Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8890 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-16-2019 2:23 PM
173 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, dwise1, kjsimons, Meddle, PaulK, RAZD, Tangle, Tanypteryx (9 members, 164 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 847,581 Year: 2,618/19,786 Month: 700/1,918 Week: 288/266 Day: 25/35 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   Did Jesus do anything original?
Brian
Member (Idle past 3002 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 1 of 30 (26858)
12-16-2002 5:33 PM


What was so special about Jesus, conceding for a moment that he did exist and the words and deeds attributed to him by whoever wrote the gospels are actually true?

Did he do or say anything original?

------------------
Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!

www.lyingforgod.org

[This message has been edited by Brian Johnston, 12-16-2002]


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by zipzip, posted 12-16-2002 8:47 PM Brian has responded

    
zipzip
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 30 (26902)
12-16-2002 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Brian
12-16-2002 5:33 PM


Are you joking? If we take what you say as givens, he:

1) Fulfilled several thousand years of prophecy
2) Was born of a virgin birth
3) Taught reverse social order, where king is servant
4) Actually was God and participated in creation of the universe
5) Had supernatural powers including miraculous healing powers
6) Died for your sins
7) Rose from the dead having conquered the power of sin and death
8) Appeared to all his followers many times following his resurrection
9) Is seated at the right hand of the throne of God

C'mon.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Brian, posted 12-16-2002 5:33 PM Brian has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 12-17-2002 12:14 PM zipzip has not yet responded
 Message 19 by Brian, posted 12-18-2002 3:58 PM zipzip has responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 212 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 3 of 30 (26994)
12-17-2002 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by zipzip
12-16-2002 8:47 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by zipzip:
[B]Are you joking? If we take what you say as givens, he:

1) Fulfilled several thousand years of prophecy

Hmm, there are several prophecies that are said to have been fulfilled by Jesus, but such prophecies didn't exist in the OT.

Examples:

* Matthew claims that Jesus' birth in Bethlehem fulfils the prophecy in Micah 5:2. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

* "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chr.2:18, 2:50-52, 4:4).

* The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.

It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make the verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan. 2:5-6

* "He shall be called a Nazarene." Matthew claims this was a fulfillment of prophecy, yet such a prophecy is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. 2:23

* Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. 16:28

* This verse claims that Jesus fulfils the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9. But this cannot be since the person referred to in Zechariah (see verses 10-13) was both a military leader and the king of an earthly kingdom. 21:4

* Jesus predicts the end of the world within the lifetime of his listeners. 23:36

* Verse 33 says that during Jesus' crucifixion, the soldiers didn't break his legs because he was already dead. Verse 36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy.

* Jesus implies that he will return to earth during the lifetime of John. 21:22


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by zipzip, posted 12-16-2002 8:47 PM zipzip has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by John, posted 12-17-2002 12:23 PM nator has not yet responded
 Message 6 by judge, posted 12-17-2002 6:27 PM nator has not yet responded

    
John
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 30 (26996)
12-17-2002 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by nator
12-17-2002 12:14 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by schrafinator:
[B]
quote:
Originally posted by zipzip:
Are you joking? If we take what you say as givens, he:

1) Fulfilled several thousand years of prophecy

Hmm, there are several prophecies that are said to have been fulfilled by Jesus, but such prophecies didn't exist in the OT.

Examples:

* Matthew claims that Jesus' birth in Bethlehem fulfils the prophecy in Micah 5:2. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

* "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chr.2:18, 2:50-52, 4:4).

* The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.

It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make the verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan. 2:5-6

* "He shall be called a Nazarene." Matthew claims this was a fulfillment of prophecy, yet such a prophecy is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. 2:23

* Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. 16:28

* This verse claims that Jesus fulfils the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9. But this cannot be since the person referred to in Zechariah (see verses 10-13) was both a military leader and the king of an earthly kingdom. 21:4

* Jesus predicts the end of the world within the lifetime of his listeners. 23:36

* Verse 33 says that during Jesus' crucifixion, the soldiers didn't break his legs because he was already dead. Verse 36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy.

* Jesus implies that he will return to earth during the lifetime of John. 21:22


Oh come on shraf!! You're just quibbling Isn't it obvious that Jesus, being God, fulfills anything he wants?

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 12-17-2002 12:14 PM nator has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:02 PM John has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 30 (27007)
12-17-2002 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by John
12-17-2002 12:23 PM


Jesus being the Son of God didn't do anything he wanted, he only did the will of the Father.

