What Day was Jesus Crucified?

[look3467]

I'm sorry you had to post such a long winded response but most of this we've already gone over and sadly...you are mistaken. :thud:

Oh well, I am sorry that what I had to say was of no contribution.

As far as being mistaken, well, that's up to the interpreter.

Well wishes on the subject.

Blessings, AJ

 

[fallingblood]

You're in drama mode again.

No, I specifically checked. I turned my knob to winner mode.

 

[smokydot]

The Scriptures you requested at http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2285065-post926.html
so that you could show they are not anti-types (fulfillment of types-->pictures, symbols), are entered into the post.

This oughta' be good insight into how you handle the Scriptures. . .whether you wrestle them or not (2 Pet 3:16).

1) That would be Peter who said that Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed, an anti-type, Actually, it was Paul, in 1 Co 5:7 (type-->Ex 12:1-6)

2) the author of Hebrews who said that Jesus was our perfect High Priest, who offered the once-for-all sacrifice, and our Mediator of the (new) covenant (typied by Moses), all anti-types,
Perfect High Priest -- Heb 7:24-28, 9:11 (type-->Lev 21:10, 21-23),
once-for-all sacrifice -- Heb 7:27, 9:28, 10:12 (type-->Lev 3:1-5),
Mediator of the (New) Covenant -- Heb 8:6-13, 9:15 (in Gal 3:39, type-->Ex 20:19; Dt 5:5)

3) John who said Jesus' blood cleanses from all sin, an anti-type (of the blood of the sacrificial animal which was sprinkled on the brazen altar,
to cleanse it from defilement by the sin which was laid with hands on the animal, and then the sin-bearing animal was laid on the altar, defiling it.
cleansing blood -- 1 Jn 1:7 (type-->Lev 1:5, 3:2, 8, 13)

You place yourself above the Scriptures in the following link when you reject the types and anti-types of the NT:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2285025-post921.html

Very, very, very interesting. . .

Your assertion that the Bible is not a whole, as is shown in the following link, remains groundless.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2284573-post873.html

 

[smokydot]

Um, no. I discipline myself with sound rules for interpretation.

If you give the verses that you're refering to, I can easily show how you're misinterpreting them. I will not venture to guess.

They are presented here:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2287270-post943.html

 

[smokydot]

The issue of "types" doesn't unify Scripture. That's why I was talking with you about it.

That fig leaf is "covered" here.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2286525-post940.html

And I asked you for the Scriptures you were referring to so that I could show you why.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Merry Christmas, smokydot.

 

[smokydot]

Response to above post (946):

An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shown all around them, and they were terrified.
But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news (gospel) of great joy that will be for all the people.
Today, in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Messiah the Lord."

Suddenly, a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,
"Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace (with God) to men
on whom his favor rests."

O Holy Night, angellous.

And the Scriptures you requested at http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2285065-post926.html
so you could show they are not anti-types (fulfillment of types-->symbols, pictures) are presented below:

This oughta' be good insight into how you handle the Scriptures. . .whether you wrestle them or not (2 Pet 3:16).

Quote:
Tell it to Peter, John and the author of Hebrews for starters.

1) That would be Peter who said that Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed, an anti-type, Actually, it was Paul.
Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed -- 1 Co 5:7 (type-->Ex 12:1-6);

2) the author of Hebrews who said that Jesus was our perfect High Priest who offered the once-for-all perfect sacrifice, and our Mediator of the (new) covenant
(typified by Moses), all anti-types,
Perfect High Priest -- Heb 7:24-28, 9:11 (type-->Lev 21:10, 21-23);
Once-for-all perfect sacrifice -- Heb 7:27, 9:28, 10:12 (type-->Lev 3:1-5);
Mediator of (new) covenant -- Heb 8:6-13, 9:15 (in Gal 3:9, type-->Ex 20:19, Dt 5:5);

3) John who said Jesus' blood cleanses from all sin, an anti-type (of the blood of the sacrificial animal which was sprinkled on the brazen altar, to cleanse it
from defilement by the sin which was laid with hands on the animal, and then the sin-bearing animal was laid on the altar, defiling it.
Jesus' blood which cleanses from all sin -- 1 Jn 1:7 (type-->Lev 1:5, 3:2, 8, 13).

You place yourself above the Scriptures in the following link when you reject the types of the OT and their anti-types in the NT:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2285025-post921.html

Very interesting. . .

