This is mostly a result of other topics.

The purpose of this thread is to inquire as to why Christians believe in the divinity of Jesus, plain and simple.

I have seen many people saying the OT prophecies are true, and give that as evidence for the validity of their religion, but really all it does is hint that Judaism is right.

Prophecies Regarding the Messiah

<OL TYPE=A>

<LI> Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28)

<LI> Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6)

<LI> Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)

<LI> Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world -- on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9)

</OL>

None of these were fulfilled by Jesus.

Personal Qualities Regarding the Messiah

<OL TYPE=A>

<LI> Prophet: Jesus was not a Prophet. His prophecies never came true (these will be dealt with later).

<LI> Descendant of David (Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1): Jesus, being born of a virgin, could not have come from David through Joseph. When it is said to Jesus that they know who he is, and that he is from Galilee, he admits to it. But the descendant of David is to come from Bethlehem. (John 7:27-28,41-43)

<LI> Observance of Torah (Deuteronomy 13:1-4): Jesus sought to change Jewish religion and disregard parts of the Torah. Not only that, but he performed "Miracles" and spoke of a God completely unlike the God of the Hebrews.

</OL>

God as Man

The claim that Jesus is God is in direct contradiction to the OT (Numbers 23:19). The Messiah is to be born of Jewish parents and have the same traits as anyone else. There is nothing supernatural about the Messiah according to the OT.

Charlatans

If you believe in the bible, then you believe in all that happened to Moses. His parting of the Red Sea was clearly a miracle, no? Yet no one worshipped him. Miracles can be granted to men by God to test His people. There is nothing in Jesus' miracles that is a national revelation. It is always with a few people, and often questioned.

Let's take Jesus' miracle of healing the blind man (John 9:1-41). Not even the blind man's own neighbours, who saw him every day, knew him as a blind man. They knew him as a beggar. They accuse him of being a disciple of Jesus and a sinner, throwing him out.

How about Jesus on the cross receiving a message from an angel? (John 12:27-29)

"The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him."

The people who were there at the crucifixion said they heard thunder. Those who were not even present are the ones who claimed it was an angel.

The people Jesus 'healed' were questionable at best, and the angel talking to him is from people who were not even present. So what else is there? What about his brothers? They would surely believe that he was the Messiah, right? I mean, they knew him better than anyone else. Hmm.. no. They didn't. Strange, isn't it? (John 7:3-5).

Prophecies of Jesus

(Mark 13:20-30, Matthew 24:29-35, Luke 21:25-33, Matthew 16:27-28)

Jesus tells of how he will return before the death of those standing there with him. He never came back.

(Matthew 12:38-40)

Jesus tells of how he will spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, yet he dies on a Friday afternoon and comes back on a Sunday morning. Another failed prophecy.

Jesus and Scripture

(Mark 2:24-26, I Samuel 21:1-6, I Samuel 30:7)

Jesus talks about Abiathar as high priest, yet at the time of the incident, it was not Abiathar.. it was Ahimelech, his father.

(Matthew 23:35, II Chronicles 24:20-21, Zecheriah 1:1)

Jesus made a mistake yet again when it came to scripture.. Jesus said that Zacherias, who was slaughtered between the Temple and the altar, was the son of Berachia, but Zacherias was the son of Jehoiada, and not the son of Berachia.

Zacherias, who was slaughtered between the Temple and the altar, was the son of Jehoiada, and not the son of Berachia, as stated by Jesus. Jesus was mixing up two things: There was a prophet Zacherias son of Berachias, but he was not the one who was slain in the Temple courtyard. Zacherias son of Berachias was the prophet who gave us the Bible book Zacheriah.

---

Links:

Miracles of jesus? (http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/index.html)

Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus (http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/jewsandjesus.htm)

----------

There is much more that could be added, but I think most people should just take a look at the Miracles of Jesus? website included above, as it goes into detailed descriptions of its skepticism.

The main reason I did this was to find out why literalists use the OT to prove validity, yet can't see how the OT doesn't validate the NT.

Anyone who is willing to give me some input is more than welcome.

quote:Originally posted by malaria:

This is mostly a result of other topics.

The purpose of this thread is to inquire as to why Christians believe in the divinity of Jesus, plain and simple.

