|
Author
|
Topic: Did They Write About Jesus in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms?
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
Re: Prophets
I agree, but the Book of Hebrews was not around during the ministry of Jesus and is not part of the documents mentioned in the OP. hey, speaking of books in the op, there's still about a third of that list faith posted. wanna start going through those? they're a bit harder, so we can take 'em one at a time. these ones are actually prophesy, so we have to get some context, and see what they apply to. (hey, maybe a few even actually predict jesus, i dunno. it'd be cool to find out)
אָרַח
|
AdminJar
Inactive Member
|
Getting towards witching hour folk.
If you want to start down that path I suggest a PNT.
|
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3483 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: 04-25-2004
|
Re: Prophets
I lost track of what's left. If you have a good idea of the one's we haven't touched on or at least were considered messianic, make a list and we can try to address them before we turn into pumpkins.  This has been an interesting discussion.
"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
Message 244 of 305 (203848)
04-29-2005 10:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 242 by AdminJar
04-29-2005 6:58 PM
|
|
Re: Getting towards witching hour folk.
alright, when this topic dies, i'll propose a new one of what's left, and we'll stick strictly to those ones.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 242 by AdminJar, posted 04-29-2005 6:58 PM | | AdminJar has not replied |
|
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 245 of 305 (203853)
04-29-2005 11:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 231 by ramoss
04-29-2005 3:14 PM
|
|
Re: ALL the Hebrew verses with "Almah" in them
I am arguing that parthenos from the greek translations from 400 years before this Christ guy did not exclusively mean virgin. I have acknowledged that over and over and over.
I held up the example of Dinah, and it being used for her after she was raped. Why did they refer to a woman who was raped if 'parthenos' Once again, I have said myself in previous posts that it doesn't ALWAYS mean sexually pure. You are having trouble reading. Same with the other authors you mentioned where I again acknowledged that it doesn't always mean sexually pure, which I shouldn't have needed to say at all since I said it at the beginning before you brought up any of that. But when a word is wanted to mean sexually pure, parthenos is the word that is used. And that is how it was used in Isaiah 7:14 and in Genesis 24:43. Parthenos was not used for any of the other uses of "almah" but it was used for those two verses in order to get across the meaning of literal virginity as no other Greek word would have worked. I've said this clearly many many times now. If you still don't get it you have a very serious problem.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 231 by ramoss, posted 04-29-2005 3:14 PM | | ramoss has not replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1470 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 246 of 305 (203854)
04-29-2005 11:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 232 by doctrbill
04-29-2005 3:31 PM
|
|
Re: No, NOT two virgin births
"PARTHENOS" IS AS CLOSE AS YOU ARE GOING TO GET IN GREEK TO A WORD THAT IS UNEQUIVOCAL FOR "VIRGIN." THAT'S THE POINT. THAT IT ALSO IS USED TO REFER TO YOUNG WOMEN IN GENERAL DOES NOT AFFECT THE FACT THAT IT IS THE ONLY WORD THAT DOES REFER TO LITERAL VIRGINITY WHEN THE CONTEXT REQUIRES IT. YES, WHERE IS THE REFEREE?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 232 by doctrbill, posted 04-29-2005 3:31 PM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2790 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
Re: nitpick.
Ramossmessage 231 ramoss writes: "I held up the example of Dinah, and it being used for her after she was raped. Why did they refer to a woman who was raped if 'parthenos' means sexually pure?" Arachnophiliamessage 237
Arachnophilia writes: ramoss, your other points are probably valid, but the septuagint does not have "parthenos" here. i post every instance of it above. Sorry buddy, but I am happy to report that Ramoss is correct. The following happened AFTER the local prince took Dinah, "and lay with her, and humbled her." (verse 2)
quote:
"And he was attached to the soul of Dina the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spoke kindly to the damsel." Genesis 23:3
Where damsel is given for ... you guessed it ... Kai prosesxe th yuxh Deinav thv qugatrov Iakob kai hgaphse thn parqenon kai thn dianoian thv parqenou auth. Source: The Septuagint With Apocrypha: Greek and English by Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton. Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. Originally published by Samuel Bagster & Sons, London, 1851. LCCCN: 70-106440l; ISBN 0-310-20430-5. Perhaps you were thrown off the scent by the changing noun case? Automated searches can do that to a guy.  The stem of the word is parqen- with various suffixes to fit various 'cases.' Happy hunting. 
Theology is the science of Dominion.- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4019 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 248 of 305 (203864)
04-30-2005 12:04 AM
|
|
|
See how much more placid the life of an atheist is? No delving unto what a word might or might not mean. No fears of misinterpretation. No worries about damnation if you misjudge the content. instead, one day after another delving into the real mysteries of life. Almost hum-drum by comparison.
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2790 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
|
|
Message 249 of 305 (203866)
04-30-2005 12:20 AM
|
Reply to: Message 246 by Faith
04-29-2005 11:11 PM
|
|
General Specific.
