Did Jesus really fulfill all of the laws???

tbeachhead

Well-known member
I am certified to teach English, and I made no English error. The error was on your part, thinking that a figurative remark was literal.
Did you mean this literally? Or figuratively. You'll have to preface your posts if you want your "English" to be understood. "You'll have to obey all 613 laws" seems clear until you understand it was never meant to be read as written. I mean that literally, btw.
 

tbeachhead

Well-known member
Yes at least you read me correctly -- I do indeed claim that Jesus did not fulfill all the messianic prophecies and therefore cannot be the messiah.
That's not what you said. You said he did not fulfill all 613 laws.

By the numbers:
Here are just three examples (and I need only list one to rule J out as messiah):
1. The messiah will usher in an era of peace between the nations. Jesus didn't do this.
Jesus' work is clearly not finished, and He made no claim to that end. He said, "I will return." But He came to fulfill God's promise to Abraham by which ALL the nations of the earth will be blessed.
2. The messiah will bring all the Jews in diaspora back to Eretz Yisrael. Jesus didn't do this.
Speculation on your part...Whom do you believe brought the nation back to be born in a day? Many have proposed that this was a matter of conniving and betrayal under the Balfour betrayal. What do you think? Do you suggest that it's a miracle, as many Evangelical Christians maintain? Do you believe God has done this independent of Messiah?
3. The messiah will rule Israel from Jerusalem. Jesus did not do this.
On this we agree...Jesus did not do this, yet. There is a matter of the heart that first takes place.

What strikes me here is the fact that you have decided to ignore the resurrection, an historic and undeniable fact that belies all your claims. That He rose from the dead is proof enough that there is a work that comes to precede His return, as Peter put it, "...a salvation that stands ready to be revealed in the last day." In that day they will look on Him Whom they pierced...unfortunately...you don't fit into any of this.

Your people never pierced Him...and they probably persecuted those who did.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Yep. You are confused.
Not on this topic.

Nope. He was without sin...and His Righteousness was His alone. You're claims are specious, albeit, I'm sure, self-satisfying.
At a minimum, his parents fulfilled at least 3 commandments for him, so he's depending on their righteousness in those instances.

Donating to the temple funds, contact with the dead, nazarite vows, etc., show imperfections.

Yep. Entirely.
Yep, so his salvation was based on others.

Distilled speech...I guess it works for you.
If it works, it works.
 

tbeachhead

Well-known member
No. That's the point of this thread. His parents fulfilled at least 3 commandments for him. So, he relies on them for their righteousness, as you should too, right?
Your speciousness is dazzling...

They obeyed the Law. He is the embodiment of the Law they obeyed.

Let me ask you this: Do you rely on Abraham for your faith? Because he obeyed, you are called as his child. Here's a newsflash: Abraham relied on the Word of God, and that was His claim to righteousness. Mary became pregnant, because she relied fully on the Word of God that was spoken to her. Disobedience was not even an option, because she had made her decision to entirely rely on the Word of God Whom she bore.

Until you understand the nature of the Word, and the power He carries to create all things, this will continue to be an object of your snark and understandably disrespectful disdain.
Even Isaiah 53 doesn't teach that as the servant is counted with the sinners, v12. Not only that, but the specific sacrifice talked about there is an asham, v10, only for unknown sins, not all sins.
That He is "counted with the sinners" only reflects the misguided opinion of the Pharisees and the Cohanim of His day. "We esteemed Him...but..." shows that your error was foreseen.

BTW, God doesn't have sins nor takes them on Himself. That's an impossibility, Deut 32:6.
Not following your vast Biblical knowledge here. Deuteronomy 32:6 says, "Is this how you repay the LORD, O foolish and senseless people? Is He not your Father and Creator? Has He not made you and established you?"

The issue of what God did in Messiah is not here in Deuteronomy. It's in Isaiah:
3He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.

You've proven this true with every post. Your response echoes that of the leaders of His day, who were all likewise well-indoctrinated by their traditions to reject Him when He came, as Isaiah foresaw.

Like one from whom men hide their faces,
He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4Surely He took on our infirmities
and carried our sorrows;
yet we considered Him stricken by God,
struck down and afflicted.

Your people believed they were doing God a favor rejecting Him.

5But He was pierced for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him,
and by His stripes we are healed.


Christians didn't write this. We merely understand the word of the prophets that you MUST reject if being Jewish means, as it does with you, you must reject Messiah.

8By oppression and judgment He was taken away,
and who can recount His descendants?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;

10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him
and to cause Him to suffer;


Foreseen, foretold and fulfilled...

and when His soul is made a guilt offering,

How can a man's soul be made "a guilt offering." This is the Lord's doing, and yours to deny.

He was stricken for the transgression of My people.

Can God do that?


