Wrong Perspective About Christians

[sculleywr]

Well, God promised no more of that after he brought flood. He promised no more curses. He promised he'll never destroy living things. He promised there will be spring everyday. (Gen 8:21-22)

Unfortunately, God broke his promise and caused destruction. God kept breaking his promises throughout the Old Testament.

Should I believe in someone who breaks his promises? No.

Incorrect. He promised he would not use water to destroy the earth. Nothing else.

 

[authentic]

The discussion about the religion never stops.

 

[Maria]

The discussion about religion should keep goin'. I find their comments/statements very interestin'. I enjoy readin' their posts.

 

[authentic]

I never tell them to stop talking about the religion. I am just saying that the discussion itself would never stop.

 

[Teresh]

Never saw that one in the Bible. Is that First or Second Opinions?

It's neither. The United Monarchy is what that period is called in retrospect.

Sorry, but not even Jewish histories show the belief until the second millenium. NO credible historian sees that as true.

And yet you can't cite any sources... When it's established you have little real knowledge of Judaism you can't just say things like they're true, you need to back them up.

Jesus isn't new. HE fulfilled 300 prophecies, a lot of which he had no control over, such as, place of birth, the amount of money for his denial, and even the date of his birth (Daniel's prophetic vision about the 70 sevens.). A prophecied event is not new.

That requires the belief in something I don't consider to be valid--Christian scripture.

We've also already established that the vast majority of the "prophecies" you claim he fulfilled weren't prophecies, are extremely vague, and/or could have been accomplished by anyone.

Then let us see, without the tanakh, you have nothing that is divinely inspired.

Only part of it is divinely inspired.

Here are what the sources say:

Usually dated between 60 and 80...Two papyrologists, Fr. Jose O'Callaghan and Carsten Peter Thiede, have proposed that lettering on a postage stamp-sized papyrus fragment found in a cave at Qumran, 7Q5, represents a fragment of Mark Mark 6:52-53; thus they assert that the present gospel was written and distributed prior to 68.

It doesn't look good.

Cite.

ANd God said that the Messiah would be of the woman's seed. Jesus fulfilled that one, being the only born to a virgin.

All men (and women) are born of women. Your interpretation is a very wide stretch. I can tell you're getting a bit desperate here as you've abandoned your original argument.

I am sorry, but it is blasphemy to say that the tanakh is not inspired. It was written by prophets.

The Law was revealed to Moses at Mt. Sinai. It was not written down until quite a bit later, though.

Nevi'im were written by the prophets.

The K'tuvim were written by oridinary people. They are not the Word of God nor are they divinely inspired.

You don't even hold the scriptural belief.

I'm not required to. I'm allowed to have my own beliefs.

I said it was being prepared. Get your words right. PRiestly garments, cornerstones, all the way down to the cups for the temple. Why get all this if you aren't going to eventually build the temple? I trust the newspapers over you.

Why make them? They want to build the Temple, yeah. That doesn't mean anyone is ever going to let them do it.

They already are. Why haven't they been arrested? They have been working for the last ten years!

And if they were arrested, what would they be charged with? The most heinous crimes of pottery, masonry and goldsmithing? They will not get to build the Temple. That doesn't mean they have done anything illegal so far.

The source I gave you for the news. It is mentioned in the same news report that reported the preparations of the temple.

The article does not mention anyone claiming to be the Messiah. Did you actually read it or are you just making more stuff up?

 

[hottiedeafboi]

Wow, sculley, you have a good pointer and facts and sense in that. What a gift that God given you. Smile and tho, they think you missing the point as I see you didn't. Smile

 

[sculleywr]

It's neither. The United Monarchy is what that period is called in retrospect.

You know, I have debated with several Jews, and you are different than all of them. All of them wanted to rebuild the temple, matter of fact, I have a hunch that you are part of the minority. Considering the fact that every Jew on Volconvo, Debatepolitics, and democracyforums is gunning against you, you are the minority of those that are outspoken.

And yet you can't cite any sources... When it's established you have little real knowledge of Judaism you can't just say things like they're true, you need to back them up.

