virgin birth

[Elia]

What's even funnier is a people claiming that Isaiah 52:13--53:12 applies to themselves collectively, thus making themselves collectively the Messiah of the world.

Bs"d

No, Israel applying Isaiah 53 to themselves doesn't make them the messiah of the world, for the very simple reason that Isaiah 53 has absolutely nothing to do with the messiah.

Because of your brainwashing you think that Isaiah 53 speaks about the messiah, but the facts are different.

Here is an excerpt of my Isaiah 53 page, here to be found: http://Isaiah53.notlong.com

According to Christianity, the whole chapter of Isaiah 53 and the last verses of chapter 52, from verse 13, are talking about Jesus. Why do they think so? Because the NT says so, and because it fits so nicely with the Christian story about a suffering messiah. And what proof do the Christians have that the subject in Isaiah 53, the suffering servant, is the messiah?

Nothing.

There is not the slightest indication, let alone a proof, that the servant of God, mentioned in Isaiah 53, is the messiah. In the authentic messianic prophecies there is always a sign that it talks about the messiah, the anointed king. ("messiah" means "anointed one") In the real messianic prophecies it speaks about a king, or about a ruler, or about a descendend of David, or about a descendend of Isai, the father of David. But here in Isaiah 53 is nothing like that. Also the word "messiah" is not used in Isaiah 53. There is not the slightest hint toward a messiah. It just speaks about the servant of God. And NOWHERE in Isaiah, NOWHERE in the whole Hebrew Bible, is the messiah ever referred to as "the servant of God". So Christianity is making up fairy tales here.

Besides this, saying Isaiah 53 speaks about the messiah runs into several problems. The prophet Isaiah is talking in the present/past tense; verse 3 and 4: “He is despised and rejected of men” “We hid as it were our faces from him, he was despised, and we esteemed him not” It goes on like this in the past tense up to verse ten. This is not the way the prophets announce future events, by saying that they already happened. The King James Version says in verse 2: "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant." Future tense. However; this is wrong. Here is absolutely positively spoken in the past tense. Compare the Revised Standard Version, it gives this verse correctly in the past tense. A quick course in exegesis for confused Christians: When a prophet speaks in the past tense, then he speaks about events that happened already. This is commonly called 'History'. Prophecy is about things that are going to happen in the future. History is the opposite of prophecy. Therefore, when a prophet speaks in the past tense, he is not prophesizing. These elementary facts were well known to the people whom translated the KJV, therefore they corrupted the translation and changed past tense to future tense, so that they could squeeze in Jesus.

When the prophet Isaiah switches to the future tense, he describes events that are not applicable to Jesus; verse 10: “When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,” He was not married, how is he going to see his seed?

Verse 12: “Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong” This essential part he did not fulfill. Only the simple part he did, as usually; being sick, suffering, dying; the part that can apply to millions of people, and the key part is going to happen in some unknown future.


No messiah to be found in Isaiah 53.

 

[chair]

Chair, Ben Masada and Elia,

do you sacrifice animal when you sin?

thanks.

No, We pray. Just like teh people of Ninveh.
Have you seen your "fully recovered" Jesus walking around recently?

 

[meshak]

No, We pray. Just like teh people of Ninveh.
Have you seen your "fully recovered" Jesus walking around recently?

But Tora is full of sacrificial laws that commanding to obey all of them.

I thought Judaism is obeying the Tora.

 

[chair]

But Tora is full of sacrificial laws that commanding to obey all of them.

I thought Judaism is obeying the Tora.

Judaism is not exactly what you think it ought to be. Besides which- were we supposed to close up shop and disappear once the Temple was destroyed? Note that it had happened with the First Temple too (that is in the Bible), and we didn't simply disappear.

 

[beameup]

Bs"d

It is very simple. And Mary was married to Joseph when she got pregnant.

So that leaves only the above conclusion as to the origins of JC.

yes, ruach 'elohim
Joseph embraced the "first son" as his, in obedience to the Angel.
However, "recreated" Judaism hasn't seen angels in 2,000 years, so that belief has probably disappeared as well.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

However, perhaps your "god" is impotent and has no creative power whatsoever.

 

[Ben Masada]

Bs"d

It is very simple; Joseph denied paternity of JC. And Mary was married to Joseph when she got pregnant.

So that leaves only the above conclusion as to the origins of JC.

