Christianity and the End Times

Name a few. The only one I've ever heard told is the temper tantrum in the temple, but it seems logical that if it really was His Fathers House he would have every right to chase the marketers out the door. Got any more?

Only in your world Faith.In my world the word week means seven days. If it means 7 years then the translation should say that because, you know, it's several orders of magnitude wrong. But in either case, it still didn't happen.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

You can't understand the Old Testament without SOME basic respect for how the Hebrew language is used.

Neither of us read the bible in Hebrew. We read it in English. If the English translation is 'week' then it means 7 days. If it actually means something else, then the translation is wrong.But, as I say, in either case, the prophecy, like all others - your own included - failed.

If Jesus wasn't susceptible to sin, there would have been no point in Satan tempting Him.

YOU didn't answer it. I pointed out that it only takes one ambiguity to make ambiguity.

The best translations take into account the way Hebrew is used because often its meanings are lost if a flatfooted translation is made instead. Hebrew has all kinds of conventions that help bring out its meanings and a good preacher will explain these things.

Who said Jesus wasn't susceptible to sin? Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You are wrong about that, but in any case this wasn't about ambiguity. I was answering your claim that Christians made up original sin and blood sacrifice rather than relying on the Bible. They are both unambiguously in the Bible.

Besides His tantrum in the Temple, He destroyed an innocent herd of pigs and he withered a fig tree. Anger seems to have been one of His weaknesses. He also used perfume on his feet - I don't know if that was vanity or just plain selfishness. He prayed to be excused from the cross. On the cross He practically denounced God for forsaking Him. Sounds pretty human to me.Seriously, you should know this stuff.

You said He had no human foibles. What could be more human than susceptibilty to sin?

No, they are not unambiguous in the Bible. I showed you the contradictory verses. The only thing that's unambiguous about it is your cherry-picked preference.

Jesus never did anything that was not absolutely perfect and correct. He never lost control. His anger was always righteous and correct. Accepting the perfume was a way of saying He was worth it all. The poor you will always have with you but me you will not always have with you. He is worth ten thousand million alabaster boxes of the costliest stuff. The way you denigrate His noble actions and words is positively nauseating.

You don't know how to read the Bible and eventually it is just a tedious futility to try to debate you.

I gave you examples and all you give in return is unsupported denial. Pointing out that He was human is not denigrating. He's a lot more impressive as a human who resisted temptation most of the time than as a God who could do no wrong.