree this refers to a Messiah specifically.No one in the Jewish world says this refers to the messiah specifically. It is simply not understood in that way; certainly not on a literal level.


Isaiah 53: 4-6 - Messiah as being punished for us all in order to bring about our salvation by taking on our sins.

Isaiah 53:7 - He would not go against his accusors. The whole chapter is assumed ot refer to the jewish people, as above.


Zechariah 9:9 - The entrance of the Messiah to Jerusalem on a donkeyMillions of people did this.

In sum, Jews are not blind or evil. We certainly know what's in our own bible. We simply understand it differently.



These things are all fulfilled according to the gospels. Considering the few Christians of the time, the vast amount of all relgions counter to them in that area and beyond...if the gospels are nothing more than a fable or a fairy story, how would it have survived as scripture? I don't think it would have happened (any many tried to squelch it and drive it out over the years).Oh, no doubt. God wanted this new religion spread, just as he wanted other religions spread. It serves His purposes. That doesn't make it Truth though.


I'd have to question what was more important...God doing what people expected or what He wanted under divine plan. I doubt Moses expected to hear from a burning bush or that a donkey would talk. Nothing in the prophecies are typical or "expected" under normal experiences...that's part of what makes prophecies so incredible - that they are not expected to be normal; they're expected to be fulfilled. And based on the scripture we have...I think it's fair to say that Christ met all the requirements of prophecy.

Well, we're still waiting for Ezekiel's third Temple, the ingathering of the exiles and the world peace as prophesized by Isaiah, the universal knowledge of God as prophesized by Zacharia...

Mograce2U
Jul 14th 2008, 02:20 PM
It's so easy to compare modern-day Jews to biblical Jews and say "Aha! They are evil after all!"

It's also a weak argument.I didn't say that they were "evil". But it is not hard to make a comparison when unbelief is still what marks them, because your hope in Messiah is focused on carnal understanding only. The Jewish hope in scripture is for their redemption and salvation.

(Isa 52:7 KJV) How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!

This is the message Moses said that Prophet would bring to them. Malachi tells us that a herald would be sent in advance who was like Elijah calling the people to repent. Some 400 years later John the Baptist showed up doing this and announced the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world had come. Yet you will not hear this gospel - so does this not make you like your fathers?

(Isa 53:1 KJV) Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? Answer: ISRAEL

(Isa 52:13-15 KJV) Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. {14} As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: {15} So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

We are from these many nations whom Christ has redeemed, yet many in Israel reside in their unbelief denying this was even their hope or that it was the message given by their own prophets. So it is hard to see modern Israel as the descendants of Abraham, Moses or David who held fast to their hope for their redemption. The children of unbelievers are not part of the remnant nor among those chosen of God. That is as long as they continue in their unbelief, their plight is that God is not with them. This is the tragedy that is Israel today who because of her unbelief, rejects her own salvation which God sent to them first.

(John 8:24 KJV) I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:24 PM
There are many biblical prophecies Jews are waiting on. A good summary of them (although it is not all of them) is in Ezekiel 37:

21 And say unto them: Thus saith the Lord GOD: Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the nations, whither they are gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land; 22 and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all; and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all; 23 neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions; but I will save them out of all their dwelling-places, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them; so shall they be My people, and I will be their God. 24 And My servant David shall be king over them, and they all shall have one shepherd; they shall also walk in Mine ordinances, and observe My statutes, and do them. 25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob My servant, wherein your fathers dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, they, and their children, and their children's children, for ever; and David My servant shall be their prince for ever. 26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them--it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; and I will establish them, and multiply them, and will set My sanctuary in the midst of them for ever. 27 My dwelling-place also shall be over them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 28 And the nations shall know that I am the LORD that sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for ever.'

apothanein kerdos
Jul 14th 2008, 02:29 PM
As I already stated, rebuilding the temple, gather the Jewish exiles, world peace, universal knowledge of God...

Is it possible that the Rabbis were wrong in their interpretation of who the Messiah would be? Is it possible that maybe, through their hermeneutical method, they missed out on some Messianic prophecies?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:30 PM
I didn't say that they were "evil". But it is not hard to make a comparison when unbelief is still what marks them, because your hope in Messiah is focused on carnal understanding only. The Jewish hope in scripture is for their redemption and salvation. Oh, I believe in God. I'm a religious man. And God keeps His promises. He promised certain things, and we're still waiting for them. As I already stated, most Christians are also waiting for them to be fulfilled, in the second coming...



This is the message Moses said that Prophet would bring to them. Malachi tells us that a herald would be sent in advance who was like Elijah calling the people to repent. Some 400 years later John the Baptist showed up doing this and announced the Lamb of God who would take away the sins of the world had come. Yet you will not hear this gospel - so does this not make you like your fathers?Because I don't believe John was a prophet.


(Isa 53:1 KJV) Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? Answer: ISRAELMaybe. Or maybe the startled people are mentioned in the previous verse... 15 So shall he startle many nations, kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they perceive



We are from these many nations whom Christ has redeemed, yet many in Israel reside in their unbelief denying this was even their hope or that it was the message given by their own prophets
There goes that circular logic again. "The Jews didn't listen to the prophets, they didn't listen to Jesus, ergo, Jesus was a prophet."


So it is hard to see modern Israel as the descendants of Abraham, Moses or David who held fast to their hope for their redemption.
Why? We are the descendants of Abraham, whether you like it or not. We are still waiting for redemption.



The children of unbelievers are not part of the remnant nor among those chosen of God. That is as long as they continue in their unbelief, their plight is that God is not with them. This is the tragedy that is Israel today who because of her unbelief, rejects her own salvation which God sent to them first.This is your opinion. It is not a fact. Not even every Christian believes it.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:31 PM
Is it possible that the Rabbis were wrong in their interpretation of who the Messiah would be? Is it possible that maybe, through their hermeneutical method, they missed out on some Messianic prophecies?Of course, anything is possible. But as I already said, even Christians are waiting for some of the prophecies in the Tanach to be fulfilled...

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 02:40 PM
As I already stated, rebuilding the temple, gather the Jewish exiles, world peace, universal knowledge of God...

He rebuilt the teemple in the believers. The temple in Jerusalem will also be rebuilt during the millenial kingdom.

The gathering of the Jewish exiles is in a way happening now, but actually will truely be realized with the second coming.

World peace is during the millenial kingdom.

There is universal knowledge of God. It is written in the hearts and minds of men. But you have to open yourself up to it, and if you refuse to open your heart, and silence your soul to listen, then you will not hear him.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:44 PM
He rebuilt the teemple in the believers. The temple in Jerusalem will also be rebuilt during the millenial kingdom.

The gathering of the Jewish exiles is in a way happening now, but actually will truely be realized with the second coming.

World peace is during the millenial kingdom.

There is universal knowledge of God. It is written in the hearts and minds of men. But you have to open yourself up to it, and if you refuse to open your heart, and silence your soul to listen, then you will not hear him.
Well, the coming of the messiah is supposed to be a reward for returning to God.

You've just turned it into a test.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 02:44 PM
The Jews in the bible were lacking in faith in God, the Jews in Jesus's time didn't have faith in him, ergo, Jesus was God.

The Jews in the bible lacked faith, then found it, then lacked it again, then found it.

The Jews were split during the time of Christ, some believed on him, and others did not.

Christians today are no different, in fact I would argue that most of them lack true faith. Many of them call on Christ, but when they stand before him in their lot at the time of judgement he will say, I know you not depart from me.

ALL have fallen short of the glory of God.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:45 PM
The Jews in the bible lacked faith, then found it, then lacked it again, then found it.

The Jews were split during the time of Christ, some believed on him, and others did not.
That isn't the argument you're making though.

Too many people use the Jew's straying from God as evidence that Jesus was God.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 02:49 PM
That isn't the argument you're making though.

Too many people use the Jew's straying from God as evidence that Jesus was God.

I don't need the Jew's to stray to find evidence of Christ's divinity.

It is everywhere I look.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 02:50 PM
Well, the coming of the messiah is supposed to be a reward for returning to God.

You've just turned it into a test.

I have no power to do anything, and I can turn nothing away from it's natural purpose. I am a mere servent, all the power comes from above, and through the Holy Spirit.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:54 PM
I don't need the Jew's to stray to find evidence of Christ's divinity.

It is everywhere I look.
Good for you!

Other's faith may not be as strong.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 02:55 PM
I have no power to do anything, and I can turn nothing away from it's natural purpose. I am a mere servent, all the power comes from above, and through the Holy Spirit.
That's great, but you completely ignored my point.

apothanein kerdos
Jul 14th 2008, 02:59 PM
Of course, anything is possible. But as I already said, even Christians are waiting for some of the prophecies in the Tanach to be fulfilled...

Absolutely agreed.

But would this necessitate that a belief in a 'double' return of the Messiah (first time as a suffering servant, second time as a conquering hero) is necessarily wrong?

After all, if the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53 is correct and this refers to the Messiah, it seemingly contradicts the conquering passages of the Messiah unless there is a 'double' return.

Now, I agree that it is contingent upon the Christian interpretation. If the Christian interpretation is wrong, then it's simply wrong. At the same time, I believe the evidence, reasoning, and proper hermeneutical work falls upon the Christian side.

LadyinWaiting
Jul 14th 2008, 03:12 PM
One major issue I take with a response:


No one in the Jewish world says this refers to the messiah specifically. It is simply not understood in that way; certainly not on a literal level.


It's never a strong argument to respond in terms of absolutes:

The Fifty-Third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, edited by S.R. Driver and A.D. Neubauer. Here are two examples from that book:

"Our Rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the King Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view." - Rabbi Moshe Alshekh, 16th century.

"But he was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, the meaning of which is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities which produce the effect of his being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for them himself." - Rabbi Eliyyah de Vidas, who wrote during the 16th century.


(From the website I used for quick reference.)


Also, you're operating on the idea that the way one peson or culture explains prohecy without looking at the merits of a contradicting one (which is built on a preponderance of evidence).

Christ, if not the Messiah, could not be a "good teacher" or even a good person as he intentionally acted as a false prophet to lead people who would otherwise be Jewish astray. He would be either the worst heretic or a lunatic for his actions of creating a new, false religion based on his subversion of Jewish law. It was for such heresy (supposed) that he was executed. False prophets are spoken against in Jewish scripture, with specific punishments, are they not?

*Now, granted, I believe Messiah is Christ. I believe everything that is in the New Testament as well as the Old. However, this is basically to just highlight the false leaps of logic that must be made in order to make Christ a "good teacher" under any other faith when he denies all other faiths as being the way. It doesn't logically fit.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 03:28 PM
Absolutely agreed.


OK, well you're honest and thoughtful. I appreciate discussions with people like yourself.

OK, so let's look at what you've said:

But would this necessitate that a belief in a 'double' return of the Messiah (first time as a suffering servant, second time as a conquering hero) is necessarily wrong?As I said, anything is possible. Jews never saw Isaiah 53 as referring to the messiah in any case. The sometimes conflicting narratives about the messiah himself was usually seen as an either/or scenario. If we deserve it, on clouds from heaven, i.e. with miracles and fanfare. If we deserve it, humble and riding on a donkey, i.e. apparently naturally. The linchpin for that whole argument is in Isaiah 60:22 "I, the Lord, will hasten it in it's time". I.e. if we deserve it, God will hasten it. If we don't, the messiah will still come, but at the appointed time.



After all, if the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 53 is correct and this refers to the Messiah, it seemingly contradicts the conquering passages of the Messiah unless there is a 'double' return.Again, possibly so.But there are many problems with the Christian reading of Isaiah 53, including some bad mistranslations. Again, that doesn't make it wrong. But it's a hard sell.


Now, I agree that it is contingent upon the Christian interpretation. If the Christian interpretation is wrong, then it's simply wrong. At the same time, I believe the evidence, reasoning, and proper hermeneutical work falls upon the Christian side.This is true, and it's brave that you say so.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 03:48 PM
It's never a strong argument to respond in terms of absolutes: First mistake, it isn't "Rabbi Moses Alschech" -- his name was Moshe el Sheikh and he was called Alshich. Your source can't even get the guy's name right. Second of all, he never said what you claim. He compared the suffereing servant to Moses, not the messiah. And he never said the servant WAS Moses, he simply used it as an allegory.

The second rabbi you quote I have never heard of.

In any case, Rashi writing 500 years earlier states that the servant is the Jewish people.

And a Christian source, Origen, who lived from 185 to 250, wrote that Jews he conversed with stated that the servant was the Jewish people.




Also, you're operating on the idea that the way one peson or culture explains prohecy without looking at the merits of a contradicting one (which is built on a preponderance of evidence). No, I operate under the assumption that the established understanding is correct unless someone can prove otherwise.


Christ, if not the Messiah, could not be a "good teacher" or even a good person as he intentionally acted as a false prophet to lead people who would otherwise be Jewish astray.Unless his mission was not really to the Jews. What if his mission was to lead gentiles closer to God?


He would be either the worst heretic or a lunatic for his actions of creating a new, false religion based on his subversion of Jewish lawUnless he is misquoted or misunderstood by those who heard him.


It was for such heresy (supposed) that he was executed. False prophets are spoken against in Jewish scripture, with specific punishments, are they not?He wasn't executed for false prophecy, but for blasphemy. Which, incidentally, is not a crime in Judaism. And false prophets are stoned. He was crucified. By gentiles.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 04:22 PM
Unless his mission was not really to the Jews. What if his mission was to lead gentiles closer to God?

Unless he is misquoted or misunderstood by those who heard him.

He wasn't executed for false prophecy, but for blasphemy. Which, incidentally, is not a crime in Judaism. And false prophets are stoned. He was crucified. By gentiles.

O.K. hold up a minute.

1. His mission was to the Jews first, but then when they didn't listen he took his message to the gentiles. He came to fulfill the law for the Jew, and create a new covenent for the world.

