Posted on 11/06/2001 10:13:10 AM PST by JMJ333
*I know this is an extremely old article [I dug it out of the back of my closet} but it is well worth the read.
Jesus was a committed Jew of his day. And to truly understand Jesus, we need a solid background in Jewish religious, social, and political history.
Jesus, a rural Jew, lived in Galilee, in the northern part of Palestine. And in Jesus day, Galilee was divided into an upper and lower region. The lower region, where Jesus lived was a rich valley that stretched from the Mediterranean to the sea of Galilee, a distance of about 25 miles.
As far as we know, in Jesus' time there were four principle Jewish sects: The Essenes, the Zealots, the Sadducees, and the Pharisees.
The Essenes, whose name may come from an Arabaic word meaning "pious," had already withdrawn from Jerusalem and Temple participation by the time of Jesus. In isolated monastic communities established in the Judean wilderness, they studied scriptures and developed a rule of life. Essenes were known for their piety--daily prayer, prayer before and after meals, strict observation of the Sabbath, daily ritual bathing, emphasis on chastity and celibacy, wearing white robes as a symbol of spiritual purity, and sharing communal meals and property. Nowhere in the Gospels, however, is Jesus presented as adhering to the Essenes way of life.
Jesus was not a zealot either. Zealots were Jews who vehemently opposed the Roman occupation of Palestine. But there is no evidence in any of Jesus' teachings that he encouraged revolt against Rome.
Jesus also was clearly set apart from the Sadducees, whose name in Hebrew means "Righteous ones." These Jews believed in a strict interpretation of the Torah and did not believe in life after death. Jesus, of course believed in bodily resurrection (Mark 12:18-27)
Contrary to common understanding, Jesus may well have been close to the Pharisees, even if he did debate them vigorously. Many of Jesus' teachings and much of his style was similar to theirs. To understand this, we need to compare the central teachings of the Pharisees to Jesus' teachings.
The Pharisees were a lay reform group within Judaism. The name Pharisee itself means "separate ones" in Hebrew, which refers to a ritual observance of purity and tithing; the word Pharisee can also be translated as "The interpreter," referring to this group's unique interpretation of Hebrew scripture.
As reformers, the Pharisees did not oppose Roman occupation; rather their focus was on reforming the temple, especially with respect to its liturgical practices and priests. And the Pharisees turned their attention toward strengthening Jewish devotion to the Torah, which, they said, had to be continually readjusted within the framework of the contemporary Jewish community. While the Pharisees insisted that the 613 commandments found in the written Torah remained in effect, the commandments had to be carefully rethought in light of new human needs.
The temple priests, though, looked upon the precepts of the Torah more literally and primarily in terms of sacrificial observances at the Temple. The Pharisees, on the other hand, taught that every ordinary human action could become sacred--an act of worship. Doing a "good deed" for another human, a "mitzvah" in Hebrew, was accorded a status that in some ways, surpassed Temple worship. This was truly a revolution in religious thinking.
In addition, a new religious figure in Judaism--the teacher--or Rabbi--emerged within the Pharisaic movement. For their part, rabbis fulfilled a twofold role in the community: They served as interpreters of the Torah and, more importantly, they helped make its teachings relevant. Their principle task was instructional, not liturgical.
From the Pharisaic reform emerged what was later called the synagogue ("assembly of people"). The synagogue became the center of this movement, which quickly spread throughout Palestine and the cities of Jewish Diaspora. Unlike the Jerusalem Temple, the synagogues were not places where priests presided and sacrifices were offered; rather they were places where the Torah was studied, rabbis offered interpretations, and prayers were said. Thus, synagogues became not merely "houses of God" but far more "houses of the people of God."
The Pharisee also emphasized table fellowship--a way of strengthening relationships within a community. In the eyes of the Pharisees, the Temple altar in Jerusalem could be replicated at every table in the household of Israel. A quiet but far reaching reform was at hand. There was no longer any basis for assigning to the priestly class a unique level of authority.
The Pharisees saw God not only as creator, giver of the Covenant, and much more, but in a special way, as the Parent of each individual. Everyone had the right to address God in a direct and personal way, not simply through the temple sacrifices offered by the priests.
The Pharisees also believed in resurrection. Those whose lives were marked by justice would rise once the Messiah had come. Then they would enjoy perpetual union with God.