And your denial of the unity of the whole Bible is given the lie in the following:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2284573-post873.html

 

[Poisonshady313]

...

A Chassidic Rabbi Makes a Startling Discovery​

My name is Moshe and I am a Chassidic Jew who has, from my youth, learned the words of our Holy Prophets, and has been puzzled by their meaning. Then, on the day before Yom Kippur, I contemplated the solemnity of the day and was made aware of the amazing meaning of G-d’s words. I recognized the fulfillment of 42 Messianic prophecies of the Tenach, and they changed my life forever.

Early in the morning I went to get my rooster to fulfill the ancient custom. There in the light I looked into his eyes and saw fulfilled the words, ‘I am the rooster[1] who has seen affliction.’[2] I took him and swung him around my head as the verse says, ‘And he circled his head[3].’[4] I moved my hands as I swirled him, as it says, ‘Only against me did he turn his hand.’[5]

With this he leaped from my hand and started to run. As it says, ‘They have run away without seeing good.’[6] I cried a short pray to HaShem as it says, ‘My words I say out of the bitterness of my soul.’[7] He ran from me, fulfilling the verse, ‘To me they showed their back and not their face.’[8]

As he ran, I borrowed a cane from a man near me so as to catch him with the rounded edge, as the verse says, ‘And Moshe took the stick.’[9] I tried to catch him with the hook, but only the blows of the cane hit his back as it says, ‘Afflicted by the rod of his anger.’[10] and it also says, ‘I struck you with the blows of an enemy.’[11] He turned to me and I got him right on the cheek fulfilling the verse, ‘I have offered my cheek to the one who strikes me.’[12]

He ran from me into a dark corner and I followed after him, as the verse says, ‘He has led me and driven me into the darkness and not light.’[13] I had him there in the corner as it says; ‘All her pursuers overtook her in the small place.’[14] He stood there, silent, in fulfillment of the words of the prophet, ‘He was persecuted and afflicted, but he did not open his mouth.’[15] In that corner there was nowhere for him to hide from me as the verse says, ‘Can a person hide in a concealed place, and I should not see him?’[16] He was now trapped as the verse says, ‘He has walled me in so I cannot escape.’[17] In his eyes I could see him praying silently to HaShem, ‘My G-d my G-d why have you forsaken me?’ [18]Clearly it was fulfilled for him, ‘The mighty ones of Bashan encircle me.’[19]

I grabbed him and he started to call out to HaShem. As the verse says, ‘My G-d, I call to you by day and you do not answer and by night and there is no respite.’[20] But there was no answer as it says, ‘Though I would scream out and plead he shut out my prayer.’[21] It was clearly the end. I grabbed him and took my place in the line waiting to give my rooster to the shochet (ritual slaughterer.) He was silent, ‘Like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a ewe to her sharers he did not open his mouth.’[22]

The shochet took him by the neck as it says; ‘He grasped me by the neck.’[23] With that he screamed out, ‘Be not far from me because distress is near and there is none to help me.’[24] He also said, ‘Save my soul from the sword.’[25] The shochet slaughtered him fulfilling ‘He was removed from the living land.’[26] He let the blood fall on the floor, as it says, ‘I am poured out like water.’[27]

I took the dead chicken and gazed at it as the prophet says, ‘They have looked upon me whom they have pierced.’[28] I took it to be made kosher. We separated it into pieces snapping it’s bones as the verses say, ‘All my bones became disjointed.’[29] ‘He has broken my bones.’[30]

Then I took him home to cook. My wife removed the skin as it says, ‘He has worn away my flesh and skin.’[31] She placed him in a pot with water, as it says, ‘For the waters have reached unto my soul.’[32] She added many spices as it says, ‘And she gave …many spices.’[33] She covered up the pot so it could cook as it says; ‘He has placed me in darkness.’[34] The smell of it filled the room as it says, ‘That the spices may flow out.’[35]

After that it was served on the table and we gazed upon it as the verse says, ‘I count my bones and they gaze and look upon me.’[36] He was divided among the members of my family, as it says, ‘Therefore I will divide him among the many.’[37] We rejoiced and sang as we ate him, as it says, ‘I have become a thing of laughter for my people, they sing all day long.’[38] ‘In him our hearts were joyful.’[39] After which we were full and praised G-d as it says, ‘You shall eat and be satisfied and praise HaShem your G-d.’[40] We truly saw the goodness of G-d as it say, ‘You should taste and see that HaShem is good.’[41] There were many more messianic prophecies that I could have added that applied to my messianic rooster. Many more he will fulfill when he comes back in glory.

