Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OS Answer #7-10 -- Jesus Christ is not a scapegoat...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OS Answer #7-10 -- Jesus Christ is not a scapegoat...

    (7) My proof that you misquoted/misapplied John 1;29 and 1 Cor 5:7.
    (8) My quote about the lamb and the scapegoat.


    "The Christians say that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world. The NT is very dysfunctional at this point. John the Baptist even claims that Jesus Christ is the "Lamb of God that takes the away the sin of the world."

    John 1:29 (NIV) The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

    Paul claims that Jesus Christ is in fact the "Passover Lamb."

    1 Corinthians 5:7b (NIV) …For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

    "In our turf we all know that the Passover lamb has no power whatsoever to take away any sin."

    Notice, here, as is your regular practice, two different verses, or parts of verses, two different authors, different audiences, different circumstances, but you try to give the impression that they are the same thing…
    In all fairness, a lamb is not a goat. Anyone in Christianity will relate to you that both references, John the Baptist and Paul’s are pointing to the same person Jesus Christ.
    Hebrews 9:11 goes on to say, "But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood,
    …and himself pretty beaten up and well covered with Roman (i.e. Heathen) spit from at least a couple of long lasting rounds. It doesn’t say anywhere that he took a shower after that. If he were a Passover lamb he would be a reject. Check with any orthodox Jewish Rabbi if such a lamb would qualify for the Passover Seder.

    Matthew 26:67 (NIV) Then they
    spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him.

    Matthew 27:30 (NIV) They
    spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again.

    Mark 14:65 (NIV) Then some began to
    spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and beat him.

    Mark 15:19a (NIV) Again and again they struck him on the head with a staff and
    spit on him.
    “In the same way Jesus suffered unfairly on the cross for sins He did not commit. He was innocent and sinless yet suffered as if He had sinned. Jesus is our scape-goat! Just as the scape-goat was driven into the wilderness. Jesus was crucified outside the gate of the city of Jerusalem."
    The scapegoat was not meant to die, but to go free. Nobody ever referred to Jesus Christ as a scapegoat, anyway. This is another goof of the NT writers. They didn’t think of it.

    The NT writers ignored the fact that although it is highly altruistic from a human perspective, but to Almighty Yahweh it is an abomination that the innocent pay for the sins of someone else.

    John 15:13 (NIV) Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. (i.e. this is anti-Torah)

    Exodus 23:7 * Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty.

    Deuteronomy 27:25 * "Cursed is the man who accepts a bribe to kill an innocent person." Then all the people shall say, "so be it!"
    (i.e. Jesus Christ set up Judas to fall under this curse)

    Psalms 106:38 * They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was desecrated by their blood.
    39 They defiled themselves by what they did; by their deeds they prostituted themselves.
    40 Therefore Yahweh was angry with his people and abhorred his inheritance.
    (i.e. …until the Christians came up with the idea that shedding the “innocent” blood of the “son of man” is OK)

    Proverbs 17:15 * He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the righteous, even they both are abomination to Yahweh. (i.e. According to Christian mythology, Almighty Yahweh shot his foot.)

    Proverbs 17:26 * To punish a righteous man is not good, nor to strike princes because of their uprightness. (i.e. no exceptions otherwise Almighty Yahweh would be shooting his own feet)

    Proverbs 24:24 * Whoever says to the guilty, "You are innocent"-- peoples will curse him and nations denounce him. (i.e. According to Christian mythology, Almighty Yahweh shot his foot.)
    (9) My request for documentation of your claim that N.T. practices were copied from heathen cults eating flesh and drinking blood.

    "The Christian philosophy about salvation is a concoction of bizarre ideas about the effect of the Passover lamb in a personal saving faith.. . . The Heathen of that day used to drink blood. "

    Do you have anything at all resembling historical documentation of this allegation? Or is it just more of Lou's anti-Christian fantasy.
    I took it from today’s Heathen. They drink and eat pure blood in so many products and forms. I am not saying anything about blood transfusions, ok? I also read that this practice comes from way back, but I am not going to spend time digging the source now. If they offered innocent blood in sacrifice maybe they drank it, too. Although I agree with you, maybe we should let the guilty go free until proven guilty. It is the American way, anyway.
    (10) My questions and comments about drinking blood and eating flesh in the N.T.

    "After he died everybody was supposed to eat of his flesh and drink his blood forever in a cannibalistic ritual known as the "Eucharist."

    I assume you are referring to, Matthew, 26:26, and following. This is another of your tactics, in politics they call it "plausible deniability." You don't actually cite a specific verse, so you can later deny misquoting it.

    If this is the passage you are referring to. Note, Jesus is speaking while He is alive and holding bread and wine in His hand. When his disciples ate the bread and drank the wine, His body was completely intact and His blood still flowing in His veins. So no "cannibalistic ritual", no drinking blood, no eating human flesh, whatsoever. The rest of your infantile babbling about "drinking of a stiff's blood", etc., etc. doesn't merit further response.

    As for symbolism, that is nothing unusual, all the elements of the pesach seder are symbolic. For example, the bitter herbs represented the bitter slavery of the Israelites.

    Matthew 26:26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
    Yes, I understand that the flesh and the blood of Jesus Christ is symbolic in the Eucharist. Oops, wait, are you Catholic? If so, you should know that the Eucharist is the real stuff! How cannibalistically symbolic can you get? If you are Lutheran, then you know that it is both! Anybody else settles with the symbolism of the real thing.

    Anything symbolic is an image of the real stuff or event. I suspect that Jesus Christ or Paul for that matter came up with a new way of celebrating the Passover using the body and blood of Jesus Christ as a substitute for the passover lamb. Whoever wrote the gospels probably copied from Paul. Paul made the first recorded statement that Jesus Christ is the Passover lamb that was already sacrificed. And as I read the gospels written many years after Paul popularized the idea of Jesus Christ as the Passover lamb I don’t see a trace of any lamb during the “Last Seder.” Did Jesus Christ proceed to celebrate the Passover seder in a different setting substituting his body and blood for the Passover lamb? It is very possibly that he did so. I say so because there are TOO MANY irregularities registered at that Pesach celebration. I don’t have time now to list all the irregularities because they are too many, mostly in violation of HaTorah.