There is little doubt, then, that Jesus and the Pharisees shared many central convictions. The first was their basic approach to God as a parent figure. In story after story in the Gospels, Jesus addresses God in this way. And Jesus' central prayer begins by invoking God as "Our Father" (Matt. 6: 9-13). The effect of this emphasis was fundamentally the same for Jesus as for the Pharisees (although Jesus had a unique position as God's "Only begotten Son"). More than anything, this approach led to both an enhanced appreciation of the dignity of every person and ultimately to the notion of resurrection--and perpetual union with God.
Jesus' own public stance closely paralleled the evolving role of the Pharisaic teacher. Jesus on a number of occasions in the Gospels are filled with examples of Jesus teaching in synagogues.
Jesus clearly picked up on another central feature of Pharisaism as well, that of the oral Torah, which refers to interpretations given by the Pharisees to various Torah texts. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus offers interpretations of Scripture quite similar to those of the Pharisees.
Finally, Jesus also embraced the table fellowship notion of Pharisaism. The meal narratives in the New Testament are an example of this. In the end, He selected table fellowship for a critical of his ministry, the celebration of the first Eucharist.
Then why, in the Gospels, do the Pharisees appear as the archenemies of Jesus? Here is gets complicated. For one thing, some Pharisees were praised by Jesus (for example the scribe of Mark 12:32). And we know that Jesus ate with Pharisees (Luke 7:36; 14:1).
But there was still conflict between the Pharisees and Jesus, nevertheless. And here scholarship offers three possible explanations.
The first sees Jesus and his teachings as quite similar to the Pharisees. The animosity in the Gospel results from subsequent interpretations of Jesus' action. For example, Jesus' practicing healing on the Sabbath or his disciples picking grain in the holy day were actions clearly not supported by the Pharisees.
Another possible explanation results from our enhanced understanding of the Talmud, the collected teachings of the Pharisees and their rabbinic heirs. In the Talmud are references to some seven categories of Pharisees, which clearly shows that the Pharisaical movement encompassed a wide range of viewpoints and, more important, that internal disputes, often of the heated variety, were quite common. The Gospel portraits of Jesus disputing with the "Pharisees" were examples of "hot debates" that were common in the Pharisaic circles rather than examples of Jesus condemning the Pharisees.
A third scholarly approach stresses positive connection between Jesus' central teachings and those of the Pharisees. In light of these, one becomes suspicious about the so-called texts of conflict. Surely Jesus would not denounce a movement with which he had so much in common.
Hence, either Jesus was speaking in a very limited context, or what are commonly called "the conflict stories" represent religious tensions existing in the latter part of the first century when the gospels were written. The Christian community--now formally expelled from the synagogues--was engaged in intense competition for Jewish converts. The New Testament statements about conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees may reflect that competition.
Regardless, one fact remains. Jesus' own Bible was the Hebrew Scriptures. His attitude toward the sacred writings is summed up in the assertion "Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish the Law but fulfill (Matt. 5:17).
On the whole, Jesus' teachings were wither literally biblical or filtered through the Pharisaic use of the scripture, or both.
The way the Pharisee and Jesus used the Hebrew Scriptures becomes more clear when Jesus argues his position by using so-called "proof-texts." Here, Jesus quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures to prove a point or refute a critic (See the Sermon on the Mount Matt 5, 6, & 7). In such instances, Jesus was drawing on a technique used by the Pharisees in trying to make a point.
The "Proof-Texting" that Jesus used did, at times, pit him against the Pharisees--such as when He challenged certain claims they made about the unwritten law and called them hypocrites for placing higher value on teachings of humans than of God (Matt. 23: 1-36).; such as when He used scripture to refute the Pharisaic teachings about plucking grain on the Sabbath (Matt 12: 1-8). or unwashed hands (Matt. 15:20).
At other times though, Jesus' "proof-texting" placed him on the side of the Pharisees. Once in an impressive debate with the Saduccees, He used Hebrew scripture to reinforce his belief, and that oft he Pharisees, in an afterlife. Jesus was so impressive he won the Pharisees' applause (Matt. 22: 23-33).
Possibly the best example we have of Jesus' use of Hebrew Scriptures is his teaching on love. "Teacher," one Pharisee asked, "which commandment is greatest?" And Jesus responded by quoting Deuteronamy 6:5, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment" (Matt. 22: 36-39). Them Jesus went on quoting Leviticus 19:18, "The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself." In brief, Jesus was proof-texting his answer.
Jesus' use of the Hebrew Scriptures, therefore, was unabashedly Jewish. And it was similar to that of his contemporaries, particularly the philosophy of the Pharisees.
