“The Son is equal to his Father”

[Ajax]

What you consider "fundamentalism" is up to you and intranscendental.

I'm referring to the Sola Scriptura (the Bible as the sole infallible source of authority).

 

[Eli G]

I'm referring to the Sola Scriptura (the Bible as the sole infallible source of authority).

If it were not for the Bible, the truth about God and the right way to worship Him would never be known.

 

[Dimi95]

By the way, Isaiah 7:14 is proven beyond any doubt that has nothing to do with Jesus.

Let's keep reading

Isaiah 7:15-16
"He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."

These verses explain the sign God is giving Ahaz. A baby named Immanuel will be born, and before the kid is very old, the kings attacking Ahaz will be gone. This was fulfilled in Ahaz’s day, and the little boy named Immanuel was an ongoing sign that God delivered Ahaz and Judah.In the very next chapter of Isaiah you can see that Immanuel was living during Ahaz’s reign.

Isaiah 8:8
"And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel"

The main point of this sign in Isaiah is that a child would shortly be born, and his mom would name him Immanuel (God with us). If your city were under siege by Ephraim and Syria, you most likely wouldn’t name your kid 'God with us'—maybe 'God help us,' but not 'God with us.' The sign of a baby being given the name Immanuel indicated that in a very short time, the war would be over.

I assume what you are thinking.
Isn’t Isaiah 7:14 about Jesus' virgin birth? Are there two virgin births in the Bible? The short answer is no.
The word used for 'virgin' in Isaiah 7:14 is the Hebrew word alma.This word refers to a young woman, a maid, or a newly married woman.Though young women were usually virgins (if unmarried), this Hebrew word didn’t refer specifically to a virgin (someone who hasn’t had sex).
That word is betula, and it’s frequently used in the Old Testament (Gen. 24:16, Deut. 22:19, Est. 2:2).
So , the Isaiah 7:14 sign given to Ahaz was not about a miraculous virgin birth.It was about the name of a child soon to be born, which signified the war would be over.

So , it leads us to the next question , was Jesus born of a virgin or just a young woman?
Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek, not Hebrew. When Matthew quotes Isaiah 14:7 in Matthew 1:23, he quotes the Septuagint version of this verse.The reason it’s important for this question is that it shows us the Greek word the translators used for the Hebrew word alma.I think that i don't need to explain what parthenos means to you.
Here’s where things get interesting. When the Septuagint was translated from Hebrew into Greek, the word parthenos meant 'a young woman of marriable age,' much like the Hebrew word alma.However, by the time Matthew wrote his Gospel, the word parthenos had come to mean 'one who has never engaged in sexual intercourse.'

So, what does all this mean?
Matthew tells that 'all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet' (Matt. 1:22). This sign, given by God to Ahaz, was fulfilled in the child Immanuel, who was born to a young woman during Ahaz’s reign. But Matthew tells us there’s a further fulfillment of this sign in the virgin birth of Jesus.

Immanuel - God with us
Yeshua - To deliver

 

[Kenny]

Kenny, Which God are you referring to?

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob

What is His NAME… What is the NAME of the Son of His love?

You mean the second part of the Godhead? Many names… The Word, the Messiah, The Truth, The Light, The Life, The Redeemer Kinsman… so many more names.

Isn’t Yeshua the MAN through whom GOD will judge the world?

Here we have the unity of the Godhead again...

We have the Father:

1 Peter 1:17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work

We have the son:

2 Tim 4:1 and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

Then again… the two are one and if you have seen the Son, you have seen the Father - And the Son, doesn’t do or anything that the Father says or does.

What will ‘Jesus-your-God’ be doing while ‘Jesus-the-Man’ is seated on the great white throne judging the world?

• ‘For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.’ (1 Cor 15:27)

If Jesus created all things, Col. 1:15 - Then He didn’t create Himself.

Now.. if you can stop equating The Word (pre-Jesus) to what happened after The Word became Jesus, you would understand that Jesus is the Head over all things and gave that to the Church which is His body.

GOD has placed all things (except His throne) in the hands of Jesus Christ. But if Jesus Christ is already ‘God’… how does that work - because Jesus Christ is still subject to God, the king, who is seated on the throne of POWER (not the great white throne which is the throne of judgement).

God (YHWH) …. (On the seat of Power)
|
The Son (Jesus) …. (On the seat of Judgement)
|
Human Kings and Priests (The Elect of God)
\ \
/\/\
The Second Resurrected Ones (To be judged)

oK??