12Therefore I will allot Him a portion with the great,i
and He will divide the spoils with the strong,
because He has poured out His life unto death,
and He was numbered with the transgressors.
Yet He bore the sin of many
and made intercession for the transgressors.Can anyone "bear the sin of many?" Does God need your permission to do that/

You really need to have this discussion with God Himself, if you entertain the notion that Isaiah was inspired to write this...unless you suggest that God would make the soul of a sinner a sacrifice for you. Can a sinner, in your theology, bear the sin of many?
The Rock, His work is perfect; For all His ways are justice; A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, Just and right is He.
So...not a sinner...as we said.

Ironically, Jesus never taught what you're saying. Either way, he's counting on his parents righteousness for perfection.
There is clearly a lot that Jesus taught that you have not understood.

BTW...His parents were righteous. He chose them to bear Messiah. Your horse is on the wrong side of your cart.
No, if he's perfect in the law as you claim, then he would fulfill all of the law himself. But, he didn't in at least these 3 commandments.
It's amazing that this satisfies you.

Apply your error to Samson and see what you get. She obeyed, drank no wine, and Samson was born. Samson was born to a faithful woman who, like her father Abraham before her, believed God and obeyed. He wasn't dependent on her obedience. He was the product of her obedience, as you are the product of Abraham's obedience and the Pharisees rebellion.

In the same light. Jesus was entirely dependent on the life of Mary for the nine months of her gestation. That's how children are born into the world. Mary was righteous which justifies God's choice. It certainly doesn't put His choice of Mary into question. She believed God like her father Abraham did before her.
 
Last edited:

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Your speciousness is dazzling...
On the contrary. It's on point.

They obeyed the Law. He is the embodiment of the Law they obeyed.
They obeyed the law for him, and he relies on their righteousness. There's no getting around this.

Let me ask you this: Do you rely on Abraham for your faith? Because he obeyed, you are called as his child.
No, I don't rely on anyone for my faith. It's a personal thing.

Here's a newsflash: Abraham relied on the Word of God, and that was His claim to righteousness.
Abraham trusted in God's promise and acted.

Mary became pregnant, because she relied fully on the Word of God that was spoken to her.
She was married and had relations with Joseph. Outside of that would be adulterous.

Disobedience was not even an option, because she had made her decision to entirely rely on the Word of God Whom she bore.
Disobedience is always a possibility.

Until you understand the nature of the Word, and the power He carries to create all things, this will continue to be an object of your snark and understandably disrespectful disdain.
Sorry, but the created, Jesus, created nothing. All knees will bow and tongues confess the true God. That includes Jesus too.

That He is "counted with the sinners" only reflects the misguided opinion of the Pharisees and the Cohanim of His day. "We esteemed Him...but..." shows that your error was foreseen.
You can't get around he was counted among them.

Not following your vast Biblical knowledge here. Deuteronomy 32:6 says, "Is this how you repay the LORD, O foolish and senseless people? Is He not your Father and Creator? Has He not made you and established you?"
Oops. V4

The issue of what God did in Messiah is not here in Deuteronomy. It's in Isaiah:
3He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.
Actually, Isaiah 53 doesn't speak of Messiah but of Israel the servant.

You've proven this true with every post. Your response echoes that of the leaders of His day, who were all likewise well-indoctrinated by their traditions to reject Him when He came, as Isaiah foresaw.
Rejected for reason.

Like one from whom men hide their faces,
He was despised, and we esteemed Him not.
4Surely He took on our infirmities
and carried our sorrows;
yet we considered Him stricken by God,
struck down and afflicted.

Your people believed they were doing God a favor rejecting Him.
Yep.

5But He was pierced for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him,
and by His stripes we are healed.


Christians didn't write this. We merely understand the word of the prophets that you MUST reject if being Jewish means, as it does with you, you must reject Messiah.
Where does it say we rejected Messiah?

8By oppression and judgment He was taken away,
and who can recount His descendants?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;

10Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush Him
and to cause Him to suffer;


Foreseen, foretold and fulfilled...

and when His soul is made a guilt offering,
Yes. An asham is for unknown sins, and doesn't cover all sins. So your messiah wouldn't even cover everything.

How can a man's soul be made "a guilt offering." This is the Lord's doing, and yours to deny.
See above.

He was stricken for the transgression of My people.

Can God do that?
God doesn't take on sins.

12Therefore I will allot Him a portion with the great,i
and He will divide the spoils with the strong,
because He has poured out His life unto death,
and He was numbered with the transgressors.
Yet He bore the sin of many
and made intercession for the transgressors.Can anyone "bear the sin of many?" Does God need your permission to do that/
Yes, the remnant Israel has borne the punishment for all of Israel.