2. He was crucified by both Jews AND gentiles. The Pharisees were the ones who desired to see Christ killed. If it wasn't for the Pharisees he would not have been crucified at all. The Pharisees then led Christ to Pontius Pilate, who argued that Christ was not in his jurisdiction and had him sent to Herod. Herod feared a riot from the Jews no matter what his verdict and had him sent back to Pilate. Since Pilate was the highest authority in the land concerning that matter he had no choice but to hear it. He did everything within his power to free Christ, going so far as to put him up against the most hated criminal in his day giving the Jews a choice he thought they would have to make in favor of Christ. The Jews screamed to free a murderer, and to crucify Christ. Pilate then had no choice but to see Christ crucified.

The gentiles crucified Christ in those days by first not following the spirit of justice. The gentiles today crucify Christ through our sin.

The Jews crucified Christ in those days by delivering him up to the courts on false charges. The Jews today crucify Christ by denying his name.

Please do not sit here in all honesty and try to say the Jews take no blame for the crucifixion of Christ. Every human being on the face of the Earth takes responsibility for that. The Jew first, and then the Gentile.

daughter
Jul 14th 2008, 04:34 PM
No, I operate under the assumption that the established understanding is correct unless someone can prove otherwise.


Which established understanding though? The established Christian understanding has been around 2000 years...


Unless his mission was not really to the Jews. What if his mission was to lead gentiles closer to God?
Unless he is misquoted or misunderstood by those who heard him.

Now, that's interesting... would this mean that He was "annointed" by God with a mission to the gentiles? Would that not make him a Messiah? (Oh no, I sound like John Hagee... :o) But what I mean is, you accept that Jesus fulfilled God's plans, and you seem to concede that He's brought Gentiles closer to God... That would make Him some kind of Messiah, wouldn't it?

He wasn't executed for false prophecy, but for blasphemy. Which, incidentally, is not a crime in Judaism. And false prophets are stoned. He was crucified. By gentiles.Well, the Romans weren't interested in Jewish definitions of blasphemy. And the Jews didn't execute Him. In those days, the Romans forbade the nations under their command from executing men (women didn't count, hence the woman caught in adultery would have been stoned, while the man would have got away with it.) If someone was to be executed at all, it had to be by Rome. When Stephen was stoned later on, Roman power had broken down in the province for a while. But at the time of Christ's execution, it was quite tight on the area, so if someone was to be executed, it had to be by Rome.

So, would you consider that gentiles executed someone who was sentenced for blasphemy under Jewish law?

My understanding is that a political elite based in Jerusalem manipulated Pilate into sentencing Christ, who was from a different part of the nation, and not any elite. He had plenty of Israelite followers. The problem was not even the Pharisees, it was a certain clique within that group.

Under Jewish law, Christ was considered a blasphemer, but the Romans didn't care about that, and needed to be persuaded of something else... so treason against Rome was the ticket. (As in, "This man said he was king of the Jews.")

Basically, everyone was guilty. Gentiles, historically, have resented the Jews for being the chosen people, and have committed the classic crime of transference... Romans DID nail Christ to a cross. But I'll bet Constantine didn't see it that way...

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 04:37 PM
O.K. hold up a minute.

1. His mission was to the Jews first, but then when they didn't listen he took his message to the gentiles. He came to fulfill the law for the Jew, and create a new covenent for the world.I know you believe this to be true. But a question was asked as to how I saw it, and I gave my perspective. I don't expect you to believe it.


2. He was crucified by both Jews AND gentiles. The Pharisees were the ones who desired to see Christ killed. If it wasn't for the Pharisees he would not have been crucified at all. The Pharisees then led Christ to Pontius Pilate, who argued that Christ was not in his jurisdiction and had him sent to Herod. Herod feared a riot from the Jews no matter what his verdict and had him sent back to Pilate. Since Pilate was the highest authority in the land concerning that matter he had no choice but to hear it. He did everything within his power to free Christ, going so far as to put him up against the most hated criminal in his day giving the Jews a choice he thought they would have to make in favor of Christ. The Jews screamed to free a murderer, and to crucify Christ. Pilate then had no choice but to see Christ crucified.This is the standard Christian view. I do not believe that it happened as you say, though.




Please do not sit here in all honesty and try to say the Jews take no blame for the crucifixion of Christ. Every human being on the face of the Earth takes responsibility for that. The Jew first, and then the Gentile.
I take no blame for it. I blame the Romans, who generally crucified revolutionaries. That is who I believe Jesus to be.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 04:44 PM
Which established understanding though? The established Christian understanding has been around 2000 years...
The Jewish understanding has been around for 3300 years...


Now, that's interesting... would this mean that He was "annointed" by God with a mission to the gentiles? Would that not make him a Messiah? (Oh no, I sound like John Hagee... :o) But what I mean is, you accept that Jesus fulfilled God's plans, and you seem to concede that He's brought Gentiles closer to God... That would make Him some kind of Messiah, wouldn't it?Sure. That doesn't make him the Jewish messiah though.




My understanding is that a political elite based in Jerusalem manipulated Pilate into sentencing Christ, who was from a different part of the nation, and not any elite. He had plenty of Israelite followers. The problem was not even the Pharisees, it was a certain clique within that group.If any Jewish group didn't like him, it would have been the Saducees and no the Pharisees.


Under Jewish law, Christ was considered a blasphemerNo, he wasn't.


but the Romans didn't care about that, and needed to be persuaded of something else... so treason against Rome was the ticket. (As in, "This man said he was king of the Jews.")Or maybe that was the only reason the Romans crucified him. For being a revolutionary. Which is actually closer to the Jewish definition of the messiah than the Christian one.

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 04:46 PM
I know you believe this to be true. But a question was asked as to how I saw it, and I gave my perspective. I don't expect you to believe it.

This is the standard Christian view. I do not believe that it happened as you say, though.



I take no blame for it. I blame the Romans, who generally crucified revolutionaries. That is who I believe Jesus to be.

You believe Jesus to be a revolutionary?

If you don't believe in Christ, or are not here to learn about Christ....then what ARE you here for?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 05:07 PM
..then what ARE you here for?
I'm here to learn about Christians.

And believe it or not, some people here have made some fascinating observations about the bible. It has offered me insight into my own religion.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 05:14 PM
You believe Jesus to be a revolutionary?

Let me clarify,

I don't think Jesus was going to raise an army to fight the Romans. He was obviously a pacifist. But he wanted an end to Roman rule in Judea, and especially their involvement in Jewish religious affairs like appointing the High Priest. But I think he intended to pray and have God do the fighting for him...

theleast
Jul 14th 2008, 05:20 PM
When Christ comes back, he will be as a whirlwind and his army will be with him.

daughter
Jul 14th 2008, 05:27 PM
So... Fenris... you believe that Jesus was a Messiah to the Gentiles? That's interesting... So, you do believe Him to have been fulfilling God's will?

I do know that you've said in the past that you don't think He deserved to die. I just wanted to throw that in, so everyone would know where you're coming from!

In your opinion, Jesus was on a mission from God, to draw the Gentile nations to the God of Israel, He was annointed for that task, He was not a blasphemer, and it was wrong for Him to be condemned to death?

Am I right?

Just randomly... do you think you would have liked to talk to Jesus?

Mograce2U
Jul 14th 2008, 05:31 PM
Oh, I believe in God. I'm a religious man. And God keeps His promises. He promised certain things, and we're still waiting for them. As I already stated, most Christians are also waiting for them to be fulfilled, in the second coming...

Many Christians still struggle with their unbelief. But our hope is found in the scriptures which speak about the One who was to come and redeem Israel. It is ironic that Israel claims to have a hope in being redeemed and yet continues to reject the way which God has provided to them. And goes so far as to change how Isa 52 & 53 was to be understood to justify themselves regarding who God's Servant would be and what He was to do - FOR their redemption from their sins.

Maybe. Or maybe the startled people are mentioned in the previous verse... 15 So shall he startle many nations, kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they perceive

All this is saying is that the Gentiles who were not privy to the law and prophets, would believe; while Israel who should have known God's Servant, would not desire Him but would despise Him instead.

There goes that circular logic again. "The Jews didn't listen to the prophets, they didn't listen to Jesus, ergo, Jesus was a prophet."

Jesus proved He was a prophet of God by His works and His words. God was with Him, and there is no testimony which claims otherwise except from false witnesses who accused Him of blasphemy and sin. How can you honestly read the record of His testimony to us given by eyewitnesses who knew Him and still believe nothing that He said? Especially in light of the prophecies given beforehand about Messiah? It can only be, because the light has gone out in Israel BECAUSE they do not believe God!

Why? We are the descendants of Abraham, whether you like it or not. We are still waiting for redemption.

So was Ishmael, but he was not the child of promise, nor was Messiah to come from him.

This is your opinion. It is not a fact. Not even every Christian believes it.An opinion which is formulated because I believe the scriptures and the prophets of God who gave them to us. My hope in the promise of God for eternal life is thru faith in what Jesus has accomplished for Israel and the world. We have the remission of sins because the Father accepted the offering of His Son whom He sent to save us - the Holy One of Israel; who sits upon His Father's throne FOREVER. Isaiah 53 is Messianic which if you would open your eyes in faith you would see Jesus filled that role perfectly. God is glorified in Christ, yet Israel does not know Him still because she will not forsake her unbelief for faith in God to do what He has promised.

I marvel that this is so in you Fenris.

LadyinWaiting
Jul 14th 2008, 05:44 PM
Is it possible they were using a translated version of the name? I doubt that they misquoted what is actually in the writing. Also, just because you haven't heard of the other Rabbi doesn't mean that he didn't exist. You said NO ONE in the Jewish world. You're incorrect. That's just fact right now since there is evidence to the contrary. The misuse of a NAME doesn't change what is quoted as text from that written work.

Additionally...Origen wrote what the people HE conversed with said, not what ALL people state. There are many who call themselves Christians yet don't believe in Hell. It doesn't mean that it can be applied to all people of that faith.

Additionally, Rashi writing a conflicting piece doesn't change what the others said. My intent was to point out you do not speak for all people, and when engaged in a debate sort of thing, it's important to not use absolutes that you cannot back up appropriately.


No, I operate under the assumption that the established understanding is correct unless someone can prove otherwise.

However, there IS proof otherwise. You simply refuse to accept it, somewhat blindly. If it's midnight, and I tell you it's dark outside, we could go round and round just because you refuse to admit the truth of the darkness outside. As I've said many other times, denial of the truth doesn't change the fact that truth is truth. If a park bench has been freshly painted and there's a "wet paint" sign on it, your denial of it being wet paint doesn't change the truth that when you walk away, your clothes will bear the truth of the sign. (Granted, this is only true if the sign was put there authentically and not as a prank, a week earlier etc.)


Unless his mission was not really to the Jews. What if his mission was to lead gentiles closer to God?
That would mean that the God he was leading people to is a false God, an idol...and we know what happened when the idol worship took place with the Jewish culture. "Though shall have no other God's before me" is pretty clear in terms of a commandment. Why would God send Christ on a mission to confuse the whole of society rather than one that would RECONCILE everyone who believes (which is what the Christian faith presents)? It isn't logical. Either Christ would be leading everyone to idolatry by making himself a god to be praised and worshipped as Lord, or else he WAS the Lord incarnate.


Unless he is misquoted or misunderstood by those who heard him.

How is this even a way to address the fact that he either was who he said he was or he was a lunatic or liar? He was telling people how to get to Heaven, that he was God incarnate, etc. How is any of that NOT creating a new faith?


He wasn't executed for false prophecy, but for blasphemy. Which, incidentally, is not a crime in Judaism. And false prophets are stoned. He was crucified. By gentiles.

Yes, false prophets ARE supposed to be stoned. That was my point. He was spouting off prophecy about the world to come based on those who recorded the stories of his life. By that standard, he should have been swiftly executed under the law. That's if what he was saying wasn't coming true.

He was walking around healing people and preaching against the Jewish leaders and their customs...you don't think that the religious leaders at the time would have called him under questioning if they could have?


This is the standard Christian view. I do not believe that it happened as you say, though.
^ That was regarding the view of the crucifixion of Christ. However, other historians have at least corroborated the elements leading up to his death, regardless of whether or not you believe in the resurrection.


Again, these are people who would have been easily rounded up and executed quickly if the chance was open, meaning those who wrote the New Testament. This uprising could have been quickly squelched out if it were not accurate. People weren't that impressionable and naive that they would just blindly follow what could get them killed. Don't you think that says something about the veracity of scriptures themselves?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 05:46 PM
So... Fenris... you believe that Jesus was a Messiah to the Gentiles? Not 'messiah', because he was never anointed as te word messiah means. But sent to the gentiles? certainly.


That's interesting... So, you do believe Him to have been fulfilling God's will? Yes.


I do know that you've said in the past that you don't think He deserved to die. I just wanted to throw that in, so everyone would know where you're coming from! Well, as I say, he committed no crime that would merit the death penalty from a Jewish court.


In your opinion, Jesus was on a mission from God, to draw the Gentile nations to the God of Israel, He was annointed for that task, He was not a blasphemer, and it was wrong for Him to be condemned to death?

Am I right?Correct.


Just randomly... do you think you would have liked to talk to Jesus?
Given how much I enjoy the company of his followers, I am sure I would have enjoyed his company as well.:)

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 05:49 PM
I marvel that this is so in you Fenris.
Your entire post is opinion. You are certainly entitled to it.

apothanein kerdos
Jul 14th 2008, 05:55 PM
OK, well you're honest and thoughtful. I appreciate discussions with people like yourself.

I feel it's the best way to handle a discussion. If either side comes from a position of, "There's no chance I could be wrong," then it just gets arrogant.


As I said, anything is possible. Jews never saw Isaiah 53 as referring to the messiah in any case. The sometimes conflicting narratives about the messiah himself was usually seen as an either/or scenario. If we deserve it, on clouds from heaven, i.e. with miracles and fanfare. If we deserve it, humble and riding on a donkey, i.e. apparently naturally. The linchpin for that whole argument is in Isaiah 60:22 "I, the Lord, will hasten it in it's time". I.e. if we deserve it, God will hasten it. If we don't, the messiah will still come, but at the appointed time.