    Actually my original question is very important. If the elements of the Eucharist represent the body and blood of Jesus Christ, tell me what body. Is it his own body before the crucifixion? The NT writers say that he had a sinless and spotless body. Regardless of how innocent it was there is a Christian dogma that says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingodm of Heaven... Now if that body and blood of Jesus Christ is the one hanging on the cross. I would have a little problem explaining because it was loaded with sins and I don’t want to be sarcastic adding spit, too. During the time that Jesus Christ was dead, he was supposed to be roasting in Hell so I am not sure about how to word it. And after the alleged resurrection, his body couldn’t be flesh and blood anymore because "flesh and blood do not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven." You must answer what flesh and blood of Jesus Christ are we talking about in the Eucharist because I can count 4 stages in the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ.

    Well, Old Shep, I came to the end of answering your old questions. Somebody said that facts are stubborn things. I admire your fairness in demanding documentation. I am sure that if you were that fair minded all around you would be more careful how you read the NT and the Tanakh. I don’t have any plans to come up with a new religion. I am waiting for the real messiah of Israel to show up soon. You may even call him the anti-Christ. Now that I think of it, we will have a lot in common. BTW, I don’t believe in any of that although you may accuse me of being an anti-Christ. All that is NT crap. The Book of Revelation is the dessert that you feed on to fleece the sheep.
    "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

  • #2
    Lou,

    Some of your non-answers, when I asked for documentation.

    "I took it from today’s Heathen.. . .I also read that this practice comes from way back, but I am not going to spend time digging the source now."

    Don't make claims you can't back up. Three months ago, +/-, you challenged me, specifically, saying you would answer my questions. You should have done any research before then. Three months and you still can’t back it up!

    "Anyone in Christianity will relate to you that both references, John the Baptist and Paul’s are pointing to the same person Jesus Christ."

    I didn't ask "Anyone in Christianity" I asked you. Put up or shut up! I said both verses do not refer to the Pesach.

    "If he were a Passover lamb he would be a reject. Check with any orthodox Jewish Rabbi"

    You are shooting off your face, you document it, don't refer me to someone else!

    "The scapegoat was not meant to die, but to go free. Nobody ever referred to Jesus Christ as a scapegoat, anyway."

    I quoted a source that referred to Jesus as a scapegoat. Where does it say, “The scapegoat was not meant to die? What happens to a small, defenseless, domestic animal released in the wild? It gets eaten!

    "to Almighty Yahweh it is an abomination that the innocent pay for the sins of someone else."

    So, I ask you again, explain these verses.

    Jer 18:21 Therefore deliver up their (my people, vs. 15) children to the famine, and pour out their blood by the force of the sword; . . .

    Jer 19:9 And I will cause them (Judah and Jerusalem, vs. 7) to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters. . .

    Amos 7:17 Therefore thus saith the LORD; . . .thy sons and thy daughters shall fall by the sword, . . .and Israel shall surely go into captivity forth of his land.


    ". . .there are TOO MANY irregularities registered at that Pesach celebration. I don’t have time now to list all the irregularities because they are too many."

    I document everything. You spout dog puke which you cannot document.

    "Old Shep, I don’t see anywhere in the Tanakh the need that an innocent person die sacrificially for any guilty party"

    See my answer, above, Jer 18:18, 19:9, and Amos 7:17 Do you see anything about a ga’al”? Any guilty party is free to die for their own sins, any time.

    "There is something wrong in the story of Jesus Christ and it doesn’t have anything to do with me. . . .You notice that I do not quote the Talmud, or any other source."

    You should read the Talmud, it was written by real Torah observant Jews, not a phony, wannabe Jew, who violates Torah every day, c.f. Ezra 10:18, Proverbs 2:16, 5:20. See earlier post re: violating Torah.

    http://www.tzaddikim.org/forum/showt...torah#post1240

    You keep babbling that Christians wrongly interpret and apply Isaiah 53 to Jesus, that it refers to Israel. Below are quotes from the Talmud. Real Jewish scholars, for hundreds of years, interpreted Isa 53 as Messianic. The N.T. writers, did not invent a Messianic interpretation or misapply Isa 53. Only now, in this era, phony, wannabe, Jews, try to revise history because it doesn’t fit your blind, hate filled, anti-Christian agenda!
    chastisements are divided into three parts, one to David and the fathers, one to our generation, and one to the King Messiah; as it is written, "he was wounded for our transgressions; and bruised for our iniquities":”'{o}

    {p}, at that time they shall declare to the Messiah the troubles of Israel in captivity, and the wicked which are among them, that do not mind to know the Lord; he shall lift up his voice, and weep over the wicked among them; as it is said, "he was wounded for our transgressions", &c. '

    {o} Mechilta apud Yalkut, par. 2. fol 90. 1.
    {p} Zohar in Exod. fol. 85. 2. See also Midrash Ruth, fol. 33. 2. and Zohar in Deut. fol. 117. 3. and R. Moses Hadarsan apud Galatia de Arcan. Cath. Ver. I. 8. c. 15 p. 586. and in I. 6. c. 2. p. 436.

    {g}, who say {h}, this is the King Messiah, who was in the generation of the ungodly, as it is said, #Isa 53:5 "and with his stripes we are healed"; and for this cause God saved him, that he might save Israel, and rejoice with them in the resurrection of the dead.

    {g} Zohar in Exod. fol. 85. 2. Midrash Ruth, fol. 33. 2. Yalkut Simeoni, par. 2. fol. 53. 3. & 90. 1.
    {h} R. Moses Haddarsan apud Galatin. de Areanis Cathol. Verit. l. 6. c. 2.

    R. Cahana {t} says, as the ass bears burdens, and the garments of travellers, so the King Messiah will bear upon him the sins of the whole world; as it is said, "the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all", #Isa 53:6.“

    {t} Apud Galatin. de Cathol. Ver. I. 10. c. 6. p. 663, and Siphre in ib. l. 8. c. 20. p. 599.

    It is, phonies like you who doctor history and the scriptures, not Christians!
    "Prophecy cannot be approximately fulfilled. It must be 100 per cent fulfilled. If anyone needs more documentation on this last point I will be glad to provide. "

    If you can, provide the documentation, so far you haven't documented diddly. Oh BTW Torah observance must be 100%!. My documentation, whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.”! James, BTW a real Jew, was paraphrasing the Talmud, in 2:10-11! You violating Torah, see response above, c.f. Ez 10:18, Prov 2:16, 5:20.

    Deut 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.

    he that is suspected in one thing, is suspected in the whole law {y}; and he that keeps this or the other command, keeps the whole law; and he that breaks this, or the other command, breaks the whole law; as whether it respects the sabbath, or adultery, or that command. Thou shall not covet, or any other {z}:

    {y} T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 69. 1.
    {z} Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 9. fol. 192. 3. Zohar in Exod. fol. 20. 2. & 37. 1. & in Lev. fol. 32. 3. Shemot Rabba, sect. 25. fol. 109. 3. T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 39. 2. & Menachot, fol. 43. 2. & Abkath Rochel, par. 1. p. 3.

