(August 28, 2013 at 11:41 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(August 28, 2013 at 4:48 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: So he's like incomplete without Jesus? 'Only' a quirky Jewish demigod pre 0 CE?

Go read the Bible, Jesus is the creator, the Holy Spirit was active in creation, the creation was spoken into existence by the Father, God as the Trinity has always existed.

I don't think I have that version. Also, I don't think anyone else does, either.

Jesus was the created...and I don't mean by a god.

(August 28, 2013 at 11:41 pm)Godschild Wrote: Go read the Bible, Jesus is the creator, the Holy Spirit was active in creation, the creation was spoken into existence by the Father, God as the Trinity has always existed.

Horseshit. The trinity was the concoction of the 3d century propagandist, Tertullian. From Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities." (You should read it, G-C. You'd come across as less of a fool.)

Quote:Neither Tertullian nor Hippolytus approached the questions of the nature of Christ as God and man and of the relationship of the divine members of the Godhead with the erudition, nuance, and acumen of Origen. But in some ways, their less daring approaches became more useful to orthodox thinkers of later times. Their opposition to patripassianist understandings (the belief that “the
Father suffered”) forced them to think in trinitarian terms, of God being distinctively three in expression though one in essence. As Hippolytus puts it, “With respect to the power, God is one; but with respect to the economy [i.e., to how this power expresses itself], the manifestation is triple” (Refutation 8:2). In Tertullian’s formulation, God is three in degree, not condition; in form, not substance; in aspect, not power (Against Praxeas, 2). Tertullian was the first Latin theologian to use the term Trinity.

Within the broad contours of proto-orthodoxy, then, one can see development and variety. As time progressed, theologians became more entranced with the mystery of the Trinity and developed a more highly refined vocabulary for dealing with it. But that was long after the major issues had been resolved, of whether Christ was man but not God (Ebionites; Theodotians), God but not man (Marcionites, some Gnostics), or two beings, one man and one God (most Gnostics). The proto-orthodox opted for none of the above. Christ was God
and man, yet he was one being, not two.

Once that was acknowledged, the details still had to be worked out. And they were worked out for centuries. If it were easy, it would not be a mystery. Theologians began to be obsessed with the question of how and in what way Christ could be both human and divine, completely both. Did he have a human soul but a divine spirit? Did he have a divine soul instead of a human soul? Was his body really like everyone else’s body? How could God have a body? Was he subordinate to the Father, as in Origen? If he was not subordinate to the   Father, why was he the one sent, rather than the other way around? And so on, almost ad infinitum.

In this earlier period, however, the debates were both more basic and more fundamental. As a result, the alternatives within the proto-orthodox tradition—as opposed to the alternatives that separated the proto-orthodox from everyone else—were less clear and less obvious. All that was to change when the protoorthodox found themselves to be the last ones standing and were forced then to move forward into the orthodox forms of Christianity of the fourth and fifth centuries.

There was a long doctrinal battle between various xtian groups and the bunch that ultimately got Constantine's ear and became the church was as Ehrman calls them, the "proto-orthodox.". The docetists, who asserted that jesus was a spirit who "seemed" to be human (but was not) had to be opposed in order for the story to maintain its power...(does them no good if jesus is off on the side laughing as they crucify him...there is no "sacrifice" in that.) But, on the other side, the patripassianists insisted that god himself suffered on the cross and this was classifed as heresy because it denied the different "persons" of the trinity. Then there was Marcionism which thought yahweh some loser piece of shit god and that "jesus" was sent by the real god...but obviously no trinity there. That's okay though because Marcion was mid-2d century and long before the trinity bullshit was created. Then there were Montanists, Ebionites, Sabellians, Adoptionists, Arians and a shitload of gnostic groups which scholars are now beginning to realize far pre-date any idea of "jesus."