I guess my problem is I don't see how Isaiah 53 could fit anything but the Messiah. It can't really be referring to Isaiah as he certainly didn't remove any troubles. Likewise, it can't be referring to Israel because it says that "he shall be rejected by his people." The Hebrews are a people, so it's hard for them to be rejected by themselves. What interpretation do you hold to?

Of course, regardless of if it refers to the Messiah or not, with your "either/or" interpretation, it wouldn't really matter. The Messiah would then become one possible manifestation.

As for Isaiah, it seems He's merely saying that depending on Israel's actions He will hasten the time of renewal, or the restoration of Israel. I don't really see, however, how it indicates an "either/or" Messiah. Could you elaborate a bit? For example, do we see anywhere in the Tanakh where it specifies other than Isaiah 60:22?


Again, possibly so.But there are many problems with the Christian reading of Isaiah 53, including some bad mistranslations. Again, that doesn't make it wrong. But it's a hard sell.

Well the question I would have to ask is if they are necessarily mistranslations. What about Christians who grew up in Judaism and are, therefore, fluent in Hebrew? What about former Orthodox Rabbis that found a problem with the traditional Rabbinical translation?

My point in that is just to ask why we should consider the Orthodox Jewish interpretation over the Christian interpretation if people with similar or the same qualifications interpreted it?

Now, of course this argument cuts both ways :)


This is true, and it's brave that you say so.


Orthodox Judaism had the luxury of being able to avoid German Higher Criticism (unfortunately Conservative and Reform Jews succumbed to it - hope you aren't part of either sect, if so I'm not insulting them, just that they accepted German Higher Criticism). Christianity, unfortunately, took a hard hit. This led to the idea that we can somehow believe Christianity even if it's historically inaccurate or if all the evidence points against it.

I try to be a bit more realistic - if it's not evidentially supported, doesn't make sense, or doesn't fit with a proper interpretation of the Old Testament, then it's false. At the same time, I'd ask you to be honest with yourself (which I believe you are) - if the Rabbinical interpretation is wrong and, in fact, the temple sacrifice went out because the Messiah had returned, that you'd be willing to admit your belief is incomplete (though not necessarily false...I refuse to believe practitioners of Judaism have a false belief, merely an incomplete belief with falsehoods thrown in - no offense of course, just my belief).

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 06:06 PM
Is it possible they were using a translated version of the name? I doubt that they misquoted what is actually in the writing.
They misquoted.


Also, just because you haven't heard of the other Rabbi doesn't mean that he didn't exist. You said NO ONE in the Jewish world. You're incorrect. That's just fact right now since there is evidence to the contrary. The misuse of a NAME doesn't change what is quoted as text from that written work.The person you quoted did not say what your source claims. Your source is wrong. I can't make it any planer than that.


Additionally...Origen wrote what the people HE conversed with said, not what ALL people state. There are many who call themselves Christians yet don't believe in Hell. It doesn't mean that it can be applied to all people of that faith.If a Jewish person made the connection between Isaiah 53 and the messiah, we would all know about it. The fact that your web site has to fabricate statements where none exist should be proof enough that it is not a Jewish concept.


Additionally, Rashi writing a conflicting piece doesn't change what the others said. My intent was to point out you do not speak for all people, and when engaged in a debate sort of thing, it's important to not use absolutes that you cannot back up appropriately.It's also not appropriate to make claims about other religions that you can't back up.




However, there IS proof otherwise. You simply refuse to accept it, somewhat blindly. As I have already said, this is not a proof in the conventional sense. It's only a proof if you believe it to be true.



That would mean that the God he was leading people to is a false God, an idol...and we know what happened when the idol worship took place with the Jewish culture. "Though shall have no other God's before me" is pretty clear in terms of a commandment. Why would God send Christ on a mission to confuse the whole of society rather than one that would RECONCILE everyone who believes (which is what the Christian faith presents)? Because God doesn't want everyone in the world to be Jewish.



How is this even a way to address the fact that he either was who he said he was or he was a lunatic or liar?My honest opinion? Here is one example, as I see it: In Judaism, many prayers refer to God as 'Our father'. Any Jew hearing another Jew referring to God as their Father would say, "Of course!" A gentile hearing it might think that God was the person's actual father. Which is how Jesus became god incarnate.


How is any of that NOT creating a new faith? I don't disagree. Christianity is a new faith.




Yes, false prophets ARE supposed to be stoned. That was my point. He was spouting off prophecy about the world to come based on those who recorded the stories of his life. By that standard, he should have been swiftly executed under the law. That's if what he was saying wasn't coming true.So the Jews had no reason to stone him then?


He was walking around healing people and preaching against the Jewish leaders and their customs...you don't think that the religious leaders at the time would have called him under questioning if they could have?
Read the Talmud: it's all about debates about the Law. A wide variety of opinion is tolerated, even encouraged...


^ That was regarding the view of the crucifixion of Christ. However, other historians have at least corroborated the elements leading up to his death, regardless of whether or not you believe in the resurrection. There are several aspects of the trial that are...highly irregular. Especially from the Jewish perspective.



Again, these are people who would have been easily rounded up and executed quickly if the chance was open, meaning those who wrote the New Testament. This uprising could have been quickly squelched out if it were not accurate. People weren't that impressionable and naive that they would just blindly follow what could get them killed. Don't you think that says something about the veracity of scriptures themselves?
Possibly. On the other hand, if things happened as you say it's pretty amazing that there are any Jews left.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 06:19 PM
I feel it's the best way to handle a discussion. If either side comes from a position of, "There's no chance I could be wrong," then it just gets arrogant.Indeed.




I guess my problem is I don't see how Isaiah 53 could fit anything but the Messiah. It can't really be referring to Isaiah as he certainly didn't remove any troubles. Likewise, it can't be referring to Israel because it says that "he shall be rejected by his people." The Hebrews are a people, so it's hard for them to be rejected by themselves. What interpretation do you hold to?The servant is the Jewish people. See my sig. If you like, I can do an entire thread about Isaiah 53, although I have done it here at least once before.


I don't really see, however, how it indicates an "either/or" Messiah. Could you elaborate a bit? For example, do we see anywhere in the Tanakh where it specifies other than Isaiah 60:22?
Well, so far we have had neither. :lol:



Well the question I would have to ask is if they are necessarily mistranslations. What about Christians who grew up in Judaism and are, therefore, fluent in Hebrew?Those are pretty rare, actually. Anyway, people fluent in Hebrew today definitely don't read it as Christians do. Actually, even some Christians read it as Jews do, now. For example, some Christian bibles now read Isaiah 7:14 as 'young woman'...


What about former Orthodox Rabbis that found a problem with the traditional Rabbinical translation?Like who...?


My point in that is just to ask why we should consider the Orthodox Jewish interpretation over the Christian interpretation if people with similar or the same qualifications interpreted it?
I don't expect you do follow the Jewish interpretation. I just want you to know that it exists.




I try to be a bit more realistic - if it's not evidentially supported, doesn't make sense, or doesn't fit with a proper interpretation of the Old Testament, then it's false.
As I say, that's brave of you.


At the same time, I'd ask you to be honest with yourself (which I believe you are) - if the Rabbinical interpretation is wrong and, in fact, the temple sacrifice went out because the Messiah had returned, that you'd be willing to admit your belief is incomplete (though not necessarily false...I refuse to believe practitioners of Judaism have a false belief, merely an incomplete belief with falsehoods thrown in - no offense of course, just my belief).My thinking on the subject is open.

apothanein kerdos
Jul 14th 2008, 06:33 PM
The servant is the Jewish people. See my sig. If you like, I can do an entire thread about Isaiah 53, although I have done it here at least once before.

I'd actually enjoy that. I can't promise I'd be involved, so if you want you can just point me to the original thread.


Those are pretty rare, actually. Anyway, people fluent in Hebrew today definitely don't read it as Christians do. Actually, even some Christians read it as Jews do, now. For example, some Christian bibles now read Isaiah 7:14 as 'young woman'...

Unfortunately they are rare, but they do exist.

As for interpreting it through the mindset of a Jew, let me ask you - do you believe Paul existed as a historical figure? I happen to believe he did (let's be honest here, what Gentile would have shown such favor to the Jewish people at that time?). We must ask ourselves - what caused these 1st century Jews, some of whom were trained Rabbis, to accept Jesus' interpretation of the Old Testament?


Like who...?

There are admittedly few. After all, who wants to convert to a religion made famous by killing Jews?

However, I would argue that the earliest Christians (the Jews) had Rabbis coming forward and accepting Christ.

Though I know the position of chazzan isn't an elaborate position, but when one becomes regular it does mean has mastered the Hebrew language and has a beautiful voice. My Zada was one and converted over, rejecting the Rabbinical teachings of Isaiah 53. You can imagine how that went. ;)


I don't expect you do follow the Jewish interpretation. I just want you to know that it exists.

Quite aware, just not proficient. I've read bits and pieces of the Talmud, but plan on trying to read the entire English translation next summer (my Hebrew is a joke).

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 06:48 PM
I'd actually enjoy that. I can't promise I'd be involved, so if you want you can just point me to the original thread.
I'll try to find it.



Unfortunately they are rare, but they do exist.
I don't think it's unfortunate
.

As for interpreting it through the mindset of a Jew, let me ask you - do you believe Paul existed as a historical figure?
I do believe he existed and he was probably the author of what became Christianity. I don't think he was a Pharisee though.


I happen to believe he did (let's be honest here, what Gentile would have shown such favor to the Jewish people at that time?). We must ask ourselves - what caused these 1st century Jews, some of whom were trained Rabbis, to accept Jesus' interpretation of the Old Testament? We don't know that any of them were trained rabbis. We also don't know much about the Jerusalem branch of the church, which was wiped out in 70ad.




There are admittedly few. After all, who wants to convert to a religion made famous by killing Jews?
Oy, don't put it like that. Any Christian who killed Jews would have done so whether he was a Christian or not.


However, I would argue that the earliest Christians (the Jews) had Rabbis coming forward and accepting Christ. You would have to present evidence.


Though I know the position of chazzan isn't an elaborate position, but when one becomes regular it does mean has mastered the Hebrew language and has a beautiful voice. My Zada was one and converted over, rejecting the Rabbinical teachings of Isaiah 53. You can imagine how that went. ;)I am sure he had his reasons. Still, this should not be viewed as a blanket concept that people who are fluent in Hebrew become Christians. We both know that usually the opposite is true.




Quite aware, just not proficient. I've read bits and pieces of the Talmud, but plan on trying to read the entire English translation next summer (my Hebrew is a joke).
The Talmud is in Aramaic.:P

apothanein kerdos
Jul 14th 2008, 07:04 PM
I don't think it's unfortunate
:lol:


I do believe he existed and he was probably the author of what became Christianity. I don't think he was a Pharisee though.

On what basis though? That he disagreed with their interpretation? Would this necessitate that he wasn't a Pharisee though?


We don't know that any of them were trained rabbis. We also don't know much about the Jerusalem branch of the church, which was wiped out in 70ad.

Which is a fair assessment, but we know that Pharisees visited Jesus during His time on earth (if we believe the Gospel accounts) and that some believed. This would mean that some of the new converts to Christianity were, in fact, Rabbis.

Secondly, doesn't this undermine the Jewish people's understanding of Scripture? Are they somehow "dumb" or "ill-informed" if they convert? What, in Judaism, makes the Rabbi superior to the common person?


Oy, don't put it like that. Any Christian who killed Jews would have done so whether he was a Christian or not.

I'm more bleak in my outlook. Unfortunately - and I can't believe this is happening - I disagree. Martin Luther is a perfect example. His view of Christianity led him to love the Jewish people, but when they wouldn't convert, well...we know the rest.

Of course, your argument does work for the Inquisition where even Jewish converts to Christianity were tortured. True Christianity is Jewish - but too often Christianity has been used to harm the Jewish people.


You would have to present evidence.

I think Paul works as evidence. Plus, it is only logical that a few rabbis came forward considering some of the Pharisees believed Jesus and asked Him personal questions.

This wouldn't mean that the Rabbinical interpretations are wrong or that these dissenting Rabbis were correct. It would mean, however, that not all Rabbis (or practicing Jews) bought into the traditional interpretations.


I am sure he had his reasons. Still, this should not be viewed as a blanket concept that people who are fluent in Hebrew become Christians. We both know that usually the opposite is true.

I wasn't trying to advocate that people in Hebrew become Christians. I was merely attempting to show that one can have a knowledge of the Scriptures (even if not a Rabbinical knowledge) in Hebrew, grow up a Jew, despise Christianity (because a 'Christian Nation' kicked you out, so you had to up and move), and still be convinced about the Messiah.

I know most Jews don't accept Christianity. I do pray and hope, however, that will change. Of course, I hope they don't accept Christianity as it is, but instead bring it back to its Jewish roots.

The Talmud is in Aramaic.

I don't know why I thought a rabbinical source written in Babylon would be in Hebrew. 'Tis what I get for speaking on so little sleep.

Mograce2U
Jul 14th 2008, 07:10 PM
Possibly. On the other hand, if things happened as you say it's pretty amazing that there are any Jews left.
(Isa 43:10-12 KJV) Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. {11} I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. {12} I have declared, and have saved, and I have showed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God.

(Luke 24:44-49 KJV) And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. {45} Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, {46} And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: {47} And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. {48} And ye are witnesses of these things. {49} And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

(Acts 1:8 KJV) But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

If I understand you correctly you see these two commissions as what were given by God to His 2 peoples respectively. God the Father who is One, has Israel for this witness. Whereas Jesus (whom the Gentiles mistakenly worship as their God), serve Him as His witnesses for what God has done for them thru Christ. I suppose you see God as winking at this idolatry on the part of the Gentiles (for their ignorance?), while He insists that Israel not succumb to it because He holds them to a higher standard. Since God never intended that the Gentiles become Jews in order to be saved, He provided this way for them.

If this is your understanding - I have a couple of questions.

If Moses' law as it was given to Israel is what is required by God for them - where is the temple and priesthood to enforce that law? How can they give witness without it since it was their "proof" that God was among them? Have the Rabbis replaced the Levites for teaching the people? Why is God no longer requiring sacrifices be offered when that was how the Levites were to teach the people?