    "I heard a different interpretation, too. That the ten people are the 10 lost tribes of Israel that will be united to the Jews in common worship of Yahweh. This is only a speculation more likely to be true than your sneaky accommodation of Jesus Christ in the picture."

    I'm not interested in your interpretation of a rumor you might have heard somewhere. Can you document it?

    "I have no reference material at the moment to figure out if the expression in Hebrew is plural or singular. . . Regardless, I still believe that Matthew’s “Immanuel” was inserted in his “gospel” just to force the fulfillment of another “prophecy” because it never happened. "

    I don't care what you "believe" about anything, can you document it? No! If you could, you would have, if for nothing else, to prove me wrong. BTW, resources are available on the Internet, and we both know it!

    "Nobody ever called Jesus Christ, “Immanuel.” I can assure you that Jesus Christ has nothing to do with that person or that name."

    Your assurance isn't worth dog puke! Do you have any documentary evidence, that Mary did not call Jesus, Immanuel, any time, anywhere? Isa 7:14 says “a virgin. . .shall call his name Immanuel” The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!

    "There is no reference anywhere in the Tanakh of a “lamb of Yahweh” that turns into a human being and needs to be sacrificed to peace Almighty Yahweh. Or get this, a serpent that turns into the “son of God” to hang on a cross."

    There is no reference anywhere in the N.T. “of a ’lamb of Yahweh’ that turns into a human being” or “a serpent that turns into the ‘son of God.’” More mindless, infantile, anti-Christian dog puke, with no basis in Christian writing or practice.

    (1)" On the second part of your point (1) about Isaiah 53:5 You wrongly claimed that I didn’t answer. So I’ll give you the same answer from a different perspective."

    (2) "So you see, Old Shep, I didn’t answer you before because it is so silly to believe that Isaiah 53:5 has anything to do with the coming of the real messiah of Israel. "

    Did you answer me before or not? Real Jews believed and taught for 2000 years, +/-, that Isaiah 53 did, refer to the real Messiah. You must also consider yourself more knowledgeable than the Talmud scholars. This should be no problem for you.

    kh’khleb shob al-qao kh’shil soneh b’aoletho
    Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
    Zaqunra'ahyahuw

    Comment


    • #3
      I am fully documented...

      Hi Old Shep,

      It seems that it is OK for you to demand documentation from me on issues that Christianity takes for granted. Like the story of the scapegoat that is eaten by wild animals and so on. I never heard that one before. Do you have any documentation that the scapegoat is eaten by wild animals, and that it cannot be the way around? You don’t have to accept any of my statements on hearsay even though they are commonly accepted in Christianity. About the “lamb of God” of John the Baptist it is the same one described by Paul. This is widely accepted in Christianity. You want to make the difference, fine. I am with you. So at the end you are saying that Jesus Christ was not sacrificed as a lamb, right? Somebody said that “as Moses lifted the serpent in the dessert so must the son of man be lifted.” Are we agreeing that Jesus Christ is like that serpent in the dessert, instead of a lamb?

      I can appreciate your help in reading passages of the Talmud dealing with Isaiah 53. Thank you. If the real HaMaschiach is described in Isaiah 53 as having the need to suffer, fine! We are looking forward to see it happen. The immorality of Jesus Christ denying to Pontius Pilate any connection with any kingdom here on Earth rules him out! Paul said that to believe in the resurrection is vital to the Christian faith. How come the resurrection of any messiah is not spelled out in the Tanakh?
      "to Almighty Yahweh it is an abomination that the innocent pay for the sins of someone else."

      So, I ask you again, explain these verses.

      Jer 18:21 Therefore deliver up their (my people, vs. 15) children to the famine, and pour out their blood by the force of the sword; . . .
      What happened then is repulsive, but you cannot sneak Jesus Christ in here! I read about Judah and Jerusalem eating the flesh of their children. Is it presented as a standard practice? They did it because they were forced to do it by the famine. It was not done to save anyone from going to Dante’s Inferno. But what about Jesus Christ introducing the eatery of his own flesh and blood as part of a religious ritual? I suspect that Jesus Christ celebrated Pesach with his disciples without a Passover lamb on the table and that he used the occasion to switch it for the Eucharist in clear violation of HaTorah. In fact, even to the last minute the apostles were wondering when Judas left the Seder that he surely went to buy WHAT WAS NEEDED for the Passover celebration, namely the Passover lamb. Definitely, there was something missing at the table that prompted the disciples to ask that question! Anyway, the celebration was not in a family setting. No children were present. Apparently the apostles already abandoned their families following Jesus Christ instruction to hate father, and mother, and all relatives and to follow him. Since I don’t see any lamb reference in the Passover celebration attended by Jesus Christ and because of the fact that Paul is saying that Jesus Christ is the Passover lamb already sacrificed. I can see how the Eucharist comes about substituting bread and wine for the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ so that a new religious rite can be instituted to identify the Christians. On a side note, I see Jesus Christ eating and drinking his own flesh and blood at the institution of the Eucharist, or did he “pass the cup” and skip the bread? Hey, a question like this would break the monotony of any "Sunday School" class... Is the Eucharist a "sacrament" to take away sins? Did Jesus Christ partake of it? Anyway, this is a major deviation from HaTorah. It seems to me that Christianity swallowed the hook with bait and everything. I am barely scratching the surface. I keep digging so much dirt!

      I still wish to hear your comments about MY main question…

      Actually my original question is very important. If the elements of the Eucharist represent the body and blood of Jesus Christ, tell me what body. Is it his own body before the crucifixion? The NT writers say that he had a sinless and spotless body. Regardless of how innocent it was there is a Christian dogma that says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingodm of Heaven... Now if that body and blood of Jesus Christ is the one hanging on the cross. I would have a little problem explaining because it was loaded with sins and I don’t want to be sarcastic adding spit, too. During the time that Jesus Christ was dead, he was supposed to be roasting in Hell so I am not sure about how to word it. And after the alleged resurrection, his body couldn’t be flesh and blood anymore because "flesh and blood do not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven." You must answer what flesh and blood of Jesus Christ are we talking about in the Eucharist because I can count 4 stages in the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ.
      Nobody ever called Jesus Christ, “Immanuel.” I can assure you that Jesus Christ has nothing to do with that person or that name."