Knowing and appreciating the Jewish origins has at least three advantages: First, it helps us revise negative understandings of the Pharisees. It also helps us to avoid anti-Semitism. Finally, it allows us to better appreciate the Jewish roots of Christianity. Ultimately, understanding Jesus as a Jew will help us to better understand both our own faith and that of the contemporary Jews.
I will admit to you right now that your post is too long to read. I do not believe that writing books back and forth to each other is valuable. I apologize because you spent a lot of time on both your posts and I am now making one of them a waste of time. I hate doing that to you, but doing otherwise would be a waste of my time. I have satisfied myself from your first post that your concerns are not mine. The brief look I took at your response to the idea that Yeshua did not exalt Himself demonstrated that my concerns are not yours. Maybe there was something in the post I skipped that would convince me that you had a better grasp on who Yeshua is than I do, but I'm going to take the chance that there wasn't.
I will only comment on the above quoted line. I also know that a man cannot be G-d.
But I will not limit G-d to say that He cannot be a man.
Shalom.
It's because back then as it is today religious leaders prefer to build and rule over their kingdoms than to bring people to the love of God.
If you will let me add in the one word as I have done, I will agree with you.
G-d will always have a remnant. Remember Nicodemus?
Shalom.
But a waste of time? No, I don't consider my post a waste of time. Others may not have such thick scales over their eyes.... and some people may show their love of God by seeking the truth, no matter where that truth takes them.
Nowhere does the Jewish Bible or Prophets say that the Messiah would be a god or God-like. The very idea that God would take on human form is repulsive to Jews because it contradicts the concept of God as being above and beyond the limitations of the human body and situation.
Judaism believes that God is eternal, above and beyond time. God cannot be born, He cannot die, He cannot suffer, He can not "become flesh," nor can He be divided into sections ("Father, Son, and Holy Ghost"). These are pagan notions. Certainly no "God" or "Son of God" could have called out on the cross, as Jesus is supposed to have said, "My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?" After all if Jesus was God, then he abandoned himself??? Makes no sense.
How difficult would it be for a God to live according the Law? It would not be difficult at all. But, how difficult is it for a 'man' to live according to the Law? Much harder; man has to try, and work at it.
Selah!
I hope this post is SHORT enough for you!
Now, to this post that is of a length I can handle, you said:
God cannot
My faith is too big to ever utter that phrase.
You are right to say that the Scriptures did not claim that Messiah would be Messiah-el. That's why Yeshua praised Simon for that declaration. He said, "Man did not reveal this to you, but the Spirit of G-d." The twelve did not even realize it because it was a thing never heard of before. He was standing before them, but they were not able to understand until He opened their eyes after He was raised by Ha Shem from the dead. It was a totally new thing, but when you know the thing you can then go back and read Scripture again and understand that G-d did exactly what He promised He would do. I'm sure the people of G-d did not understand what G-d was telling Habakkuk about using an evil kingdom to accomplish His purposes until after the Diaspora. That is the way G-d's prophecy often works.
You say that the Trinity does not make sense. I agree from my human perspective. But it makes even less sense to me to suggest that, as you say, God cannot. That phrase is beyond my comprehension. I cannot fathom it.
By the way, if you are a Jew (and you write like one - a compliment not an insult) you should have recognized the reference Yeshua made from the cross when He said, "Eli, Eli, lamach sabcthani" Perhaps the idea that G-d could abandon Himself doesn't make sense to you, but how about His reference to the Scripture that predicted the Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced...
while hanging there with his hands and feet pierced...
a form of capital punishment that the Jews did not ever use.
Shalom.
We don't have the luxury of sitting face to face over coffee or tea. But, what we do have is good enough to discuss things. Sure it takes time, but that's what 'saving' files is all about. I started my post yesterday morning, then saved it, since I had to leave. But when I got home I finished it.
Now, to this post that is of a length I can handle, you said:
God cannot
My faith is too big to ever utter that phrase.
Frankly, I would agree with you that God CAN do anything, but as I mentioned in the previous post, what point would be made in a God following Law???
You are right to say that the Scriptures did not claim that Messiah would be Messiah-el. That's why Yeshua praised Simon for that declaration. He said, "Man did not reveal this to you, but the Spirit of G-d." The twelve did not even realize it because it was a thing never heard of before. He was standing before them, but they were not able to understand until He opened their eyes after He was raised by Ha Shem from the dead. It was a totally new thing, but when you know the thing you can then go back and read Scripture again and understand that G-d did exactly what He promised He would do. I'm sure the people of G-d did not understand what G-d was telling Habakkuk about using an evil kingdom to accomplish His purposes until after the Diaspora. That is the way G-d's prophecy often works.