As to the original question, to my knowledge Jesus was the only one to enter into this world with a heavenly host. The angels that appear to the shepheards are commonly thought of as just a chior. I has been pointed out to me that this was not a choir but an army. (host=army) No wonder the shepheards were afraid. God did not send his Son into this world weak, like the rest of us come into the world. Anyways thought it was interesting, and as far as I know pretty original.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by John, posted 12-17-2002 12:23 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by John, posted 12-17-2002 7:40 PM funkmasterfreaky has responded
 Message 12 by doctrbill, posted 12-18-2002 12:20 AM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
judge
Member (Idle past 4486 days)
Posts: 216
From: australia
Joined: 11-11-2002


Message 6 of 30 (27077)
12-17-2002 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by nator
12-17-2002 12:14 PM


schrafinator:
Hmm, there are several prophecies that are said to have been fulfilled by Jesus, but such prophecies didn't exist in the OT.

Examples:

* Matthew claims that Jesus' birth in Bethlehem fulfils the prophecy in Micah 5:2. But this is unlikely for two reasons.

* "Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers not to a town, but to a clan: the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chr.2:18, 2:50-52, 4:4).

* The prophecy (if that is what it is) does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah 5:6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.

It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make the verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan. 2:5-6

Judge:
Hi there schrafinator!
We may not ever really know exactly why matthews rendering differs in this way from the reading in the text we have that comes form the massorettes. However it is entirely possible , at least, that Matthew did not alter the text.

What I am saying is that I don't know that we should assume that the text of the OT that matthew was familiar with was identical to the Hebrew text that forms the basis of our english bibles.

As you may be aware the hebrew text that we use for our english translations was put together (and probably standardised) by European jewish believers in the middle ages. With perhaps some minor exceptions all the copies we have read identically.
This text varies at times with the LXX, the peshitta OT, the samaritan text , various aramaic targums and the NT.
Interestingly it also varies form some hebrew dead sea scrolls.

I think Matthew was probably familiar with an Aramaic targum, which probably read as the NT does.

* "He shall be called a Nazarene." Matthew claims this was a fulfillment of prophecy, yet such a prophecy is not found anywhere in the Old Testament. 2:23

* Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. 16:28

Judge:
I love this one! Yes I think there is no question that Jesus clearly said that He would come in glory or return and establish His kingdom in the lifetime of His listeners. Personally I think He did return. This of course means the historic creeds are wrong ,in part.

* This verse claims that Jesus fulfils the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9. But this cannot be since the person referred to in Zechariah (see verses 10-13) was both a military leader and the king of an earthly kingdom. 21:4

* Jesus predicts the end of the world within the lifetime of his listeners. 23:36.

Judge:
Yes he does. Heaven and earth passed away and were replaced by a new heavens and a new earth. I happened. if we read isaiah 65 we see that this is not meant to be taken literally.

* Verse 33 says that during Jesus' crucifixion, the soldiers didn't break his legs because he was already dead. Verse 36 claims that this fulfilled a prophecy: "Not a bone of him shall be broken." But there is no such prophecy.

* Jesus implies that he will return to earth during the lifetime of John. 21:22

judge:
Perhaps, but what was his return supposed to be. What was the coming of the messiah supposed to be in the OT? He was supposed to come in power and glory as a ruler who inaugerates the messainic age.
What most did not understand was that He was first to come and suffer, before entering into His glorious reign.
Is jesus implying He will return to earth (as before) or that he will come and inaugurate His kingdom?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by nator, posted 12-17-2002 12:14 PM nator has not yet responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 30 (27094)
12-17-2002 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 1:02 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Jesus being the Son of God didn't do anything he wanted, he only did the will of the Father.

One and the same, Funk. Come on man!! The Trinity and all.....

quote:
As to the original question, to my knowledge Jesus was the only one to enter into this world with a heavenly host.

Not so my grace filled buddy. Countless mythologies describe their Gods the same way.

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:02 PM funkmasterfreaky has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 8:22 PM John has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 30 (27100)
12-17-2002 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by John
12-17-2002 7:40 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:
[b]
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Jesus being the Son of God didn't do anything he wanted, he only did the will of the Father.

quote:
One and the same, Funk. Come on man!! The Trinity and all.....

Jesus was very much a man when he was on earth, God cannot be tempted, Jesus was tempted. He did the will of the Father not of the flesh.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.

[This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 12-17-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by John, posted 12-17-2002 7:40 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by John, posted 12-17-2002 9:03 PM funkmasterfreaky has responded
 Message 13 by doctrbill, posted 12-18-2002 12:40 AM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 30 (27110)
12-17-2002 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 8:22 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Jesus was very much a man when he was on earth, God cannot be tempted, Jesus was tempted. He did the will of the Father not of the flesh.