 

[Eli G]

In my country of origin the word for "miss" is used to refer to girls who are not yet married as well as those who are still virgins... In the past, common sense dictated that an unmarried young woman was still a virgin. Today this sense of the word "miss" has been lost for obvius reasons.

IMO that term was used the same way in the first century, at least in decent families ambience, like those of Jewish education.

From this point of view, the idiomatic argument of modern Jews is meaningless.

 

[Ajax]

If it were not for the Bible, the truth about God and the right way to worship Him would never be known.

Yes I agree that if it wasn't for the Bible we wouldn't know about Judaism and Christianity. But what makes you think that the Bible tells the truth about God? There are lot of holy books of other religions which claim the same thing. In fact the God of OT has completely different ideas from Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels. The "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" became "if anyone slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also". The millions of killings ordered or performed by God to sinners, became "“If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me".
And please don't tell me that it is due to the different times. God's instructions originating from an omniscient being, should have been timeless.

Nice talking to you, thank you and have a nice day. I have some work to take care of.

 

[Kenny]

There are absolutely no health problems attributed to sins.

That would only be if I closed my eyes and denied science. If you are involved in bestiality, are you saying you won’t contract diseases?

You can be a sinner as much as you wish and there will be no problem with your health, if you take the right precautions.

Again… only if I close my eyes to science. If I drink excessively, are you saying my liver won’t give out? My nephews liver did.

Unless you think that God will punish you with health/body problems if you are one.

Never said “God will punish you”. Where did you get that from?

The concept of sin and its impact on health and lifespan is a fallacy based on the individual's beliefs and religious backgrounds. Anyway a God who can resurrect himself would have no problems whatsoever with any petty problems like sins.

Please look above and tell me science is wrong.

According to the Christian tradition martyrs had much worse torture than what Jesus had. Also an expert in torturing and ..cooking steaks was the Church.

source?

As I said sins have no impact on the body. The bible says only that the wages of sin is death. That's why sinful people sacrificed animals to get the sin out of them...as they thought at the time.

Please review above

But you didn't reply to me on two items. Firstly, how is it possible that a God does not want to execute His -before the foundation of the world - plan, shakes, prays (to whom?), sweats, fears and needs angels to support him psychologically, especially when he knows that he will easily defeat Satan, free all people from sins and will be resurrected in three days.
And secondly did you find any evidence that Jesus was tormented in hell? Tip: I don't think you will find any.

Have you ever carried the sins of the world? You can’t address where you haven’t been
Secondly, I already answered that question. I can’t prove that you are wrong, and you can’t prove that I am wrong with the texts and logic I gave.

 

[Kenny]

That was an especulation of old critics of the Bible that has already been discarded.
The whole book of Isaiah has one single writer.

AMEN! but when we need a reason not to believe the word of God, any reason is a good reason.

 

[Dimi95]

If it were not for the Bible, the truth about God and the right way to worship Him would never be known.

If there were no Church Fathers , no Bible.By tradition the teachings are preserved.
The Bible is just end-product.

Sola-Scriptura makes every man his own pope.
The Apostolic tradition of the Church Fathers gave us the Scripture that we have today.

 

[Ajax]

So , it leads us to the next question , was Jesus born of a virgin or just a young woman?
Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek, not Hebrew. When Matthew quotes Isaiah 14:7 in Matthew 1:23, he quotes the Septuagint version of this verse.The reason it’s important for this question is that it shows us the Greek word the translators used for the Hebrew word alma.I think that i don't need to explain what parthenos means to you.
Here’s where things get interesting. When the Septuagint was translated from Hebrew into Greek, the word parthenos meant 'a young woman of marriable age,' much like the Hebrew word alma.

Exactly.. And the proof is here...

Genesis 34:2-3 "and when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humbled her. 3 And his soul was drawn to Dinah the daughter of Jacob; he loved the maiden and spoke tenderly to her."

Septuagint version
Γεν. 34,2καὶ εἶδεν αὐτὴν Συχὲμ ὁ υἱὸς Ἐμμὼρ ὁ Εὐαῖος, ὁ ἄρχων τῆς γῆς καὶ λαβὼν αὐτήν, ἐκοιμήθη μετ᾿ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐταπείνωσεν αὐτήν.
Γεν. 34,3 καὶ προσέσχε τῇ ψυχῇ Δείνας τῆς θυγατρὸς Ἰακὼβ καὶ ἠγάπησε τὴν παρθένον καὶ ἐλάλησε κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν τῆς παρθένου αὐτῇ.

How could Dinah be a virgin (sexually) when she was just raped?

The author of the gospel according to Matthew borrows all kind of irrelevant OT verses and presents them as prophecies for Jesus.
That's how the Immaculate Conception dogma was created.