Why do the prophecies given to Israel foretell of a Messiah who was to come for Israel's redemption, if in fact it was only for the Gentiles? Was a human sacrifice needed to make redemption for Gentile sins while mere animals were sufficient for Israel? Which even they do not need any more, and just happens to coincide with the arrival of the Gentile Savior? Since salvation has come for the Gentiles, is it that Israel needn't be kept sanctified by blood anymore? Were her sins forgiven too when the Gentiles received remission for their sins? Even though Jesus was not her savior? Did Jesus perhaps accomplish something for Israel too?

Why the program change? And how is this now Israel's testimony that the One God is who she serves? While the Gentiles are spreading the gospel of Jesus throughout the world, tainted by their idolatry? Is the plan of redemption to condemn us all - or save us all?

(James 1:16-18 KJV) Do not err, my beloved brethren. {17} Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. {18} Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

I would like to hear what Judaism teaches is the good news from God in which we are to hope - or even in which Israel hopes. I mean what does she trust God for? And how is the Messiah she says is still to come for Israel going to do more for us than Jesus already has? I would like to hear the Jewish version of the gospel of our salvation - as God gave it to them.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 07:27 PM
On what basis though? That he disagreed with their interpretation? Would this necessitate that he wasn't a Pharisee though? I don't think he was a Pharisee because he admitted working for the High Priest, who was a Saducee.




Which is a fair assessment, but we know that Pharisees visited Jesus during His time on earth (if we believe the Gospel accounts) and that some believed. This would mean that some of the new converts to Christianity were, in fact, Rabbis.Well.. we have to settle the difference between the historical Jesus and the NT biblical Jesus.

I have said many times that much of what Jesus said actually fits to what a rabbi in the era would have said. We only go astray when we start to get the comments about being God incarnate and such. So if we remove the theological stuff and just focus on his ethical and moral teachings, yes, a Pharisee would agree 100%.


Secondly, doesn't this undermine the Jewish people's understanding of Scripture? Are they somehow "dumb" or "ill-informed" if they convert?
No. But they are reading scripture in a nontraditional way.


What, in Judaism, makes the Rabbi superior to the common person?The rabbi is more well studied. But a rabbi couldn't misdirect his congregation because anyone can read the holy books and call him on it if he was leading them astray.




I'm more bleak in my outlook. Unfortunately - and I can't believe this is happening - I disagree. Martin Luther is a perfect example. His view of Christianity led him to love the Jewish people, but when they wouldn't convert, well...we know the rest.
Well, no one likes rejection. Still, Martin Luther broke the back of the Catholic church and really made countries like America possible. So it's a mixed bag.


Of course, your argument does work for the Inquisition where even Jewish converts to Christianity were tortured. True Christianity is Jewish - but too often Christianity has been used to harm the Jewish people.I won't debate the point. But again, I think anyone who wants to misbehave will always find an excuse.




I think Paul works as evidence. Plus, it is only logical that a few rabbis came forward considering some of the Pharisees believed Jesus and asked Him personal questions.

This wouldn't mean that the Rabbinical interpretations are wrong or that these dissenting Rabbis were correct. It would mean, however, that not all Rabbis (or practicing Jews) bought into the traditional interpretations.That's actually true in certain aspects of Judaism. Still, the idea of man-as-god and the complete abrogation of the Law is more than even the most untraditional rabbi could accept.




I wasn't trying to advocate that people in Hebrew become Christians. I was merely attempting to show that one can have a knowledge of the Scriptures (even if not a Rabbinical knowledge) in Hebrew, grow up a Jew, despise Christianity (because a 'Christian Nation' kicked you out, so you had to up and move), and still be convinced about the Messiah.

I know most Jews don't accept Christianity. I do pray and hope, however, that will change. Of course, I hope they don't accept Christianity as it is, but instead bring it back to its Jewish roots.Fair enough.



I don't know why I thought a rabbinical source written in Babylon would be in Hebrew. 'Tis what I get for speaking on so little sleep.:lol:

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 07:41 PM
(Isa 43:10-12 KJV) Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. {11} I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. {12} I have declared, and have saved, and I have showed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God.Right. And we do believe in God.



If I understand you correctly you see these two commissions as what were given by God to His 2 peoples respectively. God the Father who is One, has Israel for this witness. Whereas Jesus (whom the Gentiles mistakenly worship as their God), serve Him as His witnesses for what God has done for them thru Christ. I suppose you see God as winking at this idolatry on the part of the Gentiles (for their ignorance?), while He insists that Israel not succumb to it because He holds them to a higher standard. Since God never intended that the Gentiles become Jews in order to be saved, He provided this way for them.
Something like that...


If this is your understanding - I have a couple of questions.

If Moses' law as it was given to Israel is what is required by God for them - where is the temple and priesthood to enforce that law?
Why is it necessary? Again, there was no temple from 586BC until more than 70 years later.


How can they give witness without it since it was their "proof" that God was among them?
We are witnesses by doing God's will. For example, the Sabbath: "between Me and the children of Israel it is a sign forever, that in six days the Lord created the heavens and the earth..."


Have the Rabbis replaced the Levites for teaching the people?
Yes, but this happened even before the end of the second temple. The priesthood became corrupted and most were Saducees...


Why is God no longer requiring sacrifices be offered when that was how the Levites were to teach the people?No Temple, no sacrifice.


Why do the prophecies given to Israel foretell of a Messiah who was to come for Israel's redemption, if in fact it was only for the Gentiles?
Because Jesus was not a 'messiah', which means 'anointed'. he was simply a messenger of God, as indeed all of mankind is. And that was his mission.


Was a human sacrifice needed to make redemption for Gentile sins while mere animals were sufficient for Israel?
He was not sacrificed as redemption. He was killed because that's what the Romans did to troublemakers. It does appear to have helped him with his mission though.


Which even they do not need any more, and just happens to coincide with the arrival of the Gentile Savior?
He was a gentile savior, not the gentile savior. There are others, of other faiths, who also brought pagan people closer to God.


Since salvation has come for the Gentiles, is it that Israel needn't be kept sanctified by blood anymore?:hmm: I don't understand.


Were her sins forgiven too when the Gentiles received remission for their sins?
What? People today have to atone for their sins.


Did Jesus perhaps accomplish something for Israel too?I told you, he wasn't a sacrifice.


Why the program change?What program change?


And how is this now Israel's testimony that the One God is who she serves? While the Gentiles are spreading the gospel of Jesus throughout the world, tainted by their idolatry? Is the plan of redemption to condemn us all - or save us all?God does not want to condemn anybody.



I would like to hear what Judaism teaches is the good news from God in which we are to hope - or even in which Israel hopes. I mean what does she trust God for? We trust that God will fulfill His word.


And how is the Messiah she says is still to come for Israel going to do more for us than Jesus already has?
The messiah we're waiting for will fulfill the prophecies I spoke of earlier.


I would like to hear the Jewish version of the gospel of our salvation - as God gave it to them.The Tanch doesn't mention the afterlife at all. So whatever I tell you will be followed by your complaints about how it isn't in scripture.

Ta-An
Jul 14th 2008, 07:47 PM
You believe Jesus to be a revolutionary?

I do believe Jesus Christ to be the greatest revolutionary that ever lived :pp

Mograce2U
Jul 14th 2008, 07:52 PM
Fenris,
Then the Jew who was to be God's witness to the world, has no hope of life to offer the world? Where did Job get his hope to be raised from the dead - or Abraham? How could Moses speak about the book of life if scripture didn't address this?

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 07:59 PM
I do believe Jesus Christ to be the greatest revolutionary that ever lived :ppA definite mover and shaker, no doubt about it.

Fenris
Jul 14th 2008, 08:01 PM
Fenris,
Then the Jew who was to be God's witness to the world, has no hope of life to offer the world? Where did Job get his hope to be raised from the dead - or Abraham? How could Moses speak about the book of life if scripture didn't address this?
I didn't say we don't believe in the afterlife. Of course we do. It's just not based on anything scriptural; except perhaps in the general sense that God must be fair and just.

Friend of I AM
Jul 14th 2008, 09:31 PM
I voted no because it's a tricky question that deserves examination on a deeper level.

On the one hand, Jesus said,

But whoever shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven.

This seems fairly straightforward until we come to Peter's denial of Jesus.

Jesus said to him, "Truly I say to you that this night, before a cock crows, you shall deny Me three times." Peter says to Him, "Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You." All the disciples said the same thing too.

I wouldn't be too careful to reserve judgment of someone who denies Jesus. As we see above, Jesus' emphatic statement about denial is mitigated in practice by his wisdom and mercy. I think the warning is strong, real, and significant. But I can't say the application of the consequences are automatic.

Just wanted to post this again, as it is the best answer in here regarding this question. Thumbs up.

th1bill
Jul 14th 2008, 09:47 PM
Zechariah 12 - 14 indicates that the Jews who are in Israel and even the entire race of Israel who are alive during the great Tribulation will be saved. Here is one verse,

Zech 12:10 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=38&CHAP=12&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=10) And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

but it is best to read both chapters.

There are other verses as well in both the old and new testaments that refer to Israel being saved and to some Jews being purposely blinded so that the gentiles could be saved - here is one verse:

Rom 11:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
I'm sorry for missing your post but things have been going on that have diverted my attention to some extent. The scriptures you have selected are very good ones and all that is left to do is to consider them in the light of all other scripture. I feel it is always best to remember that the very best interpreter of scripture is scripture. When we consider your selections in the light of Rev. 7 there is a picture cast forward that I find, compels me to witness, even to the fundamental Jews. All of the folks calling themselves Jewish, just like everyone that names the name of Christ, will not be saved.

Friend of I AM
Jul 14th 2008, 09:48 PM
You know what's interesting is the Isaiah 49 prophecy where God is speaking and states "I've engraved you in the palm of my hands"

Is this God the Father speaking or Jesus? Hmm..well both are one as stated by Jesus. I guess the oneness of God the Father and the son transcends way above our human understanding. We also have the Isaiah prophecy where it references Jesus as "Mighty God" as well as the "Everlasting Father" and other versus which state that Jesus came in the fully glory of the Father.

So although I agree with BroRog's post above, I'd have to say that one must be careful in the presentation of who Christ is within their teachings, as well as beware of any doctrines that take away the glory of God from him.

I've found that many of the real confusing false doctrines in today's society, try to take this aspect away from him by likening him as a "prophet"(who was not the literal messiah or did not possess any glory of God) or just another created creature on the level of Adam.

I think this is what is meant when people say "don't deny the divinity of Christ" - basically, when one takes away that aspect of him, they're likening him to nothing more than an average joe, and an average joe didn't die for our sins, the very son of God did.

mouse1992
Jul 14th 2008, 11:53 PM
Just because someone doesn't believe in Jesus, it doesn't mean that they are an atheist you know...

Oh, I forgot......

.......But for the other religions, of course they'll go to Heaven if God wills it! Jesus is God that became flesh, right?

Fenris
Jul 15th 2008, 12:20 AM
Oh, I forgot......

.......But for the other religions, of course they'll go to Heaven if God wills it! Jesus is God that became flesh, right?
Uh, what?:confused

Ta-An
Jul 16th 2008, 05:14 PM
A definite mover and shaker, no doubt about it.
No doubt about that :D

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 12:39 PM
Well, at this point it looks like more than 80% of you think I'm going to hell forever. I appreciate your candor and your honesty in taking part in this poll.

I guess the only thing I have to add is that you should enjoy my company now because obviously you won't be seeing me in the hereafter...

theleast
Jul 17th 2008, 01:17 PM
Well, at this point it looks like more than 80% of you think I'm going to hell forever. I appreciate your candor and your honesty in taking part in this poll.

I guess the only thing I have to add is that you should enjoy my company now because obviously you won't be seeing me in the hereafter...

And that my friend, is why I said your question was baited. ;)

But listen, I didn't take the poll, and I am not judging you. God will judge the world, not I. I do wish you would do as I asked of you, but if you are unwilling that is your call.

Athanasius
Jul 17th 2008, 02:02 PM
Oh, I forgot......

.......But for the other religions, of course they'll go to Heaven if God wills it! Jesus is God that became flesh, right?

Oh my...

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and )the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me". Mouse, no one of another religion is going to Heaven. God isn't going to 'will it'.

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 02:17 PM
And that my friend, is why I said your question was baited. ;).
How does that make the question baited? I asked a question, it was answered, and now I'm merely saying what will happen according to that answer.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 02:41 PM
How does that make the question baited? I asked a question, it was answered, and now I'm merely saying what will happen according to that answer.This goes back to my only other post in this thread. The lack of an 'I don't know' option actually makes this little experiment invalid. But the bottom line, Fenris, is that it is our heavenly Father who will judge. Why not cease asking man what will happen and rather go to the source? Pray diligently that He reveal to you whether you must accept Yeshua. I am certain if you persist in your question to Him, He WILL answer. And really, when it comes right down to it, no poll in the world is going to make one bit of difference, is it? There is only One whose answer is important, so ask Him. ;)

God Bless!

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 02:51 PM
This goes back to my only other post in this thread. The lack of an 'I don't know' option actually makes this little experiment invalid.
I would have put one in if I had thought about it beforehand, believe me. When you raised the issue I realized it was an important option for this poll. Oh well...


But the bottom line, Fenris, is that it is our heavenly Father who will judge. Why not cease asking man what will happen and rather go to the source? Pray diligently that He reveal to you whether you must accept Yeshua. I am certain if you persist in your question to Him, He WILL answer. And really, when it comes right down to it, no poll in the world is going to make one bit of difference, is it? There is only One whose answer is important, so ask Him. ;)I realize this. And no one can know what's in another persons heart. But still, there have to be absolutes. Is Hitler in heaven or in hell? What about mother Theresa? People who exhibit such extremes of behavior have to be pigeonholed or God isn't good, just, or fair. That's my 0.02$

daughter
Jul 17th 2008, 03:09 PM
Hitler is in hell. Mother Theresa? I don't know. I don't know her motives in what she did. If she did what she did for the sheer love of God, then I think she's in heaven. But I think it's possible that there are some altruists in hell, who did everything for public approval, and secretly despised God.