      Your assurance isn't worth dog puke! Do you have any documentary evidence, that Mary did not call Jesus, Immanuel, any time, anywhere? Isa 7:14 says “a virgin. . . shall call his name Immanuel” The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!
      I am taking time from work to answer your post. I have no reference material to offer you now. I actually know for a fact that the virgin (i.e. young girl) did call her son “Immanuel,” but this Immanuel is not Jesus Christ but the little kid that was born to her 400 years or so before Jesus Christ was born. The virgin (i.e. young girl) was pregnant already when Isaiah was saying Isaiah 7:14. You can trust me. I read the whole context of Isaiah 7 and 8 and that is what I get. Isaiah was not taking about any event in the future.
      "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

      Comment


      • #4
        Lou,

        "Actually my original question is very important. If the elements of the Eucharist represent the body and blood of Jesus Christ, tell me what body. Is it his own body before the crucifixion? The NT writers say that he had a sinless and spotless body. Regardless of how innocent it was there is a Christian dogma that says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingodm of Heaven... Now if that body and blood of Jesus Christ is the one hanging on the cross. I would have a little problem explaining because it was loaded with sins and I don’t want to be sarcastic adding spit, too. During the time that Jesus Christ was dead, he was supposed to be roasting in Hell so I am not sure about how to word it. And after the alleged resurrection, his body couldn’t be flesh and blood anymore because "flesh and blood do not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven." You must answer what flesh and blood of Jesus Christ are we talking about in the Eucharist because I can count 4 stages in the metamorphosis of Jesus Christ."

        Actually, Lou I answered your original question back on July 23 10:58 AM, my time. You ignored it because you aren't interested in an answer or discussion. You are a bitter, old man, with a grudge against Christianity, and all you want to do is keep using this forum, or any forum, as a free platform to keep posting your dog puke, same old feces over and over again.

        Let me repose an earlier question to you. When Jews eat the bitter herbs at Pesach, does it literally turn into 400 years of bitter bondage. Do they actually, literally get beaten, starved, etc., for 400 years, every year? While you are at it address all the other elements of the Pesach Seder.

        http://www.tzaddikim.org/forum/showt...highlight=lamb

        1 Samuel 17:34 And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father’s sheep, and there came a lion, and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock: {lamb: or, kid} . . .
        07716 seh seh or sey say
        probably from 07582 through the idea of pushing out to graze; TWOT - 2237; n m
        AV - sheep 18, cattle 10, lamb 16, ewe 1, lamb + 03532 1; 46
        1) one of a flock, lamb, sheep, goat, young sheep, young goat
        1a) sheep, goat
        1b) flock (collective)
        36 Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God.


        Jeremiah 5:6 Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall watch over their cities:

        I have documented two of my points. One that predators such as bears, lion, and leopards, all native to Israel, eat lambs. And two, a young goat and a young sheep were both called sey in Hebrew. This is the word used throughout Exodus to describe the Pesach. The Pesach could have been either a young sheep or goat. So when John said "Behold, the lamb of God.,in Hebrew, he could have meant either a young sheep, or a young (scape) goat.

        Lou, you want to play little juvenile games, but you can't afford it.

        "It seems that it is OK for you to demand documentation from me on issues that Christianity takes for granted. Like the story of the scapegoat that is eaten by wild animals and so on. I never heard that one before. Do you have any documentation that the scapegoat is eaten by wild animals, and that it cannot be the way around? You don’t have to accept any of my statements on hearsay even though they are commonly accepted in Christianity. About the “lamb of God” of John the Baptist it is the same one described by Paul. This is widely accepted in Christianity."

        Now Lou document your comment that sheep or goats eat lions, bears, and leopards! And don't give us any pathetic infantile excuses. Since you challenged me on something so basic. Put up or shut! And if you can't then you simply prove you are what I have said all along, a lying piece of doggy doo.

        One final point Lou, which you ignored on another several other threads. You are a dog puke liar and will remain one as long as you violate Torah, and remain married to a “strange, i.e. Christian, wife” Note this is also documented.

        "I hate no Christian. My wife is a Christian and I love her. Many of my relatives are Christians. I get along well with them. They are very upset with me because I will never attend a Christian worship service again."

        http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002010-9.html

        Ezra 10:18 And among the sons of the priests there were found that had taken strange wives: namely, of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren; Maaseiah, and Eliezer, and Jarib, and Gedaliah.
        19 And they gave their hands that they would put away their wives; and being guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their trespass.

        Pr 2:16 To deliver thee from the strange woman, even from the stranger which flattereth with her words;

        Pr 5:20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

        As I documented on an earlier post if you violate one point of Torah you are in violation of the entire Torah. No exceptions! When you obey Torah, then you might have some credibility to criticize others.
        Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
        Zaqunra'ahyahuw

        Comment


        • #5
          Jeremiah 5:6 Wherefore a lion out of the forest shall slay them, and a wolf of the evenings shall spoil them, a leopard shall watch over their cities:

          I have documented two of my points. One that predators such as bears, lion, and leopards, all native to Israel, eat lambs. And two, a young goat and a young sheep were both called sey in Hebrew. This is the word used throughout Exodus to describe the Pesach. The Pesach could have been either a young sheep or goat. So when John said "Behold, the lamb of God." in Hebrew, he could have meant either a young sheep, or a young (scape) goat.
          Old Shep, you are now operating on a desperate mode. You are gasping for air to survive as a Christian. It is also possible that the scapegoat would have survived any attack from wild animals and that at the end of its life it died of natural causes. What wild animal would come near a goat covered in Roman spit in any way? OK. this is my point. The bitter herbs that you are talking about is OK, but what about the spit? what significance does it have in all this. Don't you think that the writers of the NT may have goofed the crucifixion story by adding Roman spit to it?

          My question about the Eucharist is still unanswered. What kind of a body of Jesus Christ do the Christians need to think of every time they partake of the elements of the "Lord's Supper" or Eucharist. Bear in mind that, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of Heaven." There are 4 kinds of flesh and blood of Jesus Christ,

          1) The "sinless" body of Jesus Christ before his crucifixion?

          2) The body of Jesus Christ hanging on the cross, covered in his own coagulated sweat blood from Getsemany and full of Roman spit, and loaded with the sins of the world?

          3) The body of Jesus Christ in his decomposing state including his coagulated blood still in his flesh after he died? This poses a problem according to HaTorah. The blood of the animal, goat or lamb has to be drain from the animal and shed on the ground. Drinking the blood that fell on the ground while Jesus Christ was hanging on the cross talking to everybody around him doesn't sound right. The procedure is to have the neck slashed and the blood shed as commanded for any animal, goat or lamb. By the time Jesus Christ was dead his blood must have gotten filthy washing "the sins of the world." How can any of that be "spiritualized" or what kind of flesh and blood symbolism is there in the Eucharist that the Christians need to watch.