They also were unaware that Jesus had to suffer, die and be resurrected. In fact when Jesus told Peter about his coming death, Peter says No, we will not let it happen. See he was unaware of this alledged prophecy because it WAS NOT in the OT!!!!
You say that the Trinity does not make sense. I agree from my human perspective. But it makes even less sense to me to suggest that, as you say, God cannot. That phrase is beyond my comprehension. I cannot fathom it.
Correction. The Jewish faith says it... and let's not forget that Jesus was Jewish.... I merely pointed out that it makes no sense to have a God on earth for us the emulate, since God can do anything, particularly following the Law. It is more meaningful that a 'man' follow the Law and lead by example....
By the way, if you are a Jew (and you write like one - a compliment not an insult) you should have recognized the reference Yeshua made from the cross when He said, "Eli, Eli, lamach sabcthani" Perhaps the idea that G-d could abandon Himself doesn't make sense to you, but how about His reference to the Scripture that predicted the Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced...
What is the OLD TESTAMENT (Tanakh) verse for that???
while hanging there with his hands and feet pierced...
And being pierced by a sword as mentioned earlier in the 'archtypes'/enemies of God...
a form of capital punishment that the Jews did not ever use. That's right.... it was a form of death used by the Gentiles... for crimes against the state. I mentioned that and explained it in a previous post, but perhaps you didn't read that one either.
We don't have the luxury of sitting face to face over coffee or tea.
We may have one day. Until then I will not be using FR to go through the whole Tanak or Brit Chadashah with you. Bits at a time, yes. Again, please forgive my weakness.
Frankly, I would agree with you that God CAN do anything, but as I mentioned in the previous post, what point would be made in a God following Law???
The point is very carefully made in the Brit Chadashah. Before I quote it for you, perhaps you would tell me what point you thought was being made? (This is one of the reasons I don't like this forum - interaction is lousy. You can go look up the answer and circumvent my approach in sharing my faith.)
They also were unaware that Jesus had to suffer, die and be resurrected. In fact when Jesus told Peter about his coming death, Peter says No, we will not let it happen. See he was unaware of this alledged prophecy because it WAS NOT in the OT!!!!
Actually, the suffering was there. The death was there. The kingdom was there. What was not there was the long separation between the death and the kingdom. You and I are both impatient over the length of that separation when Messiah will come to reign and of the increase of the Kingdom there will be no end. Then justice will finally be established in the earth. Now I need the concordance I don't have, but I know you know where the suffering servant verses in Yesha-yahu are located.
Correction. The Jewish faith says it... and let's not forget that Jesus was Jewish.... I merely pointed out that it makes no sense to have a God on earth for us the emulate, since God can do anything, particularly following the Law.
Just for the sake of clarification - is that why you believe Messiah was sent, to give us an example to emulate? I will tell you that Christians do not believe this. We know we can never emulate Yeshua. We will target Him because his perfection is what we are asked for, but we know we can not be perfect because we are not G-d. What you have said is actually very close to blasphemy to Christians.
What is the OLD TESTAMENT (Tanakh) verse for that???
Psalm 22:1(NIV) For the director of music. To the tune of "The Doe of the Morning." A psalm of David. My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Why are you so far from saving me, so far from the words of my groaning?
See also from Psalm 22
7 All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
8 "He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him."
Sound like what the leaders said while Yeshua was on the Cross?
17 I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.
More imagery of the crucifiction. As to the pierced hands and feet:
16 Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.
There is a reason Yeshua gave this Psalm to His followers as He died. Note particularly:
24 For he has not despised or disdained the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help.
25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly; before those who fear you will I fulfill my vows.
26 The poor will eat and be satisfied; they who seek the LORD will praise him-- may your hearts live forever!
27 All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the LORD, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him,
28 for dominion belongs to the LORD and he rules over the nations.
Will you forgive me if I shout: AMEN! Hallelu-yah
And being pierced by a sword as mentioned earlier in the 'archtypes'/enemies of God...
Does that mean that everyone who has been pierced by the sword since the beginning of time is an enemy of G-d?
That's right.... it was a form of death used by the Gentiles... for crimes against the state. I mentioned that and explained it in a previous post, but perhaps you didn't read that one either.
