|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Prophecy of Messiah: Isaiah 7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 611 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Yes, kkng ahaz said he di dnot want to 'test the lord'. Isaiah said, he was goign to give the sign never the lexs.
In Isaiah's own words, the signs are himself, and his sons. In context. No other persons writing involved, Even flow of storyline in his writing. NO need for somebody to reinterpret what is said from another book, written hunreds of years later.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Simply repeating things that have been refuted doesn't make them right.
buz writes: 5. God reveals to the prophet Isaiah that this birth is a future event, the repeated phrase, "in that day," clearly indicative of this. A careful reading of these "in that day" verses of chapter 7 clearly imply a future event substantially removed from the day the prophecy was given. If you read those sections you will see that they do not refer to Jesus, and I even gave you specific quotes so that you could see them in context.
18 In that day the LORD will whistle for flies from the distant streams of Egypt and for bees from the land of Assyria. 19 They will all come and settle in the steep ravines and in the crevices in the rocks, on all the thornbushes and at all the water holes. Please point out where that will apply to the life of Jesus?
buz writes: The son will know to do the good and refuse the evil, clearly again implying the christ/messiah, Jesus. If the statement refers to Jesus then Jesus did not know right from wrong and had to learn that just like every other child, he was just another normal kid and not something special.
15 He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. buz, to try to shoehorn and force Isaiah 7 into some prophecy of Jesus you need to ignore all the other verses in Isaiah 7. Here is the problem buz. When folk try to use stuff like this to convince non-believers of the reality of Jesus message, it actually drives them away. If you believe that there really is a Gospel, good news to share, dragging out things like this which are obviously false, ludacrous even, doesn't help. They read Isaiah 7 and their immediate response is "This is nonsense. It doesn't refer to Jesus at all. If this is what they call evidence then it's pretty obvious that Christianity is simply a meeting place for folk that are not capable of critical thinking or even independant thought. Guess the whole idea of Christianity can just be ignored as a joke." If Christians want to spread the Good News, they need to throw out all these simplistic, ridiculous attempts to con folk. You aren't going to convince anyone who actually bothers to read the book, and you are going to continue to alienate the very people you are trying to attract. Start actually spreading the message. GOD has forgiven ALL mankind. Not just Christian, not just Jews, but everyone, Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, Satanist, Wiccan, everyone. GOD also has asked us to try to do what is right. Love GOD and love others as you love yourself. It really is as simple as that. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1343 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
That's not what I said nor what I implied. really? let's look again. first, jar asked:
quote: instead of providing an answer (indeed, you could not have found one in the bible), you wrote:
quote: in other words, that bit of the prophecy applies to "the end time, the church age" and not something that happened (past tense) during the life of jesus. something that will happen during the "2nd advent of Jesus when he rules and reigns in his millenial kingdom." we can tell that because given the two things it could be referring to, it's not one of them. so it must be the other. in other words, not fulfilled (yet), but will be during the second coming. how is that not what you said or implied? This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 03-18-2006 09:02 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
PaulK writes: Regardless of whether the child in Isaiah 7 is the same as the child in Isaiah 8 it is absolutely clear that the child of Isaiah 7 must be born before the events of the prophecy occur.Those events include the defeat of the kingdoms of Aram (Syria) and Israel. Both were long gone by the time Jesus was born. 1. The events of the prophecy include: a. The land of the two kings Judah abhors will become forsaken wasteland. v.16b. Jehovah will bring upon Judah and the people of Judah, new days unlike the past. v. 17 c. The flies and bees shall rest in the desolate valleys of Egypt and Assyria. v. 18,19 d. The hired of the king of Assyria will have shaven heads and beards.v. 20 e. Poor herdsmen with a few animals will inhabit the desolate land. v. 21,22 f. Thorns and briers will cover the forsaken land fit only for herdsmen's animals. 2. NOTE VERSE 16. All of this will happen before the one who chooses to do the good and abor the evil, i.e. the sinless Imanuel (God with us/God incarnate) child is born. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 611 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
No, actually, it will happen before that child (Isaiah's son) would be old be a toddler.