          4) The new body of Jesus Christ void of flesh and blood?


          By the way, there is nothing in the the Passover seder celebrated by Jesus Christ that indicates that there was a lamb or goat on the table. He must have replaced the body of the lamb or goat with his own flesh and blood in the wafer and grape juice. I believe that Paul was thinking of using this scenario when he came up with the idea of the Eucharist as a unifying rite identifying the Christians from the Jews. Many years later the writers of the NT tagged the Eucharist to the freaky Passover seder celebrated by Jesus Christ and his disciples.

          I am still using the NT as my documentation. Remember what Saint Peter, a.k.a. "Satan" wrote,

          1 Peter 3:15 (NIV) But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, (please, Old Shep, don't call me "dog puke" anymore!)
          "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

          Comment


          • #6
            Lou,

            This actually belongs on your answer #6, but I cannot get into that thread, so. Four times in the most recent post you claim something in Christianity is anti-Torah.

            "(i.e. this is a Heathen idea totally anti-Torah)

            (i.e. Jesus Christ set up and actually begged
            (A dog puke lie. Read The Greek!! OS) Judas to go ahead and betray him quickly. He didn't do anything to stop Judas from committing a crime. He actually became his mentor. (A dog puke lie! OS) This is totally anti-Torah.)

            (i.e. until the Christians came up with the idea that shedding the "innocent" blood of the "son of man" appeases "the father."
            (A dog puke lie! OS) This is totally anti-Torah!)

            (i.e. Jesus Christ is due for a lot of cursing. Christianity is basically anti-Torah.)
            "

            You are always babbling about Christianity, in general, or some out-of-context verse being anti-Torah. In addition to being the absolute ultimate in "religious" hypocrisy, your most recent posts also change the subject, as usual, going off on a tangent unrelated to this thread. And I use "religious" in its most derogatory sense.

            Here is the bottom line Lou, I'm sick of trying to discuss or reason anything with you. You are a pathological liar, and a hypocrite, totally incapable of quoting the simplest scripture or reference correctly or in context.

            Here is something I have posted several times which you have ignored. I have better things to do with my time than expend the effort to look up scriptures and references, write a reasoned response only to be ignored, again and again. If you refuse to answer this again do not bother posting anything to me in the future. If you want to talk about anti-Torah, discuss this or forget it!
            "One final point Lou, which you ignored on another several other threads. You are a dog puke liar and will remain one as long as you violate Torah, and remain married to a "strange, i.e. Christian, wife" Note this is also documented.

            "I hate no Christian. My wife is a Christian and I love her. Many of my relatives are Christians. I get along well with them. They are very upset with me because I will never attend a Christian worship service again."

            http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/002010-9.html

            Ezra 10:18 And among the sons of the priests there were found that had taken strange wives: namely, of the sons of Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren; Maaseiah, and Eliezer, and Jarib, and Gedaliah.
            19 And they gave their hands that they would put away their wives; and being guilty, they offered a ram of the flock for their trespass.

            Pr 2:16 To deliver thee from the strange woman, even from the stranger which flattereth with her words;

            Pr 5:20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?

            As I documented on an earlier post, from the Tanakh and The Jewish Talmud, if you violate one point of Torah, you are in violation of the entire Torah. No exceptions! Lou, when you obey Torah, then you might have some credibility to criticize others.

            Oh BTW Torah observance must be 100%!. My documentation, "whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James, BTW a real Jew, was paraphrasing the Talmud, in 2:10-11! You violating Torah, see response above, c.f. Ez 10:18, Prov 2:16, 5:20.

            Deut 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.
            "he that is suspected in one thing, is suspected in the whole law {y}; and he that keeps this or the other command, keeps the whole law; and he that breaks this, or the other command, breaks the whole law; as whether it respects the sabbath, or adultery, or that command. Thou shall not covet, or any other {z}:"
            {y} T. Bab. Erubin, fol. 69. 1.
            {z} Bemidbar Rabba, sect. 9. fol. 192. 3. Zohar in Exod. fol. 20. 2. & 37. 1. & in Lev. fol. 32. 3. Shemot Rabba, sect. 25. fol. 109. 3. T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 39. 2. & Menachot, fol. 43. 2. & Abkath Rochel, par. 1. p. 3.
            Lou it ain't going away, since you want to dictate to others obedience to Torah, clean up your own house first. If you don't you are worse than an infidel.!"
            BTW, Lou, isn't adultery, murder, and idolatry anti-Torah? What was that ancient Jewish King's name who committed adultery and when the woman became pregnant, had her husband murdered to cover it up? And who was that other ancient Jewish King, the son of the first one, who set up idols of several pagan deities and worshipped those idols himself? This is another question you have previously ignored. Notice how you fake, phony, wannabe Jews point fingers and criticize Christians for supposedly being anti-Torah but get the stupids and can't answer when it concerns your own disobedience to Torah. Since you ain't man enough to walk the walk, don't talk the talk!
            Last edited by OldShepherd; 09-29-2001, 06:26 AM.
            Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
            Zaqunra'ahyahuw

            Comment


            • #7
              Old She, you don't like my wife...!

              I know, I know, Old Shep, you are disappointed that I am not one of the 144,000 virgin men of Israel. BTW, the prophecy of the 144,000 virgin Israelite men listed in the Book of Revelation is totally anti-Torah. The Hebrew Scriptures do not teach virginity as any objective. The incapacity of having children was a morbid experience for any Israelite. Our Creator commanded that we should be fruitful and multiply. Please correct me if I am wrong. Ever since Abraham was promised that in him and his descendants all the families of the Earth will be blessed anyone desiring to be a virgin all his/her life was not only in contempt of Yahweh’s word that he commanded for 1000 generations, but he/she demonstrates hatred toward our Creator, too, because such person refuses to let his/her desendants to be a vessel of Yahweh's blessing to any of the families of the Earth. Are you with me, Old Shep?

              I have so many questions about the 144,000 virgin males from Israel in the Book of Revelation. It says that they never touched a woman. I did. I touch a Christian woman all the time. I wonder since when touching a woman is a defilement? Must she be a Christian woman to get a Jew defiled? Somebody is mocking the Hebrew Scriptures in here. The mere fact that the 144K are virgins in purpose disqualifies them for any connection with Israel. What comments do you want me to make?