I did not read what you wrote, but as you see I was aware of the fact. If this was not a Jewish form of punishment, why did David write about it?
Shalom.
Yes.. I was tempted to say I didn't read it, because it was too long...
I know you know where the suffering servant verses in Yesha-yahu are located.
You didn't mention the book, I have to guess that you mean Isaiah... but the suffering servant IS ISRAEL, the nation, and NOT a person!!
Just for the sake of clarification - is that why you believe Messiah was sent, to give us an example to emulate? I will tell you that Christians do not believe this. We know we can never emulate Yeshua. We will target Him because his perfection is what we are asked for, but we know we can not be perfect because we are not G-d. What you have said is actually very close to blasphemy to Christians.
Yes, I know. Christians don't WANT to have to TRY to be better or more spiritual. They don't want to be responsible for their actions. They'd rather play the 'grace' card and let others do the work for them! ie Jesus. That is why the idea of Satan is different for Christians than it is for Jews. The Christians say that they are tempted by Satan. Jews feel they are tempted by themselves, Satan's whose purpose is to accuse man in front of the Heavenly Court The idea is to overcome temptation, not blame temptation on Satan. Its just the theological 'blame game'. etc..]
See also from Psalm 22
7 All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 8 "He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him."
Sound like what the leaders said while Yeshua was on the Cross?
Why, yes, it does... and so did all the quotes I previously gave regarding Jesus and the archtype similarities. Why is it that you only select and accept those that you WANT? And all the correlations I gave are not acceptable?????
Does that mean that everyone who has been pierced by the sword since the beginning of time is an enemy of G-d?
Of course not... but the overwhelming amount of verses pertaining to the archtypes and Jesus makes it very hard to ignore.
I did not read what you wrote, but as you see I was aware of the fact. If this was not a Jewish form of punishment, why did David write about it?
Probably for the same reason that Isaiah and Ezekiel wrote about it! lol
Isaiah 14:4 "That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!
Isaiah 14:12-16 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"
And we come full circle...morning star/lucifer... you might actually try READING the posts. It would make my posts a lot shorter since I wouldn't have to REPEAT myself! #240.
Isaiah 14:19 "But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet."
Ezekiel 32:7-8 "And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD."
I won't repost all the verses to support the archtypes since it would make this far too long.
Don't even bother replying since you can't be bothered to READ.
That is a valid interpretation. Given Yeshua's life, can you not accept that the suffering servant is the Messiah is also a valid interpretation? If Yeshua had never been born and taught what He taught there might never be any reason to suspect that this was Messiah. But, then again, I believe the Rabbis taught it was Messiah until it became necessary to counter the Nazarene sect. I could be wrong about that, though.
Yes, I know. Christians don't WANT to have to TRY to be better or more spiritual. They don't want to be responsible for their actions. They'd rather play the 'grace' card and let others do the work for them! ie Jesus.
Please don't put words in my mouth. I know there are Christians who are exactly what you say, but we are discussing theology, not people who abuse what G-d has said. I don't know whether you are Chassidic or Orthodox or Liberal or what, but do you not allow for differences within the belief system?
That is why the idea of Satan is different for Christians than it is for Jews. The Christians say that they are tempted by Satan. Jews feel they are tempted by themselves, Satan's whose purpose is to accuse man in front of the Heavenly Court The idea is to overcome temptation, not blame temptation on Satan. Its just the theological 'blame game'. etc..]
What you have just described is classic Christian theology. There are some who have tossed that understanding so they can blame the devil. As Flip Wilson used to say (Geraldine Jones) "The Devil made me do it, honey!" But that is not classic Christian theology. Neither is it classic Christian theology to claim that Satan does not exist. But there are Christians who teach those too.
Why, yes, it does... and so did all the quotes I previously gave regarding Jesus and the archtype similarities. Why is it that you only select and accept those that you WANT? And all the correlations I gave are not acceptable?????
Because of the question I posed to you that you appear to take up later.
Me: Does that mean that everyone who has been pierced by the sword since the beginning of time is an enemy of G-d?
You:Of course not... but the overwhelming amount of verses pertaining to the archtypes and Jesus makes it very hard to ignore.
Your version of overwhelming and mine differ. But even if I agreed, the simple fact of the empty tomb would trump them. For all you know I fit many verses of the archetypes of the enemies of G-d. That doesn't make me one of them. If you and I finally met, and you saw the Spirit of G-d descend on me like a dove and announce that I was the apple of His eye (hardly likely) wouldn't you overlook similarities between me and Lucifer?