Guess what.. that is what happened. The king of assyria lost a couple of cities that King Ahaz was contending with him about. See.. it had come true.. in King Ahaz's time. The sign of god was not so much the son.. but the amount of time period between the conception of the son, and the time he could start talking, and understanding right from wrong. It happened by the time Isaiahs son was a toddler. See. So simple. So complete within itself. It was written about after the fact. Isaiah's prediction and fullfillment is all carried within Isaiah. No need to go wandering out and find something written 700 years later to explain it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
even ignoring parts of the verse and then twisting what is actually said to fit YOUR interpretation. That is unbelievable buz.
buz writes: a. The land of the two kings Judah abhors will become forsaken wasteland. v.16 but what the verse actually says is
16 But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. Why did you wilfully ignore "But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,..."? That alone shows that it is not about Jesus, unless you think Jesus just another child that had to learn right from wrong just like every other kid.
buz writes: b. Jehovah will bring upon Judah and the people of Judah, new days unlike the past. v. 17 but buz wilfully leaves out the rest of that verse.
17 The LORD will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah”he will bring the king of Assyria. When during Jesus lifetime did the House of David get invaded by the king of Assyria?
buz writes: c. The flies and bees shall rest in the desolate valleys of Egypt and Assyria. v. 18,19 In this assertion you not only cherry pick words out of two verses but change the meaning totally. What Isaiah 18-19 actually say is:
18 In that day the LORD will whistle for flies from the distant streams of Egypt and for bees from the land of Assyria. 19 They will all come and settle in the steep ravines and in the crevices in the rocks, on all the thornbushes and at all the water holes. It actually says that the flies and bees will come from Egypt and Assyria and afflict the House of David. How is that a reference to Jesus?
d. The hired of the king of Assyria will have shaven heads and beards.v. 20 Again, that is simply NOT what the bible says. Here is verse 20 so folk can read what is actually there.
20 In that day the Lord will use a razor hired from beyond the River ”the king of Assyria”to shave your head and the hair of your legs, and to take off your beards also. Buz, it does not say that the Assyrians will have shaven heads and hair but that GOD will use the king of Assyria to shave hair from the legs, head and beard of the House of David. Now how does that apply to Jesus? This is getting tiresome but one final example of how you are perverting what is actually in Isaiah 7. You say:
2. NOTE VERSE 16. All of this will happen before the one who chooses to do the good and abor the evil, i.e. the sinless Imanuel (God with us/God incarnate) child is born.
But again, that is not at all what verse 16 says. Once again, here is verse 16 for all to read.
16 But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. First, note that the boy does not know right from wrong. Are you saying that Jesus had to learn right from wrong just like every normal child? In addition, it says these things are going to happen during the childs lifetime, after his birth but before he grows up. And it is not Assyria that will be laid waste but the House of David. Buz, not one of the things that you assert hold up when one actually reads the bible, none, zero, zip, nada, nyet. This message has been edited by jar, 03-19-2006 02:22 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DeclinetoState Member (Idle past 6437 days) Posts: 158 Joined: |
ramoss writes: In Isaiah's own words, the signs are himself, and his sons. In context. No other persons writing involved, Even flow of storyline in his writing. NO need for somebody to reinterpret what is said from another book, written hunreds of years later. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
(Matthew 1:22, 23, KJV) The idea that Jesus' birth fulfills an Old Testament prophecy in Isaiah comes from Matthew ch. 1. It's not a creation of latter-day fundamentalists. (If it were, we could dismiss the "fundies" but continue to accept Jesus.) Such being the case (i.e., that Matthew apparently misquotes Isaiah) then, does it justify dismissing the entire gospel account? The entire New Testament? Can we safely say that there is no good reason to believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Such being the case (i.e., that Matthew apparently misquotes Isaiah) then, does it justify dismissing the entire gospel account? The entire New Testament? Can we safely say that there is no good reason to believe in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior? I don't think it is anymore reason to dismiss Jesus as Lord and Savior than buz's misuse of Isaiah. The Map is not the Territory and the Bible is not GOD. The authors and redactors of Matthew were building a franchise and just as in any advertising, sometimes spurious claims are made. This message has been edited by jar, 03-19-2006 01:28 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DeclinetoState Member (Idle past 6437 days) Posts: 158 Joined: |
But if we're expecting God to be perfect, then (many would suggest) His Word must be perfect, too. It obviously isn't--unless someone is able to satisfactorily explain away the problem of Isaiah 7 and other problems, which so far hasn't happened.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
But that is the error of the fundamentalists. The Bible itself never claims to be the literal Word of God. At most some parts of it are claimed to be - typically prophets repeating messages that they say were sent to them from God.
