Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Divinity of Jesus
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 46 of 517 (427784)
10-12-2007 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Rahvin
10-10-2007 10:14 PM


Where does it say the Messiah must be a descendent of Solomon?
It seems like we've been through this before, a few years ago.
I'm not going through it again. But to refresh me on your argument what passage says the Messiah must be a descendent of Solomon - OF SOLOMON?
As I recall (and this is from memory, so forgive me), he was supposed to be a descendant of David. Since Solomon was David's son, Jesus would have to have been a descendant of Solomon as well.
Not so.
David had two sons at least - Solomon and Nathan.
Jesus was a descendent of David through the line that ran through Nathan and not Solomon.
This knock down drag out we've had before. Re-debating former debates with the same people in intervals of every five or six years is just a little too depressing to me. So interested parties should go to archive and find those former discussions.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Rahvin, posted 10-10-2007 10:14 PM Rahvin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by ringo, posted 10-13-2007 1:39 AM jaywill has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 47 of 517 (427812)
10-13-2007 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by jaywill
10-12-2007 10:44 PM


jaywill writes:
Re-debating former debates with the same people in intervals of every five or six years is just a little too depressing to me.
Imagine how those of us feel who have to go through the same points every five or six weeks.
So interested parties should go to archive and find those former discussions.
Those of us who are truly trying to dispell the darkness know that ain't gonna happen. We have to keep working at it.
Since you're one of the few dogmatists around here who actually knows anything about the Bible, it's a lot easier when we don't have to correct you all the time, too.

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by jaywill, posted 10-12-2007 10:44 PM jaywill has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 517 (427835)
10-13-2007 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Brian
10-11-2007 2:38 PM


The problem with this passage you have referenced is that it is not referring to a town at all, it is referring to a clan.
What is the difference?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Brian, posted 10-11-2007 2:38 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 8:21 AM Jon has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 49 of 517 (427856)
10-13-2007 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Jon
10-13-2007 3:49 AM


What is the difference?
Well this would mean that this 'messiah' mentioned by Micah would not have to be born in Bethlehem, as the author of Matthew incorrectly stated.
The child could have been born anywhere in the world, as long as the child was from the clan of Bethlehem Ephrathah.
From the context of Micah it is obvious that he is speaking about a clan, there has never been thousands of towns in Israel.
It is equally obvious that this leader will appear soon and smite the Assyrians. It is a bit like the Isaiah 7:14 prophecy where the 'virgin' will give birth very soon as a sign to Ahaz that the current alliance against him would fail.
Whoever wrote gMat completely ripped this prophecy out of context, which is a big and recurring feature of his work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Jon, posted 10-13-2007 3:49 AM Jon has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 50 of 517 (427857)
10-13-2007 8:25 AM


Jesus was a descendent of David through the line that ran through Nathan and not Solomon.
My point exactly.
The BIBLE says that the messiah comes from Solomon's bloodline, the BIBLE says Jesus was a descendant of Nathan (through Mary, even though bloodline doesnt go through women), thus Jesus could not have been the Messiah.
Cognitive dissonance has to be at the core of Christianity.

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:16 AM Brian has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 51 of 517 (427864)
10-13-2007 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Brian
10-13-2007 8:25 AM


Are you sure about that Brian?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 8:25 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:19 AM jaywill has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 52 of 517 (427867)
10-13-2007 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by jaywill
10-13-2007 9:16 AM


About what Jay?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:16 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:27 AM Brian has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 53 of 517 (427869)
10-13-2007 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Brian
10-13-2007 9:19 AM


What is the Hebrew word for "bloodline" and can you show me its usage in the Old Testament in connection with Messianic passages?
Let's start there.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:19 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:29 AM jaywill has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 54 of 517 (427870)
10-13-2007 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by jaywill
10-13-2007 9:27 AM


We have already been through this Jay, as you have already pointed out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:27 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:30 AM Brian has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 55 of 517 (427871)
10-13-2007 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Brian
10-13-2007 9:29 AM


LOL!
Now you're talkin. Have a nice day.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:29 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:34 AM jaywill has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 56 of 517 (427874)
10-13-2007 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by jaywill
10-13-2007 9:30 AM


Have a nice day.
Oh I will have.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:30 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:43 AM Brian has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 57 of 517 (427876)
10-13-2007 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Brian
10-13-2007 9:34 AM