Probably for the same reason that Isaiah and Ezekiel wrote about it! lol
Isaiah 14:4 "That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!
Hmmm, I don't see any reference to crucifixion of either David or the Messiah.
Isaiah 14:12-16 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"
Nope, no reference to crucifixion there either.
Now let me ask you a question. Suppose the king of Babylon had actually ascended to the throne of Heaven. Would you believe the king of Babylon or the prophet? The prophet was right about the king of Babylon, but Yeshua was not cast down into the pit, as Messiah will not be. Yeshua did not see corruption, as Messiah will not.
I won't repost all the verses to support the archtypes since it would make this far too long.
Thank you, since I have already responded to this issue. If you aren't convinced by the empty tomb, it's agree to disagree time. The empty tomb convinces me.
Shalom.
It's not a matter of interest, ET. Don't take this personally, but since I know Yeshua, the Risen Christ, very G-d from very G-d, it's not likely you will convince me. It's like you trying to convince me that my wife isn't a woman. You can provide all the proofs you want, but I have a proof that trumps them.
If you already know that the empty tomb is not enough to prove that Yeshua is G-d, then there isn't any point in my trying to convince you otherwise. I respect your position and you are welcome to it. If there is anything in any of the posts you made that would, if properly refuted, cause you to receive the Risen Lord as Your Lord then I will put in hours and hours, even on FR, although I would prefer face-to-face. I will even search through this thread to find it so I can address it.
There is only one such thing that would cause me to change my position, and you are welcome to provide it. If it exists, I truly want to know. It would mean that I am talking with a demon when I am communing with Yeshua, and I would stop immediately.
Prove that Yeshua was not raised from the dead.
Shalom.
"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:"
Ok, let's establish a timeline. They needed to remove Jesus from the cross because of the approaching Sabbath. Sabbath starts at about 6pm on Friday.
John 20 :1 "The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. 2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the LORD out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him"
The first day of the week, while it is still dark. Pre-dawn. Sunday is the first day of the week. So, how much time elapses between 6pm Friday and pre-dawn Sunday?
Friday night 6pm to Saturday night 6pm = 24 hours Saturday night 6pm til hmm pre-dawn Sunday... seems to be a slight problem here. It doesn't even come out to 48 hours, not even close to 48 hours. Maybe 36 hours, a day and a half, but not 72 hours!
Hmmmmm
"By law and custom, the Jewish people of Jesus' day took the Sabbath as a day of complete rest. Because no work could be done on the Sabbath, which we call Saturday, Friday came to be known as Preparation Day." (Josephus, Antiquities, Book XVI, Chapter 6.)
It was a day when food and other things needed for Saturday were prepared in advance. This is our first clue to the day of the crucifixion, because all four Gospels state that Jesus was crucified on Preparation Day, a Friday . This is also the common consensus of the Church Fathers and scholars throughout church history.
Judeans reckoned the 24-hour day from sunset-to-sunset. The Book of Leviticus, Chapter 33: "5 The LORD's Passover begins at twilight on the fourteenth day of the first month.."
The 3 nights and 3 days in the tomb, ARE NOT THERE!
Selah! (Think about it!)
I don't have to prove anything. The FACTS speak for themselves! But, I can hardly wait for your explanation as to the 'missing time'. Gee, maybe he was abducted by aliens! Horrors!
Another 'failed' prophecy. Which reminds me. You haven't addressed all the messianic requirements that Jesus failed to fulfill. See post #240, I have to keep this short, course that is no guarantee that you will READ it!
"And they will weep for Him like an only son. And they will ask, where did you get those wounds in your hands? And He will answer, in the house of my friends." The Old Testament is FULL of promises to the Jews concerning the coming millenial age........And the Satan doesn't like it one bit, which is the reason for the last 2000 years of anti-semitism.
I have heard the suggestion that Yeshua was not crucified on Friday. I accept that He was buried on Friday.
I am not aware He needed to be in the ground three days and three nights. You are welcome to provide the reference for me. Is that a Messianic prophecy? Do the Jews accept that Messiah is to suffer?
We are told that Yeshua rose on the third day. He was buried before sundown on Friday so he was buried on Friday, the first day. He was in the tomb on Saturday, which would be the second day. He rose on Sunday, sometime after sundown on what we would call Saturdy, which would be the third day.
As for the Messianic prophecies, I am not the great scholar. Here are the ones I know of.
Shalom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.