You really need to have this discussion with God Himself, if you entertain the notion that Isaiah was inspired to write this...unless you suggest that God would make the soul of a sinner a sacrifice for you. Can a sinner, in your theology, bear the sin of many?
Yes, the righteous fall 7 times.

So...not a sinner...as we said.


There is clearly a lot that Jesus taught that you have not understood.

BTW...His parents were righteous. He chose them to bear Messiah. Your horse is on the wrong side of your cart.

It's amazing that this satisfies you.

Apply your error to Samson and see what you get. She obeyed, drank no wine, and Samson was born. Samson was born to a faithful woman who, like her father Abraham before her, believed God and obeyed. He wasn't dependent on her obedience. He was the product of her obedience, as you are the product of Abraham's obedience and the Pharisees rebellion.
Personal choice when it comes to me.

In the same light. Jesus was entirely dependent on the life of Mary for the nine months of her gestation. That's how children are born into the world. Mary was righteous which justifies God's choice. It certainly doesn't put His choice of Mary into question. She believed God like her father Abraham did before her.
So Jesus righteousness was based on others. He's saved as a result of others.
 

tbeachhead

Well-known member
On the contrary. It's on point.
Naaah. It defines specious.
They obeyed the law for him, and he relies on their righteousness. There's no getting around this.
Do you suggest that your god relied on Abraham's righteousness? He relied on Samson's mother's righteousness to act on Samson's behalf? Then the Bible is rife with examples of God relying on the righteousness of man. Your argument is specious.

No, I don't rely on anyone for my faith. It's a personal thing.
And self-satisfying. And unlike Abraham, you pick and choose, and you do what seems right in your own eyes. Your ilk is in the Bible, but it's not the kind of faith Abraham had.

And the question is: Can God rely on your faith as He did on Manoah's wife's faith?

Let me clarify: I rely on Mary's faith to instruct me. I rely on the Word to instruct me as He promised He would. (Psalm 32. Isaiah 30. Ezekiel 11 and 36. Jeremiah 31:33)

You have to understand: The Word is living and active...He's sharper than a two-edged sword. There is nothing He cannot do, once spoken. He does not return void. That is why Christians, instructed by His Word, say He is actually alive in them. Such is the life of the Word of God, that it sees formlessness and void and speaks life into existence. Such is His Word today.
Abraham trusted in God's promise and acted.
God relied on him to do just that.

The majesty of Torah depends on the faith of man, displayed in his response to the Word of God.
She was married and had relations with Joseph. Outside of that would be adulterous.
False...She was betrothed, and had not known him, and she believed the Word of God...and became pregnant by faith in the Word. The Word alone and Mary's faith in that word, supplied the DNA that caused the Word to be made flesh, be clothed in mortality and to dwell for a time among us. That's how it worked.

Contrast that with Jesus among the Nazarenes...steeped in the doctrines and traditions of man, and their own limited expectations, having seen Messiah as a little boy. Their unbelief, like yours, limited God.

You're limited understanding borders on blasphemy, because your god is limited to your own imagination.
Disobedience is always a possibility.
For some...For Adam certainly. Not for Mary. She did not hesitate, like Abraham in his later years.
Sorry, but the created, Jesus, created nothing. All knees will bow and tongues confess the true God. That includes Jesus too.
Your misinformed misunderstanding. It has nothing at all to do with history besides the historic rejection you are forced to repeat, because of the choice those whom you claim as your fathers made. The Word was made flesh as I just showed you, and as you already know...He was not created. He was merely clothed with flesh to walk among us.
You can't get around he was counted among them.
Why would I get around the mistake you made...and continue to make! He was counted wrongly among them...as it is written.

This verse does not tell me what God cannot do. It only highlights the limits you have imposed on your god. He is the Rock...there is no other.
Actually, Isaiah 53 doesn't speak of Messiah but of Israel the servant.
You have to say that...even though "Israel" is never mentioned....ever. And everything describes to the letter both the passion and the redemption that passion procured, and how it works. It describes a single servant. It certainly does not apply to you...or to any of your synagogue...or to any Jew alive today. Do you suggest otherwise? How has your soul been made a sacrifice for sin? Do you have a testimony I'm missing? I can relate Jesus' testimony...but you've clearly read it from all four points of views.
Rejected for reason.
Yep...They'd lose their job and prominence. That's why they bribed Judas, and called false witnesses...and lied at the incontestable resurrection.

They certainly fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy concerning them to the letter...and glorified the Word of God, as He should be.

Where does it say we rejected Messiah?
v. 3. Why do you ask...You despise and reject him as Isaiah foretold.

Yes. An asham is for unknown sins, and doesn't cover all sins. So your messiah wouldn't even cover everything.
Another absolutely specious claim...He not only is the guilt offering, His is the intercession for our peace. Don't read this one verse at a time if you want to understand the extent of His mercy on your ancestors grave error.

