Micah 5:1

[CG Didymus]

You're babbling. You claimed …

​

Prove them!

Yeah,pretty stupid claim. It was a parody of a Christian. I can't prove them, and I doubt they really happened. The whole birth narrative could easily have been fabricated IMO.z

 

[Tumah]

As we can see, these ideas have been used and reused; defined and redefined (107 times, concerning Ben Adam). How do the sons of God in Genesis 6:2 differ from those of Job 1:6? How did Ezekiel's description of himself, as the Son of Man, differ from the other prophets?

In the 107 times that "son of man" is "used and reused," they all mean the same exact thing a human.

Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son.

It's not logical to assume that Matthew sought to replace Hosea's idea. Instead, Matthew uses (calls attention to) Hosea's idea, simply stating the Jesus had fled to Egypt and returned to Israel, AS WELL. Abraham and Jacob would've also satisfied Matthew's understanding.

I've seen that not every Jew believes the literal accuracy of the Exodus. Some of you believe it never happened as described, whereas others of you believe in varying detail. Who would these two opposing views each identify as the "son" who was called out of Egypt?

It is quite logical to assume that Matthew would seek to replace Hosea's ideas as he was seeking to replace the entire religion. Some might call it writing with an agenda

You will have to ask those Jews.

Isaiah 53:3 He was despised, and forsaken of men, a man of pains, and acquainted with disease, and as one from whom men hide their face: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

If I take this quote and reuse it to describe something I am personally experiencing-- How are you able to say God isn't consistent in fulfilling His own words?



Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded because of our transgressions, he was crushed because of our iniquities: the chastisement of our welfare was upon him, and with his stripes we were healed.

.. And who's to say this specific quote isn't an accurate description of what happened with Martin Luther King, or Gandhi, or any other revolutionary martyr?

It can describe any number of people. However, I wouldn't say that the verse is fulfilled in all those people, I would say they had aspects of their lives that were identical to the subject of Isaiah.

 

[Sleeppy]

In the 107 times that "son of man" is "used and reused," they all mean the same exact thing a human.

I would say they had aspects of their lives that were identical to the subject of Isaiah.

So we agree.

 

[Tumah]

So we agree.

Judging by the part of my response that you snipped, I wonder.

 

[Sleeppy]

Judging by the part of my response that you snipped, I wonder.

Let's make this simple then; if it weren't for Matthew's quotation of Hosea, do you suppose the majority of the world would have ever read Hosea's book?

 

[CG Didymus]

Let's make this simple then; if it weren't for Matthew's quotation of Hosea, do you suppose the majority of the world would have ever read Hosea's book?

The Christian world reads it and understands it doesn't it? It is part of "their" word of God isn't it? Or, do most Christians ignore those prophets? After all, they were "minor".

 

[Tumah]

Let's make this simple then; if it weren't for Matthew's quotation of Hosea, do you suppose the majority of the world would have ever read Hosea's book?

I would hope not.

Are you trying to suggest that Matthew provided the world a service by misappropriating a verse from Matthew for his own agenda but which incidentally caused others to actually read Micah for themselves?

 

[Sleeppy]

I would hope not.

Are you trying to suggest that Matthew provided the world a service by misappropriating a verse from Matthew for his own agenda but which incidentally caused others to actually read Micah for themselves?

You have this idea that Matthew is attempting to replace Hosea. But instead, Matthew calls more attention to Hosea than he would've ever received otherwise.

And the majority of those reading both texts never see any replacement theology. There's no real proof of your assertion, whatsoever.

 

[Tumah]

You have this idea that Matthew is attempting to replace Hosea. But instead, Matthew calls more attention to Hosea than he would've ever received otherwise.

Is calling attention to Hosea a thing?

And the majority of those reading both texts never see any replacement theology. There's no real proof of your assertion, whatsoever.

I have difficulty believing that most Christians besides yourself do not translate "in fulfillment of" Of Matthew 2:15 as meaning that the verse in Hosea 11:1 was meant as a prophecy for Jesus. That is what the word "fulfillment" means. To achieve what was predicted. If Jesus fulfilled what was written in Hosea, than Jesus achieved what Hosea predicted.

Perhaps, the best that can be said is that they may take the dual prophecy route.

 

[Sleeppy]

Is calling attention to Hosea a thing?



I have difficulty believing that most Christians besides yourself do not translate "in fulfillment of" Of Matthew 2:15 as meaning that the verse in Hosea 11:1 was meant as a prophecy for Jesus. That is what the word "fulfillment" means. To achieve what was predicted. If Jesus fulfilled what was written in Hosea, than Jesus achieved what Hosea predicted.

Perhaps, the best that can be said is that they may take the dual prophecy route.

God's word is continual. Don't you see that? If you believed in God a little more, you'd understand and use Christians to your advantage.


And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he lifted up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and swore by Him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and a half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

What does this mean?

 

[metis]

Then you must be a firm believer in the New Age Movement.

 

[Sleeppy]

Then you must be a firm believer in the New Age Movement.

What determines the New Age Movement?

 

[metis]

My point is that if one believes "God's word is continual", which is what you had posted, then the most modern religion or religious movement must be the more correct one. Therefore, according to that logic, Islam must be more correct than either Judaism or Christianity, and the New Age Movement must be more correct than either of them.

To me, that's not so logical.