This article and its footnotes are found in this link:

A Chassidic Rabbi Makes a Startling Discovery


Though this article is typically used to debunk the lists of "proof texts" which Christians use to show all the prophecies Jesus fulfilled, it's equally appropriate now when you're trying to show these "types" and "anti-types".


You can pick out anything at all in this world, and someone can find a phrase, passage, or verse in the Tanach, pull it radically out of context... perhaps even mistranslate it a little bit... and apply it to that thing you picked out.


Your list is crap. You should be embarrassed to assert with any measure of confidence that it's at all meaningful.

 

[smokydot]

A Chassidic Rabbi Makes a Startling Discovery​

My name is Moshe and I am a Chassidic Jew who has, from my youth, learned the words of our Holy Prophets, and has been puzzled by their meaning. Then, on the day before Yom Kippur, I contemplated the solemnity of the day and was made aware of the amazing meaning of G-d’s words. I recognized the fulfillment of 42 Messianic prophecies of the Tenach, and they changed my life forever.
Early in the morning I went to get my rooster to fulfill the ancient custom. There in the light I looked into his eyes and saw fulfilled the words, ‘I am the rooster[1] who has seen affliction.’[2] I took him and swung him around my head as the verse says, ‘And he circled his head[3].’[4] I moved my hands as I swirled him, as it says, ‘Only against me did he turn his hand.’[5]
With this he leaped from my hand and started to run. As it says, ‘They have run away without seeing good.’[6] I cried a short pray to HaShem as it says, ‘My words I say out of the bitterness of my soul.’[7] He ran from me, fulfilling the verse, ‘To me they showed their back and not their face.’[8]
As he ran, I borrowed a cane from a man near me so as to catch him with the rounded edge, as the verse says, ‘And Moshe took the stick.’[9] I tried to catch him with the hook, but only the blows of the cane hit his back as it says, ‘Afflicted by the rod of his anger.’[10] and it also says, ‘I struck you with the blows of an enemy.’[11] He turned to me and I got him right on the cheek fulfilling the verse, ‘I have offered my cheek to the one who strikes me.’[12]
He ran from me into a dark corner and I followed after him, as the verse says, ‘He has led me and driven me into the darkness and not light.’[13] I had him there in the corner as it says; ‘All her pursuers overtook her in the small place.’[14] He stood there, silent, in fulfillment of the words of the prophet, ‘He was persecuted and afflicted, but he did not open his mouth.’[15] In that corner there was nowhere for him to hide from me as the verse says, ‘Can a person hide in a concealed place, and I should not see him?’[16] He was now trapped as the verse says, ‘He has walled me in so I cannot escape.’[17] In his eyes I could see him praying silently to HaShem, ‘My G-d my G-d why have you forsaken me?’ [18]Clearly it was fulfilled for him, ‘The mighty ones of Bashan encircle me.’[19]
I grabbed him and he started to call out to HaShem. As the verse says, ‘My G-d, I call to you by day and you do not answer and by night and there is no respite.’[20] But there was no answer as it says, ‘Though I would scream out and plead he shut out my prayer.’[21] It was clearly the end. I grabbed him and took my place in the line waiting to give my rooster to the shochet (ritual slaughterer.) He was silent, ‘Like a sheep being led to the slaughter or a ewe to her sharers he did not open his mouth.’[22]
The shochet took him by the neck as it says; ‘He grasped me by the neck.’[23] With that he screamed out, ‘Be not far from me because distress is near and there is none to help me.’[24] He also said, ‘Save my soul from the sword.’[25] The shochet slaughtered him fulfilling ‘He was removed from the living land.’[26] He let the blood fall on the floor, as it says, ‘I am poured out like water.’[27]
I took the dead chicken and gazed at it as the prophet says, ‘They have looked upon me whom they have pierced.’[28] I took it to be made kosher. We separated it into pieces snapping it’s bones as the verses say, ‘All my bones became disjointed.’[29] ‘He has broken my bones.’[30]
Then I took him home to cook. My wife removed the skin as it says, ‘He has worn away my flesh and skin.’[31] She placed him in a pot with water, as it says, ‘For the waters have reached unto my soul.’[32] She added many spices as it says, ‘And she gave …many spices.’[33] She covered up the pot so it could cook as it says; ‘He has placed me in darkness.’[34] The smell of it filled the room as it says, ‘That the spices may flow out.’[35]
After that it was served on the table and we gazed upon it as the verse says, ‘I count my bones and they gaze and look upon me.’[36] He was divided among the members of my family, as it says, ‘Therefore I will divide him among the many.’[37] We rejoiced and sang as we ate him, as it says, ‘I have become a thing of laughter for my people, they sing all day long.’[38] ‘In him our hearts were joyful.’[39] After which we were full and praised G-d as it says, ‘You shall eat and be satisfied and praise HaShem your G-d.’[40] We truly saw the goodness of G-d as it say, ‘You should taste and see that HaShem is good.’[41] There were many more messianic prophecies that I could have added that applied to my messianic rooster. Many more he will fulfill when he comes back in glory.
This article and its footnotes are found in this link:
A Chassidic Rabbi Makes a Startling Discovery
Though this article is typically used to debunk the lists of "proof texts" which Christians use to show all the prophecies Jesus fulfilled, it's equally appropriate now when you're trying to show these "types" and "anti-types".
You can pick out anything at all in this world, and someone can find a phrase, passage, or verse in the Tanach, pull it radically out of context... perhaps even mistranslate it a little bit... and apply it to that thing you picked out.
Your list is crap. You should be embarrassed to assert with any measure of confidence that it's at all meaningful.