I have my knowledge from debating with multiple Jews, doing a strong class of Old Testament Survey, including multiple readings of 1 Kings through 2 Chronicles, and from reading multiple books about Jews. To learn anymore, I would have to go to rabbi school. You are the ONLY Jew I have ever met that said flat out that the prophets were not inspired.

That requires the belief in something I don't consider to be valid--Christian scripture.

We've also already established that the vast majority of the "prophecies" you claim he fulfilled weren't prophecies, are extremely vague, and/or could have been accomplished by anyone.

Ok, tell me, how can a man born in Egypt claim to be Messiah when the prophets say in Micah 5:2:
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Only part of it is divinely inspired.

No, without the Tanakh, you cannot collaborate the Torah. Secular groups say that they could dismantle all messianic beliefs by showing that the scriptures are not inspired. The WHOLE Tanakh is, as it says in itself, "The Word of the LORD.

Joshua 3:9
And Joshua said unto the children of Israel, Come hither, and hear the words of the LORD your God.
1 Samuel 3:21
And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the LORD.
1 Kings 2:4
That the LORD may continue his word which he spake concerning me, saying, If thy children take heed to their way, to walk before me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail thee (said he) a man on the throne of Israel.
2 Kings 9:26
Surely I have seen yesterday the blood of Naboth, and the blood of his sons, saith the LORD; and I will requite thee in this plat, saith the LORD. Now therefore take and cast him into the plat of ground, according to the word of the LORD.
1 Chronicles 10:13
So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it;


And Jewish law says that people are not to claim the word of the Lord unless divinely inspired. EVERY BOOK IN THE TANAKH CLAIMS THE WORD OF THE LORD. That mean that Jeremiah is a blasphemer?

Cite.

wikipedia. And there are questions of whether or not Mark came from an even earlier source, which would place the original in the mid-30s. Again, debate.

All men (and women) are born of women. Your interpretation is a very wide stretch. I can tell you're getting a bit desperate here as you've abandoned your original argument.

But they always have the seed (genetics) of the man in them. Jesus was born of a virgin, and thus had none of Joseph's seed. And I haven't abandoned my original argument. I have streamlined it.

The Law was revealed to Moses at Mt. Sinai. It was not written down until quite a bit later, though.

Nevi'im were written by the prophets.

The K'tuvim were written by oridinary people. They are not the Word of God nor are they divinely inspired.

They were written by prophets. Jeremiah, who prophecied the final defeat of Judah. Daniel, who prophecied the conquest of the Medes and the Persians. You saying these men were normal? The gift of prophecy comes only with the spirit of the Lord.

I'm not required to. I'm allowed to have my own beliefs.

Then don't claim to represent the majority of Jews. You are part of the minority. Nobody I have met has denied the inspiration of the Tanakh. That, and you contradicted yourself by bringing in the Micah prophecy. Here is my new argument to that. Since it is not inspired, it is not a prophecy, and that means that there is no prophecy about the kingdom of God. That means that there is no need for the Messiah to establish a kingdom. See the problem? It is a double standard you are holding.

Why make them? They want to build the Temple, yeah. That doesn't mean anyone is ever going to let them do it.

7

All they need is money to buy the property they want to buy. They don't want the temple mount, they want to buy the Mount of Olives, and "redirect the Shekinah" to that site. They then want to build the temple there. And since they will have the property under their own name, the government will have no way to claim that it is illegal. Next, the antichrist comes in and uses it as a lever in the peace talks, causing HAMAS to agree with the Israelites not to attack them so long as they do not interfere with the building of the temple. This is the kind of perfect set up you wold only expect if God were involved with a prophecy.

And if they were arrested, what would they be charged with? The most heinous crimes of pottery, masonry and goldsmithing? They will not get to build the Temple. That doesn't mean they have done anything illegal so far.

If they were arrested for building the temple, would it be for the most heinous crime of building a worship center on their own property? :Rolls eyes: See the stupidity?

The article does not mention anyone claiming to be the Messiah. Did you actually read it or are you just making more stuff up?[/QUOTE]

No, it mentions the building in "Expectation of their own messiah..." How do you expect something you do not know will happen. Why weren't they trying to build it back when they were reinstated as a country.