 

[Ajax]

That would only be if I closed my eyes and denied science. If you are involved in bestiality, are you saying you won’t contract diseases?

C'mon Kenny, you know better....
It's not the actual sin of bestiality that is responsible for the diseases, but the stupidity of the people performing it.
Provided you take doctors' advised precautions, what diseases can you get from pride, lust, adultery, envy, wrath and spiritual sloth?

Again… only if I close my eyes to science. If I drink excessively, are you saying my liver won’t give out? My nephews liver did.

Same as above, if someone is stupid and drinks 5 bottles of wine daily, it's not the sin that will kill him. It's his stupidity.
By the way did Jesus get drunk from the drunken people sins?

Please look above and tell me science is wrong.

It's not that the science is wrong. Wrong is your idea that all the sins are harmful for the body, and that despite Jesus was sinless, all the sins of the people transferred to him and he suffered when ....he was dead or almost dead.

Have you ever carried the sins of the world? You can’t address where you haven’t been
Secondly, I already answered that question. I can’t prove that you are wrong, and you can’t prove that I am wrong with the texts and logic I gave.

You haven't answered the question. All you said was a) the Jesus was tormented in hell and b) that Jesus took upon him all the sins of the world resulting in deterioration of his body, for which you can present no evidence whatsoever.
In all honesty, do you believe that if Jesus is God and had made this plan before the foundation of the world, knowing full well all the consequences in detail, would he be afraid and wouldn't want to go ahead with his plan?
If you really think so, it's a huge insult to Him.

 

[Kenny]

C'mon Kenny, you know better....
It's not the actual sin of bestiality that is responsible for the diseases, but the stupidity of the people performing it.

That was a great two-step that really can be interpreted as “OK, I see your point. The stupidity of the sin that people are committing causes disease. You were right”.

Provided you take doctors' advised precautions, what diseases can you get from pride, lust, adultery, envy, wrath and spiritual sloth?

The sin of adultery of my dad produced double double digits divorces, suicides, drug addicts, abortions and dysfunctions. Not everything has to be diseases.

Same as above, if someone is stupid and drinks 5 bottles of wine daily, it's not the sin that will kill him. It's his stupidity.

That was a great two-step that really can be interpreted as “OK, I see your point. The stupidity of the sin that people are committing causes disease. You were right”.

By the way did Jesus get drunk from the drunken people sins?

fiunny

It's not that the science is wrong. Wrong is your idea that all the sins are harmful for the body, and that despite Jesus was sinless, all the sins of the people

Tell that to my nephew who died because of alcoholism. I never said “all sins produces diseases”. I think you read into that.

transferred to him and he suffered when ....he was dead or almost dead.

While on the cross where
AMPC
[For many the Servant of God became an object of horror; many were astonished at Him.] His face and His whole appearance were marred more than any man’s, and His form beyond that of the sons of men—but just as many were astonished at Him,

All of this so that mankind can be reunited with the God that loves and understands. So that even if we were filled with sin as red as scarlet, we would be white as wool, or as red as crimson we would be white as snow.

You haven't answered the question. All you said was a) the Jesus was tormented in hell and b) that Jesus took upon him all the sins of the world resulting in deterioration of his body, for which you can present no evidence whatsoever.

Then you didn’t read what I said

In all honesty, do you believe that if Jesus is God and had made this plan before the foundation of the world, knowing full well all the consequences in detail, would he be afraid and wouldn't want to go ahead with his plan?

Where does it say “He was afraid”? If you knew you had to be tortured, would you want to go to it?

If you really think so, it's a huge insult to Him.

OK, if you think so.

The bottom line is that I trust that God so loved you and me, thought we insult Him, malign Him, or whatever else mankind invents that is wrong, that if we believe on Him, we would not perish but have everlasting life for He did not come to condemn the world but rather through Him we would be saved. (All within the context of my signature, of course)

what exactly do you believe about Jesus?

 

[Dimi95]

Exactly.. And the proof is here...

Genesis 34:2-3 "and when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her, he seized her and lay with her and humbled her. 3 And his soul was drawn to Dinah the daughter of Jacob; he loved the maiden and spoke tenderly to her."

Septuagint version
Γεν. 34,2καὶ εἶδεν αὐτὴν Συχὲμ ὁ υἱὸς Ἐμμὼρ ὁ Εὐαῖος, ὁ ἄρχων τῆς γῆς καὶ λαβὼν αὐτήν, ἐκοιμήθη μετ᾿ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐταπείνωσεν αὐτήν.
Γεν. 34,3 καὶ προσέσχε τῇ ψυχῇ Δείνας τῆς θυγατρὸς Ἰακὼβ καὶ ἠγάπησε τὴν παρθένον καὶ ἐλάλησε κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν τῆς παρθένου αὐτῇ.