Can you find one book in the Bible which is clearly written as if God were the author ? It's not hard to find books which were written as if a human writer were the primary author - and Isaiah is one of them.-->http://
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
But if we're expecting God to be perfect, then (many would suggest) His Word must be perfect, too. Well, that's a problem for those who think that GOD wrote the Bible, but has nothing to do with either Christianity or a belief in GOD. The Bible is filled with inconsistencies, mutually exclusive passages, errors of fact and omissions from beginning to end. It's a book, actually an anthology of anthologies with countless unnamed authors, editors and redactors. This is not a problem for most Christians and it is only those who try mental gymnatstics and outright twisting of what is written as seen in Message 184 that have problems. Unfortunately, their games simply serve to drive anyone who uses critical thinking away from the real word and message of the Bible. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
The Bible contains multiplied hundreds of translation, grammatical, and punctuation errors, and when these errors are corrected by scholarship (as they have) then the Bible is technically inerrant. We also know the Bible contains no factual errors. Also, the Bible at face value appears to contradict and/or be inconsistent. This is an illusion caused by the complexity of its Source (the same illusion, Darwinists say, is caused by a blind watchmaker). The Bible was written in such a way that only gifted men and women, who are called by God, to unfold the complexity and show that there really are no contradictions or inconsistencies. Persons who need the Bible to be wrong champion the illusion. These same people usually have the ability to understand complicated scientific arguments written in technical journals but the same ability applied to the Bible suddenly escapes them.
Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures The verse above is referring to the Risen Christ. The: their is His apostles and disciples. These same persons grew up reading the Hebrew scriptures and walked with Jesus for 3 1/2 years yet they still did not understand the meaning UNTIL Christ opened their understanding. If apostles and disciples did not understand then how much more everyone else, especially atheists and Darwinists as is seen in their almost endless nonsensical renderings ? The point is only a person called by God, who has a gift, can open understanding of the Scriptures. Augustine had the gift as did Luther. In modern times: Spurgeon, Morgan, Niebuhr, C.S. Lewis, and of course Dr. Scott. Mankind's only choice is to find someone who they judge to have the gift and listen and learn from them. Otherwise everything and everyone else is just a Tower of Babel. Ray
This message has been edited by Herepton, 03-19-2006 04:39 PM This message has been edited by AdminJar, 03-19-2006 06:44 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Jar, I see you enjoy inflaming your opponents. You know what I think about your insults. Go and talk to someone else and I'll do the same.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
What about the other stuff I've cited which was also included in the prophecy, i.e. the "in that day" future stuff like the land becoming a desolation, etc?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Arach writes: really? let's look again. first, jar asked: quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When during Jesus life did the King of Assyria shave the Hebrews heads, the hair of their legs and take off their beards? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- instead of providing an answer (indeed, you could not have found one in the bible), you wrote: quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "In that day" is indicative of a general period of time relative to the messianic era. Often these OT messianic prophecies include the end time of the 2nd advent of Jesus when he rules and reigns in his millenial kingdom, the church age, being a silent mystery to the prophets. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- in other words, that bit of the prophecy applies to "the end time, the church age" and not something that happened (past tense) during the life of jesus. something that will happen during the "2nd advent of Jesus when he rules and reigns in his millenial kingdom." we can tell that because given the two things it could be referring to, it's not one of them. so it must be the other. in other words, not fulfilled (yet), but will be during the second coming. Read the text.1. The Lord, not the King of Assyria, does the shaving. 2. The shaving text is quite ambiguous as to exactly what it means, but in context it appears to be related to the desolation of the land involving the King of Assyria with just what that involvement is being what is ambiguous. "That is hired in the parts beyond the river with the King of Assyria" The previous verse as well as verses following all deal with the desolation of the land of Assyria and the region in general. 3. Factoring in all the verses of the prophecy with the repetition of the phrase "in that day" applied to the growing in of "thorns and briers" et al, there's no way you can apply it to the short term there and then. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024