Well, I've avoided my two cents worth, because it's hard for me to know what to say. I'm sure someone will bite my head off, but here goes.

Jesus does say, "I am the way, the truth, and the light. NO-ONE comes to the Father, but by me."

On the other hand, I think of people like Anne Frank, or Primo Levi, and the idea of them burning in hell forever just seems so horrible. And also, I hope you don't mind me saying, the idea of you, or your family, being in hell, really hurts me.

I'm scared to talk to you about the mercy of God, because although it feels to me that He breaks His heart to save people, the thought that I might be wrong and give you false comfort is terrifying. There IS a hell, and I do believe that many "good" people end up there.

On the other hand, I believe that you love God with all your heart, soul and mind, and that you love your neighbour.

I believe that the historic "Christian" church has a lot of blood on its hands... the monster that they made of Jesus in the minds of so many has driven many people from Him. For example, the nuns who abused my mother in law for being illegitimate and having a Jewish father, will be more deeply punished than anyone they drove from Christ. They are like the hypocrites in Isaiah... "you offer up your prayers, but I will not hear, your hands are full of blood."

I must admit that many in the "church" have hands full of spiritual blood, and God is just, and will punish equitably.

But as to what happens to people who rejected Christ because of the false image they were given of Him, I don't know. I know God is merciful, but I also know how wicked my own heart is. If I hadn't repented, I know for a fact that I would deserve hell, even though I never "did" anything very wicked. In my heart I was a very wicked woman, and didn't know it. I don't think that's unusual. Humans are a wicked species, and we need a dramatic answer and cure to that.

Well, one thing that gives me a lot of comfort in your case Fenris, and other devout Jews. You do read the Bible, and you do seek to know God's will. That is something in your favour, and I know God continues to love the Jews. I suspect when time is rolled up, we'll be delighted by His solution to everything.

theleast
Jul 17th 2008, 03:48 PM
How does that make the question baited? I asked a question, it was answered, and now I'm merely saying what will happen according to that answer.

You were looking for that answer to begin with.

That is why it was baited.

If I put a worm on a hook, I'm hoping to catch a fish.

If I put a carrot in a trap, I'm hoping to catch a rabbit.

daughter
Jul 17th 2008, 03:56 PM
I think he was expecting that answer... not necessarily looking for it.

If I were in Fenris' position, I'd want to know for sure that I understood people's opinions too. It was a fair question.

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 04:46 PM
You were looking for that answer to begin with.

That is why it was baited.
As daughter said, I was expecting that answer, not looking for it.

The most predictable answer: 'Yes'.

The most hedging-my-bets answer: 'We don't know'

The most interesting answer: 'No'.

Mograce2U
Jul 17th 2008, 06:13 PM
This goes back to my only other post in this thread. The lack of an 'I don't know' option actually makes this little experiment invalid. But the bottom line, Fenris, is that it is our heavenly Father who will judge. Why not cease asking man what will happen and rather go to the source? Pray diligently that He reveal to you whether you must accept Yeshua. I am certain if you persist in your question to Him, He WILL answer. And really, when it comes right down to it, no poll in the world is going to make one bit of difference, is it? There is only One whose answer is important, so ask Him. ;)

God Bless!Just a small correction so that we don't lead Fenris astray:

(Acts 10:42 KJV) And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he [Jesus] which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

(Acts 17:31 KJV) Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man [Jesus] whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 06:24 PM
As daughter said, I was expecting that answer, not looking for it.

The most predictable answer: 'Yes'.

The most hedging-my-bets answer: 'We don't know'

The most interesting answer: 'No'.But either way, Fenris, we're back in the same place. Whether one says yes, no, or I don't know matters little. It will only be when you ask God Himself that you will really get the answer you seek.

Robin, Fenris is not likely to ask Yeshua. While he may decide to ask God. Either way, he will get the same answer.

God Bless!

daughter
Jul 17th 2008, 06:40 PM
Asking Yeshua and God are the same thing, so I think we're okay! :D

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 06:41 PM
But either way, Fenris, we're back in the same place. Whether one says yes, no, or I don't know matters little. It will only be when you ask God Himself that you will really get the answer you seek.
Actually, he doesn't answer either. We have to wait to ask Him in person, and I'm in no hurry to do that.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 08:03 PM
Actually, he doesn't answer either. We have to wait to ask Him in person, and I'm in no hurry to do that.That's too bad. He does answer for me, and I'm sure He would for you if you would only seek His voice. At Sinai they asked for Moses to be the mediator because they could not bear to hear His voice, but it is still there to be heard.

God Bless!

Mograce2U
Jul 17th 2008, 08:09 PM
But either way, Fenris, we're back in the same place. Whether one says yes, no, or I don't know matters little. It will only be when you ask God Himself that you will really get the answer you seek.

Robin, Fenris is not likely to ask Yeshua. While he may decide to ask God. Either way, he will get the same answer.

God Bless!But we are remiss if we don't tell him what Peter did:

(Acts 2:36-39 KJV) Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. {37} Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? {38} Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. {39} For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

If Fenris is to ask the Father to give him understanding, this is what his concern should be!

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 08:16 PM
But we are remiss if we don't tell him what Peter did:

(Acts 2:36-39 KJV) Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. {37} Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? {38} Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. {39} For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

If Fenris is to ask the Father to give him understanding, this is what his concern should be!Robin, if Fenris were to diligently ask God whether he must accept Yeshua (which is the question of the thread) what do you think God will tell him? Do you think God will somehow lead him astray? I don't which is why I will stand firmly on my advice to him that he should seek the answer from God.

God Bless!

Fenris
Jul 17th 2008, 08:44 PM
That's too bad. He does answer for me, and I'm sure He would for you if you would only seek His voice.
I speak to Him all the time. In prayer and in casual conversation. I know He hears me.


At Sinai they asked for Moses to be the mediator because they could not bear to hear His voice, but it is still there to be heard.

I am uncomfortable with comparisons to biblical characters.

Mograce2U
Jul 17th 2008, 08:54 PM
Robin, if Fenris were to diligently ask God whether he must accept Yeshua (which is the question of the thread) what do you think God will tell him? Do you think God will somehow lead him astray? I don't which is why I will stand firmly on my advice to him that he should seek the answer from God.

God Bless!I'm sorry but I don't see the point of this question at all.

If Fenris desires to know the truth of Jesus as the Christ, the Lord will give him understanding. If there is any other answer than this, it would not be from the Lord.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 10:37 PM
I'm sorry but I don't see the point of this question at all.

If Fenris desires to know the truth of Jesus as the Christ, the Lord will give him understanding. If there is any other answer than this, it would not be from the Lord.That is EXACTLY the point I was making! ;) Fenris is asking a question that he might get 100 different answers to, from human beings, when God is the only One whose opinion matters. True? So I have encouraged Fenris to take the question of the OP to God. I'm really not sure why that advice would be a problem. :hmm:

Studyin'2Show
Jul 17th 2008, 10:50 PM
I speak to Him all the time. In prayer and in casual conversation. I know He hears me.

I am uncomfortable with comparisons to biblical characters.I'm sure that you do. So, if you really want to know the answer to the question of the OP, be diligent to ask Him. He may not answer in the timeframe you expect, but He will answer.

The comparison was not meant to be an insult. I see myself in many of the people of the Bible. Not to derail the thread, and you can choose not to answer, but do you think those at Sinai were more wicked because they chose not to hear from God? I don't. I just don't think they were ready to hear Him. It is God's desire to have us walk with Him as Adam did in the garden. That includes both talking to and hearing from Him. Are you willing to hear His voice?

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 12:51 AM
The comparison was not meant to be an insult.
I don't see it as an insult. it's just difficult to compare people today to people back then. At least, it is for me.

Brother Mark
Jul 18th 2008, 01:42 AM
If Fenris is to ask the Father to give him understanding, this is what his concern should be!

I didn't believe in Jesus when I prayed to God for help. He led me to faith in Christ but I didn't believe Jesus was raised from the dead when I started searching.

Brother Mark
Jul 18th 2008, 01:45 AM
I am uncomfortable with comparisons to biblical characters.

I've seen you say this in several threads lately. Would you mind sharing why your are uncomfortable with comparisons and what kind of comparisons is it that bothers you? I have a few more questions for you on this matter but I don't want to push it too hard because I don't want to cause any undue grief. But right now, I am very interested in your response.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 10:00 AM
I've seen you say this in several threads lately. Would you mind sharing why your are uncomfortable with comparisons and what kind of comparisons is it that bothers you? I have a few more questions for you on this matter but I don't want to push it too hard because I don't want to cause any undue grief. But right now, I am very interested in your response.
You guys are very interesting on this point.

ON the one hand, you are all convinced that when presented with a choice, you will choose to sin because of man's depraved nature.

On the other hand, you are all convinced that when presented with a test of faith you'll all pass with flying colors. You're so convinced of that fact that you regularly chide biblical characters for their lack of faith. Whether it's Abraham and Hagar, or the Jews in the desert, you're so convinced that if you were presented with the same circumstances, you would rely on faith.

My life has been remarkably test-free, so to speak. And I prefer it that way. I'm pretty sure that if I were presented with the circumstances of the biblical characters, I would fail their tests quite spectacularly.

--------------------------------------

There's also the concept of judging others favorably. We are always taught that when we see another person doing something of unclear motive, we should presume that their motive is good, not bad.

For example, earlier in this thread a comment was made about the Jews being unwilling to hear all Ten Commandments directly from God. They wanted Moses to act as an intermediary. The quick conclusion is that their faith was weak, and indeed that is what was said. But is that judging them favorably? Isn't it also possible that they had the highest of motives? Perhaps they realized that if they heard God speak it would render them incapable of sin? And good deeds without free will is no good deeds at all?
---------------------------------------

There is a story in the Talmud about a rabbi who mocked the king Menasseh's idolatry. That night in a dream the king visited him. The king offered him a solution to a very vexing Law question that had been troubling the rabbi. The rabbi was amazed. He said to the king, "If you had such great Torah knowledge, why did you sin with idols?" The king relied, "If you had been there with me, you would have picked up the hem of your robe and run after me to sin..."

The Talmud says that if the previous generations were like angels, we are like men; and if they were like men, we are like animals. Indeed, the Jewish perspective has always been that our forbears were on a much higher spiritual level than we are. Christians see that backwards, I guess...

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 12:05 PM
You guys are very interesting on this point.

ON the one hand, you are all convinced that when presented with a choice, you will choose to sin because of man's depraved nature.

On the other hand, you are all convinced that when presented with a test of faith you'll all pass with flying colors. You're so convinced of that fact that you regularly chide biblical characters for their lack of faith. Whether it's Abraham and Hagar, or the Jews in the desert, you're so convinced that if you were presented with the same circumstances, you would rely on faith.

My life has been remarkably test-free, so to speak. And I prefer it that way. I'm pretty sure that if I were presented with the circumstances of the biblical characters, I would fail their tests quite spectacularly.
Fenris, I think this is where you have completely missed the boat. Who ever said that we pass every test of faith? :o It definitely wasn't me and I have not met ANY believer that would say that or even anything close to it. When we look at biblical figures to see where they may have erred it is not because we are 'chiding' them as you suppose, but rather so we can see where we are making the same or similar errors so we can ask for His grace and assistance in learning to chose rightly in the future. We learn from them, we shouldn't judge them. Goodness, if my life were spread out on the page :eek:

So, though I can only speak for myself I think you have us colored all wrong. Just as you say you come here so we can learn the truth about you, I would hope that you can see the truth about us. ;)

God Bless!

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 12:21 PM
Fair enough.

But even so, I think the general judgment of biblical characters here is harsh, quite harsh. Biblical characters should be studied not just for their mistakes, but also for their triumphs. And I think those triumphs go beyond their acts of faith and should also include their acts of loving-kindness and good deeds. Abraham argued with God about destroying Sodom, fighting on behalf of wicked men. Moses told God that if He destroyed the Jews He should blot Moses's name out from the Bible as well, even though the Jews had vexed Moses no less than God.

Are those not acts worthy of recognition? Or is the glass always half-empty?

daughter
Jul 18th 2008, 12:27 PM
I love the fact that Abraham and Moses both interceded for their people... and Jeremiah is probably the person I most admire in the Bible besides Jesus, because of his faithfulness for so many years (forty I think) when he pleaded with people, and warned them of what was coming. I absolutely adore the loving courage and fidelity of these men, not to mention David and Isaiah.

When I see a Bible character stumble, it humbles me, because it warns me how easily I can do the same. If Aaron slipped into idolatry, Miriam into envy, Moses into anger... what hope do I have?

The same hope they had. An almighty and forgiving God.

By the way, I still can't get over the fact that Moses made one mistake in all his years in the desert, and people today criticise him for it. I can't get through a day without messing up!

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 12:32 PM
This is providing me with a very interesting insight into Christianity. Yes, very interesting...:hmm:

I had not seen this aspect before. It's very different from Judaism....

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 01:55 PM
Actually, he doesn't answer either. We have to wait to ask Him in person, and I'm in no hurry to do that.

We do? Did not God speak to his people in the days of old?

Perhaps the fact that God isn't speaking to you is a sign that you should change the path your on.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 01:56 PM
As daughter said, we admire them for their triumphs and hope to emulate them in those ways. David was a man after God's own heart because it was always his desire to be in His presence. That he was an adulterer and a murderer does not mean that we would disdain him because of it. All of us have sinned and fallen short. ;) Don't mistake our biblical discussions as a lack of respect.

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 01:57 PM
That is EXACTLY the point I was making! ;) Fenris is asking a question that he might get 100 different answers to, from human beings, when God is the only One whose opinion matters. True? So I have encouraged Fenris to take the question of the OP to God. I'm really not sure why that advice would be a problem. :hmm:

That is good advice. I have given similair advice several times already.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 02:00 PM
We do? Did not God speak to his people in the days of old?

Perhaps the fact that God isn't speaking to you is a sign that you should change the path your on.
Prophecy ended with Malachi.

Are you're claiming to have spoken with God? And He answered you?