Faith writes: THAT IT ALSO IS USED TO REFER TO YOUNG WOMEN IN GENERAL DOES NOT AFFECT THE FACT THAT IT IS THE ONLY WORD THAT DOES REFER TO LITERAL VIRGINITY WHEN THE CONTEXT REQUIRES IT. 1. - If it means women in general then it cannot mean pre-sexual women in specific. 2. - There is nothing about the context of Isaiah 7 which requires a pre-sexual woman.
"PARTHENOS" IS AS CLOSE AS YOU ARE GOING TO GET IN GREEK TO A WORD THAT IS UNEQUIVOCAL FOR "VIRGIN." So far, the ONLY unequivocal word we have looked at is bethulah. 'Virgin' is NOT unequivocal. It has at least two definitions in English and even more in Latin. "Literal virginity" is a cute but homegrown expression which depends on the definition of Virginity and is therefore is NOT unquivocal. Parthenos is NOT unequivocal, for it can (as you point out), mean a variety of things. Bethulah IS unequivocal, for it has ONLY ONE DEFINITION. And that's what unequivocal means.
Theology is the science of Dominion.- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 246 by Faith, posted 04-29-2005 11:11 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2790 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: 01-08-2001
|
In the Afterglow
Ah yes. It's a wonderful life - atheism. On the other hand, someone has to come down here and bait these little buggers. I find it a stimulating 'spiritual' exercise. The spirit of revenge - for all the lies and repression I endured as a "good" Christian. I so enjoy battling the evil empire of Jesus and his minions. It is a great catharsis. I don't really hate the little droids. I just hate what they stand for. I was once one of them, so I have to back off a bit when I smell their blood. I would so enjoy the kill but I know I'd regret it soon afterward.
Theology is the science of Dominion.- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 248 by Nighttrain, posted 04-30-2005 12:04 AM | | Nighttrain has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
|
Message 251 of 305 (203882)
04-30-2005 2:46 AM
|
Reply to: Message 246 by Faith
04-29-2005 11:11 PM
|
|
Re: No, NOT two virgin births
"PARTHENOS" IS AS CLOSE AS YOU ARE GOING TO GET IN GREEK TO A WORD THAT IS UNEQUIVOCAL FOR "VIRGIN." actually, i suggested 3 or 4 alternatives above that can ONLY mean virgin...
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 246 by Faith, posted 04-29-2005 11:11 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
|
Message 252 of 305 (203883)
04-30-2005 2:47 AM
|
Reply to: Message 247 by doctrbill
04-29-2005 11:13 PM
|
|
Re: nitpick.
Perhaps you were thrown off the scent by the changing noun case? Automated searches can do that to a guy yes, that was. i admit it, i didn't read the entire septuagint! anyways. i'm happy to be wrong, here.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 247 by doctrbill, posted 04-29-2005 11:13 PM | | doctrbill has not replied |
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
See how much more placid the life of an atheist is? No delving unto what a word might or might not mean. No fears of misinterpretation. No worries about damnation if you misjudge the content. instead, one day after another delving into the real mysteries of life. Almost hum-drum by comparison. i think it's just as silly to brush off the text saying you don't believe any of it as it is accept it all as the word of god, without actually analyzing it any. this applies to anything really, not just the bible.
אָרַח
|
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1369 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: 05-21-2004
|
|
|
Message 254 of 305 (203885)
04-30-2005 2:56 AM
|
Reply to: Message 249 by doctrbill
04-30-2005 12:20 AM
|
|
Re: General Specific.
Parthenos is NOT unequivocal, for it can (as you point out), mean a variety of things. well, i'm sure i missed a few entries now that you've pointed that i missed some other conjugations of the root, but i think my list above pretty well establishes that "parthenos" is most often used to render "betulah" and not "almah" this basically would make the isaiah usage one of two things: 1. a mistake, or inconsistent rendering (we're arguing variations of this point) or: 2. an accurate rendering of an earlier text. now, keep mind that the septuagint is older than the masoretic. and i know of another instance where masoretic text actually makes no sense, but the septuagint says something different that does, and it's one word difference. so somewhere in the ~400 years between texts, a word here and there HAS been changed. it's quite possible the text originally said "betulah" in isaiah 7:14. but there's no real way to know for sure. however, even if it does, it's still not the point of the prophesy, nor can it apply to jesus. so the point is moot, really. however, i strongly suspect that number 1 is the case, due to reasons you and ramoss have pointed out.
אָרַח
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 249 by doctrbill, posted 04-30-2005 12:20 AM | | doctrbill has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4019 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
Well, Arach, having been through the religious grist-mill, so to speak, the process of making sense of it was long and arduous. But, in the end, the conflict of interpretations, the insistence of everybody being right to the exclusion of alternate theories, the preponderance of external evidence (or rather, lack of it) and finally the constant proof of a non-existence of a loving deity, all combined to put me over the fence. We all have a journey to make, some don`t want to take the first step.
|
™ Version 4.2