fulfilled prophecy - specific examples.

The complaint of PaulK was that only John (or the author of John) says that Jesus was God.PaulK wrote: The point was not about what Jesus said so much in this case, but as to what the authors of the individual Gospels say. So I demonstrated that Matthew says that Jesus was "God with us" quoting Isaiah the prophet.This time I addressed PaulK's specific objection and then he seems to shift the objection.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This is simply a matter of whose authority are you going to believe.The Gospel writer Matthew (an apostle) says that this is what the verse means - "God with us".PaulK says, not to be taken literally, Matthew's mistaken.You, reader get to make up your mind whether you take PaulK's explanation or Matthew's. You probably know where my trust is.Jesus is God with us. He claimed so and that is why they crucified Him. They didn't believe it.

Wrong.The allegory of the protective bird applies exactly to God Himself in both cases. Isaiah 31:5 - "Like flying birds so Jehovah ...

​

Like flying birds .... SO JEHOVAH of hosts will protect Jerusalem; He will protect and deliver it; He will pass over and rescue it." Jehovah of hosts, Who is God Himself, will act like protective birds over Jerusalem. Deuteronomy 32:11,12 - "As the eagle rouses his nest, Hovers over his young, Spreads his wings, takes them, [and] bears them up upon his pinions; So Jehovah alone led him and there was no strange god with Him."Again the allegory refers to God Himself. The escape IS God Himself. In some cases it is protection by deliverance. It is rousing the nest, protecting, shielding, including also protection by deliverance.Now Jesus speaks in the New Testament:"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her!

​

How often I desired to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not." (Matt. 23:37)1.) "How often" indicates more than once He had the desire. And the speaking of God being as a protective bird or birds over the children of Israel was employed more than once in the Old Testament.2.) "I desired" refers to the man Jesus Himself. This indicates that before His incaranation as a man Jesus as God - pre-incarnation - "desired" to be the protective bird shielding his beloved Jewish people from harm.3.) Jesus was not older than 30 some years old. Yet He is refering to the stoning of the prophets by Jerusalem before He was born. Often times then, in the Old Testament times when Jerusalem stoned prophets and killed those sent to her by God, Jesus as Jehovah God pre-incarnate, desired often to protect them.The passage indicates that Jesus is God Himself. That He is "God with us" is more than strongly implied by Matthew 23:37. If Christ had said "How often [My Father] desired ..." or "How often [God] desired ... " then PaulK might have a case.As it stands that is not what Jesus said, but rather "How often I desired to gather your children together ..."Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't feel the need to say anything more about that passage. Rather we can assume that you are on the side of those who do not believe the words of Jesus. That's all.We assume that you are casting your lot in along with those in Matthew's Gospel who disbelieved and opposed Christ. Nothing more interesting is going on than this.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The one with no case is PaulK.The overall "interpretation" that the audience of Jesus got was that He was teaching that He was God come to earth as a man. The fabrications are PaulK's slippery excuses to portray these teachings as misunderstandings about "assumed" words. And these misinterpretations were inserted afterwards by Christain readers like myself.Some of the powerful among Christ's religious audience rejected His teaching that He was God come to us as a man. But they understood what He was saying. And for that reason He was persecuted.PaulK simply among those who reject that He is God come to us as a man, as Jesus taught. He labors hard to dress up his rejection in reasons like "Jesus never said" that He was God come as a man. He tries to dignify his unbelief in reasons like saying "We can only assume that Jesus spoke those words."I think we have a adaquate record of the words and deeds of Jesus in the New Testament. And we have an adaquate record of what was the response to those words and deeds from various quarters of His overall audience.The accumulative effect certainly is that He taught and acted like He was the God of the Old Testament come to the earth as a man, transcending His own Sabbath, forgiving sins, raising the dead, lamenting over Jerusalem as her God in the Old Testament, and challenging His detractors to find sin in Him at all. His words are put by Him on the same level as the words of God in the Old Testament. At some times He says His words are more important - "You have heard ... But I say unto you ..."Rejecting the teaching of Jesus under the disguise that He never said the things or that they were made up by false propogandists latter makes for a flimsy case.At least the priests had the will to say "What need more do we have for witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy out of His own mouth." We don't see them putting forth various flimsy reasons like "Well, we can only assume that Jesus said these things. These are only faulty interpretations added by His disciples of what we think He said. "Thier intense opposition to the ministry of Christ was at least more honest and forthcoming. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Extra biblical historical references to Jesus:Josephus (Jewish Historian) A.D. 37-100

​

Cornelius Tacitus (Roman Historian) A.D. 55? -after 117)

​

Lucian (Greek Satirist) ( 2nd century A.D. )

​

Suetonius (Roman Hostorian) c. A.D. 120

​

Pliny the Younger (writing to the Roman emperor) c. A.D. 112

​

Thallus (Samaritan born historian) c. A.D. 52

​

Julius Africanus (refering to the dark day of the crucifixion of Jesus via Thallus) c/ A.D. 221

​

Letter of Mara Bar-Serapion after A.D. 73

​

The Jewish Talmud (completed by A.D. 500) All the above "secular" historical references to Jesus Christ. Talmudic references we would have to classify as non-Christian religious references.Now I expect that PaulK will get busy moving the bar of secular attestation to the historicity of Jesus around and disqualifying each of these witnesses.1.) Possibly he will say that Christians invented them2.) Possibly he will stress that none of them believe things identical to the disciples of Jesus therefore they are not proofs of the claims of Jesus.3.) Possibly he'll object that no one was there in "real time" writing down at the very moment what Jesus was saying. Therefore bad memories have erased all the true things said by Jesus forever.Anyway, the New Testament contains all the witness I need to decide what I should believe about Jesus. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

As I wrote, basically PaulK's response is some variation of #2 and #3. I suspect the mentioned "problems" will include standard response #1.