 

[Maria]

I never tell them to stop talking about the religion. I am just saying that the discussion itself would never stop.

Yeah, I know. I am just playin' with ya. ( Just to keep me occupied )

 

[netrox]

Sorry, I misread that one. God promised he won't destroy ALL (that keyword is overlooked on my part) creatures so with that fact, God promises it won't happen again no matter how evil people will become.

 

[netrox]

Ok, tell me, how can a man born in Egypt claim to be Messiah when the prophets say in Micah 5:2:
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

That has nothing to do with Jesus and Jesus failed that prophecy. He did NOT become a ruler of Israel.

 

[hottiedeafboi]

That has nothing to do with Jesus and Jesus failed that prophecy. He did NOT become a ruler of Israel.

You missing the point. Ruler of Israel has not yet to come. At first about Jesus was born thru virgin to die because of our sins, now God gave us Grace, that preparation for the future of His returning and the ruler of Israel will be in Millenium which is not yet happen.

 

[hottiedeafboi]

Sorry, I misread that one. God promised he won't destroy ALL (that keyword is overlooked on my part) creatures so with that fact, God promises it won't happen again no matter how evil people will become.

Read again, you overlooked the other word. God didn't promise that He will not destroy the world again. Let me type capitalize word you will see what you overlooked, God said the He promised that He wil not destoryed the world again by FLOOD.

 

[Teresh]

You know, I have debated with several Jews, and you are different than all of them. All of them wanted to rebuild the temple, matter of fact, I have a hunch that you are part of the minority. Considering the fact that every Jew on Volconvo, Debatepolitics, and democracyforums is gunning against you, you are the minority of those that are outspoken.

Not in the minority of the population. Maybe in the minority of those who are outspoken, but not of the overall population.

I have my knowledge from debating with multiple Jews, doing a strong class of Old Testament Survey, including multiple readings of 1 Kings through 2 Chronicles, and from reading multiple books about Jews.

And yet, you read from a Christian perspective, not a Jewish perspective. That distinction is enough to make it a fact that you don't know what you're talking about with regards to the Jewish perspective.

To learn anymore, I would have to go to rabbi school.

That might not be a bad thing.

You are the ONLY Jew I have ever met that said flat out that the prophets were not inspired.

I didn't say the Prophets were not divinely inspired. In fact, I explicitly said that they were! You, once again, ignored what I said in favor of what you would have wanted me to say. I said the K'tuvim, the "Writings" were not divinely inspired.

Ok, tell me, how can a man born in Egypt claim to be Messiah when the prophets say in Micah 5:2:
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

A. Egypt? Who are you talking about?
B. Another possible interpretation (not the one I hold, but one that some people believe) is that the verse states that the Messiah will be a descendant of David, who was from Bethlehem.

No, without the Tanakh, you cannot collaborate the Torah.

Do you even know what the words Tanakh and Torah *mean*? Tanakh is an acronym if you didn't know.

And Jewish law says that people are not to claim the word of the Lord unless divinely inspired. EVERY BOOK IN THE TANAKH CLAIMS THE WORD OF THE LORD. That mean that Jeremiah is a blasphemer?

The K'tuvim do not claim to be the Word of God. And the Book of Jeremiah is in the Nevi'im, not the K'tuvim.

wikipedia. And there are questions of whether or not Mark came from an even earlier source, which would place the original in the mid-30s. Again, debate.

Link?

But they always have the seed (genetics) of the man in them. Jesus was born of a virgin, and thus had none of Joseph's seed. And I haven't abandoned my original argument. I have streamlined it.

Jesus was not born of a virgin, but you believe that and I've no way to convince you otherwise. Still, it's circular logic.

Then don't claim to represent the majority of Jews. You are part of the minority.

I'm speaking from consensus, not from my own beliefs. I know what the consensus is. That doesn't mean I agree with it. I am fully capable to represent an opinion that I do not myself hold.

Nobody I have met has denied the inspiration of the Tanakh.