I'll leave you with a little funny story. It is about the first day I got a PC on the Internet with great enthusiam to chat about my Christian faith.
The first site I went to the moderator had been already overseeing the board for two years. He was about to leave the responsibility to someone else. I remember him telling the participants that in the two years he had spent as moderator he had yet one time to see anyone change their opinion about anything.
That was my introduction to Internet Discussion Boards. Now about 16 years latter, by and large I see that he was right. LOL!
You have to admit coming back around and having the same debates every couple of years with the same people is, well, like there is something else to life.
So now you're on chipping away at the divinity of Jesus ?
And that will accomplish for you ...?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Brian, posted 10-13-2007 9:34 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 5:04 AM jaywill has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 58 of 517 (428341)
10-16-2007 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by jaywill
10-13-2007 9:43 AM


That was my introduction to Internet Discussion Boards. Now about 16 years latter, by and large I see that he was right. LOL!
I would agree as far as their personal beliefs go, but I know a lot of people have changed their minds about certain histoical events after reading information on discussion boards. But this is different from a person's faith, and I worked out pretty quickly that I wouldn't change a Christian's mind about their faith. Only they can do that, but I still get amazed that anyone can study the OT and still take Jesus seriously, but that is their choice of course.
You have to admit coming back around and having the same debates every couple of years with the same people is, well, like there is something else to life.
Sure, and is another reason why I dont post here very often, but EvC has served a good purpose.
And that will accomplish for you ...?
An improved subject knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 10-13-2007 9:43 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by jaywill, posted 10-26-2007 9:36 PM Brian has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 59 of 517 (430715)
10-26-2007 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Brian
10-16-2007 5:04 AM


Saul of Tarsus was a man who fought hard against the idea of the Divinity of Jesus.
After Saul became Paul the Apostle he told us that God used him as a pattern of His longsuffering and ability to change a man from a lie to the truth:
"I give thanks to Him who empowers me, Christ Jesus our Lord, that He has counted me faithful, appointing me to the ministry.
Who formerly was a blasphemer and a persecutor and an insulting person; but I was shown mercy because, being ignorant, I acted in unbelief... But because of this I was shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Jesus Christ might display all His long-suffering or a pattern to those who are to believe on Him unto eternal life" (See 1 Tim. 12-16)
I think this passage is very interesting because Paul was a strict Pharisee. As a Pharisee he would never commit blasphemy against God. But now he realizes that His denying the Lord Jesus Christ was his commiting blasphemy against God. IN other words he realizes now that he formerly fought against the Divinity of Jesus.
Modern skeptic don't know what to do with such a person. Tyopically they concoct fabrications that Paul was not really a Pharisee or various other sundry lies to dull the impact of the man's personal testimony.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 5:04 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Brian, posted 10-27-2007 1:56 PM jaywill has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 60 of 517 (430787)
10-27-2007 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by jaywill
10-26-2007 9:36 PM


Modern skeptic don't know what to do with such a person.
When I decided to leave Christianity, it was a very difficult decision, I obviously began to look at the Bible from a very different angle, and I do have a few problems with Paul’s conversion experience (apart from the usual objections of conflicting accounts).
Think about this, if you wanted to popularise something what better way is there than to tell people that you once hated this product but now you realise how wrong you were? People would obviously find it more convincing that an opponent of something is now an avid supporter of it now.
Tyopically they concoct fabrications that Paul was not really a Pharisee or various other sundry lies to dull the impact of the man's personal testimony.
Well, surely you agree that we only have Paul’s word that this conversion happened, we only have his word that he hated Christianity, and most of all, we only have his word that he had persecuted Christians. It is this final point that I have a real problem with because it just doesn’t sit right with what we know from external evidence.
The idea that Paul could swoop into Damascus, on the orders of the Sanhedrin, to persecute Christians there really doesn’t sound plausible at all. What power did the Sanhedrin have in Syria?
Then we have to recognise that the very same group that was supposed to be persecuting Christians allowed Paul to preach in their synagogues.
Finally, under Pax Romana, it is difficult to imagine the Romans allowing this persecution to go ahead when they themselves allowed the nations under their Empire to follow their own faith. Thus, to me, I feel it is more believable that Paul never persecuted Christians, but that the story is a piece of propaganda invented to persuade people that Christianity must be true because one of its most fervent opponents is now persuaded that it is true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by jaywill, posted 10-26-2007 9:36 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 10-27-2007 2:57 PM Brian has not replied
 Message 62 by jaywill, posted 10-28-2007 1:52 AM Brian has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024