|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why did the Christian messiah fail to fulfill the messianic prophecies? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: I still don't understand why an "incarnated son" or "God incarnate" Messiah might have been unknown when there is supposedly all these "fulfilled prophecies". Look at the Holy Spirit issue here.
quote: Something just isn't adding up here. Why the ignorance of such things in 55 A.D.?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: I should point out that most secular historians seem to consider any mention of food prohibitions as "cultic" or "ceremonial" and the edited text (taking out the food prohibitions) as "moral. P45 is the edited text. (it was used by the western church including a few prominent 2nd century apologists) One can find quite quite a lot of google books and pdfs covering the subject on the first page of google using a general web search Google You will see p45 and the western quotations of Acts 15:20, 15:29, 21:25 described as being changed into "moral laws" as opposed to the King James Greek text being "ceremonial". It is a clear bias. Get used to it. Here is what really is a ceremonial law example
quote: Another
quote: To eat pork or not is a moral law. Not ceremonial of cultic or ritual law. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Then why was James (the brother of Jesus) a vegetarian according to every early source? (I don't think Acts 15:20, 15:29, 21:25 indicates vegetarianism though somebody reading it - without any other informations - might think it says such.)
The biblical text of Paul offers fairly strong evidence that he was a vegetarian. The Egyptians, Hittites, and especially the Canaanites didn't eat pork. Neither did the Philistines after 1000 B.C.E. Zoroaster didn't consider animal suffering to be unimportant. Neither did the Hindus. Or the Navajo. (didn't eat pork) Or the Zulu. (didn't eat pork) Most Christians (if one includes gnostics as "Christians") were vegetarian. Like all of the Jewish Christians. Many of the famous Orthodox Christians were too. A fundamentalist should see Jesus as performing magic tricks to create fake fish to eat (not real meat). The destruction of the Temple was interpreted as a New Age, and vegetarianism was the rule among Jewish Christians. Paul said Christians should become vegetarian as they increasingly become observed by others (eat it if you hide the fact of what you are eating from vegetarians, infact you can't even know what some food is in order to be able to eat it). The "market" of Paul's time can't be private anymore. There are worldwide commodity markets and statistics and everybody knows who is eating what A fundamentalist should see Jesus and/or God as seeing this Temple destruction situation through.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Jesus probably saw himself as being what you say he was. James and Paul (FOR SURE) sure did see Jesus as an anti-nationalistic, peaceful, and loving fulfillment of the Old Testament. I'll even give an example proving James did indeed see things like you say we should. But the problem is that the inter-testamental literature doesn't seem to back up your claim that the Old Testament Messiah predictions were interpreted as such. Here is James in Acts 15
quote: That is the most interesting quote in the entire Bible IMO. Look at the difference between the Septuagint and the Massorah Old Testament text of Amos 9:11-12
quote: quote:( Table of Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, in English translation is source of quotes) The Septuagint backs up your claim that Jesus fulfilled the prophecy. The Massorah contradicts your claims. Call that a split decision. But there is still the much larger difficulty in matching the incarnate (son of) God concept with the Old Testament verses. The supreme "I am" concept of a single God taking many forms (including an "eternal" (?) Holy Spirit) was unknown by 12 individuals even in 55-57 AD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
I said:
quote: The response was:
quote: Turning fish into a much larger amount of fish "left over" after the meal was done could very well be seen an making up entirely new and totally different fish. This is lab-grown and "3-D printed" fish to an entirely new level. The alcohol that was made from water, during a feast, might not have included the initial elements. The fish could have all been fake. Fundamentalists always want a "harmony" of scripture with the teachings of the Roman Catholic church (and the billion person strong "Protestant" amen squad that simply are copy cats of the Catholic traditions and teachings), but why not look for a harmony that matches up with the spirit of the teachings and interpretations of the Jewish Christian branch of James, the Ebionites, and the Elkesaites which was equally strong for centuries after the Catholics came to be around 80-100 AD? Why? Why not?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Acts 15 was my last quote. James the Just. James the brother of Jesus. James the lesser.
quote: Is that the Chinese history website I quoted about the Mani-founded branch of Jewish gnostic Christianity? It was a Chinese history site lol. That was a small part of the site. The kind words about Mani and his followers were in the context of critical commentary on Chinese religious tolerance. The point was that the typical thing people hear is that the Chinese have been historically tolerant of different religions but the site lamented the fact that it is only true relative to Europe. Romans 8:9 says you have to have the spirit of Christ to be a true follower. I offered a concession to you that some were genuine. I showed an example of the very large gnostic sect founded by Mani (but based on 1st centry Jewish Christianity).
quote: There are over 1.5 billion followers of the Hindu religion (including the Buddah branch). The concept of karma automatically makes most vegetarian. Paul talked about sins against conscience in Romans 14-15. Karma has to do with killing living creatures. Killing conscious creatures. Parasites have little or nothing to do with it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Here was a Canaanite philosopher from c.234-305 A.D.