How could Dinah be a virgin (sexually) when she was just raped?

This is false in every possible way.

First na`arah(damsel) is the word used in this verse and it means A young, unmarried woman.

I fully agree with the fact that parthenos means a marriageable girl both in Classical Greek and in the book of Genesis. I also agree with the fact that it had the meaning of 'virgin' in the other instances of this word in the Greek Bible, mainly because it was systematically used to translate betulah. With respect to 'almah, the word meant a 'young virgin': that is the meaning given several times in their commentaries by Rashi, Ben Gershon and other Rabbis from the Middle Ages. The difference between betulah and 'almah is that the latter word adds the idea of youth.

In the early part of the Koine, παρθένος had not yet shifted to refer specifically to a virgin. It was used just like נַעֲרָה* (naʕará) and עַלְמָה (ʕalmá) and בְּתוּלָה (btulá) in Hebrew.

So no , the accusation does not stand.

The author of the gospel according to Matthew borrows all kind of irrelevant OT verses and presents them as prophecies for Jesus.
That's how the Immaculate Conception dogma was created.

Well , what you said is faith based , not evidence based. You are free to think so

The problem is the thought that leads everyone to conspiracy theory and eliminating the fact that they may have seen Jesus ressurected from the dead.

I have seen this before , i don't know why you belive this sources or you are not well informed

 

[Ajax]

That was a great two-step that really can be interpreted as “OK, I see your point. The stupidity of the sin that people are committing causes disease. You were right”.

No Kenny, for the simple reason that not all sins causes diseases. In fact no sins cause any disease if you use common sense, think about the others and follow the rules for healthy life. This discussion started because you insisted that the sins of the world cause damage to the body of Jesus, which is hilarious.

Of course, that is easy for you to say since your didn’t suffer with the sins of humanity. Your right to believe that but I wouldn’t subscribe to that since you have no idea what the sins of the world would do to a body.

Thieves do not suffer diseases because they steal. So Jesus health would not deteriorate because of the sins he took upon him. And for some sins which according to you cause "diseases", like drinking (in your example), Jesus did not drink to have his liver damaged. Why do I have to explain the self-evident?

source?

Synaxarium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

While on the cross where
AMPC
[For many the Servant of God became an object of horror; many were astonished at Him.] His face and His whole appearance were marred more than any man’s, and His form beyond that of the sons of men—but just as many were astonished at Him,

All of this so that mankind can be reunited with the God that loves and understands. So that even if we were filled with sin as red as scarlet, we would be white as wool, or as red as crimson we would be white as snow.

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is a song of hope to the people of Judah exiled in Babylon, assuring them that God has not abandoned them. Despite some debate regarding the servant’s identity, the general consensus is that the suffering servant of the Lord is figuratively “Israel” collectively (see Isaiah 41:8; 44:1-2, 21; 45:4; 49:3).
The servant in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is described as someone so physically marred and disfigured that he is beyond recognition (52:14-15).

Where does it say “He was afraid”? If you knew you had to be tortured, would you want to go to it?

Being in agony, sweating, needing heavenly sent angel to support him and not wanting to go through with his plan is a clear sign that he was afraid. When I become God, I will let you know.
And something else... the 6th Ecumenical Synod decided the obvious...that God the Father and Jesus the Son can not have different wills. So Jesus words that is not his will to go through his crucifixion (although it was supposedly His plan), is extremely contradictory.

what exactly do you believe about Jesus?

After studying the Bible for 4 years, I freaked out and have become an agnostic. I'm not an atheist, I just don't know.
Too many lies and contradictions in all the books my friend.

 

[Ajax]

This is false in every possible way.

First na`arah(damsel) is the word used in this verse and it means A young, unmarried woman.

I fully agree with the fact that parthenos means a marriageable girl both in Classical Greek and in the book of Genesis. I also agree with the fact that it had the meaning of 'virgin' in the other instances of this word in the Greek Bible, mainly because it was systematically used to translate betulah. With respect to 'almah, the word meant a 'young virgin': that is the meaning given several times in their commentaries by Rashi, Ben Gershon and other Rabbis from the Middle Ages. The difference between betulah and 'almah is that the latter word adds the idea of youth.

In the early part of the Koine, παρθένος had not yet shifted to refer specifically to a virgin. It was used just like נַעֲרָה* (naʕará) and עַלְמָה (ʕalmá) and בְּתוּלָה (btulá) in Hebrew.