See above.
I see you cannot answer and have not been able: You have said yourself "a man's soul cannot be given in sacrifice...", thus contradicting what you know is written in the Tenach. So I'll ask again: see my question above and answer it.

God doesn't take on sins.
So your dispute is with Isaiah, then? And you do not believe Tenach?

Yes, the remnant Israel has borne the punishment for all of Israel.
Not that effective, now, is it....Presumptuous...but ineffective. How can sinners bear the sins of others? Has God suddenly punished the children for their fathers' sins? That's a change that contradicts Torah.

Yes, the righteous fall 7 times.
And the unrighteous? You're actually saying God would accept a blemished sacrifice?

Personal choice when it comes to me.
For which you'll answer...and that still does not respond to my point.

So Jesus righteousness was based on others. He's saved as a result of others.
No...His righteousness is based on His obedience to the Father's will...simple as that. Anyone's righteousness is measured according to his on choices, and not according to who changed their diapers. Your argument at the end of the post is a specious as it is each time you fall back on it.
 
Last edited:

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Naaah. It defines specious.
Naaah. You just don't understand the problem.

Do you suggest that your god relied on Abraham's righteousness?
Did I say that?

He relied on Samson's mother's righteousness to act on Samson's behalf? Then the Bible is rife with examples of God relying on the righteousness of man. Your argument is specious.
I've never said God relies on anyones righteousness.

And self-satisfying. And unlike Abraham, you pick and choose, and you do what seems right in your own eyes. Your ilk is in the Bible, but it's not the kind of faith Abraham had.
I don't know why you're choosing to spew false reports.

And the question is: Can God rely on your faith as He did on Manoah's wife's faith?
God doesn't rely on anyone's faith? They either obey or not.

Let me clarify: I rely on Mary's faith to instruct me.
I don't rely on Mary for anything. Sounds like RCC teaching.

I rely on the Word to instruct me as He promised He would. (Psalm 32. Isaiah 30. Ezekiel 11 and 36. Jeremiah 31:33)
I rely on God's words, and not man. Psalm 146:3.

God relied on him to do just that.
God doesn't rely on man.

The majesty of Torah depends on the faith of man, displayed in his response to the Word of God.
The majesty of Torah exists whether man keeps it or not. The law is righteousness and truth.

False...She was betrothed, and had not known him,
Then she got pregnant outside of marriage, and the child is a mamzer. Your choice.

and she believed the Word of God...and became pregnant by faith in the Word.
Nope. She believed she'd get pregnant by her husband, according to the spirit of the law and marriage.

The Word alone supplied the DNA that caused the Word to be made flesh, be clothed in mortality and to dwell for a time among us. That's how it worked.
Rotfl... nothing supports your idea. Leviticus 12:1-8, Luke 2:22-24, points to tazria, conceived via sperm.

You're limited understanding borders on blasphemy, because your god is limited to your own imagination.
Only a physical god is limited.

For some...For Adam certainly. Not for Mary. She did not hesitate, like Abraham in his later years.
Your misinformed misunderstanding. It has nothing at all to do with history besides the historic rejection you are forced to repeat, because of the choice those whom you claim as your fathers made. The Word was made flesh as I just showed you, and as you already know...He was not created. He was merely clothed with flesh to walk among us.
You didn't show or prove anything. A new god with a new nature is created.

Why would I get around the mistake you made...and continue to make! He was counted wrongly among them...as it is written.
It doesn't say wrongly or that the servant is sinless.

This verse does not tell me what God cannot do. It only highlights the limits you have imposed on your god. He is the Rock...there is no other.
It says He has zero sins. Taking on sins are sins.

You have to say that...even though "Israel" is never mentioned....ever. And everything describes to the letter both the passion and the redemption that passion procured, and how it works.
Israel is mentioned as servant in several places in Isaiah.

It describes a single servant. It certainly does not apply to you...or to any of your synagogue...or to any Jew alive today.
You wouldn't know.

Do you suggest otherwise? How has your soul been made a sacrifice for sin? Do you have a testimony I'm missing? I can relate Jesus' testimony...but you've clearly read it from all four points of views.
By suffering, and being exiled because of others.

Yep...They'd lose their job and prominence. That's why they bribed Judas, and called false witnesses...and lied at the incontestable resurrection.
Incontestable? No one in Rome, Josephus, etc., ever wrote about his resurrection, ascension, 500 saints busting out of tombs, etc.
 

tbeachhead

Well-known member
Naaah. You just don't understand the problem.
Certainly not the way you "understand" it.
Did I say that?
If it's true for Jesus, it is also true for God. How can you not see this? God purposed to bless a nation through Israel...He had to depend on Abraham to bring that about! Israel's existence was entirely dependent on God's relying on Abraham to go into Sarah the full ninety years...Israel exists because God relied on Abraham. He limited Himself.