I have seen many people saying the OT prophecies are true, and give that as evidence for the validity of their religion, but really all it does is hint that Judaism is right.

Prophecies Regarding the Messiah

<OL TYPE=A>

<LI> Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28)

<LI> Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6)

<LI> Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)

<LI> Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world -- on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9)

</OL>

None of these were fulfilled by Jesus.

Personal Qualities Regarding the Messiah

<OL TYPE=A>

<LI> Prophet: Jesus was not a Prophet. His prophecies never came true (these will be dealt with later).

<LI> Descendant of David (Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1): Jesus, being born of a virgin, could not have come from David through Joseph. When it is said to Jesus that they know who he is, and that he is from Galilee, he admits to it. But the descendant of David is to come from Bethlehem. (John 7:27-28,41-43)

<LI> Observance of Torah (Deuteronomy 13:1-4): Jesus sought to change Jewish religion and disregard parts of the Torah. Not only that, but he performed "Miracles" and spoke of a God completely unlike the God of the Hebrews.

</OL>

God as Man

The claim that Jesus is God is in direct contradiction to the OT (Numbers 23:19). The Messiah is to be born of Jewish parents and have the same traits as anyone else. There is nothing supernatural about the Messiah according to the OT.

Charlatans

If you believe in the bible, then you believe in all that happened to Moses. His parting of the Red Sea was clearly a miracle, no? Yet no one worshipped him. Miracles can be granted to men by God to test His people. There is nothing in Jesus' miracles that is a national revelation. It is always with a few people, and often questioned.

Let's take Jesus' miracle of healing the blind man (John 9:1-41). Not even the blind man's own neighbours, who saw him every day, knew him as a blind man. They knew him as a beggar. They accuse him of being a disciple of Jesus and a sinner, throwing him out.

How about Jesus on the cross receiving a message from an angel? (John 12:27-29)

"The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him."

The people who were there at the crucifixion said they heard thunder. Those who were not even present are the ones who claimed it was an angel.

The people Jesus 'healed' were questionable at best, and the angel talking to him is from people who were not even present. So what else is there? What about his brothers? They would surely believe that he was the Messiah, right? I mean, they knew him better than anyone else. Hmm.. no. They didn't. Strange, isn't it? (John 7:3-5).

Prophecies of Jesus

(Mark 13:20-30, Matthew 24:29-35, Luke 21:25-33, Matthew 16:27-28)

Jesus tells of how he will return before the death of those standing there with him. He never came back.

(Matthew 12:38-40)

Jesus tells of how he will spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, yet he dies on a Friday afternoon and comes back on a Sunday morning. Another failed prophecy.

Jesus and Scripture

(Mark 2:24-26, I Samuel 21:1-6, I Samuel 30:7)

Jesus talks about Abiathar as high priest, yet at the time of the incident, it was not Abiathar.. it was Ahimelech, his father.

(Matthew 23:35, II Chronicles 24:20-21, Zecheriah 1:1)

Jesus made a mistake yet again when it came to scripture.. Jesus said that Zacherias, who was slaughtered between the Temple and the altar, was the son of Berachia, but Zacherias was the son of Jehoiada, and not the son of Berachia.

Zacherias, who was slaughtered between the Temple and the altar, was the son of Jehoiada, and not the son of Berachia, as stated by Jesus. Jesus was mixing up two things: There was a prophet Zacherias son of Berachias, but he was not the one who was slain in the Temple courtyard. Zacherias son of Berachias was the prophet who gave us the Bible book Zacheriah.

---

Links:

Miracles of jesus? (http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/index.html)

Why Jews Don't Believe in Jesus (http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/jewsandjesus.htm)

----------

There is much more that could be added, but I think most people should just take a look at the Miracles of Jesus? website included above, as it goes into detailed descriptions of its skepticism.

The main reason I did this was to find out why literalists use the OT to prove validity, yet can't see how the OT doesn't validate the NT.

Anyone who is willing to give me some input is more than welcome.