Was the rooster a descendant of Abraham from the house of David?

The most important requirement for the Messiah was not fulfilled there,
thereby rendering all the contemplation, awareness and realization null and void.
Sorry that this hard-fought-for understanding is so futile and useless. . .which pretty much parallels the real situation on this issue.

However, when these prophecies are applied to Jesus of Nazareth, of the house of David, born in the city of David, these prophecies call for serious reckoning
which deals with the NT reports of the matter.

Get back to us when that has been done. . .and show that Jesus of Nazareth has not fulfilled the Messianic prophecies.

Til then, the real crap is denial of Jesus' fulfillment of them.

 

[smokydot]

Merry Christmas, smokydot.

An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shown all around them, and they were terrified.
But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid. I bring you good news (gospel) of great joy that will be for all the people.
Today, in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Messiah the Lord."

Suddenly, a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God and saying,
"Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace (with God) to men
on whom his favor rests."

O Holy Night, angellous.

The "types" simply aren't there. The construction of a "type" in interpreting the Scripture is artificial and reckless, because we have the advantage of hindsight added to a heritage of interpretation. When this is the case, we are facing a later reading into the text. Therefore, the type comes from our reading of the text and not the text itself.

Tell it to Peter, John and the author of the letter to the Hebrews, for starters. . .talk about reckless!!!
That is about as reckless a handling of the clear words of the NT writers as I have ever seen.

If you give the verses that you're referring to, I can easily show how you're misinterpreting them. I will not venture to guess.

This oughta' be good insight into how you handle the Scriptures. . .whether you wrestle them or not (2 Pet 3:16) in order to discredit the clear words of the NT writers.

1) That would be Peter who said that Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed, an anti-type, Actually, it was Paul.
Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed -- 1 Co 5:7 (type-->Ex 12:1-6);

2) the author of Hebrews who said that Jesus was our perfect High Priest, who offered the once-for-all perfect sacrifice, and our Mediator of the (new) covenant
(typified by Moses), all anti-types,
Perfect High Priest -- Heb 7:24-28, 9:11 (type-->Lev 21:10, 21-23);
Once-for-all perfect sacrifice -- Heb 7:27, 9:28, 10:12 (type-->Lev 3:1-5);
Mediator of (new) covenant -- Heb 8:6-13, 9:15 (in Gal 3:9, type-->Ex 20:19, Dt 5:5);

3) John who said Jesus' blood cleanses from all sin, an anti-type (of the blood of the sacrificial animal which was sprinkled on the brazen altar, to cleanse it
from defilement by the sin which was laid with hands on the animal, and then the sin-bearing animal was laid on the altar, defiling it),
Jesus' blood which cleanses from all sin -- 1 Jn 1:7 (type-->Lev 1:5, 3:2, 8, 13).