Maybe you just haven't asked them if they think Job or Lamentations were prophetic books.

But in this case, the issue is that you keep trying to change what I'm saying because what I am saying is inconvenient for you. But if you alter what I say, maybe I won't pick up on it. And if I don't pick up on it, you may have been dishonest, but you have an argument made.

Sorry, but I'm a bit too smart for that. Changing what I say is dishonest and isn't winning you any points here.

That, and you contradicted yourself by bringing in the Micah prophecy. Here is my new argument to that. Since it is not inspired, it is not a prophecy, and that means that there is no prophecy about the kingdom of God. That means that there is no need for the Messiah to establish a kingdom. See the problem? It is a double standard you are holding.

No, you just don't understand the relatively simple concept that some books can be divinely inspired and others aren't. Micah is a prophetic book.

All they need is money to buy the property they want to buy. They don't want the temple mount, they want to buy the Mount of Olives, and "redirect the Shekinah" to that site. They then want to build the temple there. And since they will have the property under their own name, the government will have no way to claim that it is illegal. Next, the antichrist comes in and uses it as a lever in the peace talks, causing HAMAS to agree with the Israelites not to attack them so long as they do not interfere with the building of the temple. This is the kind of perfect set up you wold only expect if God were involved with a prophecy.

I'm sorry, but that has to be one of the most inane paragraphs I've ever had the displeasure of reading.

If they were arrested for building the temple, would it be for the most heinous crime of building a worship center on their own property? :Rolls eyes: See the stupidity?

There's nothing illegal about them building the temple on their own property. The issue is that the Temple would have less legitimacy if it was not on the Temple Mount, and the government is not going to budge on letting them build it there.

...Actually, they could make animal sacrifices illegal (indeed they may already be so), in which case the Temple would be ineffectual and its purposes nul.

No, it mentions the building in "Expectation of their own messiah..." How do you expect something you do not know will happen.

Christians have expected the rapture to begin at least a dozen or so times now. Hasn't happened yet. Jews are no more immune to that sort of eschatological stupidity than Christians are.

Why weren't they trying to build it back when they were reinstated as a country.

Because the Messiah hasn't come yet, which is the same reason why most Jews oppose rebuilding the temple now.

 

[sculleywr]

Not in the minority of the population. Maybe in the minority of those who are outspoken, but not of the overall population.



And yet, you read from a Christian perspective, not a Jewish perspective. That distinction is enough to make it a fact that you don't know what you're talking about with regards to the Jewish perspective.



That might not be a bad thing.



I didn't say the Prophets were not divinely inspired. In fact, I explicitly said that they were! You, once again, ignored what I said in favor of what you would have wanted me to say. I said the K'tuvim, the "Writings" were not divinely inspired.



A. Egypt? Who are you talking about?
B. Another possible interpretation (not the one I hold, but one that some people believe) is that the verse states that the Messiah will be a descendant of David, who was from Bethlehem.



Do you even know what the words Tanakh and Torah *mean*? Tanakh is an acronym if you didn't know.



The K'tuvim do not claim to be the Word of God. And the Book of Jeremiah is in the Nevi'im, not the K'tuvim.



Link?



Jesus was not born of a virgin, but you believe that and I've no way to convince you otherwise. Still, it's circular logic.



I'm speaking from consensus, not from my own beliefs. I know what the consensus is. That doesn't mean I agree with it. I am fully capable to represent an opinion that I do not myself hold.



Maybe you just haven't asked them if they think Job or Lamentations were prophetic books.

But in this case, the issue is that you keep trying to change what I'm saying because what I am saying is inconvenient for you. But if you alter what I say, maybe I won't pick up on it. And if I don't pick up on it, you may have been dishonest, but you have an argument made.

Sorry, but I'm a bit too smart for that. Changing what I say is dishonest and isn't winning you any points here.



No, you just don't understand the relatively simple concept that some books can be divinely inspired and others aren't. Micah is a prophetic book.



I'm sorry, but that has to be one of the most inane paragraphs I've ever had the displeasure of reading.