Porphyry - Wikipedia(philosopher) He said the same thing:
quote: He argued that Daniel was written in the mid 2nd century BCE not the 6th. I wonder if this individual being from Tyre influenced his interest in the subject (the failed prophecy of Tyre comes to mind).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Here is the complete text from your post # 218.
quote: The texts indicate that there was more fish left over after the meal was over than there was fish before the magical miracle created lots of (additional) fish. They ate the fish, but was it from a killed animal or "3-d printed" "lab-grown type meat" (with no killing)? The nets could have been a miracle (a fundamentalist should think so) involving artificial fish (with no brains or thoughts and perhaps some strange physical matter). As for the life of the disciples before they met Jesus, surely they performed animal sacrifices and probably ate meat before they met Jesus. Matthew was a vegetarian according to Clement of Alexandria (born c. 150 A.D. and wrote close to 200 A.D.)
quote: Here is Clement of Alexandria on wikipedia. Clement of Alexandria - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Here is a super popular evangelical dictionary text.
quote: It is b.s. The Canaanites did not. Put "phoenicians ate pork" into google and see the evidence. They did not in B.C. times and did not in A.D. times.Porphyry in 245 A.D. talked about that. Archaeology shows that they did not. The Hyksos didn't eat pork and it is theorized that the Egyptians did not because of them. more google search terms: hyksos ate porkphoenicians pork herodotus All sorts of information. This lie that Canaanites ate pork has been around for ages, but it isn't true. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Here one of trillions of pieces of evidence.
Here is an expert on archaeological sites. This is a man respected on all sides of the early Israel debate. Second to none in his field.
quote: quote: Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork - Wikipedia If you follow my google links, then you will find ancient quotes about the Phoenicians and Syrians. Plus books that reference the issue Eat Not this Flesh: Food Avoidances from Prehistory to the Present - Frederick J. Simoons - Google Books There is just endlessly repeated lies that never ever end. JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, ed. Nahum Sarna (Philadelphia, 1990), talks about the pork laws and how they are meant to be followed everywhere, and not just in a cultic context. I will try to get the quote (I have the book on software, but can't use it presently). I found mp3 tracks of Vernon McGhee. See Leviticus 11 track. It is "secular" not cultic There are moral or ethical issues. Not cultic, ceremonial, or ritual. Index of /tracks/03_Leviticus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
They are super duper important when it comes to the history of the early church. And the beliefs.
Steve Mason, in his Early Christian Reader, said that the discovery of the multi volume work of Hegesippus would be more important for the knowledge of the early church than the Dead Sea Scrolls or Nag Hammadi texts. He visited every church in all the major towns in the 2nd century, and wrote a history that stretched back to the first century. hegesippus important early history - Google Search hegesippus james vegetarian - Google Search This specific book below looks at the early texts that say James, Matthew, Peter, and Thomas were vegetarians. It is hostile to the idea that they were vegetarian. Is God a Vegetarian?: Christianity, Vegetarianism, and Animal Rights - Richard Alan Young - Google Books The Ebionite related Elkesaites existed 100 A.D. and they were vegetarian. This doesn't seem to matter to some, but it is important evidence to me. 1 Corinthians 8:10-13 and Romans 14:1-15:1 matters to me alot. So does Acts 15-21 and the related issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
I quoted this:
"The clean/unclean system divided animals, people, and land into three categories to teach separation from the Gentiles" The response was:
quote: People say that the ceremonial precepts involving ritual purity are the only issues relative to meat prohibitions. Out with the ceremonial precepts, and out with any issues related to eating food being a sin. It isn't even true that the ban on pork was ceremonial. And it isn't true that eating pork was allowed by Jesus and James (or Paul or Peter). This false premise has been a real discussion stopper.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Here is the entire context. This is after he died and rose.
quote: He was already dead, and a story arises that he ate fish. This text shows endless signs of editing. The better manuscripts don't have the honeycomb part in it, and the evidence is like 100% that part wasn't in the original c.90 AD writing of Luke. Granted the fish part is still in there. But did you read Luke 1:1-4? Luke plainly admits that he used numerous sources and that his Gospel was late. Mark shows evidence of severe editing in chapter 16 (the parallel to Luke 24). Luke stands alone in this fish part. Endless clues of an unauthentic event with regards to the fish part. There is another issue in Luke. People claim Jesus ate the passover Lamb. But here is the text.
quote: Read on and you will see that this specific text ooks like this very event was supposed to replace the Passover lamb. And a lamb being killed wasn't mentioned here anyway. This Passover meal is actually used by people to claim Christians should eat meat (or at least that they should be allowed to). Unreal! How full of it can you get?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
Did you know that the Gospel of Thomas (logos 12) shows Jesus making James the leader of the church?
This Gospel is a very valuable source as it contains the primitive (pre Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) Logoi formt, and infact that very sayings/logoi themselves are of a more primitive text type than what is in the Synoptics and John. This link has the saying and shows all sorts of comments by scholars on the saying. Gospel of Thomas Saying 12 - GospelThomas.com Here is a google link to follow the issue. Galatians 1-2 shows Paul talking about James and his importance. Acts 15-21 is priceless. Josephus mentions only and only 1 Christian - James! The most important church historian was Hegesippus. Google"Saint Hegesippus (Ἅγιος Ἡγήσιππος) (c. 110 — c. April 7, 180 AD), was a Christian chronicler of the early Church who may have been a Jewish convert and " Here is what he said of James.
quote: The scripture says Jesus was a Nazarin , so perhaps this type of practice (among Jesus followers) came from Jesus? I don't know but it must be considered. This is not nonsense. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2424 Joined: Member Rating: 1.3 |
quote: Everything. The Temple destruction and ending of sacrifices with its associated New Age of peace and no killing is very important. Indeed.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024