Death of Jesus

[jmvizanko]

Again I think it would be wise to reserve such critical words until you've actually read the book, wouldn't you?

I have read vast tracts of it, but definitely not a majority. It wasn't interesting enough to continue. In fact, almost any other book on my book shelf seems like a more enlightening read.

As for Jesus, he doesn't have to have 'the correct interpretation' to have a valid interpretation and see it fulfilled in his own life giving him a reason to believe he is the Messiah. I'm somewhat disappointed that you brought up modern Jewish interpretations of the Messiah when I went to lengths already to show how anyone else's beliefs are irrelevant when we're talking about what Jesus believed. You even implicitly agreed with me.

The whole point is either Jesus was or was not the messiah. Many people believe the Bible does not indicate that he is. And many people believe a lot of different things about the Bible; its open enough to interpretation to have bred the most sectarianized religion in existence.

Concerning generic requirements, I don't think that birth year is a generic requirement. Consider that no one born since the temple was destroyed can even fulfill the requirement Daniel gives, there will be no Jewish Messiah other than the ones that have already come.

"The mashiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel and restoring Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18). He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15). " I forgot that he did all that....

I started with a very specific requirement that Jesus had no control over, and moved to a very generic requirement that Jesus had limited control over. The point here is whether or not Jesus was insane to believe He was the Messiah or the Son of God, and I think I'm doing a fair job showing that it's not insane because he actually did fulfill the prophecies. If I do say so myself.

With all do respect, I don't think you have done a fair job. It takes a second to find a website with a hundred reasons Jesus was the messiah, and a second to find one with a hundred reasons that he wasn't. And you've only thrown out personal opinions on like 3.

I think it's unwise to accuse God of being infantile for wanting credit for his work. After all, unless you live in an oppressive country, you get credit for your work. To give someone else credit would be a lie, and I think that the mind of God is more averse to lying than given to feigned humility.

Its not who deserves credit, its the wanting credit in the first place. The more enlightened people, in my opinion, and some of my favorite thinkers have, not been interested in pompous credentials or accomplishments.

As an example, the best way to give charity, in my opinion, is anonymously.

If God created all things, then He deserves the credit for creating all things. If God saves the world, He deserves the credit for saving the world

Those two statements are pretty funny back to back. If god creates the world in such a way that it needs to be saved, then why should he get ANY credit for saving it?

Why do you call this infantile? You seem to be opposed to believing in Jesus without having given it a lot of serious thought.

Considering the vast amount of time I have spent reading, debating, and thinking about religion, and quite a bit on Christianity, I am almost offended by your implication. But its really just our vastly different perception that makes your assumption not only forgivable, but completely understandable. What is so painfully obviously true to you is so painfully obviously not true to me, just as Islam is painfully obviously not true to both of us. And the fact that intelligent people can sincerely, after a ton of thought, come to vastly different conclusions about the same subject, is what is so interesting about religion in my opinion.

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
Do you think your credibility suffers when you make sweeping statements about a belief system whose book(not very long, might I add) you haven't taken the pains to read?

Next time I'll remember that we're talking about various critics interpretation of the Bible instead of actually talking about the Bible. I'm more interested in what Jesus thought of Himself than what other people thought of what Jesus thought of Himself

If theres nothing more, I'll direct my attention elsewhere.

Somewhat disappointed,
QM