I've never said God relies on anyones righteousness.
You just don't understand what you are saying, because you're applying this nonsense to Jesus, and you do not see the nonsensical blasphemy you're proposing. God has always worked with and through the faithful. Always...

In short, from the first day, He has always relied on His Word to do what He sent Him forth to complete. And the Word has never failed...and those who have faith in His Word likewise do as He does and speak as He speaks.
I don't know why you're choosing to spew false reports.
You have chosen what you will believe and you have rejected the Word when it does not fit. For you, God's image and likeness are an expression of character...neither image nor likeness. For you, the "servant" is not Messiah. It's "Israel"...sent to offer the nation's soul...It's selective belief, but not before your presuppositions are set.

For you, faith was instructed by generations of tradition. I suggest that the root is not as reliable as scripture itself. For me, faith was instructed by a demonstrable event in time...and required a reexamination of all of scripture, because the Word was vindicated by that event, the Crucifixion, Death and Resurrection that were both foreseen and foretold.

God doesn't rely on anyone's faith? They either obey or not.
Yeah...but...Not leaves you with Sodom...nothing much there, but Ezekiel's revelation...that they had pride, fulness of bread and abundance of idleness, and they did not care for the poor and the needy...and they did abominable acts.

But obey, as God relied on Ezekiel to do, leaves us all with instructions in righteousness, and the warning we need concerning Sodom's inexorable demise. God didn't tell you this: He let Ezekiel do that. How are you missing this? He's not going to come and tell you what I'm saying. He's relying on me to tell you what I've seen and I've learned from Him.
I don't rely on Mary for anything. Sounds like RCC teaching.
Scripture instructs me...And Mary's response to Gabriel is like Daniel's response to Gabriel's, except her response had a far more personal cost. Faith has consequences, if you let the Word in to do the instructing.
I rely on God's words, and not man. Psalm 146:3.
That's, I think, why these conversations are not boring. I believe you.

God doesn't rely on man.
I don't think even you believe that. God didn't write the Psalms...He relied on songwriters like David to do that. There is a concept in Christianity that is pertinent and poignant: He calls us co-laborers with Christ. Redemption is done by men, with men and through men. He gave Aaron the assignment...He did not come down to do it by Himself. When Aaron failed, it was Aaron's repentance and return to obedience that restored the sons of Israel in the desert. God relied on Aaron...When God wanted to destroy all of Israel and start afresh with Moses, it was Moses' intercession that saved your people from utter destruction. God relied on the intercession of Moses. He will not accomplish His purpose without us. Such is the nature of His overwhelming love for us.
The majesty of Torah exists whether man keeps it or not. The law is righteousness and truth.
You missed my point...Don't miss this: The majesty of Torah is the interaction between God and man. Torah is not merely law. It's Israel in the desert. It's the golden calf. It's Balaam's prophecies of overwhelming chesed mercy over a rebellious and stiff necked people.

Then she got pregnant outside of marriage, and the child is a mamzer. Your choice.
It's all covered...and if you accept the fact that she received the Word from Gabriel, and conceived by faith in that word, then she was not the repulsive word you choose to insult her with...she was set apart as the one meant to bring Messiah into the world. She was betrothed and untouched, and stands alone as virgin, but with child.

To be as you describe her requires a touch that she never experienced until Jesus was born. Joseph understood this...and accepted the word of the angels as well, and so he protected her.

To that extent, the RCC's have not erred. In their worship of her and of eternal virginity, the statues and parades...that's nonsense. She was always Jewish...and had sons and daughters whose names we know.


Nope. She believed she'd get pregnant by her husband, according to the spirit of the law and marriage.
That's false, and the testimony of scripture belies your claim. Jesus was born of a virgin. Your deliberately limited understanding is in play here. And that's fine. Faith is far better rooted in the demonstrable resurrection. The virgin birth only recommends the extent to which the chesed of God will go on your behalf.

Rotfl... nothing supports your idea. Leviticus 12:1-8, Luke 2:22-24, points to tazria, conceived via sperm.
You err. This is what faith does, and this is how faith works. Your god is so limited, you can only tell me what's impossible with your god, and you don't see that. Luke's account proves the claim. She became pregnant the moment she said, "Be it done unto me according to your word." At that moment, the Word entered the flesh. Luke only speaks in the verses you cite of the circumcision ritual eight days after birth...He was born of normal means. His conception was by faith.
Only a physical god is limited.
That's clearly false...your god is so limited there are things that are impossible to him.