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 02:00 PM
Fenris, I think this is where you have completely missed the boat. Who ever said that we pass every test of faith? :o It definitely wasn't me and I have not met ANY believer that would say that or even anything close to it. When we look at biblical figures to see where they may have erred it is not because we are 'chiding' them as you suppose, but rather so we can see where we are making the same or similar errors so we can ask for His grace and assistance in learning to chose rightly in the future. We learn from them, we shouldn't judge them. Goodness, if my life were spread out on the page :eek:

So, though I can only speak for myself I think you have us colored all wrong. Just as you say you come here so we can learn the truth about you, I would hope that you can see the truth about us. ;)

God Bless!

Good post. Listen to this post.

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 02:04 PM
Prophecy ended with Malachi.

Are you're claiming to have spoken with God? And He answered you?

God answers me in several ways. He answers me with revelations, and he answers me with granting my prayers.

Do I hear a booming voice in my head? No.

But let me say this, one day when I was challenging God, I was in a rainstorm screaming at him telling him to "bring it on." Just then a lightning bolt struck a telephone pole about 50 feet from me and I was actually knocked on my rear.

I think he did actually talk to me that day LOL. To be honest, it was at that point that I started my relationship with God as a new man.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 02:06 PM
Prophecy ended with Malachi.

Are you're claiming to have spoken with God? And He answered you?Is that written somewhere in scripture, that prophecy is over? :hmm: Why would you believe God has stopped speaking if He never said that He would stop? Have we not told you that He is indeed still speaking? Yes, I have heard His voice. That's the good news (gospel)! :) He has made Himself available to His people.

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 02:06 PM
I love the fact that Abraham and Moses both interceded for their people... and Jeremiah is probably the person I most admire in the Bible besides Jesus, because of his faithfulness for so many years (forty I think) when he pleaded with people, and warned them of what was coming. I absolutely adore the loving courage and fidelity of these men, not to mention David and Isaiah.

When I see a Bible character stumble, it humbles me, because it warns me how easily I can do the same. If Aaron slipped into idolatry, Miriam into envy, Moses into anger... what hope do I have?

The same hope they had. An almighty and forgiving God.

By the way, I still can't get over the fact that Moses made one mistake in all his years in the desert, and people today criticise him for it. I can't get through a day without messing up!

Yeah, their truely are some great hero's in the bible, NT amd OT alike.

Christ is of course my favorite. :cool:

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 02:08 PM
As daughter said, we admire them for their triumphs and hope to emulate them in those ways. David was a man after God's own heart because it was always his desire to be in His presence. That he was an adulterer and a murderer does not mean that we would disdain him because of it. All of us have sinned and fallen short. ;) Don't mistake our biblical discussions as a lack of respect.
Well, I can only tell you what I see. And that's what I see.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 02:11 PM
God answers me in several ways. He answers me with revelations, and he answers me with granting my prayers.

Do I hear a booming voice in my head? No.

If you consider that an answer, then yes, God has answered me.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 02:15 PM
Is that written somewhere in scripture, that prophecy is over? :hmm: Why would you believe God has stopped speaking if He never said that He would stop? Have we not told you that He is indeed still speaking? Yes, I have heard His voice. That's the good news (gospel)! :) He has made Himself available to His people.
I think it's pretty obvious that prophecy has stopped.

We just disagree on when.

theleast
Jul 18th 2008, 02:18 PM
I think it's pretty obvious that prophecy has stopped.

We just disagree on when.

I suppose it depends on what exactly you mean by prophecy.

There are people who have visions, and dreams, and can interpret prophecy today. I almost consider the interpretation of prophecy as prophecy...ALMOST.

Many of the OT prophets had the same themes running throughout their books. John also has a simlair method of prophecy, and has themes from the OT prophets as well. The reason for that is that they all have the same Spirit giving them the prophecies.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 02:25 PM
I suppose it depends on what exactly you mean by prophecy.

There are people who have visions, and dreams, and can interpret prophecy today. I almost consider the interpretation of prophecy as prophecy...ALMOST.

Right...almost.

No one today claims to have a direct message from God.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 03:17 PM
I think it's pretty obvious that prophecy has stopped.

We just disagree on when.When did I agree that it has stopped? :hmm: I actually have heard His audible voice at times. Not everyone has though.

Mograce2U
Jul 18th 2008, 03:21 PM
--------------------------------------

For example, earlier in this thread a comment was made about the Jews being unwilling to hear all Ten Commandments directly from God. They wanted Moses to act as an intermediary. The quick conclusion is that their faith was weak, and indeed that is what was said. But is that judging them favorably? Isn't it also possible that they had the highest of motives? Perhaps they realized that if they heard God speak it would render them incapable of sin? And good deeds without free will is no good deeds at all?
---------------------------------------
I don't think God is ever surprised by our reactions and perhaps intends to provoke certain responses from us to get us to agree to His purposes. To bring us in line with His will. God's purpose WAS to give a mediator to the people - in this case Moses. He goes to great lengths to establish His authority with Moses to lead the people, so it makes sense that getting them to ask for what He wants to do is essential in providing to them. Its pretty hard to lead a people who are not yet willing to follow the leader they have been given! When they are brought to the place where they ask for this, God answers. This was true with king Saul too - not that he was ultimately God's choice, but it prepared the way to give them David.
...
The Talmud says that if the previous generations were like angels, we are like men; and if they were like men, we are like animals. Indeed, the Jewish perspective has always been that our forbears were on a much higher spiritual level than we are. Christians see that backwards, I guess...In one sense I do think ancient people had a better hold on their need for God. Certainly that is the bane upon the modern world who claims there is no God and assumes they are sovereign in this world. But scripture holds forth that God has revealed Himself to man in a progressively fuller sense - at least to those whom He has chosen. The pagans were sunk in idolatry while Israel was shown the glory of the true God. As Christians we see the fullness of God's redemptive plan for all the world in Jesus. Which is not to say we all have the fullness of understanding, only that it has been further revealed to us in the gospel of Christ.

If there were no sustaining light given to us by God - who would continue to believe? Even Israel who was given great light in the presence of the glory of God struggled with unbelief and idolatry. But God keeps a faithful remnant.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 03:30 PM
I don't think God is ever surprised by our reactions and perhaps intends to provoke certain responses from us to get us to agree to His purposes. To bring us in line with His will. God's purpose WAS to give a mediator to the people - in this case Moses. He goes to great lengths to establish His authority with Moses to lead the people, so it makes sense that getting them to ask for what He wants to do is essential in providing to them. Its pretty hard to lead a people who are not yet willing to follow the leader they have been given! When they are brought to the place where they ask for this, God answers. This was true with king Saul too - not that he was ultimately God's choice, but it prepared the way to give them David. Can't argue with this.


In one sense I do think ancient people had a better hold on their need for God. Certainly that is the bane upon the modern world who claims there is no God and assumes they are sovereign in this world.
Again, can't argue with this.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 03:32 PM
When did I agree that it has stopped? :hmm: I actually have heard His audible voice at times. Not everyone has though.
Well, you're a prophet then. :dunno:

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 05:13 PM
Well, you're a prophet then. :dunno:A prophet receives insight on future events. I don't claim to be a prophetess. He has spoken to me on a personal level. For example, the very first audible word I ever heard from Him was 'music'. That's it but it was as audible as if someone had been standing next to me and spoken. For a few years I fumbled unsure of exactly what it meant but I began to pursue music and it has blossomed for me, my hubby and my 18 yr old daughter. Just recently, when looking for a service for my aunt who lives in SC I found that there were no companies that offered it. I said (really to myself), "Wow, someone should really do that." And once again, clear as a bell, I heard audibly, "Why don't you?" We are planning to move next June and have a tentative 2 year plan to start the business. You see, God was able to guide and direct me with His voice but no prophesy was revealed to me. Prophesy is like when Elijah said it wouldn't rain for a certain amount of time. Look, I'm not attempting to make myself out as someone more special than another. I prayed diligently for quite a while specifically for His voice and got one word. :D Then didn't hear anything else audible for half a dozen years. But I have heard. And so can you if you diligently seek it.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 05:44 PM
A prophet isn't someone who tells the future, per se.


The English word "prophet" is not an accurate translation of the Hebrew navi. Whereas the Hebrew term comes from a root meaning to speak or proclaim, the English one originates in a Greek word denoting the prediction of the future. The concept of Greek prophecy reflects a very different religious culture, in which oracles foretold coming events, and had scant interest in moral instruction.

This is definitely not the case among the Hebrew prophets. The Nevi'im were not concerned with revealing the course of future events. Their messages were invariably aimed at the here-and-now, to proclaim God's word to their contemporaries.


While it is true that several of the prophets do make declarations about what will befall Israel in days to come, about impending conquests or about the Messianic restoration--these matters are never the principal concern of the message. Rather, they are intended to indicate the consequences of disobedience and moral laxity, or the rewards in store for those who maintain their devotion under conditions of adversity. Except perhaps in the most general of terms, none of these "prophetic" visions of the future has the character of an absolute or unalterable scenario. Ultimately, they are all conditional upon the people's response.

Mograce2U
Jul 18th 2008, 05:48 PM
A prophet isn't someone who tells the future, per se.And Jesus and the Apostles fit this description well!

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 05:52 PM
A prophet isn't someone who tells the future, per se.Within the text it says that a prophet proclaimed a message to the people. I have already made it clear that for me it was personal. He did not tell me audibly to go give a message to anyone. I do not claim to be a prophetess. But that really is not the issue. The issue is that His voice is available for you to hear if you cry out for it diligently. He will give you the answers that you seek.

God Bless!

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 05:54 PM
And Jesus and the Apostles fit this description well!
Right and they lived what, 2000 years ago? I already said that prophecy is closed, and all we disagree on is when that happened...

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 05:56 PM
Within the text it says that a prophet proclaimed a message to the people. I have already made it clear that for me it was personal. He did not tell me audible to go give a message to anyone. I do not claim to be a prophetess. But that really is not the issue. The issue is that His voice is available for you to hear if you cry out for it diligently. He will give you the answers that you seek.

Personal experiences are just that: personal. My own personal experiences have led me to completely different conclusions than yours have led you to.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 18th 2008, 06:05 PM
Personal experiences are just that: personal. My own personal experiences have led me to completely different conclusions than yours have led you to.According to what you've posted you have never sought to hear His voice. Before I sought it I would have had the same personal experience as you. Here's a question, would you consider asking Him to speak to you (audibly)?

Mograce2U
Jul 18th 2008, 06:21 PM
Personal experiences are just that: personal. My own personal experiences have led me to completely different conclusions than yours have led you to.Which is why we must turn to scripture to find our hope. And that hope should be the same for all.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 10:51 PM
According to what you've posted you have never sought to hear His voice. Before I sought it I would have had the same personal experience as you. Here's a question, would you consider asking Him to speak to you (audibly)?
No. I am certainly not worthy. I also do not desire the loss of free will.

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 10:52 PM
And Jesus and the Apostles fit this description well!
You know, I have to revisit this for a second. The problem is that you don't claim Jesus to have been a prophet. You claim he was god incarnate...

Fenris
Jul 18th 2008, 11:01 PM
You know, I have to be honest. If I heard voices in my head, I wouldn't think it was God. I would think that needed medical help.

Mograce2U
Jul 19th 2008, 12:08 AM
You know, I have to revisit this for a second. The problem is that you don't claim Jesus to have been a prophet. You claim he was god incarnate...Who appeared to us as a Prophet of God as was declared to Moses.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 19th 2008, 12:18 AM
No. I am certainly not worthy. I also do not desire the loss of free will.Did Moses lose his free will? Did Elijah? Did Abraham? :hmm: No. Where do you get such ideas? Too bad. I'm sure many thought they were crazy too. Curiously, what made them worthy to hear His voice and you not?

Studyin'2Show
Jul 19th 2008, 12:21 AM
You know, I have to revisit this for a second. The problem is that you don't claim Jesus to have been a prophet. Not true. We absolute know that He is not only a prophet, but He is THE Prophet foretold to come by Moses. :)

JesusMySavior
Jul 19th 2008, 03:27 AM
One cannot go to hell for what he or she does.

(read that again).

One can only go to hell for rejecting God's plan of salvation.



(Technically one can say our sin does send us to hell but we're all sinners, we don't have to do anything to go to hell...so it's not our sin, it's what we fail to receive as a gift from God)

Mograce2U
Jul 19th 2008, 03:49 AM
One cannot go to hell for what he or she does.

(read that again).

One can only go to hell for rejecting God's plan of salvation.

(Technically one can say our sin does send us to hell but we're all sinners, we don't have to do anything to go to hell...so it's not our sin, it's what we fail to receive as a gift from God)I am quite fond of pithy statements that are succinct and to the point. Kudos for this one.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 01:23 AM
Who appeared to us as a Prophet of God as was declared to Moses.
Moses never claimed to be God.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 01:25 AM
Did Moses lose his free will?
Moses was denied entry to the holy land for the smallest of errors. I have no desire to be held to that high standard.



. Curiously, what made them worthy to hear His voice and you not?
Obviously they were on a much higher spiritual level.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 01:26 AM
Not true. We absolute know that He is not only a prophet, but He is THE Prophet foretold to come by Moses. :)
There was no 'THE prophet'. There were many prophets. Read Deuteronomy 18 again.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 01:27 AM
One cannot go to hell for what he or she does.

(read that again).

One can only go to hell for rejecting God's plan of salvation.


Point of faith, not fact.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 01:39 AM
Moses was denied entry to the holy land for the smallest of errors. I have no desire to be held to that high standard.

Obviously they were on a much higher spiritual level.

There was no 'THE prophet'. There were many prophets. Read Deuteronomy 18 again.You said you would lose your free will if you heard the voice of God. Show me where Moses lost his free will?

Hagar heard YHWH. Was she more spiritual than you?

I have read Deuteronomy 18, Fenris, and it does not say He will raise up prophets, plural.

Deuteronomy 18:15 - “The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 10:48 AM
You said you would lose your free will if you heard the voice of God. Show me where Moses lost his free will?Again, Moses was held to very exacting standards.


Hagar heard YHWH. Was she more spiritual than you?Obviously yes.