Yeah, kinda makes the Trinity idea a bit screwy doesn't it?

Funk, man, you edited your post and left out that part where you admitted that.... Well, we know don't we

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 8:22 PM funkmasterfreaky has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 10:29 PM John has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 30 (27115)
12-17-2002 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by John
12-17-2002 9:03 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Jesus was very much a man when he was on earth, God cannot be tempted, Jesus was tempted. He did the will of the Father not of the flesh.

Yeah, kinda makes the Trinity idea a bit screwy doesn't it?

Funk, man, you edited your post and left out that part where you admitted that.... Well, we know don't we


Oh busted! I decided it was not something I will "admit". Couldn't argue it any further without offending others.

I don't see how it makes the trinity screwy. So Jesus came in the flesh, fully, and did the will of the Father. How does this mess up the doctrine of the trinity? Right from Genesis God is refered to as "we".

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by John, posted 12-17-2002 9:03 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by John, posted 12-17-2002 11:26 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 30 (27120)
12-17-2002 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 10:29 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Oh busted! I decided it was not something I will "admit". Couldn't argue it any further without offending others.

But confession is good for the soul....

quote:
I don't see how it makes the trinity screwy. So Jesus came in the flesh, fully, and did the will of the Father. How does this mess up the doctrine of the trinity? Right from Genesis God is refered to as "we".

Do you know the history of the trinity by any chance? Despite the rumors, it is doubtful that this doctrine was held by the early church-- meaning those living in the first, say, 150-300, years. There was a lot of bickering from the time of the Gospels until about 400BC, when church leaders decided it was fact.

http://home.rmci.net/cbolton/TRIN.HTM

http://www.islandnet.com/~bible/trinityhistory.htm

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 10:29 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 807 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 12 of 30 (27126)
12-18-2002 12:20 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 1:02 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
The angels that appear to the shepheards are commonly thought of as just a chior. I has been pointed out to me that this was not a choir but an army. (host=army) No wonder the shepheards were afraid.

Great observation funkmaster. This fits in well with my current line of study. Thanks for mentioning it.

db


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:02 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 807 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 13 of 30 (27129)
12-18-2002 12:40 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 8:22 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
God cannot be tempted,

Eh?

Then why the dire warning, "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."?

And why the many occasions when it is said that He was tempted?

- "they tempted the LORD" Exodus 17:7;
- "those men ... have tempted me" Numbers 14:22;
- "they tempted God" Psalm 78:18;
- "your fathers tempted me" Psalm 95:9;
- etc.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 8:22 PM funkmasterfreaky has not yet responded

  
Karl
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 30 (27134)
12-18-2002 2:39 AM


quote:
God did not send his Son into this world weak, like the rest of us come into the world.

I have to disagree! One of the wonders of the Incarnation is that God did become weak and helpless. If He was not a real weak, helpless baby, He was not fully Man, and Christian theology is up a well-known scatological creek without a paddle.

Are you familiar with the Edward Shillito[spelling?] poem "Jesus of the Scars"

The other Gods were strong but thou wast weak
They rode but thou didst stumble to a throne.

Moving on to the "prophecies", haven't we been here before a few weeks ago? I'm sure Matthew was well aware of the original meanings of these passages. He is not claiming that Jesus is fulfilling some Old Mother Shipton prediction from ancient times, but that Jesus is the cumulative fulfilment of the national hopes of Israel from ancient times. He does not claim that Jesus is the ruler from the clan of Bethlehem, or the Immanuel born of a "young woman" (erroneously virgin in the Septuagint). He is saying that those ancient events foreshadow the coming of Jesus. And just as those ancient passages were about deliverance, so is Jesus.

Our problem here is that we are applying a particularly modernist scientific approach to the issue of these prophecies, which would have been quite alien to the culture that produced them. I think this mistake is made by fundamentalists, who need to bend things to make them work, and extreme liberals, who just say "The Bible got it wrong", and others who extend that to "and therefore Christianity is a load of hokum".

[This message has been edited by Karl, 12-18-2002]


Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 3:42 AM Karl has responded

  
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 30 (27143)
12-18-2002 3:42 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Karl
12-18-2002 2:39 AM


I agree Jesus was a normal infant baby, minus the normal conception, (imo). However Satan would have destroyed this infant were it not for the army of heaven that accompanied him to this earth. He was defended.

------------------
Saved by an incredible Grace.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Karl, posted 12-18-2002 2:39 AM Karl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Karl, posted 12-18-2002 6:23 AM funkmasterfreaky has responded

  
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019