              Revelation 14:4 (NIV) These are those who did not defile themselves with women, for they kept themselves pure. They follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They were purchased from among men and offered as firstfruits to God and the Lamb.

              Revelation 14:10-11a (NIV) he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever…"


              Are you trying to tell me that the ministry of these fine "young Jewish virgin men" is to keep company with Jesus Christ, a.k.a. "the Lamb" while they are watching millions upon millions of Jews, Americans, Arabs, and what have you being roasted alive in a sulfuric fire forever? Or will they enjoy watching only the torment of those who took the 666 mark? Will it be an interactive viewing? Will they be throwing some sulfur brickets to the fire as they watch? Will Jesus Christ be watching at the tune of the "new song that only they can sing"? Will the spectacle be watched from Mount Zion where they are standing? How sadistic can they get? Are you sure you are talking about young Jewish men doing all this? I don’t think so. The Grecian NT writers were disgustingly anti-Jews. That is why no decent Jew will ever discuss anything about the NT or the Hebrew Scriptures with the Christians. You have to be at the receiving end to really appreciate how abominably anti-Jew is the NT. Old Shep, can you still give me an answer to the questions that I am asking you in this paragraph?

              OK, Old Shep, I may be a bit off track, so what to you? You won’t be my judge. The traditional dislike for the Jews is getting you off guard on what you read in the Scriptures. There is a tendency to ignore the special relationship the Jews have with our Creator. Compare what the gracious Almighty Yahweh has to say about the end of Israel to what Jesus Christ will do to the "church." Compare loyalty to loyalty.

              Jeremiah 31:37 * This is what Yahweh says: "Only if the heavens above can be measured and the foundations of the earth below be searched out will I reject all the descendants of Israel because of all they have done," declares Yahweh.

              Revelation 3:16 (KJV) So because thou are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth.

              It is you who needs to know how hot or cold you ought to be. I hate to be the judge on this one, but you are hardly definable. You are about at the point of no return. You keep saying that I am not answering your questions. I try to do it as soon as you reply!
              "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

              Comment


              • #8
                Lou,

                The topic of this thread by your choice is "OS Answer #7-10 -- Jesus Christ is not a scapegoat..." not the 144,000 virgins, but once again you pull your favorite trick.!

                Your questions were answered many times over by me, Seventh Angel, Nacharyahu, ThePhysicist, Eliyah, the moderator, and others. Part of one of my responses from the "Christianity does Virginity" thread, 09-28-1999 to 05-02-2000.

                "The subject of this thread was not "Christian church bride" it was “virginity”. You challenged me twice to come to this thread and talk about virginity. You have yet to address any of my responses concerning virginity, instead you keep desperately trying to change the subject."

                http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum1/HTML/001433.html

                Other previous threads which address virginity.

                http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Archive...-7-000099.html

                http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Archive...-000054-2.html

                http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum7/HTML/000119.html

                Just prior to banning you entirely from his forum, Eliyah said this about you.

                "One thing that is beginning to be obvious to me is that I am probably wasting my time discussing these things with you and answering your questions because your mind is probably already made up. You ignore what you cannot refute and go on to find something else. This cannot continue forever."

                http://www.eliyah.com/forum2/Forum7/HTML/000137.html
                Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
                Zaqunra'ahyahuw

                Comment


                • #9
                  Old Shep,

                  Let me bring here one of the posts that I pinned at the Eliyah forum. None of you have any answers for my questions. Christianity assumes that any assertive statement made by any preacher settles any argument. "Amen", brother?

                  =============================================
                  Any Christian takes it for granted that “The LORD” is the savior in the Old Testament, but “Jesus” is the one in the NT. It squares with Paul’s slogan, “Jesus is Lord!” and nobody questions anything.

                  Romans 10:9 (NIV) That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
                  10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
                  11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
                  12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
                  13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."


                  Christians reject Yahweh's salvation for that of "Jesus." In fact, most of them don't even know who Yahweh is and Paul came up with a whole new set of requirements for salvation. Where does it say in the Tanakh that we must believe that “Jesus is Lord” and that "God" raised him from the dead to be saved? I put my trust in Yahweh and sure hope that I will never be put to shame.

                  Joel 2:27 * Then you will know that I am in Israel, that I am Yahweh your Elohim, and that there is no other; never again will my people be shamed.

                  Psalms 31:1-3 * In you, O Yahweh, I have taken refuge; let me never be put to shame; deliver me in your righteousness.
                  2 Turn your ear to me, come quickly to my rescue; be my rock of refuge, a strong fortress to save me.
                  3 Since you are my rock and my fortress, for the sake of your name lead and guide me.


                  Yahweh, not “Jesus” or Yahushua is my Rock. I will not be put to shame. Anyway, you failed to pinpoint at least one single verse in the Tanakh that tells me that my salvation is dependent on my believing in the Messiah. I know what the Christians believe about "Jesus Christ" and on what conjectures they base that belief. They are the same ones that you presented in your study. I still believe that in your study you confuse Jacob (i.e. Israel) with the Messiah in several of your quotes. Yahweh doesn’t speak in riddles on veryu important issues. You failed to pinpoint at least one single verse that will make me stop and consider whether I should believe in Yahushua or "Jesus" as my savior and thereby rejecting Yahweh's exclusive Savior’s attribute.

                  You probably know that Yahweh saves, how come he later on delegated that attribute to someone else who never registered his name in history except in the Greek language? My question to you is still unanswered. Isaiah 50 talks about Jacob. That is what I get reading it in the full context from the previous to the next chapter. I only see Jacob.

                  I know that you find difficult to believe that the Jews and not the Christians will eventually come up with the true way back to Yahweh, but that is what the Tanakh CLEARLY says in more than one way.

                  Zechariah 8:23 * This is what Yahweh Almighty says: "In those days ten men from all languages and nations will take firm hold of one Jew by the hem of his robe and say, `Let us go with you, because we have heard that Elohim is with you.'"

                  Isaiah 55:5-7 * Surely you will summon nations you know not, and nations that do not know you will hasten to you, because of Yahweh your Elohim, the Holy One of Israel, for he has endowed you with splendor."
                  6 Seek Yahweh while he may be found; call on him while he is near.
                  7 Let the wicked forsake his way and the evil man his thoughts. Let him turn to Yahweh, and he will have mercy on him, and to our Elohim, for he will freely pardon.
                  (i.e. Without any human sacrifice.)