And a God who walks with Adam in the cool of the day is still as unlimited as the God who shows his back parts to Moses on the mountain, or the God Who is in the still small voice that speaks to Elijah.
You didn't show or prove anything. A new god with a new nature is created.
Nope. He Who promised did as He promised.

It doesn't say wrongly or that the servant is sinless.
This is the weirdest claim: He bears the transgressions of many...like the goat to Azazel, outside the camp. He's made a sin offering. Show me where a blemished lamb is offered up and accepted. You cannot. Read it again. He bore the transgressions of many. You cannot make that claim on anybody's behalf. That passage is not about you or yours, but about the one you rejected as Isaiah foresaw.

It says He has zero sins. Taking on sins are sins.
That's what substitutionary sacrifice was all about. Don't you even understand what the lamb was for? Soul for soul...the life of the lamb on your behalf.

Like I said...you're highlighting the limits you've placed on your god...You're telling him that you don't even need Moses any more. The traditions you've salvaged from the rubble of the temple are all you need to satisfy the law's demands.
Israel is mentioned as servant in several places in Isaiah.
Yep.

But (checking) Not here!

You wouldn't know.
I'd love to hear y'all describe how you are the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, and how your soul has been made a sacrifice...

By suffering, and being exiled because of others.
Or because, like Manasseh and Ahaz, Ahab and his spawn, you rejected God at the hour of his coming.

We all like sheep have gone astray. We are each being called by His grace and His Word to His temple.
Incontestable? No one in Rome, Josephus, etc., ever wrote about his resurrection, ascension, 500 saints busting out of tombs, etc.
That's a false claim, and you know it...and the abundant evidence of His resurrection is seen in two incontestable facts: the word of His resurrection spread by eye-witnesses from Jerusalem to Tarshish in the west, and to Japan in the east.

And NO ONE ever claimed to produce His mutilated body, until the ridiculous claims were made in the nineties, the claims you brought up...a sabbath's journey from where He was crucified....as if stunning revelation came to the archaeologists after two thousand years of searching.

Let me give you a third, because you know this: The Nazarene sect and the Jews worshipped in the Temple until Titus came and destroyed both the temple and any fellowship we had shared and enjoyed. That's decades after the resurrection, and you know it...without any credible attempt to belie the claims to the resurrection.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Certainly not the way you "understand" it.
Of course not.

If it's true for Jesus, it is also true for God. How can you not see this? God purposed to bless a nation through...
God doesn't limit Himself. That wouldn't be God. I know Phillipians teaches this, but it's a farce.

You just don't understand what you are saying, because you're applying this nonsense to Jesus, and you do not see the nonsensical blasphemy you're proposing.
It's blasphemous to say God is physical.

In short, from the first day, He has always relied on His Word to do what He sent Him forth to complete. And the Word has never failed...and those who have faith in His Word likewise do as He does and speak as He speaks.
God's word doesn't return void.

You have chosen what you will believe and you have rejected the Word when it does not fit.
No, I reject your words and false gods.

For you, God's image and likeness are an expression of character...neither image nor likeness.
An expression of character, role, actions. They are both image and likeness. Study the words some more.

For you, the "servant" is not Messiah. It's "Israel"...sent to offer the nation's soul...It's selective belief, but not before your presuppositions are set.
Isaiah calls Israel the servant outright.

For you, faith was instructed by generations of tradition.
False. Don't put words in my mouth. You've previously presented false witness.

I suggest that the root is not as reliable as scripture itself. For me, faith was instructed by a demonstrable event in time...and required a reexamination of all of scripture, because the Word was vindicated by that event, the Crucifixion, Death and Resurrection that were both foreseen and foretold.
Blah blah

Yeah...but...Not leaves you with Sodom...nothing much there, but Ezekiel's revelation...that they had pride, fulness of bread and abundance of idleness, and they did not care for the poor and the needy...and they did abominable acts.
Yes, Israel has had a history just like all nations.

But obey, as God relied on Ezekiel to do, leaves us all with instructions in righteousness, and the warning we need concerning Sodom's inexorable demise. God didn't tell you this: He let Ezekiel do that. How are you missing this? He's not going to come and tell you what I'm saying. He's relying on me to tell you what I've seen and I've learned from Him.
God's words, not Ezekiel.

Scripture instructs me...And Mary's response to Gabriel is like Daniel's response to Gabriel's, except her response had a far more personal cost. Faith has consequences, if you let the Word in to do the instructing.
God has been in my life for a while.

That's, I think, why these conversations are not boring. I believe you.
I'm glad you're enjoying it.

I don't think even you believe that. God didn't write the Psalms...He relied on songwriters like David to do that.
The inspiration is from God.

There is a concept in Christianity that is pertinent and poignant: He calls us co-laborers with Christ....
Torah is God's law.