So no , the accusation does not stand.

Which accusation does not stand? Can you be more specific?

 

[Dimi95]

Which accusation does not stand? Can you be more specific?

How can Dinah be a virigin(sexually) when she was just rapped...

I don't see how that stands with what is noted in History.

 

[Kenny]

No Kenny, for the simple reason that not all sins causes diseases.

I never said “all sins causes diseases” - I think you read into that. Robbery doesn’t cause sickness but it will rob your freedom

In fact no sins cause any disease if you use common sense, think about the others and follow the rules for healthy life.

I gave you two examples. You choose to ignore the examples.

This discussion started because you insisted that the sins of the world cause damage to the body of Jesus, which is hilarious.

Please quote that… happy to admit error if I did.

Thieves do not suffer diseases because they steal.

true

So Jesus health would not deteriorate because of the sins he took upon him.

I’m sorry… again, I think you read into what wasn’t there (unless I spoke in error) - Jesus’ death was because of sin - it includes sickness but not all sin causes sickness. Some sins just cause death… like overdosing.

And for some sins which according to you cause "diseases", like drinking (in your example), Jesus did not drink to have his liver damaged. Why do I have to explain the self-evident?

buit if He took the sins of all… then the results of all sin was in his body including death

Synaxarium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I’m sorry…. I looked it over and didn’t find what you were trying to say. Can you quote a portion and explain?

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is a song of hope to the people of Judah exiled in Babylon, assuring them that God has not abandoned them. Despite some debate regarding the servant’s identity, the general consensus is that the suffering servant of the Lord is figuratively “Israel” collectively (see Isaiah 41:8; 44:1-2, 21; 45:4; 49:3).
The servant in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is described as someone so physically marred and disfigured that he is beyond recognition (52:14-15).

And that servant was Jesus… “ He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

But you can choose to believe otherwise

Being in agony, sweating, needing heavenly sent angel to support him and not wanting to go through with his plan is a clear sign that he was afraid. When I become God, I will let you know.

Do that! So you can interpret what you are reading just like I can interpret what I read about Jesus’ suffering

And something else... the 6th Ecumenical Synod decided the obvious...that God the Father and Jesus the Son can not have different wills. So Jesus words that is not his will to go through his crucifixion (although it was supposedly His plan), is extremely contradictory.

Hmmm… no. (although they may have established that) - they got it from what was written and it can still be seen in scripture today.

After studying the Bible for 4 years, I freaked out and have become an agnostic. I'm not an atheist, I just don't know.

OK… we all have our journey to walk.

 

[Ajax]

I gave you two examples. You choose to ignore the examples.

I replied to both of them, but probably you didn't understand them.

Please quote that… happy to admit error if I did.

Here it is..

Of course, that is easy for you to say since your didn’t suffer with the sins of humanity. Your right to believe that but I wouldn’t subscribe to that since you have no idea what the sins of the world would do to a body.

And that servant was Jesus… “ He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

No the servant was Israel as I showed you with the additional verses of Isaiah naming the servant, plus Jesus was not so physically marred and disfigured that he was beyond recognition.

I’m sorry…. I looked it over and didn’t find what you were trying to say. Can you quote a portion and explain?

Have another one...
The Tortures and Torments of the Christian Martyrs - Martyrum Cruciatibus - a Modern Revision

 

[Ajax]

How can Dinah be a virigin(sexually) when she was just rapped...

I don't see how that stands with what is noted in History.

It was meant to show that maiden and virgin (παρθένος) did not mean at that time a (sexually) virgin. It simply meant young woman, girl.
But the author of Matthew didn't know that probably and thought he could include Isaiah's 7:14 as a prophecy for his idea about the conception of Jesus.

 

[Kenny]

I replied to both of them, but probably you didn't understand them.

LOL… if that makes you happy

Here it is..

Of course, that is easy for you to say since your didn’t suffer with the sins of humanity. Your right to believe that but I wouldn’t subscribe to that since you have no idea what the sins of the world would do to a body.

I don’t see “sickness only” in that statement. So you read into it.

No the servant was Israel as I showed you with the additional verses of Isaiah naming the servant, plus Jesus was not so physically marred and disfigured that he was beyond recognition.

However, the Apostles wouldn’t agree with you.

Have another one...
The Tortures and Torments of the Christian Martyrs - Martyrum Cruciatibus - a Modern Revision

You point to a book with no quotations. Did you have a point?

this is really starting to sound like “Any excuse is a good excuse because I don’t want to believe”.