                  My question to you is the same, Where in the Tanakh does it say that my salvation is dependent on my "believing" in HaMaschiach, whoever he may be. To be more specific, if HaMaschiach (let's skip names) is the suffering and rejected servant that you describe in Isaiah 53, where does it say in the Tanakh that my salvation depends on believing or having faith in him? This ought to be an easy answer for you, but at this moment my mind keeps drawing a blank.

                  2 Samuel 22:2 * He said: "Yahweh is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer…;

                  Isaiah 45:21 * Declare what is to be, present it-- let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past? Was it not I, Yahweh? And there is no Elohim apart from me, a righteous El and a Savior; there is none but me.

                  Isaiah 43:11 * I, even I, am Yahweh, and apart from me there is no savior. (You can kiss “Jesus” or Yahushua good bye)

                  Isaiah 49:26b *… Then all mankind will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob." (BTW, this didn’t happen yet – Israel is not saved and hardly anybody in the world knows about Yahweh.)

                  Hosea 13:4 * "But I am Yahweh your Elohim, [who brought you] out of Egypt. You shall acknowledge no El but me, no Savior except me. (You can kiss “Jesus” or Yahushua good bye, again, and again!)


                  Now please tell me where in the Tanakh does it say that for my personal salvation (i.e. resurrection and residence in Olam HaBa here on good old Earth) I must believe in another Savior. In fact, we don’t even know the name – it may be Immanuel, Jesus, Yeshua, Y’shua, Yahushua, Yahshua, Yahoshua, Christ, or who knows? I have the impression that you are applying another function to HaMaschiach, just like the Christians do. The Tanakh clearly states that there is no salvation except only in Yahweh. I think that Yahushua was a nice Jewish fellow who thought that Yahweh was his father in a very special way and that he was going to be the real Messiah the deliverer of Israel, but he end up his days without delivering. He even cried from the stake, “why hath thou forsaken me?” Later on Yahushua was picked by Paul and made into the central figure of his new religion. Remember that the real Messiah will succeed and he will deliver all the goods! I am waiting for the winner. He will be the begotten Son of Yahweh.

                  Isaiah 42:4a * he will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth.

                  Isaiah 62:11-12 * Yahweh has made proclamation to the ends of the earth: "Say to the Daughter of Zion, `See, your Savior comes! See, his reward is with him, and his recompense accompanies him.'"


                  I put all my hope of salvation in Yahweh. He is full of mercy. If HaMaschiach already came without delivering the goods and he needs to come back again, fine! But I sure want to know where does it say in the Tanakh that my salvation is dependent of believing in a suffering Messiah who was crucified and pierced by the Heathen and then resurrected.

                  Psalms 25:14 * Yahweh confides in those who fear him; he makes his covenant known to them.
                  15 My eyes are ever on Yahweh, for only he will release my feet from the snare.
                  16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted.
                  17 The troubles of my heart have multiplied; free me from my anguish.
                  18 Look upon my affliction and my distress and take away all my sins.
                  19 See how my enemies have increased and how fiercely they hate me!
                  20 Guard my life and rescue me; let me not be put to shame, for I take refuge in you.


                  What’s wrong in trusting Yahweh for salvation? Is he handicapped? You are taking my question very lightly. I don’t believe that it is a waste of your time. You are probably short of an obvious and to the point answer and it takes time for you to answer. So I won’t mention the “servant” attribute of HaMaschiach, again. I won’t make you feel that I’m abusing of you precious time. If I gave you the impression of having ignored any of your answers, I’ll get there in time. This new format makes it hard to follow up with a rebuttal like in most debates, maybe you should set up this forum differently. I’m sure that we both must work for a living, too. So I can understand your frustration in failing to make me see some of your points in a short form. Somebody said that you must ALWAYS be ready to give an answer of the reason of your faith. In fact, you should do it joyfully. The way I’m looking forward to your answers. BTW, you probably noticed that my questions are based on positive and clearly understood passages of Scripture that leave no room for interpretation other that what it says. I know it is hard to differentiate which servant is HaMaschiach and which one is Jacob, so I don’t want to discourage you. You are doing a great job!
                  "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This guy Lippard sounds a lot like Lou.
                    "Lippard (Lou?) leads his readers to believe that the early Christians invented most of the Old Testament predictions they claim were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. That is, the alleged predictions were not previously regarded as Messianic prophecies, but were associated with Jesus after the fact. This is reflected in his statement: "the alleged Old Testament prophecy is not a messianic prophecy or not a prophecy at all.". . .

                    The truth is that there was a strong Messianic tradition long before the time of Christ, a tradition that was well known among the Jews of Jesus' day. It was this tradition that the early Christians knew and applied to Jesus This tradition is preserved in the pre-Christian translations of the Old Testament made by the Jews, such as the Septuagint (LXX), and the Aramaic Targums. . .
                    The post-Christians translations made by the Jews reflect the effects of their debates with the Christians and their resultant anti-Christian bias.
                    The ancient Jewish Messianic traditions are also still present in the Talmudic literature, although somewhat tainted by the post-Christian debates. These ancient Jewish sources indicate that the passages in the Old Testament understood by the early Christians as Messianic were also understood by the ancient Jews as Messianic. Alfred Edersheim, a Christian Jew and scholar of the nineteenth century, one much more acquainted with the complexities of Messianic prophecy than Thomas Paine, compiled a list of 456 such references to the Messiah in ancient Jewish literature: 75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Writings, supported by more than 558 separate quotations from the rabbinic literature.[1] So, although Lippard and Sigal (Lou) may not regard the passages as Messianic prophecies, they were regarded as such by both ancient Jews and Christians. Lippard and Sigal (and phony wannabe Jews , like Lou)have essentially disregarded these ancient Jewish Messianic traditions, and have invented a modern definition of what constitutes a Messianic prophecy--one that suits their own apologetic agenda.
                    * * *
                    So John referred to Jesus as "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Lippard (Lou) supposes that Jesus failed to meet the requirements for a sacrifice because He was scourged and mutilated.
                    * * *
                    But Jesus was physically and spiritually spotless when the sacrifice began. The scourging and mutilation were part of the whole execution process by which he became the sacrifice. The Levitical sacrifices were no longer without blemish once the priest's knife cut its throat, flayed its skin, and dismembered its body. So Jesus was no longer spotless once the sacrificial process began. Lippard (Lou) is grasping at straws to bring up such pointless objections.