It's all covered...and if you accept the fact that she received the Word from Gabriel,
I don't.

and conceived by faith in that word, then she was not the repulsive word you choose to insult her with
Pregnancy outside of marriage is not a good thing. The result is a mamzer.

...she was set apart as the one meant to bring Messiah into the world. She was betrothed and untouched, and stands alone as virgin, but with child.
A virgin doesn't give birth.

To be as you describe her requires a touch that she never experienced until Jesus was born. Joseph understood this...and accepted the word of the angels as well, and so he protected her.
Actually, Joseph wanted to divorce her. The problem is who touched her.

To that extent, the RCC's have not erred. In their worship of her and of eternal virginity, the statues and parades...that's nonsense. She was always Jewish...and had sons and daughters whose names we know.
Yes, she was just a regular woman.

That's false, and the testimony of scripture belies your claim. Jesus was born of a virgin.
Isaiah 7:14 says young woman and doesn't pertain to Jesus or his time.

Your deliberately limited understanding is in play here. And that's fine. Faith is far better rooted in the demonstrable resurrection.
Never happened.

The virgin birth only recommends the extent to which the chesed of God will go on your behalf.
No virgin birth.

You err. This is what faith does, and this is how faith works. Your god is so limited, you can only tell me what's impossible with your god, and you don't see that.
No, I can see your idea of a physical god is idolatrous.

Luke's account proves the claim. She became pregnant the moment she said, "Be it done unto me according to your word." At that moment, the Word entered the flesh. Luke only speaks in the verses you cite of the circumcision ritual eight days after birth...He was born of normal means. His conception was by faith.
The law in Leviticus 12:1-8 points to her insemination by sperm.

That's clearly false...your god is so limited there are things that are impossible to him.
It's impossible for my God to be limited in human form. Imperfections.

And a God who walks with Adam in the cool of the day is still as unlimited as the God who shows his back parts to Moses on the mountain, or the God Who is in the still small voice that speaks to Elijah.
Both narratives you misunderstand.

Nope. He Who promised did as He promised.
Yep, on Sinai He showed He has no physical form. That was the revelation.

This is the weirdest claim: He bears the transgressions of many...like the goat to Azazel, outside the camp.
Show me where God says He takes on your sins.

He's made a sin offering.
An asham is a limited sacrifice for unknown sins.

That's what substitutionary sacrifice was all about...
An animal isn't God. A man isn't God.

Like I said...you're highlighting the limits you've placed on your god...
No, I'm showing the fallacies of a physical god.

You're telling him that you don't even need Moses any more...
I never said that. If you continue to say falsehoods, this conversation won't continue.

I'd love to hear y'all describe how you are the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy
The same way you think of Jesus, apply that to the remnant.

Or because, like Manasseh and Ahaz, Ahab...
No, Isaiah 7 was specific to Isaiah's time and the context proves it.

We all like sheep have gone astray.
Yep, God has been good to us.

That's a false claim, and you know it...
Can you show any evidence from Rome or Josephus?

the word of His resurrection spread
Rotfl... Japan?

And NO ONE ever claimed to produce His mutilated body...
Actually, Talpiot is pretty credible.

Let me give you a third, because you know this: The Nazarene sect...
And they continued to bring sacrifices. Quite a slap in the face if Jesus' death fulfilled something and if he was really resurrected.

That's decades after the resurrection, and you know it..
See above. No need to belie the claims when sacrifices are still being offered after a resurrection. It contradicts your point.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Certainly not the way you "understand" it.
If it's true for Jesus, it is also true for God. How can you not see this? God purposed to bless a nation through Israel...He had to depend on Abraham to bring that about! Israel's existence was entirely dependent on God's relying on Abraham to go into Sarah the full ninety years...Israel exists because God relied on Abraham. He limited Himself.

You just don't understand what you are saying, because you're applying this nonsense to Jesus, and you do not see the nonsensical blasphemy you're proposing. God has always worked with and through the faithful. Always...

In short, from the first day, He has always relied on His Word to do what He sent Him forth to complete. And the Word has never failed...and those who have faith in His Word likewise do as He does and speak as He speaks.
You have chosen what you will believe and you have rejected the Word when it does not fit. For you, God's image and likeness are an expression of character...neither image nor likeness. For you, the "servant" is not Messiah. It's "Israel"...sent to offer the nation's soul...It's selective belief, but not before your presuppositions are set.

For you, faith was instructed by generations of tradition. I suggest that the root is not as reliable as scripture itself. For me, faith was instructed by a demonstrable event in time...and required a reexamination of all of scripture, because the Word was vindicated by that event, the Crucifixion, Death and Resurrection that were both foreseen and foretold.

Yeah...but...Not leaves you with Sodom...nothing much there, but Ezekiel's revelation...that they had pride, fulness of bread and abundance of idleness, and they did not care for the poor and the needy...and they did abominable acts.