The proto-orthodox put out lots of bullshit against all these groups (and many others too numerous to name) and ended up with the hodge-podge of bullshit which is xtian doctrine. The proto-orthodox were not "holier" than the others. They were simply more ruthless much as the Bosheviks came to dominate the Russian Revolution because they were better organized and regimented than their opponents. As a result of that - which had to appeal to a murdering thug like Constantine - the west was saddled with 1500 of xtian doom and gloom.

How much better the world would have been if Maxentius had won the Battle of the Milvian Bridge.

(August 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(August 28, 2013 at 1:08 pm)Brakeman Wrote: Really? Any unbiased reader and millions of Jews would strongly disagree with that statement.

Is "Gone with the wind" about the coming life story of Rosa Parks because it happened before that time and had racist whites and some black people in it?

If the OT is not about the coming of Christ then how did the Israelites know He was coming, they were in great anticipation of His coming, please give references to where their knowledge of Him came from.

GC

They didn't, that is all scripture twists to cover a hole.
The jews strongly deny all of your claims.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles...sandjesus/
The word “Messiah” is an English rendering of the Hebrew word “Mashiach”, which means “Anointed.” It usually refers to a person initiated into God’s service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, I Kings 1:39, II Kings 9:3)

Since every King and High Priest was anointed with oil, each may be referred to as “an anointed one” (a Mashiach or a Messiah). For example: “God forbid that I [David] should stretch out my hand against the Lord’s Messiah [Saul]...” (I Samuel 26:11. Cf. II Samuel 23:1, Isaiah 45:1, Psalms 20:6)

Where does the Jewish concept of Messiah come from? One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)

Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. (Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5)

Since every King is a Messiah, by convention, we refer to this future anointed king as The Messiah. The above is the only description in the Bible of a Davidic descendant who is to come in the future. We will recognize the Messiah by seeing who the King of Israel is at the time of complete universal perfection.
etcetera ..

I like to think of the trinity as a "menage a twat."

(August 29, 2013 at 7:22 am)Brakeman Wrote:

(August 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm)Godschild Wrote: If the OT is not about the coming of Christ then how did the Israelites know He was coming, they were in great anticipation of His coming, please give references to where their knowledge of Him came from.

GC

They didn't, that is all scripture twists to cover a hole.
The jews strongly deny all of your claims.( Continued..)
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles...sandjesus/
C. TORAH OBSERVANCE

The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot (commandments) remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37) For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), "He does not observe Shabbat!"

How do you answer Duet 13:1-4 here? Jesus certainly didn't do this..

(August 29, 2013 at 12:36 pm)Brakeman Wrote:

(August 29, 2013 at 7:22 am)Brakeman Wrote:
They didn't, that is all scripture twists to cover a hole.
The jews strongly deny all of your claims.( Continued..)
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles...sandjesus/
C. TORAH OBSERVANCE

The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot (commandments) remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37) For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), "He does not observe Shabbat!"

How do you answer Duet 13:1-4 here? Jesus certainly didn't do this..

Jesus is God. Simple really.
Jesus said in Luke 16:17 "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.
Jesus said in Matthew 5:17 Do not think I've come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
Jesus said in Matthew 12:6 "I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7) And if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8) For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath."
Jesus said in Mark 2:27 And he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28) So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath."
Jesus said in John 7:23 If on the Sabbath day a man receives circumcision, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with Me because on the Sabbath I made a whole man's body well? Do not judge by appearances, but judge by right judgement."
These are verses in which Jesus the Lord of the Sabbath spoke about the law and the Sabbath.

---

Now let's examine the verses you used, John 1:45 Phillip found Nathanael and said to him,"We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph."
John 9:16 Some of the Pharisees said,"This man is not from God, for He does not keep the Sabbath." But others said,"How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them.
Now I might not be the smartest person around, however I really see no point to those verses you used as related to Jesus and the law. Other than in John 1:45 where it shows the Israelites knew through scripture and from the prophets Christ was coming.
Acts 3:22 Moses said,' The Lord will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. 23) And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.
Acts 7:37 This is the Moses who said to the Israelites,'God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers.' 38) This is the one who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him at Mt. Sinai, and with our fathers.
Again you have brought verses that show Christ being foretold, coming to the Jews as the new Covenant that brings salvation to His people.

Deut. 13:1-4, you missed on this big time too. These verses speak of a person who prophesies and the prophecy comes true yet says, let's follow a false god in not a true prophet. Jesus gave prophecies and called the Jews to follow the one true God. These verses are not about the law, they are about following the true God of creation.

Actually your boy never claims to be god. The closest he gets - and for this one has to accept the shit written in your gospels - is in gjohn - worst of the 4 for silliness - where he equates himself to god.

Have you ever read this shit? Doesn't seem like it.

Your godboy calls himself the "son of man." Which seems like a huge step down. Fuck. I'm the son of man and you know what I think of your bullshit.

(August 29, 2013 at 7:22 am)Brakeman Wrote:

(August 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm)Godschild Wrote:

---

If the OT is not about the coming of Christ then how did the Israelites know He was coming, they were in great anticipation of His coming, please give references to where their knowledge of Him came from.

---

GC

They didn't, that is all scripture twists to cover a hole.
The jews strongly deny all of your claims.
http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles...sandjesus/
The word “Messiah” is an English rendering of the Hebrew word “Mashiach”, which means “Anointed.” It usually refers to a person initiated into God’s service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, I Kings 1:39, II Kings 9:3)

Since every King and High Priest was anointed with oil, each may be referred to as “an anointed one” (a Mashiach or a Messiah). For example: “God forbid that I [David] should stretch out my hand against the Lord’s Messiah [Saul]...” (I Samuel 26:11. Cf. II Samuel 23:1, Isaiah 45:1, Psalms 20:6)

Where does the Jewish concept of Messiah come from? One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)

Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. (Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5)

Since every King is a Messiah, by convention, we refer to this future anointed king as The Messiah. The above is the only description in the Bible of a Davidic descendant who is to come in the future. We will recognize the Messiah by seeing who the King of Israel is at the time of complete universal perfection.
etcetera ..

Of coarse they deny Christ was foretold in the OT, they were looking for a warrior King like David, yet Christ was never described that way.

In 1st Samuel 26:11 the word was used as a description, anointed king, by David not God. The same word ids used in the OT as anointing unleavened bread, so the way you want to use the word even bread is a messiah. Think you need to rethink the usage of this word, anointed by oil is not the same as anointed by God. The word in general means anointed which applies to kings, priests, bread, feet and ect. Jesus was anointed by the Holy Spirit from the Father, he was also anointed a couple of times with oil, once on His head and once on His feet.

The future age of perfection can be seen in two different ages, one when Christ lived the perfect life on earth and the second is the new creation of the world where those who are saved will live.

Psalm 22 is about Christ's trial and crucifixion, so how do they explain that away.
Psalm 110 is also about Christ, king David says "The Lord says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." the rest of the psalm describes Christ and the judgement.

We can go back to the Passover feast and see Christ represented in the lamb and the forgiveness of sin for all who accept the Lamb. The blood on the door post and the command by God not to break even one bone of the lamb is the foretelling of Christ as the sacrifice for man.
Zech. 12:10-13:1 is about Christ and His redemption.

You can go on and on about one word (anointed), but it will not suffice, the word is what it is, Christ is the One anointed by the Holy Spirit. There are many more verses that refer to the coming of Christ, but I think these few will show the prophecy of Christ in the OT.

You have like many others here relied on the net as your source and it fails, God's word is where you should go if you are to find the truth within it. The study of scriptures reveals a world of truth.

GC

---

(August 30, 2013 at 1:45 am)Minimalist Wrote: Actually your boy never claims to be god. The closest he gets - and for this one has to accept the shit written in your gospels - is in gjohn - worst of the 4 for silliness - where he equates himself to god.

Have you ever read this shit? Doesn't seem like it.