I have read Deuteronomy 18, Fenris, and it does not say He will raise up prophets, plural.

Deuteronomy 18:15 - “The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear

This is referring to the general phenomena of prophets. There were some 50 prophets in all.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 11:39 AM
Again, Moses was held to very exacting standards.

Obviously yes.

This is referring to the general phenomena of prophets. There were some 50 prophets in all.Moses never lost his free will but alas, we have gone very far off the track of the OP, and appear to be now going in circles. :rolleyes: I will leave you with this, I am genuinely sorry that you believe you are not spiritual enough to hear from God. :(But I am infinitely more sorry that you don't want to because you don't want the responsibility. :cry: It reminds me of someone seeing a crime being committed and choosing to walk away because they don't want to get involved. I pray that some day you will choose to hear His voice. :pray:

God Bless!

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 11:43 AM
I am genuinely sorry that you believe you are not spiritual enough to hear from God. :(But I am infinitely more sorry that you don't want to because you don't want the responsibility.
It's not the responsibility I fear.

Let me illustrate with an example. If I am driving in my car and I obey the speed limit because I want to follow the rules, that's one thing. If I obey the speed limit because I see a police car parked on the side of the road, that's definitely a lower motivation.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 04:52 PM
It's not the responsibility I fear.

Let me illustrate with an example. If I am driving in my car and I obey the speed limit because I want to follow the rules, that's one thing. If I obey the speed limit because I see a police car parked on the side of the road, that's definitely a lower motivation.So, you don't want to hear His voice because you don't want to see a cop? :confused You don't want to hear His voice because you don't want to drive? :confused What in the world does the speeding mean in context to whether or not you desire to hear Him? :hmm:

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:04 PM
So, you don't want to hear His voice because you don't want to see a cop? :confused You don't want to hear His voice because you don't want to drive? :confused What in the world does the speeding mean in context to whether or not you desire to hear Him? :hmm:
OK, let me put it in terms Ive seen here.

Once we die, it's too late to accept the right god. Yes? Because it doesn't make sense to take a test after you've already seen the answers. Similarly, if God revealed Himself to me I would already have the answer. The test would be over.

Incidentally, the Jewish view is that in the messianic era, good deeds will have far less value- because it will be natural to be good. The test is today- because our nature is not to be good.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 05:15 PM
OK, let me put it in terms Ive seen here.

Once we die, it's too late to accept the right god. Yes? Because it doesn't make sense to take a test after you've already seen the answers. Similarly, if God revealed Himself to me I would already have the answer. The test would be over.

Incidentally, the Jewish view is that in the messianic era, good deeds will have far less value- because it will be natural to be good. The test is today- because our nature is not to be good.It seems to me that you are trying your best to convince yourself that it is better not to hear God. But it really comes down to the heart. Do you love your earthly father? Do you spend time with him and enjoy having him there to impart wisdom to you? Would it be better for you if you never heard your earthly father but rather had your brother to tell you what he said? My earthly father has passed away and I would love to hear his voice again. So, why would you not similarly or even more so want to hear your heavenly Father? Forget what comes after and ask yourself WHY you don't want to hear Him!

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:24 PM
It seems to me that you are trying your best to convince yourself that it is better not to hear God.
In a way, obviously it is not. None of the prophets lived happy lives. Their revelation was more a burden than a gift.

Of course, ultimately my feelings on the matter are irrelevant. If God chooses to reveal Himself to me, He will. If not, not. But I never saw Judaism as awaiting revelation from God. It's about doing His will whether He speaks to me or not.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:24 PM
OK, let me put it in terms Ive seen here.

Once we die, it's too late to accept the right god. Yes? Because it doesn't make sense to take a test after you've already seen the answers. Similarly, if God revealed Himself to me I would already have the answer. The test would be over.

The test isn't always about knowing the answers but rather, being obedient to what we know. God told Israel he was delivering them from Egypt to take them into a land flowing with milk and honey. They knew the answer but weren't obedient. God told Abraham he was going to make a great nation out of Isaac. Then He told Abraham to offer Isaac as a burnt offering. Abraham knew God's promise and was obedient because he knew Isaac was going to be the father of many people.

Now, what's truly scary is to be held tested without knowing the answers or to be held to a standard we don't know. Abraham heard God and it helped him to pass his test because he knew that Isaac was a son of promise, it enabled him to be obedient. Hearing God helps us pass the test it doesn't prevent us from passing the test.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:28 PM
The test isn't always about knowing the answers but rather, being obedient to what we know.
If God speaks to you, then you know more. You have to be obedient to more. Yes?

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:31 PM
In a way, obviously it is not. None of the prophets lived happy lives. Their revelation was more a burden than a gift.

You think David wasn't happy with what he heard from God concerning things like forgiveness? Or what of Abraham? Or Job? (I think Judaism refers to Job as a parable but even so, wouldn't Job be considered happy before and after his trial?) Or what of Gideon? Could not the word of God spoken to these individuals been a happy moment? Of course, there is Jeremiah and Habbakkuk. Those guys didn't really hear things that makes one go "woo-hoo" God just spoke to me.


Of course, ultimately my feelings on the matter are irrelevant. If God chooses to reveal Himself to me, He will. If not, not. But I never saw Judaism as awaiting revelation from God. It's about doing His will whether He speaks to me or not.


Certainly doing God's will is an utmost importance. But how can we do this without hearing him on some level?

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:33 PM
If God speaks to you, then you know more. You have to be obedient to more. Yes?

Yes. But also with much hearing comes much blessing. Scripture says that God blessed Abraham in every way. The flip side, IMO, is that ignorance won't be a valid defense when standing before God. He held Sodom accountable and they didn't know what an angel was. He was going to hold Nineveh accountable and there were thousands that did not know the right hand from the left. Because Nineveh heard him, they passed the test and were spared. Had they chosen not to hear, they would have been destroyed a generation earlier.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:36 PM
You think David wasn't happy with what he heard from God concerning things like forgiveness? Or what of Abraham? Or Job? (I think Judaism refers to Job as a parable but even so, wouldn't Job be considered happy before and after his trial?) Or what of Gideon? Could not the word of God spoken to these individuals been a happy moment? Of course, there is Jeremiah and Habbakkuk. Those guys didn't really hear things that makes one go "woo-hoo" God just spoke to me. Well, the ones who had to preach to the people had it tough. It is true that this did not apply to every prophet.





Certainly doing God's will is an utmost importance. But how can we do this without hearing him on some level?
We already know what God wants of us. It's in the bible. :)

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:40 PM
We already know what God wants of us. It's in the bible. :)

Of course! But one must hear what is written there, right? And then one must hear how God wishes to apply it to our lives. For instance, we know it is his will for most of us to be married. We see with Isaac and Jacob he had a particular girl in mind. Does he do the same for us? While I think we are given wide latitude with such things, I think it wise to hear what he says in scripture and to hear how he wishes us to apply it our lives.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:41 PM
Yes. But also with much hearing comes much blessing. Scripture says that God blessed Abraham in every way.
Indeed. But Abraham passed 10 very difficult tests. I personally would rather not have the revelation and not have the tests.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:43 PM
Of course! But one must hear what is written there, right? And then one must hear how God wishes to apply it to our lives. For instance, we know it is his will for most of us to be married. We see with Isaac and Jacob he had a particular girl in mind. Does he do the same for us? While I think we are given wide latitude with such things, I think it wise to hear what he says in scripture and to hear how he wishes us to apply it our lives.
God gave us common sense. Read what He expects and apply it to yourself. Divine revelation is not needed.

Edit to add: Do you mean to tell me it's impossible to do God's will without God contacting us? Has every Christian been contacted by God?

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:47 PM
God gave us common sense. Read what He expects and apply it to yourself. Divine revelation is not needed.

Did Abraham's servant choose a wife by common sense? Did David repent because of common sense? I believe common sense plays a role in our daily lives and we must have it! Yet, as scriptures say "There is a way that seems right unto man, but it's end is death". Common sense can often be described as the way that seems right to man.


Edit to add: Do you mean to tell me it's impossible to do God's will without God contacting us? Has every Christian been contacted by God?

If a man hasn't been contacted personally by God, he is not a Christian.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 05:48 PM
Indeed. But Abraham passed 10 very difficult tests. I personally would rather not have the revelation and not have the tests.

But Israel failed tests in the wilderness. They refused to hear God as Moses did but the test still came, did they not?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 05:59 PM
Did Abraham's servant choose a wife by common sense? Did David repent because of common sense? Well, here's where I start to talk about not comparing people to biblical characters...:lol:




If a man hasn't been contacted personally by God, he is not a Christian.
I was not aware that this was a Christian belief. Interesting.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:00 PM
But Israel failed tests in the wilderness. They refused to hear God as Moses did but the test still came, did they not?We are all tested. Everything in life is a test, the good and the bad....

If God reveals Himself to you the tests are invariably more difficult though. So it seems from a reading of the bible.

Ta-An
Jul 20th 2008, 06:02 PM
If a man hasn't been contacted personally by God, he is not a Christian. :eek: .:hmm:

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:05 PM
Well, here's where I start to talk about not comparing people to biblical characters...:lol:

Yea. We get there a lot don't we? ;) But wouldn't you agree these things are written not just to communicate a fact, but also for an example? Any by example, I don't mean that it has to work the same way every time but something that we should also pursue in general?


I was not aware that this was a Christian belief. Interesting.I am not sure all Christians would agree with me. But let me explain. Many folks will give a mental agreement to a theme or belief system. But one must be born again to be a believer. Being born again requires an act of God himself. Being born again is a very personal experience between a man and his God. I would say it is similar to what happened to King Saul when God gave him a new heart. Christianity teaches that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. The word "word" that is translated in that scripture is "remah". It is the spoken word of God. So when God speaks to a persons heart, that person then has faith because he heard God.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:09 PM
We are all tested. Everything in life is a test, the good and the bad....

If God reveals Himself to you the tests are invariably more difficult though. So it seems from a reading of the bible.

I thought we weren't supposed to compare ourselves to men in scripture. ;) Sorry Fenris, I couldn't resist. :D

Not only are the test more difficult, but so are the rewards. But tested we will be whether we hear God or not. The ones who passed the test were those that listened to God a lot. Those that failed asked for a Moses to mediate between them and God. Maybe there's a lesson in that.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:09 PM
Yea. We get there a lot don't we? ;) But wouldn't you agree these things are written not just to communicate a fact, but also for an example? Any by example, I don't mean that it has to work the same way every time but something that we should also pursue in general?Well, moral lessons can be learned from their behavior. I'm not so sure about it the way you're looking at it though.


I am not sure all Christians would agree with me. But let me explain. Many folks will give a mental agreement to a theme or belief system. But one must be born again to be a believer. Being born again requires an act of God himself. Being born again is a very personal experience between a man and his God. I would say it is similar to what happened to King Saul when God gave him a new heart. Christianity teaches that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. The word "word" that is translated in that scripture is "remah". It is the spoken word of God. So when God speaks to a persons heart, that person then has faith because he heard God.So does it mean one has to actually hear God?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:13 PM
Not only are the test more difficult, but so are the rewards.
I'm sorry, I have to run with this.

This is exactly why Adam ate from the tree of knowledge. So he'd have free will- making the tests more difficult , and the rewards better.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:13 PM
Well, moral lessons can be learned from their behavior. I'm not so sure about it the way you're looking at it though.

I would argue one can't be moral without hearing God on some level. For doesn't God define what is and is not moral?


So does it mean one has to actually hear God?

I was waiting for this question. If one reads the bible, isn't it important that he understand it on some level? In your belief system, God wrote the first five books. So wouldn't you say you heard God if you believe and practice the first 5 books of scripture?

There is much more to it than that for some can read scripture and not hear God. But the point in general is that one is hearing God speak when he reads the scripture. The only question then remains does he "hear" in the sense of noise. Or does he "hear" in that he listens and understands?

Isa 6:9-10

9 And He said, "Go, and tell this people:
'Keep on listening, but do not perceive;
Keep on looking, but do not understand.'
10 "Render the hearts of this people insensitive,,
Their ears dull,
And their eyes dim,
Lest they see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,,
Understand with their hearts,
And return and be healed."
NASB

So we must hear and perceive. It is of utmost importance.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:15 PM
I'm sorry, I have to run with this.

This is exactly why Adam ate from the tree of knowledge. So he'd have free will- making the tests more difficult , and the rewards better.

Ah, but he failed the test. Had he passed the test and ate of the tree of life and said no to the tree of knowledge, I think another test would have been given and it would have been of greater difficulty. But in failing the test, much misery came. When Abraham passed the test, much joy and rewards came. Eating the tree of knowledge seemed the easy way out but it ended up being far from easy for Adam and his offspring.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 06:19 PM
Indeed. But Abraham passed 10 very difficult tests. I personally would rather not have the revelation and not have the tests.So, it is for selfish reasons that you have no desire to hear your Father's voice? :hmm: I mean we are talking about my heavenly Father. Children tend to want to hear and be with their fathers, right?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:29 PM
I would argue one can't be moral without hearing God on some level. For doesn't God define what is and is not moral?

Why does one need to hear God at all? Didn't God already tell us what behavior He expects in His bible?



I was waiting for this question. If one reads the bible, isn't it important that he understand it on some level? In your belief system, God wrote the first five books. So wouldn't you say you heard God if you believe and practice the first 5 books of scripture? You know, I'm starting to see another fundamental difference between our faiths here.

Jews are expected to use logical tools to determine exactly what the Law is (this making us part of the process, I guess). Christians obviously expect revelation from above to determine God's will. This is very interesting.

I'm going to post a story from the Talmud here. I've posted it before. Jews find it very reasonable and Christians find it blasphemous. It illustrates the difference perfectly.


The rabbis debated whether an oven that had become impure could be purified. While almost all the sages felt it couldn't be, Rabbi Eliezer, a lone voice but a great scholar, disagreed:

"On that day, Rabbi Eliezer put forward all the arguments in the world, but the Sages did not accept them.

"Finally, he said to them, 'If the halakha is according to me, let that carob*tree prove it.'