There's nothing illegal about them building the temple on their own property. The issue is that the Temple would have less legitimacy if it was not on the Temple Mount, and the government is not going to budge on letting them build it there.

...Actually, they could make animal sacrifices illegal (indeed they may already be so), in which case the Temple would be ineffectual and its purposes nul.



Christians have expected the rapture to begin at least a dozen or so times now. Hasn't happened yet. Jews are no more immune to that sort of eschatological stupidity than Christians are.



Because the Messiah hasn't come yet, which is the same reason why most Jews oppose rebuilding the temple now.

Ok, I am not going to keep debating with multi-page reports flying everywhere. Pick a topic and stick to it. Don't red herring me. Otherwise, I won't dignify the posts with a response. To the crowd: Anyone want to have an actual debate?

 

[Maria]

Ok, I am not going to keep debating with multi-page reports flying everywhere. Pick a topic and stick to it. Don't red herring me. Otherwise, I won't dignify the posts with a response. To the crowd: Anyone want to have an actual debate?

Yep, I do. Do not silent Jesus Christ for witnessin'/gospelin' others. Speak for Him.

 

[Teresh]

Ok, I am not going to keep debating with multi-page reports flying everywhere. Pick a topic and stick to it. Don't red herring me. Otherwise, I won't dignify the posts with a response. To the crowd: Anyone want to have an actual debate?

Considering you kept changing the subject when confronted with contrary evidence, I'm wondering if you're even capable of having a real debate.

 

[hottiedeafboi]

Considering you kept changing the subject when confronted with contrary evidence, I'm wondering if you're even capable of having a real debate.

There you go again. Lets have a cup of coffee or milk and cookies and shared each others beliefs instead claiming and blaming. I don't even see of his changing bec you put so much in one time and that's how thing got out of hand. He didn't call you stupid or "I know everything more than you do" or or other timidating remarks like you done not just him also at me, at others. You lok for win lose conversations, we don't. Sometimes its not good time if been in escalating moment, look, I know you said what I believe and what you believe, but the way some of us see it didn't seems so. We don't hate you as much you do us by your abusive remarks at us. We stand firm in our faith whom we believe and yes, from time to time been seeing by saying how ignorant and stupid we are. Come on, have a cup of coffee or milk with cookies. So if you don't like it, but I say we do care about you and that's the truth.

 

[sculleywr]

Considering you kept changing the subject when confronted with contrary evidence, I'm wondering if you're even capable of having a real debate.

Well, having spent two and a half years debating, I have learned that the first rule is to not blast off multiple pages of info. I have debated long enough to have learned that you stick with what you say. You have contradicted yourself several times. Saying that the tanakh is not inspired, but claiming that its books have prophecies in them (Remember saying that one about Jesus not bringing the kingdom. prophecy found in Micah, part of the Tanakh.). You do not claim to represent a group of which you are not a part of. You are not a Jew, so do not claim to represent the Jews. You refuse to acknowledge the truth when it is set clearly in front of you (when you said multiple times that there was no preparation for a temple to be built.). Simple logic doesn't have you near the board for debate. Secondly, you show all your points of argument over time. I have yet to contradict myself. THat is because I have revealed a new facet of my argument each time. It is tiring arguing on something that is off-topic anyways. This debate is not Judaism vs Christianity. It is about the public having the wrong perspective of Christianity. Now. Goodbye

 

[Teresh]

I don't even see of his changing bec you put so much in one time and that's how thing got out of hand.

He posted so many inaccuracies every time he hit reply that it'd be sinful to not pick apart every single one.

He didn't call you stupid or "I know everything more than you do" or or other timidating remarks like you done not just him also at me, at others.

I never said that I know everything nor did I say he was stupid. Like him, you're putting words in my mouth. Stop lying to yourself and to everyone else because it's unbecoming. Stop pretending that I said things that I didn't.

You lok for win lose conversations, we don't.

I look for intelligent discussion. sculleywr was unable to supply that as he neglected to cite sources and then when he did cite sources, and they were found to conflict with his story, he abruptly changed the subject, fabricated yet more lies, and put words in my mouth.

We don't hate you as much you do us by your abusive remarks at us.

