Isaiah says God will kill Jesus?

[YoursTrue]

Right. Like me. I know that Genesis 1 is a creation myth. I have no need to force it to be history or science.

OK. take care. No need to force it, as you claim. God will prove Himself. I am thankful and glad about that.

 

[YoursTrue]

Right. Like me. I know that Genesis 1 is a creation myth. I have no need to force it to be history or science.

But tell me about the messiah, why you imagine he will come why don't you? Unfortunately, and I say this with kindness, you have proved to me many things. So tell me why you believe the messiah is coming. And what he will do.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is logical to appeal to authority when the experts are in agreement. Thus in the case of whether humans are animals, where we do have a consensus, it is irrational to believe otherwise.

And BTW I know plenty of Christians who would agree that humans are a type of animal, even with Genesis.

So? Many Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God.

 

[YoursTrue]

Right. Like me. I know that Genesis 1 is a creation myth. I have no need to force it to be history or science.

Not wanting necessarily to go into detail with you, but some Jews and purported Christians believe the Passover event (the Exodus from Egypt) is a myth, too. Proves nothing other than many, many people believe or celebrate for some reason that which they think are mythical accounts. Then again, take Christmas, too. MANY celebrate Christmas yet think it's also a myth...Proves nothing other than people go through rituals etc. they do not believe have support in reality to them. Thanks for bringing that to light.

 

[Ebionite]

the serpent told her she would not die

You're ignoring what the next actually says.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is logical to appeal to authority when the experts are in agreement. Thus in the case of whether humans are animals, where we do have a consensus, it is irrational to believe otherwise.

And BTW I know plenty of Christians who would agree that humans are a type of animal, even with Genesis.

I am sure you know those who call themselves Christian. Most of us do. But do you think there is the dividing line that defines Christians?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I am sure you know those who call themselves Christian. Most of us do. But do you think there is the dividing line that defines Christians?

For me as a Jew, a Christian is anyone who says Jesus is the messiah who died for their sins. There are people who like Jesus but who do not agree with that statement (such as muslims, many new agers, etc) -- I don't consider them Christian.

 

[YoursTrue]

For me as a Jew, a Christian is anyone who says Jesus is the messiah who died for their sins. There are people who like Jesus but who do not agree with that statement (such as muslims, many new agers, etc) -- I don't consider them Christian.

It seems there are dividing lines among those called Christians such as Protestants and Catholics as far as following and understanding the Bible. Similarly there are certainly dividing lines of teaching and belief in other religions, too, including Islam and Judaism.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

It seems there are dividing lines among those called Christians such as Protestants and Catholics as far as following and understanding the Bible.

Of course.

Similarly there are certainly dividing lines of teaching and belief in other religions, too, including Islam and Judaism.

Quite true. Although I wouldn't say that the four movements of Judaism, or the two types of Islam, are anything close to the tens of thousands of denominations in Christianity. Protestantism is uniquely disunified.

But the point is that every word has its meaning, whether the word is Christian or Baptist or Buddhist....

 

[1213]

According to Christian interpretation, the book of Isaiah makes it clear God was pleased with the Christ wearing a crown of thorns and nailed to a cross, no?

Isaiah 53:10

But it was the LORD’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the LORD’s good plan will prosper in his hands.

That the plan is good, because the result will be good, doesn't necessary mean that crushing and grief are itself good or desired. If Jesus wearing a crown of thorns and nailed to a cross would be what God wants, it would be so even today.

 

[Muffled]

According to Christian interpretation, the book of Isaiah makes it clear God was pleased with the Christ wearing a crown of thorns and nailed to a cross, no?

Isaiah 53:10

But it was the LORD’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the LORD’s good plan will prosper in his hands.

I opened right up to that verse in my sacred book today.

So, the Father crushed him? Killed his only son? It seems to be a prophecy of the crucifixion? Well, I guess he's welcome to crush and kill me too. I hope I get some of the same rewards, just a little!

I believe God has not selected anyone else to do that. He is in Jesus going through it Himself.

 

[Muffled]

No. You are basing this on an erroneous Christian misinterpretation of Isaiah 53.

I believe you do not have a prayer of showing error.

 

[Muffled]

Certainly not the first time.

I believe it isn't the first time someone has said that but I believe the people who do will only see what they want to see.

 

[Ebionite]

No. You are basing this on an erroneous Christian misinterpretation of Isaiah 53.

Yes, blood sacrifice was repudiated by the prophets but those who follow Paul can't deal with that because they think that their salvation depends on vicarious sacrifice.

Psalm 35 has more context about the righteous servant.

 

[Ebionite]

I believe you do not have a prayer of showing error.

The error is based on the belief that blood sacrifice was part of the plan. It wasn't.

Matthew 9​
13	But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Hosea 6​
6	For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The error is based on the belief that blood sacrifice was part of the plan. It wasn't.

Of course not. Poor people routinely made sin offerings of grain.

 

[Muffled]

The error is based on the belief that blood sacrifice was part of the plan. It wasn't.

Matthew 9​
13	But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Hosea 6​
6	For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.

So what is your point? Are you saying God is limited by what He tells others to do?

 

[Muffled]

Of course not. Poor people routinely made sin offerings of grain.

I suppose that would be substitutionary atonement.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I suppose that would be substitutionary atonement.

The point was that it was very common for atonement to be made without blood.

 

[Ebionite]

So what is your point?

My point is that the Pauline doctrine of vicarious sacrifice is not supported by the prophets.

Are you saying God is limited by what He tells others to do?

"God" is ambiguous. It comes down to the question of the reliability of the prophets.

Amo 3:7 - Surely the Lord YHWH will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.