"He pointed to a nearby carob-tree, which then moved from its place a hundred cubits, and some say, four hundred cubits. They said to him 'One cannot bring a proof from the moving of a carob-tree.'

"Said Rabbi Eliezer, 'If the halakha is according to me, may that stream of water prove it.'

"The stream of water then turned and flowed in the opposite direction.

"They said to him, 'One cannot bring a proof from the behavior of a stream of water.'

"Said Rabbi Eliezer, 'If the halakha is according to me, may the walls of the House of Study prove it.'

"The walls of the House of Study began to bend inward. Rabbi Joshua then rose up and rebuked the walls of the House of Study, 'If the students of the Wise argue with one another in halakha," he said, "what right have you to interfere?'

"In honor of Rabbi Joshua, the walls ceased to bend inward; but in honor of Rabbi Eliezer, they did not straighten up, and they remain bent to this day.

"Then, said Rabbi Eliezer to the Sages, 'If the halakha is according to me, may a proof come from Heaven.'

"Then a heavenly voice went forth and said, 'What have you to do with Rabbi Eliezer? The halakha is according to him in every place.'

"Then Rabbi Joshua rose up on his feet, and said, 'It is not in the heavens' (Deuteronomy 30:12).

"What did he mean by quoting this? Said Rabbi Jeremiah, 'He meant that since the Torah has been given already on Mount Sinai, we do not pay attention to a heavenly voice, for You have written in Your Torah, 'Decide according to the majority' (Exodus 23:2).

"Rabbi Nathan met the prophet Elijah. He asked him, 'What was the Holy One, Blessed be He, doing in that hour?'

"Said Elijah, 'He was laughing and saying, "My children have defeated me, my children have defeated me.""'

The British-Jewish scholar and writer Hyam Maccoby has commented: "This extraordinary story strikes the keynote of the Talmud. God is a good father who wants His children to grow up and achieve independence. He has given them His Torah, but now wants them to develop it...."




There is much more to it than that for some can read scripture and not hear God. But the point in general is that one is hearing God speak when he reads the scripture. The only question then remains does he "hear" in the sense of noise. Or does he "hear" in that he listens and understands?

Isa 6:9-10

9 And He said, "Go, and tell this people:
'Keep on listening, but do not perceive;
Keep on looking, but do not understand.'
10 "Render the hearts of this people insensitive,,
Their ears dull,
And their eyes dim,
Lest they see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,,
Understand with their hearts,
And return and be healed."
NASB

So we must hear and perceive. It is of utmost importance.Yeah, but really- anyone can use this to prove they are right. Jews will say Christians are wrong. Catholics will say that Protestants are wrong. Protestants will say that JWs or SDA or LDS are wrong, etc etc. This leads no where.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:31 PM
So, it is for selfish reasons that you have no desire to hear your Father's voice?
Again, my feelings on the matter are irrelevant. God will do whatever He wishes.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:32 PM
Ah, but he failed the test. Had he passed the test and ate of the tree of life and said no to the tree of knowledge, I think another test would have been given and it would have been of greater difficulty. But in failing the test, much misery came. When Abraham passed the test, much joy and rewards came. Eating the tree of knowledge seemed the easy way out but it ended up being far from easy for Adam and his offspring.Exactly. I was hoping from your last post that you understood his motivation though.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:34 PM
Exactly. I was hoping from your last post that you understood his motivation though.

Exploring his motivation may be interesting. I think I understand part of it... self preservation. That is often a thing that leads us to trouble.

daughter
Jul 20th 2008, 06:36 PM
The way I understood it, he ate the fruit because Eve offered it, and he loved his wife more than he loved God.

Very understandable, but utterly shameful.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:36 PM
Exploring his motivation may be interesting. I think I understand part of it... self preservation. That is often a thing that leads us to trouble.No, you're not getting it. And it's exactly what you said in your post, too.

Forget I mentioned it.

daughter
Jul 20th 2008, 06:37 PM
Again, my feelings on the matter are irrelevant. God will do whatever He wishes.
Fenris, if you keep this up we'll all know that you're secretly a Calivinist! :lol:

But you're right. He will.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:40 PM
Fenris, if you keep this up we'll all know that you're secretly a Calivinist! :lol:

But you're right. He will.No, because I don't think that God has to 'choose' me to be set on the right path.

daughter
Jul 20th 2008, 06:44 PM
I was teasing Fenris. ;) Anyway, God already chose you.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:44 PM
Why does one need to hear God at all? Didn't God already tell us what behavior He expects in His bible?

Can one read the bible and not hear God? Can one read the bible and hear God? If we shut out the scriptures then we do not listen to what God is saying. If we read the scriptures and do them, are we not then hearing God? I am saying that hearing God involves listening to the scriptures. If one doesn't listen/hear the scriptures it is because he chooses not to hear what God is saying through them.


You know, I'm starting to see another fundamental difference between our faiths here.

Jews are expected to use logical tools to determine exactly what the Law is (this making us part of the process, I guess). Christians obviously expect revelation from above to determine God's will. This is very interesting.

I would say we use both logical tools and revelation from above. As I said before, there's a way that seems right unto man...


I'm going to post a story from the Talmud here. I've posted it before. Jews find it very reasonable and Christians find it blasphemous. It illustrates the difference perfectly.

Well, I would say the difference is not so illustrated. For instance, God will not speak against his written word. So we know we hear him through his written word first. If a heavenly voice speaks differently than the written word, Christians would not believe it.


The British-Jewish scholar and writer Hyam Maccoby has commented: "This extraordinary story strikes the keynote of the Talmud. God is a good father who wants His children to grow up and achieve independence. He has given them His Torah, but now wants them to develop it...."

God wants his children independent of Himself?


Yeah, but really- anyone can use this to prove they are right. Jews will say Christians are wrong. Catholics will say that Protestants are wrong. Protestants will say that JWs or SDA or LDS are wrong, etc etc. This leads no where.

We have discussed proof before. I cannot prove to you God. Why do you think we encourage you to hear God? For we do not desire to prove to you what is right and wrong or what is truth. That is beyond my ability. But rather, I (and I think others here as well which is why I wrote "we" earlier) desire for you to communicate with God and then you and He decide what is right and wrong concerning proofs. I think the Hebrew scriptures encourages men to hear God through example and written encouragement.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 06:47 PM
Again, my feelings on the matter are irrelevant. God will do whatever He wishes.Whether your feelings are irrelevant or not make no difference to the pressing questions. Is God your heavenly Father? And if so, why, as His child would you not want to hear His voice? No matter what. Don't children naturally want to hear the voice of their father?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:51 PM
Can one read the bible and not hear God?Why not?
God wrote down what He expects us to do. I don't need to hear His voice in my head to make me give charity.





I would say we use both logical tools and revelation from above. As I said before, there's a way that seems right unto man...But again, this leads no where. At least using logical tools means that I can show another person with similar beliefs what to do. If we all need to wait to hear from above...




Well, I would say the difference is not so illustrated. For instance, God will not speak against his written word. So we know we hear him through his written word first. If a heavenly voice speaks differently than the written word, Christians would not believe it.As a Jew I would say a lot of the NT is against what was already said. But that's just my perception...




God wants his children independent of Himself?God wants us to be part of the process.




We have discussed proof before. I cannot prove to you God. Why do you think we encourage you to hear God? For we do not desire to prove to you what is right and wrong or what is truth. That is beyond my ability. But rather, I (and I think others here as well which is why I wrote "we" earlier) desire for you to communicate with God and then you and He decide what is right and wrong concerning proofs. I think the Hebrew scriptures encourages men to hear God through example and written encouragement.
It isn't about proof. As I've said in another thread, anyone can say "The holy spirit told me [something], so now I'm automatically right". One can't refute such a statement, so it isn't even worth discussing.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:52 PM
Whether your feelings are irrelevant or not make no difference to the pressing questions. Is God your heavenly Father? And if so, why, as His child would you not want to hear His voice? No matter what. Don't children natural want to hear the voice of their father?We have written down what He said. It is sufficient. Hearing Him speak undoes His greatest gift to me- my free will.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 06:54 PM
I was teasing Fenris. ;) Anyway, God already chose you.
Everyone is 'chosen' for some mission.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:56 PM
Why not?
God wrote down what He expects us to do. I don't need to hear His voice in my head to make me give charity.

I am not just speaking about hearing a voice in your head. Rather, I am speaking about having a hearing heart. Isaiah wrote about people that would hear but not perceive. When I mention hearing God, I am speaking of perceiving God. One can read the bible and miss God by a long shot.


But again, this leads no where. At least using logical tools means that I can show another person with similar beliefs what to do. If we all need to wait to hear from above...Hearing God didn't lead nowhere for Abraham. Can you show me one example in scripture where hearing God was detrimental to a man's well being? Now, disobedience is always detrimental. But hearing God is helpful. Balaam would make an interesting study because God told him no then yes.


As a Jew I would say a lot of the NT is against what was already said. But that's just my perception...That's why I am not using NT scriptures in our discussion.


God wants us to be part of the process. Agreed. He does his part and we co-operate with him.


It isn't about proof. As I've said in another thread, anyone can say "The holy spirit told me [something], so now I'm automatically right". One can't refute such a statement, so it isn't even worth discussing.I agree with much of what you are saying. But keep in mind, while we Christians think we are right, we are simply encouraging you to hear God.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 06:58 PM
We have written down what He said. It is sufficient. Hearing Him speak undoes His greatest gift to me- my free will.

Adam had free will before he ate the tree. I don't see free will coming from eating the fruit but rather bondage came from eating the fruit.

Are you suggesting that by hearing God we then must obey. But if we don't hear God we can then do as we please as long as it conforms to our view of scriptures?

daughter
Jul 20th 2008, 06:58 PM
Some of what Fenris is saying should make perfect sense from a Christian perspective. Jesus said to Thomas that he was blessed, because having seen he believed, but that those who did NOT see were even more blessed for their faith. He also said that a "wicked and adulterous generation seek after a sign." Fenris is simply saying that he is obeying God, whether he ever gets a sign or not. And as Christians we should agree that "the just shall walk by faith, and not by sight."

This doesn't mean that revelation has stopped though, and I'm sure that Fenris must have had incidents in his own life when he's KNOWN God was guiding him... not as a "booming voice in his head" but as a gentle arm on his elbow, steering him right.

I could be wrong though... But I know God is still active in all our lives.

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 06:59 PM
Everyone is 'chosen' for some mission.Does the God chose for the Muslim to blow himself up on a bus full of people? Or is it the enemy that wills such missions?

daughter
Jul 20th 2008, 06:59 PM
Everyone is 'chosen' for some mission.
But how do we "know" for what mission He has chosen us?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 07:02 PM
I am not just speaking about hearing a voice in your head. Rather, I am speaking about having a hearing heart.Jews pray for understanding every day. That doesn't mean hearing a voice. God is capable of affecting our perceptions in subtle ways we may not even be aware of.


Hearing God didn't lead nowhere for Abraham. Can you show me one example in scripture where hearing God was detrimental to a man's well being? No one today communicates with God as people did in biblical times.


Agreed. He does his part and we co-operate with him.Well, what do you think the rabbis in the Talmud were doing?


I agree with much of what you are saying. But keep in mind, while we Christians think we are right, we are simply encouraging you to hear God.

But what makes you think we don't? Just because we've come to a different conclusion?

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 07:04 PM
Does the God chose for the Muslim to blow himself up on a bus full of people? Or is it the enemy that wills such missions?Perhaps his mission is NOT to blow himself up. In which case, he failed...

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 07:04 PM
Some of what Fenris is saying should make perfect sense from a Christian perspective. Jesus said to Thomas that he was blessed, because having seen he believed, but that those who did NOT see were even more blessed for their faith. He also said that a "wicked and adulterous generation seek after a sign." Fenris is simply saying that he is obeying God, whether he ever gets a sign or not. And as Christians we should agree that "the just shall walk by faith, and not by sight."

This doesn't mean that revelation has stopped though, and I'm sure that Fenris must have had incidents in his own life when he's KNOWN God was guiding him... not as a "booming voice in his head" but as a gentle arm on his elbow, steering him right.

I could be wrong though... But I know God is still active in all our lives.I am not picking on Fenris. I like Fenris! :) I would like for Him to want to hear the Father's voice so that the Father can guide him to the answer to his question from the OP. Surprisingly he has said that he doesn't want to hear the Father's voice and that Hagar, an Egyptian slave, was more spiritual than himself. I would like him to see that the Father does desire a personal relationship with him. I hope you can see that anything I have said to Fenris is because I care about him.

God Bless!

Studyin'2Show
Jul 20th 2008, 07:05 PM
No one today communicates with God as people did in biblical times.That's your opinion. You've said this many times so I thought I'd turn it around on you. :D

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 07:05 PM
This doesn't mean that revelation has stopped though, and I'm sure that Fenris must have had incidents in his own life when he's KNOWN God was guiding him... not as a "booming voice in his head" but as a gentle arm on his elbow, steering him right.

You're a very perceptive woman. Because you're more right than you even know.

Brother Mark
Jul 20th 2008, 07:06 PM
Jews pray for understanding every day. That doesn't mean hearing a voice. God is capable of affecting our perceptions in subtle ways we may not even be aware of.

I agree with this. That's why I say that if one is a Christian, he has experienced God in some way.


No one today communicates with God as people did in biblical times.

I agree with this too. It's not in the same exact way.


Well, what do you think the rabbis in the Talmud were doing?

I think the story was excellent. Because the point was that even miracles do not justify a word that comes from heaven. I like the story and may even use it at some point.


But what makes you think we don't? Just because we've come to a different conclusion?

I didn't say Jews don't hear God. I am only going by what you said concerning yourself Fenris. I know you well enough to know better than to lump Jews together in a general statement. If I ever do that in our conversation it is unintentional and very likely, not what I meant to say anyway.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 07:07 PM
But how do we "know" for what mission He has chosen us?
That's the hard part. :lol:

When you see some unfinished aspect of Creation, maybe it's your job to finish it.

Fenris
Jul 20th 2008, 07:08 PM
I am not picking on Fenris. I like Fenris! :)
I know you care. :hug: