TweetyBird
New member
Are you interested in what the NT states?
Have you learned the shema?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
Are you interested in what the NT states?
TweetyBird
New member
Jesus is not one of "the gods" as determined by man.
This is where you fail to show that it's 'kaballah' and yet still pretend you're right and hadn't just pulled something right out your rear
Other traditions having similarities simply illustrates man's common ascent from Adam and Eve. Even Noah and the Deluge appears in the literature of other cultures, including many Asians who largely were separate from biblical history altogether.
You should try seeing things from a broader perspective.
I read it everyday.
KingdomRose
New member
I asked you: Is "LORD" God's name?
KingdomRose
New member
When did I ever even HINT that there is one and only one way to pronounce God's name? There are MANY pronunciations, depending on what language one speaks. The point is that however a person pronounces His name, that person is USING God's name.
My name, Pamela, is pronounced differently by a Spanish person and by a Japanese person, and I'm sure by a good many people of various languages. But ALL are versions of "Pamela."
Do you think it is fair to call God "Amun-Ra" or "Krishna" or "T'ien" when those are certainly not His name?
KingdomRose
New member
I'm with you on the subject of Jebel el Lawz. It's a shame more people don't know about it. People who claim to be interested in the Bible.
יהוה is God's name.
KingdomRose
New member
I disagree. It is clear, when one reads the 53rd chapter of Isaiah, that Isaiah is referring to someone OTHER THAN the nation of Israel. You, apparently, are confused about its meaning.
How could Isaiah be writing about the nation of Israel "being pierced for OUR transgression," when the "our" he is writing about IS the nation of Israel? You apparently understand verse 5 this way: "But [Israel] was being pierced for our transgression; [Israel] was being crushed for our errors. The chastisement meant for our peace was upon [Israel], and because of [Israel's] wounds there has been a healing for us."? (Remember, "our" and "us" was Israel, the people of which Isaiah was a member.)
Go on, then. "Like sheep each of us has wandered about; it was to each one to his own way that we have turned; and Jehovah has caused the error of us all to meet up with that one [Israel]. For [Israel] was ...being brought just like a sheep to the slaughtering; and like a ewe has become mute, [Israel] would not open its mouth....[Israel] was severed from the land of the living ones. Because of the transgression of my people, [Israel] had the stroke." Does that make sense to you? If it does, tell me what you think.
And this is the piece de resistence: Again, substituting "Israel" wherever the "suffering servant" is indicated, verse 9 would read, "Israel had done no violence and there was no deception in Israel's mouth."
This COULD NOT be the nation of Israel. Why? Because the Scriptures show plainly, book after book, that Israel was up to its eyeballs in violence and deception.
The following are a few verses---just the tip of the proverbial iceberg:
"This is what Jehovah of hosts has said: 'Cut down wood and throw up against Jerusalem a siege rampart. She is the city with which an accounting must be held. She is nothing but oppression in the midst of her. As a cistern keeps its waters cool, so she has kept her badness cool. Violence and despoiling are heard in her.'" (Jeremiah 6:6,7)
"As a cage is full of flying creatures, so their houses are full of deception." (Jeremiah 5:27)
"'Your sitting is in the midst of deception. Through deception they have refused to know me,' is the utterance of Jehovah....'Their tongue is a slaughtering arrow. Deception is what is spoken....Because of these things should I not hold an accounting with them?' is the utterance of Jehovah. 'Or upon a nation that is like this should not my soul avenge itself?'" (Jeremiah 9:6,8,9)
"The land has become full of bloodstained judgment and the city has become full of violence." (Ezekiel 7:23)
Could Israel, described above, really be the "suffering servant" that committed no violence or deception?
Or do some people need to re-assess just who the suffering servant is?
KingdomRose
New member
Excellent! Then why call him "LORD"?
That is a good question.
KingdomRose
New member
The Jewish people of Jesus' day were expecting the Messiah right around the time that Jesus showed up. Daniel's prophecy indicated when this would be in the 9th chapter (verses 24-27). The people knew all about this. It was unfortunate that the religious leaders didn't like the idea of Jesus being the Messiah. He was rocking their boat.
Check out Luke 2:25,26,30,36-38. A faithful Jew named Simeon, and a Jewish woman named Anna were waiting for the Messiah. They knew when he would come because of Daniel's prophecy in chapter 9. They were "waiting for Israel's consolation," and Simeon said, "my eyes have seen your [Jehovah's] means of saving...a light for removing the veil from the nations and a glory of your people Israel."
The Messiah fulfilled Isaiah chapter 53, and the time when he rules the world is yet in the future. The Scriptures show that he taught that his rule would be a long time from when he walked the earth. The world has had 2,000 years to get it straight that God's own government is going to rule over the earth, but the majority of religions don't even say a peep about it. Regardless, Jesus has a relatively small Church (around 8 million) that are spreading the word about that Kingdom (Matt.24:14), and Christ's return is imminent. The world will definitely know that Jehovah is the true God and Jesus is the appointed reigning King.
KingdomRose
New member
Oh Jesus WAS sent to bring peace and knowledge of God. If the world acted according to his teachings, there would be world-wide peace, and everyone would know God. But this was known and taught by Christ...that the world would not accept his teachings. The whole earth WILL know when he comes the final time, and evil will not be tolerated any longer. The nations have had 2,000 years to get it right, and their time is up.
KingdomRose
New member
You make assertions without providing any Scriptural evidence.
What do you make of this Scripture?
Psalm 49:6-9 KJV
6They that trust in their wealth, and boast themselves in the multitude of their riches;
7None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
8(For the redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever
9That he should still live for ever, and not see corruption.
No man can redeem the soul of another. Not with riches nor with anything else.