Your godboy calls himself the "son of man." Which seems like a huge step down. Fuck. I'm the son of man and you know what I think of your bullshit.

He called himself Son of Man to show that He was both God and man, Christ also said He and the Father were one, seems rather clear to those who can see.

GC

---

(August 29, 2013 at 1:48 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: If the trinity has always existed, why didn't the pre-Jesus Jews know about it? Why is the Holy Ghost suddenly active in the lives of believers when John started Baptizing people? Why did he suddenly decide baptism was necessary? Jews didn't seem too concerned with it before. How do you know there are only three emanations of god? Why cant there be four? The Holy Quad sounds much cooler than "Trinity". Does Moses' burning bush not count?

They did know about the Holy Spirit, He is mentioned in the OT. The Holy Spirit dwelt with certain men in the OT for a short period of time, but not their whole life. The Holy Spirit was and is for those who accept Christ as savior, He is our counselor.

GC

(August 30, 2013 at 12:48 am)Godschild Wrote: Jesus said in Luke 16:17 "But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.

OK but below it says:

(August 30, 2013 at 12:48 am)Godschild Wrote: Jesus said in Matthew 12:6 "..8) For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath."
Jesus said in Mark 2:27 And he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28) So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath."
Jesus said in John 7:23 If on the Sabbath day a man receives circumcision, so that the law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with Me because on the Sabbath I made a whole man's body well?.."
These are verses in which Jesus the Lord of the Sabbath spoke about the law and the Sabbath.

These verses add exceptions to the law, which is definitely adding more that a dot or "tittle". He is simple saying that he is authorized to make these changes as he is god. The old testament says otherwise.

(August 30, 2013 at 12:48 am)Godschild Wrote: Deut. 13:1-4, you missed on this big time too. These verses speak of a person who prophesies and the prophecy comes true yet says, let's follow a false god in not a true prophet.

The verses mean that anyone who does not follow the Jewish law cannot be a true prophet regardless of the accuracy of their predictions. Ergo, jesus violated jewish law and thus cannot be a prophet.

Furthermore:
Christians foremost believe the messiah came to save us personally from damnation. To back this up, they quote Isaiah 53, often called the
“suffering servant” passage:
Controversial Text
...He [the servant] was despised, and forsaken of man, a man of pains, knowing disease...Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried;...Smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was crushed because of our sins; The chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed...But the Eternal chose to crush him by disease, that, if he made himself an offering for guilt, He might see offspring and have long life (JPS).

Christians believe this is a description of the messiah and it perfectly fits the life and death of Jesus.

How Jews Respond to this Claim

Here are the problems:
•
The name “Jesus” does not appear in this text, so applying this to Jesus is a mere supposition.
•
The words “messiah,” “House of David” or “Son of Jesse” do not appear in this text, so claiming this describes the messiah is also a mere supposition. No one really knows who the servant is because the text does not tell us. He certainly doesn’t have to be either Jesus or the messiah.
•
In fact, the servant doesn’t have to be an individual. In the chapters leading up to this passage, Isaiah repeatedly identifies the whole Jewish people as God’s ‘servant’ (41:8-9; 44: 1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3), so it is likely the servant isn’t even a person, only a symbol for Jews.
•
The servant is repeatedly described as stricken with disease (vs. 3-4; 10). There is no report of Jesus having any diseases, either literally or metaphorically.
•
The servant will not die until he has children (v. 10). We have no report that Jesus ever had children.
•
The servant will live a long life because of his self-sacrifice (v. 10); Jesus died young, probably at 33
http://dracontius.net/ragwad/challlenges.pdf

(August 28, 2013 at 11:41 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(August 28, 2013 at 4:48 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: So he's like incomplete without Jesus? 'Only' a quirky Jewish demigod pre 0 CE?

Go read the Bible, Jesus is the creator, the Holy Spirit was active in creation, the creation was spoken into existence by the Father, God as the Trinity has always existed.

Where is your evidence?