I think this is a good post but is being ignored by people, there is a similar debate occuring in "Confirmation for Catholics" though it may seem off topic and this being much more related to the topic going on there, that seems underway while this has not yet been participated in by anyone other than you and myself. SO feel free to come into http://www.totse.com/bbs/Forum15/HTML/005794.html

Yeah, that was one of the many threads that made me want to make this one. This way it is in a thread alone. Oh well.

No one has said anything yet.. how odd.

This isn't a challenge, it's a question. I merely want people to explain why they believe what they do scripturally so I can look at it from both sides.

I know there are Christians of all sorts here, and I'm not looking to burn you at the stake here.

Can't you just use Google to get the typical Christan apologist answers?

Here's a start:

"None of these were fulfilled by Jesus."

It's still not too late.

"Jesus, being born of a virgin, could not have come from David through Joseph."

(a) If by virtue of Joseph's marriage with Mary, Jesus could be called the son of Joseph, he can for the same reason be called "son of David" (St. Augustine, On the Harmony of the Gospels, II, i, 2).

(b) Tradition tells us that Mary too was a descendant of David. According to Numbers 36:6-12, an only daughter had to marry within her own family so as to secure the right of inheritance. After St. Justin (Adv. Tryph. 100) and St. Ignatius (Letter to the Ephesians 18), the Fathers generally agree in maintaining Mary's Davidic descent, whether they knew this from an oral tradition or inferred it from Scripture, e.g. Romans 1:3; II Timothy 2:8. St. John Damascene (De fid. Orth., IV, 14) states that Mary's great-grandfather, Panther, was a brother of Mathat; her grandfather, Barpanther, was Heli's cousin; and her father, Joachim, was a cousin of Joseph, Heli's levirate son. Here Mathat has been substituted for Melchi, since the text used by St. John Damascene, Julius Africanus, St. Irenaeus, St. Ambrose, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus omitted the two generations separating Heli from Melchi. At any rate, tradition presents the Blessed Virgin as descending from David through Nathan.



"But the descendant of David is to come from Bethlehem."

The Gospels according to Matthew and Luke both say that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. According to Luke, Joseph and Mary were from Nazareth but had to travel to Bethlehem to be counted in a census ordered by Caesar Augustus. Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem during this trip. In Matthew, Joseph and Mary are actually natives of Bethlehem, and Jesus is apparently born at home. After Jesus' birth, the family flees to Egypt and then to Nazareth to escape a slaughter of baby boys in Bethlehem ordered by the Jewish king Herod.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Can't you just use Google to get the typical Christan apologist answers?

Here's a start:

"None of these were fulfilled by Jesus."

It's still not too late.

quote:Prophecies of Jesus

(Mark 13:20-30, Matthew 24:29-35, Luke 21:25-33, Matthew 16:27-28)

Jesus tells of how he will return before the death of those standing there with him. He never came back.

I beg to differ.

[This message has been edited by niggersexual (edited 08-16-2006).]

Tell people anything long enough and often enough, and they will probably buy it.

Jesus WAS one of many people sent by God throughout history to act as messengers. But he was no more divine than anyone else.

quote:Originally posted by niggersexual

I beg to differ. http://www.geocities.com/mikem2u/2ndcoming.html

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Can't you just use Google to get the typical Christan apologist answers?

Of course, but web pages don't respond to questions.

quote:It's still not too late.

For Jesus, it is. There is never any mention of a second coming. The Messiah is here once and once only.

quote:(a) If by virtue of Joseph's marriage with Mary, Jesus could be called the son of Joseph, he can for the same reason be called "son of David" (St. Augustine, On the Harmony of the Gospels, II, i, 2).

His brothers didn't believe in him, and everyone who knew him called him the son of Joseph because they believed he was the physical son of Joseph. This is in contradiction with the virgin birth, though.

quote:(b) Tradition tells us that Mary too was a descendant of David. According to Numbers 36:6-12, an only daughter had to marry within her own family so as to secure the right of inheritance. After St. Justin (Adv. Tryph. 100) and St. Ignatius (Letter to the Ephesians 18), the Fathers generally agree in maintaining Mary's Davidic descent, whether they knew this from an oral tradition or inferred it from Scripture, e.g. Romans 1:3; II Timothy 2:8. St. John Damascene (De fid. Orth., IV, 14) states that Mary's great-grandfather, Panther, was a brother of Mathat; her grandfather, Barpanther, was Heli's cousin; and her father, Joachim, was a cousin of Joseph, Heli's levirate son. Here Mathat has been substituted for Melchi, since the text used by St. John Damascene, Julius Africanus, St. Irenaeus, St. Ambrose, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus omitted the two generations separating Heli from Melchi. At any rate, tradition presents the Blessed Virgin as descending from David through Nathan.