It's talking about ordinary humans, all born with Adam's imperfection. That is why mankind needed someone who was NOT an ordinary man to redeem them. Jesus Christ is the only man who ever lived, besides Adam in the beginning, who was perfect and without sin.
KingdomRose
New member
Slow down. You're right, but not about Jesus being God. Jesus DIED, and God cannot die. Jesus was a man, but a PERFECT man. Not God.
Isaiah 53:3 (New American Standard Bible)
3He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
Do you think that description fits Jesus?
I think that Jesus was wildly popular, and people crowded around him, and listened to him speak.
Matthew 4:23-25 (New American Standard Bible)
23Jesus was going throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people.
24The news about Him spread throughout all Syria; and they brought to Him all who were ill, those suffering with various diseases and pains, demoniacs, epileptics, paralytics; and He healed them.
25Large crowds followed Him from Galilee and the Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judea and from beyond the Jordan.
I can probably find a dozen passages like this showing how popular Jesus was. Think about preaching to the multitude the sermon on the mount, feeding the 5000, feeding the 4000, riding a donkey into town to the cheers of his countrymen.
Jesus was mobbed every time he showed up. He was more popular than the Beatles.
This verse does not describe Jesus.
Isaiah 53:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
“he shall see his seed”
Seed.. Strong’s #2233 Zehrag in Hebrew
Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, gives agricultural definitions for the Hebrew word for “seed” and the definition, semen virile, offspring.
In the Septuagint Greek translation “seed” is translated with the Greek word “sperma” which indicates a clear meaning for seed in this verse.
Since Jesus never married according to Christian Tradition, this “seed” cannot apply to Jesus.
In instances in the Bible where “spiritual children “ are mentioned the Hebrew word “behn” Strongs # 1121 is used in contrast to the word “zehrag” which clearly refers to offspring of a sexual union.
For Example..
Deuteronomy 14:1 King James Version (KJV)
14 Ye are the children of the Lord your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.
But here is a very important verse in Isaiah 53. Take out your KJV and lets look at this one together.
Isaiah 53:9 (King James Version)
And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Do you see the enormous problem with this verse? Reeeealllllly BIG.
Is 53:9 says....""he made his grave with the wicked""
But Jesus made his grave with the RICH. He was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. His grave was NOT with the wicked.
Is 53:9 says....""with the rich in his death""
But Jesus was with the WICKED in his death. The two evildoers on the crosses on either side. Jesus was NOT with the rich in his death.
Isaiah 53:10 (King James Version)
10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief
This is only the first line of this verse. But this is the part that is relevant to what I want to show you.
Now compare this to a Jewish translation.
Tanakh The New Jewish Publication Society
But the LORD chose to crush him by disease
Here is another Jewish translation.
Chabad translation
10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill;
As you can see, in the KJV, it says he hath put him to grief, but instead of grief, the Jewish translations indicate "disease" and "ill"
If God crushed Jesus with "disease" or "illness" it just doesn't fit the Jesus story.
So the KJV and most of the other Christian Bibles say "grief" or "suffer" to make the translation fit the Jesus story.
But the Harper Collins New Revised Standard Version has a margin note that says "by disease"
Look at Young’s translation.
Isaiah 53:10
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
10 And Jehovah hath delighted to bruise him, He hath made him sick,
So which is it? Did God crush his servant and put him to grief? Or did God crush his servant and make him sick?
The Hebrew word in question is "ghahlah" strong's #2470.
Here are some examples of its use in other Scriptures.
Hosea 7:5 (King James Version)
5In the day of our king the princes have made him sick
Micah 6:13 (King James Version)
13Therefore also will I make thee sick
1 Samuel 30:13 (King James Version)
three days agone I fell sick.
1 Kings 14:1 (King James Version)
1At that time Abijah the son of Jeroboam fell sick.
2 Chronicles 32:24 (King James Version)
24In those days Hezekiah was sick
Check it out for yourself. I'm sure you will.
IMHO the correct translation is of being crushed by sickness, indicates that Isaiah 53 does not fit Jesus.
10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief
This is only the first line of this verse. But this is the part that is relevant to what I want to show you.
Now compare this to a Jewish translation.
Tanakh The New Jewish Publication Society
But the LORD chose to crush him by disease
Here is another Jewish translation.
Chabad translation
10. And the Lord wished to crush him, He made him ill;
As you can see, in the KJV, it says he hath put him to grief, but instead of grief, the Jewish translations indicate "disease" and "ill"
If God crushed Jesus with "disease" or "illness" it just doesn't fit the Jesus story.
So the KJV and most of the other Christian Bibles say "grief" or "suffer" to make the translation fit the Jesus story.
But the Harper Collins New Revised Standard Version has a margin note that says "by disease"
Look at Young’s translation.
Isaiah 53:10
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
10 And Jehovah hath delighted to bruise him, He hath made him sick,
So which is it? Did God crush his servant and put him to grief? Or did God crush his servant and make him sick?
The Hebrew word in question is "ghahlah" strong's #2470.
Here are some examples of its use in other Scriptures.
Hosea 7:5 (King James Version)
5In the day of our king the princes have made him sick
Micah 6:13 (King James Version)
13Therefore also will I make thee sick
1 Samuel 30:13 (King James Version)
three days agone I fell sick.
1 Kings 14:1 (King James Version)
1At that time Abijah the son of Jeroboam fell sick.
2 Chronicles 32:24 (King James Version)
24In those days Hezekiah was sick
Check it out for yourself. I'm sure you will.
IMHO the correct translation is of being crushed by sickness, indicates that Isaiah 53 does not fit Jesus.
This is a common Christian answer- when Jesus comes again, then the prophecies will come true. But that is an admission that he did not fulfill the prophecies. If somebody in another religion made the same claim about their leader/prophet/god - you would call it a "cop-out"- or worse.