So that makes John. . .and the writer of the letter to the Hebrews. . .and Paul. . .all artificial and reckless in their understanding of Jesus' fulfillment of the types in the OT, while you, of course, are much more enlightened and knowledgeable of the OT than they ever were.

Not-with-standing that their understanding came from Jesus himself personally: "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 (Pentateuch), the Prophets** and the Psalms.'
Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. (Note that God has to open one's mind to understand them.) He told them,
'This is what is written: The Christ will suffer (Ps 22:6, Isa 53:3) and rise from the dead (Ps 16:10) on the third day, and repentence and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what (Holy Spirit) my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.' " (Lk 24:44-49, 27). . .which happened at the Feast of Weeks.

You not only exalt yourself above the Scriptures,
when you reject the clearly presented types of the OT, and their NT anti-types, in the three samples above,

you even exalt yourself above Jesus the Christ, who believed Scripture was the "word of God". . .in every detail--as shown here:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2287311-post82.html

Unbelievable. . .absolutely unbelievable.

And your further denial. . .of the unity of the whole Bible is given the lie in the following:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2284573-post873.html

** From Ezekiel:
6:12--Christ's coming in lowliness; 6:12, 13:7--his humanity; 11:12-13--rejection and betrayal for 30 pieces of silver; 13:7--struck by the sword of the Lord (crucifixion); 6:13--priesthood; 6:13, 9:9, 14:9, 16--kingship; 14:4--coming in glory; 6:12-13--building of the Lord's (spiritual) temple; 9:10, 14--his reign; 3:10, 9:9-10--establishment of enduring (spiritual) peace and prosperity.

 

[Harmonious]

Was the rooster a descendant of Abraham from the house of David?

Neither was Jesus, if you believe in the virgin birth.

The most important requirement for the Messiah was not fulfilled there,
thereby rendering all the contemplation, awareness and realization null and void.

Neither did anything that Jesus did.

There is not world peace. The majority of all the Jews in the world are not Orthodox and living in Israel. The majority of all non-Jews of this world are not believing Noachides. I can go on, but I'll spare you for now.

The rooster is as logical a focus of Messianic prophecies in Tanach as Jesus was.

Sorry that this hard-fought-for understanding is so futile and useless. . .which pretty much parallels the real situation on this issue.

Indeed.

However, when these prophecies are applied to Jesus of Nazareth, of the house of David,

Not if you believe in the virgin birth. That whole "house" business only if you can attach a paternal father to it.

Let me highlight and underline the concept, in case you missed it. The "house" business only counts if a human father to son descendant relationship has been established. You can't be adopted into a tribe.

A person can be loved, cared for, nurtured, and in every way be a part of the family, if they are adopted, under Jewish law. But the one thing that CANNOT be transferred upon adoption is tribal affiliation.

All Jesus' mother proved was that Jesus was born Jewish.

born in the city of David,

As were lots of Jews. Nothing interesting to see with this one.

these prophecies call for serious reckoning which deals with the NT reports of the matter.

No, really not at all.

Get back to us when that has been done. . .and show that Jesus of Nazareth has not fulfilled the Messianic prophecies.

He didn't bring world peace. He didn't get all the Jews living in the world to move to Israel. He didn't ensure that all the Jews of the world followed the Rabbis (he was too busy scorning them himself, you see). The non-Jews of his time were pagans.

He didn't fulfill any Messianic prophecies.

Til then, the real crap is denial of Jesus' fulfillment of them.

Rather, the real crap (as you put it) is the insistence of Jesus' fulfillment of them.

 

[smokydot]

Neither was Jesus, if you believe in the virgin birth.

Since Mary descended from King David through Nathan (Lk 3:31), Jesus was the seed of David;
and since his legal father, Joseph, descended through King Solomon (Mt 1:60), Jesus was legally descended from the royal line of David.

Neither did anything that Jesus did.