Wow! Thank you Elia! You are right! I don't believe how I missed that detail. I know I had read that text but, it had never occurred to me to use it. In fact, when Joseph, married with Mary, denied responsibility for the pregnant state of his wife, it is only obvious that the same thing that happened to many young women, had also happened to his wife and he could not do any thing about it because it would only mean his own death. Now, putting that together with the idea of the demigod in Mat. 1:18 we have a strong evidence of Hellenism in the NT.

 

[Ben Masada]

That probably happened while the god of the Jews wasn't looking. Maybe he was taking a nap or was on break.

Are you implying that, since Jesus was a Jew, he also worshiped a god like that? This says a lot about Christians who follow the same god of Jesus which was no different from the Baal of the time of Elijah.(I Kings
18:26-29)

 

[Ben Masada]

Chair, Ben Masada and Elia,

do you sacrifice animal when you sin?

thanks.

No, and do you wanna know why? Because the system of animal sacrifices was part of the rituals of Israel and, according Jeremiah 7:22, HaShem never commanded that animal sacrifices be part of the religion of Israel. When I sin, I immediately set things right with the Lord so that my sins, even from scarlet red, become as white as snow. All I need to do is to repent, make restoration and return to the obedience of God's Law. (Isaiah 1:18,19) That's all folks! No need of sacrifices either of animals or humans.

 

[Elia]

Chair, Ben Masada and Elia,

do you sacrifice animal when you sin?

thanks.

Bs"d

We should be. At least in some cases, because only a small category of sins needs an animal sacrifice.

But we are only allowed to bring sacrifices in the Temple courtyard, on the altar there, and nowhere else.

And since we don't have a Temple right now, we cannot bring animal sacrifices.

So how do we get forgivenes for those sins?

Read all about it here: https://sites.google.com/site/777mountzion/sacrifices

 

[Elia]

yes, ruach 'elohim

Bs"d

Another option is alien abduction and artificial insemination.

Another option is that somebody ejaculated in the swimming pool, and a sperm happened to swim up her womb.

Another option is that she got raped by a Roman soldier.

Your option is that your holy spirit raped a married woman.

Which of all these options is the most likely one?

Fact of the matter is, they were in the first stage of marriage, which is a full blown marriage, it can only be dissolved by the man giving the woman a bill of divorce, or by death. If in this first stage of marriage the woman has sexual relations with another man, then she is stoned to death.

But during that first stage, which in Biblical times lasted a year, the newly weds keep on living with their own parents, and sexual relations between them are forbidden.

Not having relations with your wife for a year, but putting her under the punishment of death for adultery, is a great way to make sure she is not pregnant of somebody else before you marry her, and that's how things were done in the old days, and in the days of Joseph and Mary.

So Joseph was in the first stage of marriage with Mary, and then she turned out to be pregnant.

He wanted to disband the marriage and dump her, because that was the proper thing to do.

In the end he didn't according to the NT, but, because everybody could make the calculation after the birth of JC, that he was conceived in the time that it was forbidden for the newly weds to have sexual relations, therefore the Pharisees could say to him: "WE are not born from fornication ..."

However, perhaps your "god" is impotent and has no creative power whatsoever.

My God has created and creates every second the heavens and the earth, and everything in it.

 

[beameup]

Bs"d

Another option is alien abduction and artificial insemination.

Another option is that somebody ejaculated in the swimming pool, and a sperm happened to swim up her womb.

Another option is that she got raped by a Roman soldier.

Your option is that your holy spirit raped a married woman.

Which of all these options is the most likely one?

Using your "yeshiva logic", God's Spirit (ruach 'elohim) "raped the earth" to produce Adam. :kookoo:

 

[Elia]

Using your "yeshiva logic", God's Spirit (ruach 'elohim) "raped the earth" to produce Adam. :kookoo:

Bs"d

You think it is OK to impregnate a woman married to somebody else?

 

[beameup]

Bs"d

You think it is OK to impregnate a woman married to somebody else?

Ask God the Holy Spirit (ruach 'elohim). BTW, obviously you don't know
the Scriptures, like the fact that she was "engaged" and "volunteered
willingly" when asked by the Malak (Angel). Besides, if "you had a clue"
about BCE Judaism (the authentic one), you would have known that MANY
virgins in Israel prayed to be chosen to bring THE MESSIAH into the world.

Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not;
and see ye indeed, but perceive not. - Isaiah 6:9

They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes,
that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand.
Isaiah 44:18

 

[God's Truth]

Ask God the Holy Spirit (ruach 'elohim). BTW, obviously you don't know
the Scriptures, like the fact that she was "engaged" and "volunteered
willingly" when asked by the Malak (Angel). Besides, if "you had a clue"
about BCE Judaism (the authentic one), you would have known that MANY
virgins in Israel prayed to be chosen to bring THE MESSIAH into the world.

Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not;
and see ye indeed, but perceive not. - Isaiah 6:9

They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes,
that they cannot see; and their hearts, that they cannot understand.
Isaiah 44:18

Volunteered? Are you a Catholic?

 

[meshak]

Thank you three of you Jew friends for responding to my inquiry.

But it says to stone those who commit adultery. Do you stone offenders?

thank you.

 

[Ben Masada]

Thank you three of you Jew friends for responding to my inquiry. But it says to stone those who commit adultery. Do you stone offenders? thank you.

No, Meshak, it never happened. The commandment stood there only as a deterrent to prevent the transgression from happening. It was close to impossible for a woman to be stoned to death as a result of committing adultery. The Court procedures by themselves would discourage a woman to expose herself to that shameful behavior. If you read
about the process to prove a transgression of that sort, it would discourage any attempt to even think about it. Oh yes! The case of the woman caught in adultery and decided by Jesus to stone or not, never happened. That was not the way the Sanhedrin worked. It was either a parable or an allegory but not reality.

 

[God's Truth]

No, Meshak, it never happened. The commandment stood there only as a deterrent to prevent the transgression from happening. It was close to impossible for a woman to be stoned to death as a result of committing adultery. The Court procedures by themselves would discourage a woman to expose herself to that shameful behavior. If you read
about the process to prove a transgression of that sort, it would discourage any attempt to even think about it. Oh yes! The case of the woman caught in adultery and decided by Jesus to stone or not, never happened. That was not the way the Sanhedrin worked. It was either a parable or an allegory but not reality.

You do not obey God. You do not obey Moses.

Where is your tent and High Priest and animal sacrifice?

 

[Elia]

Where is your tent and High Priest and animal sacrifice?

Bs"d

It'll be back soon when the Temple is rebuild.

 

[Elia]

Ask God the Holy Spirit (ruach 'elohim). BTW, obviously you don't know
the Scriptures, like the fact that she was "engaged" and "volunteered
willingly" when asked by the Malak (Angel)

Bs"d

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."

"Espoused" means "married". There is no "engagement" in Judaism.

Besides, if "you had a clue"
about BCE Judaism (the authentic one), you would have known

Then you would have known that there is no such a thing as "engagement" in Judaism.

Some people call the genealogy in Matthew the 'legal line', but I am afraid that the words 'illegal line' would be more appropriate here. As most people probably don't know, a Jewish marriage is made up of two stages; kiddushin and nissu'in. With kiddushin the woman is legaly married to the man, and only the death of one of the partners can end the relation, or the man has to give the wife a bill of divorce. However, the marriage has not yet been consumed with intimate relations. This is the first stage. But already in this first stage, the woman belongs exclusively to her husband. If she would have sexual relations with another man, then that would be punished with death, see Deuteronomy 22:23-24; "If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed (the King James here calls the first stage of marriage 'betrothed') unto an husband, and a man find her in the city and lay with her, then you shall bring them both out
unto the gate of that city and ye shall stone them with stones that they die."

The second stage of marriage, nissu'in, is the consuming of the marriage through sexual relations. These days kiddushin and nissu'in are done on the same day, but in earlier days there was one year between kiddushin and nissu'in, and in that year the newly weds kept on living with their own parents. Putting the threat of stoning on a young woman a year before she had relations with her husband is a great way to make sure that she is not pregnant of somebody else before the marriage is consumed. Josef and Mary did kiddushin, but not yet nissu'in. Read Matthew 1:18; "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Mary was married to Joseph, (kiddushin, here called 'espoused') but the marriage was not yet consumed
("before they came together"). If in this stage the woman becomes pregnant from somebody else than the husband, than she has to be stoned to death, and when a child is born from that relation then it is an illegitimate child, and it is NOT the legal child of the one 'espoused' to the woman.

So the words 'legal line' are grotesque wrong here.

 

[God's Truth]

Bs"d

It'll be back soon when the Temple is rebuild.

You are not obeying Moses now, and no one has since the temple has been destroyed.

God is not speaking to Jews through the mouths of those who reject Christ.

You have no prophet.

You have no high priest.

You have to tent, and no temple.

You have no lamb sacrifice.

Christians have all that in Jesus Christ.

If another temple is ever built and animals are sacrificed to atone for your soul, then it will be as a man breaking a dog's neck.