I don't hate you at all. However, if you're going to discuss anything with me, you not only should but must know what you are talking about, something so far you and a number of other people do not understand. You cantnot discuss anything intelligently if you are not knowledgable about it. Several people, in this case, sculleywr, have attempted to bluff a semblance of knowledge about a subject they know little or nothing about. Confronted by someone that understands the subject better (in this case, me), their only recourse is to employ dishonest conversational manuevers in order to deflect attention from the fact that they do not know the subject they are discussing.

I, however, am not so forgiving. If you wish to discuss something with me, you MUST understand it or be willing to learn. An opinion is logically illegitimate if it has no basis in fact. I hope, in the course of long discussion spanning several days, that sculleywr was able to learn that.

We stand firm in our faith whom we believe and yes, from time to time been seeing by saying how ignorant and stupid we are. Come on, have a cup of coffee or milk with cookies. So if you don't like it, but I say we do care about you and that's the truth.

I care about you also, but I also won't let you be content in your ignorance. That is essentially the only reason I post on threads like this. I really don't care what you believe in so long as you do not think erroneously that your beliefs are held by all.

 

[hottiedeafboi]

He posted so many inaccuracies every time he hit reply that it'd be sinful to not pick apart every single one.



I never said that I know everything nor did I say he was stupid. Like him, you're putting words in my mouth. Stop lying to yourself and to everyone else because it's unbecoming. Stop pretending that I said things that I didn't.



I look for intelligent discussion. sculleywr was unable to supply that as he neglected to cite sources and then when he did cite sources, and they were found to conflict with his story, he abruptly changed the subject, fabricated yet more lies, and put words in my mouth.



I don't hate you at all. However, if you're going to discuss anything with me, you not only should but must know what you are talking about, something so far you and a number of other people do not understand. You cantnot discuss anything intelligently if you are not knowledgable about it. Several people, in this case, sculleywr, have attempted to bluff a semblance of knowledge about a subject they know little or nothing about. Confronted by someone that understands the subject better (in this case, me), their only recourse is to employ dishonest conversational manuevers in order to deflect attention from the fact that they do not know the subject they are discussing.

I, however, am not so forgiving. If you wish to discuss something with me, you MUST understand it or be willing to learn. An opinion is logically illegitimate if it has no basis in fact. I hope, in the course of long discussion spanning several days, that sculleywr was able to learn that.



I care about you also, but I also won't let you be content in your ignorance. That is essentially the only reason I post on threads like this. I really don't care what you believe in so long as you do not think erroneously that your beliefs are held by all.

That's not the way I see it and not only that, we didn't put the word in your mouth. We seeing you twisting it also, it may causing so much info all at one time. But you didn't cal us stupid or stuff like directively, but by saying what christian did as of they but as I see you are implying about us. Yes I do agree and no I don't see anything to make it twisting and stuff. Let it put it this way, like prophetic and not prophetic, what we believe and you said no its not and etc then you came up with N' something and K' something, which is hasn't say any of that particular. Then when he said about particular like genisis, psalms and etc, is prophetic, then you said you twisting it, I said N' is prophetic and not K' something. That hasn't discuss particular. That's for an example, that is not put word in your mouth. That's more expansion to discuss instead flat out thinking that's what he did. We have no anger, even of your remarks, but yes, hurt us and don't say we hurt ourselves, really you are hurting yourself by the remarks. But yes, forgive me for all those misunderstanding with all of this but the way I see it it is a misunderstanding. I thought about it when I watched little house, when almanzo ran up to hill and say this will be our home. Those are the time they have the dispute. Ok as if online, when you say this will be our home during our dispute, and I ask our home, OUR HOME, OUR HOME? What's my attitude? Angry or happy? We didn't ask for it. This is like what has happening here. You may think that how sculley or us act or say or etc. Bec all came at one time with different issue which make it all confusion plus like I was shocked you took netrox post and put it me by claiming I said you are a jews. That's what's been happening, like his final say isn't mean he change, its he's getting the point what's been happening. Yes, like I said, forgive me with all of this, doesn't want to keep it that way like that, its no use for that.