 

[Sleeppy]

My point is that if one believes "God's word is continual", which is what you had posted, then the most modern religion or religious movement must be the more correct one. Therefore, according to that logic, Islam must be more correct than either Judaism or Christianity, and the New Age Movement must be more correct than either of them.

To me, that's not so logical.

Being modern doesn't mean anything by itself. Division and slavery are modern. Ignorance is modern. These are things that have been since the beginning, with Adam. However, the Spirit of God is striving against these things, being one. God's Spirit reveals wisdom in every son of Adam. Even those born outside of Eden walk and live with God; and after they take Adam's wisdom of death, are resurrected with repentance.

 

[metis]

Being modern doesn't mean anything by itself. Division and slavery are modern. Ignorance is modern. These are things that have been since the beginning, with Adam. However, the Spirit of God is striving against these things, being one. God's Spirit reveals wisdom in every son of Adam. Even those born outside of Eden walk and live with God; and after they take Adam's wisdom of death, are resurrected with repentance.

Then you take back what you said. Thanks.

 

[Sleeppy]

Then you take back what you said. Thanks.

No. God's word is continual; this is the entire reason your forefathers have written to you.


.. But you must recognize foremost the living Father, in Heaven, who speaks continually to the sons of man.

 

[Tumah]

God's word is continual. Don't you see that? If you believed in God a little more, you'd understand and use Christians to your advantage.

I think you mean, G-d's word is malleable. Because that's all you've been doing here.
G-d's word is eternal because it doesn't change. G-d's word put the sun in the sky and the sun is still there 5,774 years later. Hasn't taken a day off yet.

But I do use Christians to my advantage... for entertainment.

And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he lifted up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and swore by Him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and a half; and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

What does this mean?

This means that Daniel saw an angel, (probably Gabriel whom he calls "the man" in 9:21, which is the same word used here. Although since Michael is mentioned in this one, I guess it could be him) clothed in linen standing above a river (the Tigris according to Jewish scholars). The angel raises up both his arms towards heaven and swears in the name of G-d, that there would be three and a half "time[-period]s" and then an end to the shattering of the strength of the holy nation. Then all the sufferings that were prophesied in verse 1 will end, and the "hidden ending" will come.

Is there anything else it could mean?

 

[metis]

No. God's word is continual; this is the entire reason your forefathers have written to you.


.. But you must recognize foremost the living Father, in Heaven, who speaks continually to the sons of man.

The above is belief, which is fine and dandy as far as it goes, but that doesn't mean it's factual. My "perception" of God is quite different from yours, largely cloaked in "I don't know" terms. As a scientist, I really have no choice but to go in this direction since objective evidence is pretty much nonexistent.

However, this does not mean you are wrong, but neither can I establish that you're right.

 

[Sleeppy]

I think you mean, G-d's word is malleable. Because that's all you've been doing here.
G-d's word is eternal because it doesn't change. G-d's word put the sun in the sky and the sun is still there 5,774 years later. Hasn't taken a day off yet.

God's word is NOT malleable. But do you understand that the living Sun is also dying? The energy it inherited from the Creator will not sustain it indefinitely. The Sun's energy is being hurled down to the Earth, continually. This is God's will-- and yet God's will had no beginning, because He is one.

But I do use Christians to my advantage... for entertainment.

Be careful; you may find that your children are becoming Beliebers. What a great apostasy that would be.

This means that Daniel saw an angel, (probably Gabriel whom he calls "the man" in 9:21, which is the same word used here. Although since Michael is mentioned in this one, I guess it could be him) clothed in linen standing above a river (the Tigris according to Jewish scholars). The angel raises up both his arms towards heaven and swears in the name of G-d, that there would be three and a half "time[-period]s" and then an end to the shattering of the strength of the holy nation. Then all the sufferings that were prophesied in verse 1 will end, and the "hidden ending" will come.

Is there anything else it could mean?

+Who are the "other two", on each side of the river? Is that significant in any way?
+What are the "wonders"
+What are "three and a half times"?
+What is the strength of the/a holy nation?
+What is the significance of the "hidden ending", in relation to the aforementioned suffering, or wonders?
+Is there any indication why Daniel could not understand what was said?

And he said: 'Go thy way, Daniel; for the words are shut up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall purify themselves, and make themselves white, and be refined; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand; but they that are wise shall understand.'

+Is the "man" telling David that he is not currently pure enough, or wise enough to understand?
+Is "Go your way, Daniel" valuable information for Daniel?


'And from the time that the continual burnt-offering shall be taken away, and the detestable thing that causes appalment set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.'

+When was the continual burnt-offering taken away?
+What is the detestable thing?
+Are these 1290 days, years?

'Happy is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be; and thou shalt rest, and shalt stand up to thy lot, at the end of the days.'

+Is there anyone waiting?

 

[Sleeppy]

My "perception" of God is quite different from yours, largely cloaked in "I don't know" terms. As a scientist, I really have no choice but to go in this direction since objective evidence is pretty much nonexistent.

As a scientist, you are founded on the perceptions of many scientists preceding you. Undoubtedly, you've read several books and adopted much of their information and bias.

However, these scientists were observing and teaching continual/relatable phenomenon to you. You probably believe in gravity. God's word established gravity in a way that every human could relate to, and identify. Those before you have tried to identify God's word, and relate it to others in valuable ways. It is the same today, and tomorrow.