1) He fulfilled the first requirement, from the house of David (Isa 9:6-7; Jn 7:42; Mt 1:6),
2) he fulfilled the second requirement, born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Mt 2:4-6),

3) the Jewish NT writers single out and specifically state these prophecies were fulfilled:
---a) Isaiah 7:14, 8:14-15, 9:6-7, 28:16, 42:6; 53:12, 61:1-2--virgin birth; rock of offense and stone of stumbling; seed of David; stone in Zion; a light to the Gentiles; numbered among the transgressors; miracles (Mt 1:22-23; Lk 20:18 & 1 Pe 2:8; Jn 7:42; 1 Pe 2:6; Lk 1:32, 22:37, 7:20-23),
---b) Jeremiah 31:15, 31-34--massacre of infants, new covenant in Jesus (Mt 2:17-18; Heb 8:7-13),
---c) Hosea 11:1--flight into Egypt (Mt 2:14),
---d) Zecariah 9:9, 13:7--king riding on a colt; shepherd smitten and sheep scattered (Mt 21:1-5, 26:31-32),
---e) Psalm 2:1-2, 7,--the Lord's Messiah; Son of God (Ac 4:25-27; Heb 5:5)
---f) Psalm 22:6-8,18--mocked; cast lots for his clothes (Mt 27:43; Jn 19:24),
---g) Psalm 34:20--no bones broken (Jn 19:33, 36),
---h) Psalm 40:6-8--came to do God's will (Heb 10:5-9),
---i) Psalm 45:6-7, 102:25-27, 110:1--Son of Righteousness; eternal; seated at the right hand of God (Heb 1:8-9, 10-12, 13),
---j) Psalm 69:9--stung by reproaches (Jn 2:17),
---k) Psalm 110:4--priest forever (Heb 7:15-17),
---l) Psalm 118:22--capstone builders rejected (Lk 20:17; Ac 4:10-12; 1 Pe 2:7),
---m) Deut 21:23 (not a prophecy)--cursed on the tree (Gal 3:13),
---n) Gen 12:3 (a promise)--all nations blessed through Abraham (Heb 6:13-15; Gal 3:8-9).

You get a glimpse here of what they learned from Jesus after his resurrection, when "he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures," and walked them through the Law of Moses (Pentateuch), the Psalms and the Prophets, "explaining what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself." (Lk 24:4-47, 25-27)

There is not world peace. The majority of all the Jews in the world are not Orthodox and living in Israel. The majority of all non-Jews of this world are not believing Noachides. I can go on, but I'll spare you for now.

There is peace (with God) in the world for spiritual Israel, who are the spiritual descendants of believing Abraham (Gal 3:6-9,16, 22 with Ro 3:9-20, Gal 3:24, 26-29).

The rooster is as logical a focus of Messianic prophecies in Tanach as Jesus was.

So the rooster was from the house of David?

Not if you believe in the virgin birth. That whole "house" business only if you can attach a paternal father to it.
Let me highlight and underline the concept, in case you missed it. The "house" business only counts if a human father to son descendant relationship has been established. You can't be adopted into a tribe.
A person can be loved, cared for, nurtured, and in every way be a part of the family, if they are adopted, under Jewish law. But the one thing that CANNOT be transferred upon adoption is tribal affiliation.

Are you sure you aren't the one who missed the concept?

The Messiah was to come from the tribe of Judah.
Both Joseph and Mary were from the tribe of Judah.
There is no tribal transfer going on here.

It's not about tribe, it's about lineage from King David within the tribe of Judah.
Mary descended from King David through David's son, Nathan; and Joseph descended from King David through his son, King Solomon.
There is no tribal transfer involved in Jesus descending from King David of Judah, through his legal father, Joseph. . .nor through his biological mother, Mary.

All Jesus' mother proved was that Jesus was born Jewish.

You really don't know much about the OT Scriptures regarding the Jewish Messiah, do you?

What both and Mary and Joseph "prove" is that Jesus was the seed of David, legally from the royal line of David.

As were lots of Jews. Nothing interesting to see with this one.

So that's where the rooster was born. . .to fulfill the Messianic prophecy of Micah 5:2?

No, really not at all.

The Jewish writers of the NT believed the prophecies should be reckoned with seriously, and did so in the second response above,
which are only some of those they singled out and specifically stated were fulfilled by Jesus.

He didn't bring world peace. He didn't get all the Jews living in the world to move to Israel. He didn't ensure that all the Jews of the world followed the Rabbis (he was too busy scorning them himself, you see). The non-Jews of his time were pagans.

When you reckon seriously with the prophecies already presented by Poisonshady313 (in the following link), we can then move on and address your three here.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2290213-post949.html

And then in the second response above, I have presented more for serious reckoning.

He didn't fulfill any Messianic prophecies.

The Jewish writers of the NT say he did, a few of which I have presented in the second response above.