Whether Mary was a descendant of David or not is irrelevant, because Jewish history is recorded patrilineally (spelling..?). The Messiah is to be descended from David on his father's side.



quote:The Gospels according to Matthew and Luke both say that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.

Quite right, but the Gospel of John has a direct quote from Jesus accepting the fact that he is from Galilee. The very people asking him are saying 'You're not from Bethlehem, you're from Galilee,' to which he replies 'You are correct.' Obviously these are contradicting parts. But what is more is that the genealogy of Luke and Matthew are contradictory as well. So what are we to believe? Jesus never makes mention that he is a descendant of David.



quote:According to Luke, Joseph and Mary were from Nazareth but had to travel to Bethlehem to be counted in a census ordered by Caesar Augustus. Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem during this trip. In Matthew, Joseph and Mary are actually natives of Bethlehem, and Jesus is apparently born at home. After Jesus' birth, the family flees to Egypt and then to Nazareth to escape a slaughter of baby boys in Bethlehem ordered by the Jewish king Herod.

Yes, they do say that, but there is no other record of this. In fact, King Herod died ten years before that census was even taken, so this is a clear impossibility. And again, we see a contradiction between Matthew and Luke about the town Joseph and Mary were from. One says Galilee and the other says Bethlehem.

quote:Originally posted by niggersexual:

I beg to differ.

Care to explain?

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

http ://www.geo cities.com /mikem2u/2ndcoming.html (ht tp://www.g eocities.c om/mikem2u /2ndcoming .html)

As I said, I was mostly referring to literalists. One can twist anything to fit their own agendas. We can get into a semantics argument about "The Lord is at hand," "The time is at hand," "Behold, I come quickly," "Surely I come quickly," but I'd prefer that it doesn't derail the thread.

quote:Originally posted by malaria

As I said, I was mostly referring to literalists. One can twist anything to fit their own agendas.

Exactly. Which is why I posted typical arguements from apologists. I've been in your shoes plenty of times, and you either get someone posting these arguements as a way to justify their beliefs or someone who says something like, "the translations are bad" or "I just have faith". I have yet to convince someone to doubt their religion based on contradictions, scientific inaccuracies, etc. Did you read the thread where I debate Abrahim on some scientific inaccuracies of the Quran? He still is convinced the Quran is full of scientific miracles.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Exactly. Which is why I posted typical arguements from apologists. I've been in your shoes plenty of times, and you either get someone posting these arguements as a way to justify their beliefs or someone who says something like, "the translations are bad" or "I just have faith". I have yet to convince someone to doubt their religion based on contradictions, scientific inaccuracies, etc. Did you read the thread where I debate Abrahim on some scientific inaccuracies of the Quran? He still is convinced the Quran is full of scientific miracles.

I didn't see your thread. I was actually hoping people like Digital Saviour, her hubby, xtreem (sp?), and some others would let me in on some of their beliefs because they are literalists who are present here.

I don't mind hearing the view of metaphorists either, it's just that I won't be able to present biblical evidence against their claims so it kind of gets into a pissing match. I would like to hear Jack Ketch's opinion on it, though, because I think I saw him say he believes in Jesus as the Messiah (I could be wrong, though).

quote:Originally posted by ArmsMerchant:

Tell people anything long enough and often enough, and they will probably buy it.

Jesus WAS one of many people sent by God throughout history to act as messengers. But he was no more divine than anyone else.



Just more in touch with the divine than the average bear. But, was he 'sent by God', or was that what he sought?

And now the question for you,

Is not "What Would Jesus Do?"

But where will you be,

When the Craig Machine comes partyin' through?

And if the Lord will allow,

You've got to ask yourself how,

And who and why and when and where is my messiah now?

BUMP

Where are all you Christians now?

I didn't know there was jewish propaganda.