But obey, as God relied on Ezekiel to do, leaves us all with instructions in righteousness, and the warning we need concerning Sodom's inexorable demise. God didn't tell you this: He let Ezekiel do that. How are you missing this? He's not going to come and tell you what I'm saying. He's relying on me to tell you what I've seen and I've learned from Him.
Scripture instructs me...And Mary's response to Gabriel is like Daniel's response to Gabriel's, except her response had a far more personal cost. Faith has consequences, if you let the Word in to do the instructing.
That's, I think, why these conversations are not boring. I believe you.

I don't think even you believe that. God didn't write the Psalms...He relied on songwriters like David to do that. There is a concept in Christianity that is pertinent and poignant: He calls us co-laborers with Christ. Redemption is done by men, with men and through men. He gave Aaron the assignment...He did not come down to do it by Himself. When Aaron failed, it was Aaron's repentance and return to obedience that restored the sons of Israel in the desert. God relied on Aaron...When God wanted to destroy all of Israel and start afresh with Moses, it was Moses' intercession that saved your people from utter destruction. God relied on the intercession of Moses. He will not accomplish His purpose without us. Such is the nature of His overwhelming love for us.
You missed my point...Don't miss this: The majesty of Torah is the interaction between God and man. Torah is not merely law. It's Israel in the desert. It's the golden calf. It's Balaam's prophecies of overwhelming chesed mercy over a rebellious and stiff necked people.

It's all covered...and if you accept the fact that she received the Word from Gabriel, and conceived by faith in that word, then she was not the repulsive word you choose to insult her with...she was set apart as the one meant to bring Messiah into the world. She was betrothed and untouched, and stands alone as virgin, but with child.

To be as you describe her requires a touch that she never experienced until Jesus was born. Joseph understood this...and accepted the word of the angels as well, and so he protected her.

To that extent, the RCC's have not erred. In their worship of her and of eternal virginity, the statues and parades...that's nonsense. She was always Jewish...and had sons and daughters whose names we know.


That's false, and the testimony of scripture belies your claim. Jesus was born of a virgin. Your deliberately limited understanding is in play here. And that's fine. Faith is far better rooted in the demonstrable resurrection. The virgin birth only recommends the extent to which the chesed of God will go on your behalf.

You err. This is what faith does, and this is how faith works. Your god is so limited, you can only tell me what's impossible with your god, and you don't see that. Luke's account proves the claim. She became pregnant the moment she said, "Be it done unto me according to your word." At that moment, the Word entered the flesh. Luke only speaks in the verses you cite of the circumcision ritual eight days after birth...He was born of normal means. His conception was by faith.
That's clearly false...your god is so limited there are things that are impossible to him.

And a God who walks with Adam in the cool of the day is still as unlimited as the God who shows his back parts to Moses on the mountain, or the God Who is in the still small voice that speaks to Elijah.
Nope. He Who promised did as He promised.

This is the weirdest claim: He bears the transgressions of many...like the goat to Azazel, outside the camp. He's made a sin offering. Show me where a blemished lamb is offered up and accepted. You cannot. Read it again. He bore the transgressions of many. You cannot make that claim on anybody's behalf. That passage is not about you or yours, but about the one you rejected as Isaiah foresaw.

That's what substitutionary sacrifice was all about. Don't you even understand what the lamb was for? Soul for soul...the life of the lamb on your behalf.

Like I said...you're highlighting the limits you've placed on your god...You're telling him that you don't even need Moses any more. The traditions you've salvaged from the rubble of the temple are all you need to satisfy the law's demands.
Yep.

But (checking) Not here!

I'd love to hear y'all describe how you are the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, and how your soul has been made a sacrifice...

Or because, like Manasseh and Ahaz, Ahab and his spawn, you rejected God at the hour of his coming.

We all like sheep have gone astray. We are each being called by His grace and His Word to His temple.

That's a false claim, and you know it...and the abundant evidence of His resurrection is seen in two incontestable facts: the word of His resurrection spread by eye-witnesses from Jerusalem to Tarshish in the west, and to Japan in the east.

And NO ONE ever claimed to produce His mutilated body, until the ridiculous claims were made in the nineties, the claims you brought up...a sabbath's journey from where He was crucified....as if stunning revelation came to the archaeologists after two thousand years of searching.

Let me give you a third, because you know this: The Nazarene sect and the Jews worshipped in the Temple until Titus came and destroyed both the temple and any fellowship we had shared and enjoyed. That's decades after the resurrection, and you know it...without any credible attempt to belie the claims to the resurrection.
BTW, this post of yours was way too long and unnecessary. Please limit the wording on your posts so that I can reply to them. I had to cut my last response.
 
Top