Rather, the real crap (as you put it) is the insistence of Jesus' fulfillment of them.

The "insistence of Jesus' fulfillment of them". . .is from Jesus himself (Mt 26:31-32; Lk 20:17-18, 22:22, 24:25, 44-47), as well as from the Jewish writers of the NT, above.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Sorry that this hard-fought-for understanding is so futile and useless. . .which pretty much parallels the real situation on this issue.

Even if you information were correct, you're not presenting it in a way that is useful.

Do you think that you've proven the "types" of Christ that unify the OT and NT? As far as I can tell, you haven't tried, but who knows.

Also, in your mind, is it even remotely possible that you could be wrong about anything?

 

[Harmonious]

I'm only going to respond to comments that would be relevant to those reading along. I've answered the others, and Smoky is repeating himself, and bringing nonsense that I choose not to address.

Since Mary descended from King David through Nathan (Lk 3:31), Jesus was the seed of David;

It doesn't matter WHERE Mary was from. If Mary was a convert to Judaism, that would not be more or less important than who she was descended from. Women take on the tribe of their husbands. There are exactly three issues that pertain to what tribe a woman is from, and inheritance law is NOT one of them, no matter how much you want it to be, Smoky.

And before you try to cite the daughters of Zelophchad (case in inheritance law in Numbers), the women only received the land IF THEY MARRIED WITHIN THEIR TRIBE. The tribe of the daughters was irrelevant. The tribe only passed from their father to within the tribe if their HUSBANDS were within the tribe.

Other than the three cases (I'll get into them later, if anyone wants to know, but they are completely irrelevant here), no one cares about what tribe a woman comes from. Jewish law only cares that she's Jewish.

and since his legal father, Joseph, descended through King Solomon (Mt 1:60), Jesus was legally descended from the royal line of David.

If Joseph wasn't Jesus' biological father, that means bupkis.

Tribes get inherited via biological fathers. The reign of Davidic Kingship gets inherited via biological fathers.

It is possible for Jews not to belong to a tribe, which brings them into the wonderful category of "Yisrael." They are Jews, just like other Jews.

It isn't a bad thing. It doesn't hurt anyone, though it might make life a bit complicated when we try to reinstate the Jubilee Year. But until we have to worry about that...

Men get the tribe they were born to. If that means they were born without a tribe, they stay tribeless until they die.

If you believe in the virgin birth, it doesn't matter who Joseph's lineage contained. If Joseph didn't contribute sperm, his genealogy is completely irrelevant.

1) He fulfilled the first requirement, from the house of David (Isa 9:6-7; Jn 7:42; Mt 1:6),

If you believe in the virgin birth, then it is clear that he did not do even that.

2) he fulfilled the second requirement, born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Mt 2:4-6),

Not a requirement.

3) the Jewish NT writers single out and specifically state these prophecies were fulfilled:

And Karl Marx doesn't dictate Jewish law EITHER. Neither does Spinoza.

I told you what the Messianic prophecies were. You can bring hundreds of "sources," and they mean nothing. World peace. No. All Jews in Israel. No. All Jews Torah observant (at the level of Pharisees, or Orthodox). No. All non-Jews believing in God the same way as Noachides. No. Biological father to son descendant of King David. No.

THOSE are the Messianic prophecies. Anything else that might be mentioned is puff and nonsense.

It's not about tribe, it's about lineage from King David within the tribe of Judah.

Dude - do NOT presume to explain to Jews what Jewish law is. You have NO credibility on any of this.

We KNOW what you WANT it to be. But DON'T tell Jews what we believe.

You really don't know much about the OT Scriptures regarding the Jewish Messiah, do you?

More than YOU ever will. I just described what the Messiah is supposed to do. Anything else is irrelevant. (I realize you believe otherwise, but then again... You don't really care about Jewish law, so it doesn't really matter.)

So that's where the rooster was born. . .to fulfill the Messianic prophecy of Micah 5:2?NT, above.

You are seriously not dense enough for me to insult your intelligence with a complete answer.

The idea is that TAKING SOMETHING COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT and LINKING THE IRRELEVANCE TO VERSES does not make the irrelevance more relevant.

I'm not wasting more brainpower explaining this concept.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Since Mary descended from King David through Nathan (Lk 3:31), Jesus was the seed of David;
and since his legal father, Joseph, descended through King Solomon (Mt 1:60), Jesus was legally descended from the royal line of David

So what's your next trick?