                    A Message to Mr. Lippard and other critics of Messianic prophecy

                    You think that your are free and capable of independent thinking, but you have enslaved your mind by a presupposition of unbelief--denying the possibility of an inspired Scripture and of a holy God who holds you responsible for your sin and unbelief. You think you are reasoning soundly, but the above article is evidence that you are merely rationalizing your unbelief. Sound reason follows the laws of logic, does not twist or misrepresent evidence, tells the whole truth, and is honest about the results."

                    http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...-response.html

                    http://www.webcom.com/~ctt/fabprof0.html

                    Lou, here is a very brief quote from The Life and Times Of Jesus Christ the Messiah, a two volume work, written in 1874 by Alfred Edersheim, a former orthodox, i.e. real Jew, who converted to Messianic Judaism.
                    "2. This organic unity of Israel and the Messiah explains how events, institutions, and predictions, which initially were purely Israelitish, could with truth be regarded as finding their full accomplishment in the Messiah. From this point of view the whole Old Testament becomes the perspective in which the figure of the Messiah stands out. And perhaps the most valuable element in Rabbinic excommentation on Messianic times is that in which, as so frequently, it is explained, that all the miracles and deliverances of Israel's past would be re-enacted, only in a much wider manner, in the days of the Messiah. Thus the whole past was symbolic, and typical of the future - the Old Testament the glass, through which the universal blessings of the latter days were seen. It is in this sense that we would understand the two sayings of the Talmud: 'All the prophets prophesied only of the days of the Messiah,'7 and 'The world was created only for the Messiah.'8

                    In accordance with all this, the ancient Synagogue found references to the Messiah in many more passages of the Old Testament than those verbal predictions, to which we generally appeal; and the latter formed (as in the New Testament) a proportionately small, and secondary, element in the conception of the Messianic era. This is fully borne out by a detailed analysis of those passages in the Old Testament to which the ancient Synagogue referred as Messianic.9 Their number amounts to upwards of 456 (75 from the Pentateuch, 243 from the Prophets, and 138 from the Hagiographa), and their Messianic application is supported by more than 558 references to the most ancient Rabbinic writings.10. . .

                    3. But still, as the Rabbinic ideas were at least based on the Old Testament, we need not wonder that they also embodied the chief features of the Messianic history. Accordingly, a careful perusal of their Scripture quotations11 shows, that the main postulates of the New Testament concerning the Messiah are fully supported by Rabbinic statements. Thus, such doctrines as the pre-mundane existence of the Messiah; His elevation above Moses, and even above the Angels; His representative character; His cruel sufferings and derision; His violent death, and that for His people; His work on behalf of the living and of the dead; His redemption, and restoration of Israel; the opposition of the Gentiles; their partial judgment and conversion; the prevalence of His Law; the universal blessings of the latter days; and His Kingdom - can be clearly deduced from unquestioned passages in ancient Rabbinic writings.. . .There is, indeed, in Rabbinic writings frequent reference to the sufferings, and even the death of the Messiah, and these are brought into connection with our sins - as how could it be otherwise in view of Isaiah liii. and other passages - and in one most remarkable comment12 the Messiah is represented as willingly taking upon Himself all these sufferings, on condition that all Israel - the living, the dead, and those yet unborn - should be saved, and that, in consequence of His work, God and Israel should be reconciled, and Satan cast into hell."
                    Footnotes.
                    9 See Appendix IX., where a detailed list is given of all the Old Testament passages which the ancient Synagogue applied Messianically, together with the references to the Rabbinic works where they are quoted.
                    10 Large as this number is, I do not present the list as complete. Thus, out of the thirty-seven Parashahs constituting the Midrash on Leviticus, no fewer than twenty-five close with an outlook on Messianic times. The same may be said of the close of many of the Parashahs in the Midrashim known as Pesiqta and Tanchuma (Zunz, u.s. pp. 181, 234). Besides, the oldest portions of the Jewish liturgy are full of Messianic aspirations.
                    11 For these, see Appendix IX. (Link Below)
                    12 Yalkut on Is. ix. 1.

                    http://www.ccel.org/e/edersheim/lifetimes/htm/v.htm

                    http://www.ccel.org/e/edersheim/life.../II.v.htm#II.v
                    App. IX. "It is a tradition from our Rabbis that, in the hour when King Messiah comes, He stands on the roof of the Temple, and proclaims to them, that the hour of their deliverance has come, and that if they believed they would rejoice in the light that had risen upon them, as it is written (Is. lx. 1), 'Arise, shine, for thy light is come.'

                    In that hour the Holy One, blessed be His Name, says: Ephraim the Messiah, My righteous one, Thou hast already taken this upon Thee before the six days of the world, now Thy anguish shall be like My anguish; for from the time that Nebuchadnezzar, the wicked one, has come up and destroyed My house, and burned My Sanctuary, and I have sent into captivity My children among the children of the Gentiles, by My life, and by the life of Thy head, I have not sat down on My throne. And if Thou wilt not believe Me, see the dew which is on My head, as it is said (Cant. v. 2)"


                    http://www.ccel.org/e/edersheim/life...I.ix.htm#VI.ix
                    Last edited by OldShepherd; 10-07-2001, 07:51 PM.
                    Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
                    Zaqunra'ahyahuw

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Lou,

                      Barring some unforeseen circumstance, that I cannot imagine at this time, consider this my final response to you and your mindless infantile attacks on Christianity, Jesus, and the New Testament. I have consistently responded with well supported answers. As I have constantly pointed out to you, Simpleman also pointed it out to you on this forum and Eliyah, TSA, The Physicist, Nacharyahu, and others have pointed it out on other forums. You deliberately misquote and quote scripture and other references out-of-context, and when your diatribes are proven false, you ignore the response and go off on to another equally asinine attack. For example, in this one thread alone you have ignored my responses and changed the subject three times.

                      Nullus Frigidus Auxilium Gratia
                      Zaqunra'ahyahuw

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        What about the SPIT...???

                        Old Shep,
                        But Jesus was physically and spiritually spotless when the sacrifice began. The scourging and mutilation were part of the whole execution process by which he became the sacrifice. The Levitical sacrifices were no longer without blemish once the priest's knife cut its throat, flayed its skin, and dismembered its body. So Jesus was no longer spotless once the sacrificial process began. Lippard (Lou) is grasping at straws to bring up such pointless objections.
                        What about the Roman spit, Old Shep? was it the marinating of the "lamb of God"?

                        WHAT ABOUT THE ROMAN SPIT...???

                        You have a way of ignoring the punch line in my messages...
                        "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          W'khi yarikh hazab batahor w'khibes bugdhaiw wurahatz baayim wutamea' ad-ha'arev.

                          Yarikh badad lo-tamea'!
                          Lo'Qor 'Azar Yadah

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X