 

[smokydot]

Even if you information were correct, you're not presenting it in a way that is useful.

"If it were correct???". . .it comes straight from (the Jewish writers of) the NT.
So, pray tell, what would not be "correct" in your opinion?

And "presenting it in a way that is useful" would be exactly what???
These are specific fulfillments of Messianic prophecies which Jewish writers of the NT point out, as shown in my post to you of http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2290408-post950.html

Nor is "usefulness" my responsibility. . .it is the responsibility of the reader.

Do you think you've proven the "types"of Christ that unify the OT and NT? As far as I can tell, you haven't tried, but who knows?

Ah. . .now the familiar dance starts. . .this is its first movement. . .denial of the import of the facts presented. . .not denial of the presented facts themselves, because they are irrefutable. . .nor denial that I have interpeted them correctly, because I have given the stated interpretations of the NT writers. . .but the oblique step of the dance. . .where their import, rather than their truth or my interpretation, are denied. . .as if that somehow discredits their truth, or my interpretation. . .been there, done that. . .the facts presented in the above link speak for themselves. . .my interpretation of the facts speak for themselves. . .the letter to the Hebrews clearly explains the types of the OT fulfilled in the anti-types of the NT. . .

Are you going to show my "misinterpretation" of these types or not, as you maintain that you can easily do?

You said you weren't going to discuss the unity of the Bible with me anymore, that you would discuss only the types because they do not relate to the unity of the Bible . . .so this discussion is strictly about me "misinterpreting the types," which I have clearly shown in the above link are not misinterpretations.

Nor is it not my job to "prove" the types, because the NT writers have already "proven" them, as shown in the above link.

You're kickin' up a lota' dust to cloud the issue here. . .are you rejecting the testimony of the Jewish writers of (the Word of God written in) the NT?

Also, in your mind, is it even remotely possible that you could be wrong about anything?

Could you?

I was wrong in all the pages of ink I spilled on the Passover Meal being eaten on Nissan14. It was actually eaten on Nissan 15.
Harmonious and fallingblood can testify to my admission of error in all that.

And fulfillment of OT types in the NT anti-types is not just what I think. . .it is the testimony of the Jewish writers of (the Word of God written in) the NT.

You would rather repond to someone else's posts from me, in this case--my post to Harmonious as you do here, instead of your own post from me in the link above.

Are you going to show, as you maintain in the above link that you can easily do, how I am misinterpreting the types clearly stated by the NT writers?

I didn't think so. . .all hat and no cowboy.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

"If it were correct???". . .it comes straight from (the Jewish writers of) the NT.

Yes, IF.

Can you still not tell the difference between the text and its interpretation?

 

[smokydot]

Yes, IF.
Can you still not tell the difference between the text and its interpretation?

Can you?

Heh, heh. . .more of the dance. . .movement two. . .which avoids showing, because you can't, how I have "misinterpreted" the types in http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2290408-post950.html

which you said there that you could easily do. . .heh, heh.

This is approaching pitiful. . .

 

[smokydot]

So what's your next trick?

Heh, heh. . .movement three of the dance. . .discredit the import of the facts. . .

Are you saying this is not true. . .that Jesus was not legally descended from the royal line of David?

It has nothing to do with "tricks," it is either true, or it is not. . .which is it?

The facts really chap you, don't they?
Are you going to address the NT's presentation of types and their anti-types fulfilled in Jesus in the link below?

And are you going to show how I have "misinterpreted" those types presented in http://ww.religiousforums.com/forum/2290408-post950.html

which you said there that you could easily do?

Didn't think so. . .because you can't.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Heh, heh. . .movement three of the dance. . .discredit the import of the facts. . .

Are you saying this is not true. . .that Jesus was not legally descended from the royal line of David?

It has nothing to do with "tricks," it is either true, or it is not. . .which is it?

The facts really chap you, don't they?
Are you going to address the NT's presentation of types and their anti-types fulfilled in Jesus in the link below?

And are you going to show how I have "misinterpreted" those types presented in http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2290408-post950.html

which you said there that you could easily do?

You haven't posted the information that is required - namely, the OT verses.

And yes, I can easily show how you're misinterpreting the OT, as long as I know which verses you're referring to.

I would consider it a cheap trick -- or a matter of stupidity -- for thinking that their interpretation is the text.