It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Extra Biblical Evidence for the existence of Jesus

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 05:23 PM

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: chr0naut

Please research Serapis.

Christ was a priestly title for an ordinary human person. Check your Septuagint. It was a Greek word/concept that already existed in their language, their philosophy and their theosophy, that was usurped in messianic translation.

Thank you.

The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Pentateuch which takes the concept of annointing (pouring on of usually perfumed oil) and applies it to a person (the annointed one, or Messiah).

When translating to Greek, one can see how one would have to take the concepts of 'annionting or rubbing with oil or salve' (khriein) which pre-existed in the language and create a new word "Khristos" to mean 'the annointed one', in Greek.

A similar semantic extension occurred where Shakespeare described a crowd who "mobbed", extending the preexisting word "mob" and creating from it a new verb which was immediately understandable by all.

The only link from antiquity between Serapis and 'christs' that I can find was a letter, purportedly from Hadrian to his brother Servianus in AD 134, suggesting that "There those who worship Serapis are, in fact, Christians, and those who call themselves bishops of Christ are, in fact, devotees of Serapis" and is recorded in the fourth century AD compilation "Historia Augusta". Hadrian's use of the term is at least 400 years after the word was used in the Septuagint translation.

If you know of any text which uses the word 'christ' outside of the Jewish translations please post its details. I would be most interested (I am admitting that I still could be wrong on this).

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 05:42 PM

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Now if we take all these with the Gospels and Paul's writings who spoke with the apostles we can assume we know a good bit.

No. Like schuyler said, just because some ancient 'historians' wrote about it doesn't make it "true."
Personally, I think an extraordinary man did live in the area at the time. The deity and virgin birth and magic is all nonsense.

Ever heard of fan fiction? That's all Paul and the Gospels amount to. The Gospels don't even tell the same story as one another. We don't "know" anything that isn't second-hand or ninety-seventh-hand information.

He was a guru. He didn't die on the cross - he went to India (where he'd been while he was "missing"). They welcomed him back, and there he is buried. Please look into this, it fills in all the holes and will help you realize how misled you have been, and how you are misleading others because of it.

Eleven of the 12 Disciples of Jesus were put to death at different times and locations becase they would not recant their faith. Seems a bit extreme to do for fan fiction.

After Jesus return from Egypt as a child, there is no evidence that He travelled further than 124 miles from around Jerusalem. The suggestion that He travelled more than 4,000 miles and that outside of the Roman Empire across lands held by hostile kingdoms, or by sea (there were only two trade routes in the first century) does not sound reasonable.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 06:18 PM
a reply to: chr0naut

When translating to Greek, one can see how one would have to take the concepts of 'annionting or rubbing with oil or salve' (khriein) which pre-existed in the language and create a new word "Khristos" to mean 'the annointed one', in Greek.

There's more to it than being rubbed with oil, like an oily ole snake oil salesman, lol. "Christs" are anointed by god, and made holy, not by a greasy substance, but by the spirit.

If you know of any text which uses the word 'christ' outside of the Jewish translations please post its details.

Now, the Greek language affords strange etymologies. Christian theology has chosen and decreed that the name Christos should be taken as derived from [chrio, chriso], "anointed with scented unguents or oil." But this word has several significances. It is used by Homer, certainly, as applied to the rubbing with oil of the body after bathing, as other ancient writers do. Yet the word Christes means rather a white-washer, while the word Chrestes means priest and prophet

All this is evidence that the terms Christ and Christians, spelt originally Chrest and Chrestians [chrestianoi] were directly borrowed from the Temple terminology of the Pagans, and meant the same thing. The God of the Jews was now substituted for the Oracle and the other gods; the generic designation "Chrestos" became a noun applied to one special personage; and new terms such as Chrestianoi and Chrestodoulos "a follower or servant of Chrestos" — were coined out of the old material. This is shown by Philo Judaeus, a monotheist, assuredly, using already the same term for monotheistic purposes. For he speaks of theochrestos "God-declared," or one who is declared by god, and of logia theochresta "sayings delivered by God" — which proves that he wrote at a time (between the first century B. C., and the first A. D.) when neither Christians nor Chrestians were yet known under these names, but still called themselves the Nazarenes. The notable difference between the two words [chrao] — "consulting or obtaining response from a god or oracle" (chreo being the Ionic earlier form of it), and chrio "to rub, to anoint" (from which the name Christos), has not prevented the ecclesiastical adoption and coin age from Philo's expression [Theochrestos] of that other term [Theochristos] "anointed by God." Thus the quiet substitution of the letter, for dogmatic purposes, was achieved in the easiest way, as we now see.

Thus in Aeschylus (Cho. 901) we read of pythochresta the "oracles delivered by a Pythian God" (Greek-English Lexicon) through a pythoness; and Pythochrestos is the nominative singular of an adjective derived from chrao (Eurip. Ion, 1218). The later meanings coined freely from this primitive application, are numerous and varied. Pagan classics expressed more than one idea by the verb [chraomai] "consulting an oracle"; for it also means "fated," doomed by an oracle, in the sense of a sacrificial victim to its decree, or — "to the WORD"; as chresterion is not only "the seat of an oracle" but also "an offering to, or for, the oracle.'' Chrestes is one who expounds or explains oracles, "a prophet, a soothsayer;" and chresterios is one who belongs to, or is in the service of, an oracle, a god, or a "Master"



Who were the chrestianos? Chrestus was a familiar personal name throughout the Roman Empire. It was not, however, Israelite in origin. Instead it was the name of the Egyptian Serapis (Ancient Greek: Σάραπιςa, Graeco-Egyptian god. He was invented during the 3rd century BC on the orders of Ptolemy I of Egypt as a means to unify the Greeks and Egyptians in his realm, and whose main temple was in Alexandria, Egypt [read: Pausanias, Ἑλλάδος περιήγησις or Description of Greece, 1.18.4, second century CE].

edit on 18-8-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 07:09 PM
a reply to: windword

The Greek word logos was a term in several ancient philosophical systems. Its philosophic usage goes back to Heraclitus (about 500 B.C.). It was then used by the Stoics, several hundred years later, some of whom influenced Philo.

The idea of the logos in Greek thought harks back at least to the 6th-century-bc philosopher Heracleitus, who discerned in the cosmic process a logos analogous to the reasoning power in man. Later, the Stoics, philosophers who followed the teachings of the thinker Zeno of Citium (4th–3rd century bc), defined the logos as an active rational and spiritual principle that permeated all reality. They called the logos providence, nature, god, and the soul of the universe, which is composed of many seminal logoi that are contained in the universal logos. Philo of Alexandria, a 1st-century-ad Jewish philosopher, taught that the logos was the intermediary between God and the cosmos, being both the agent of creation and the agent through which the human mind can apprehend and comprehend God. According to Philo and the Middle Platonists, philosophers who interpreted in religious terms the teachings of the 4th-century-bc Greek master philosopher Plato, the logos was both immanent in the world and at the same time the transcendent divine mind.

In the first chapter of The Gospel According to John, Jesus Christ is identified as “the Word” (Greek logos) incarnated, or made flesh. This identification of Jesus with the logos is based on Old Testament concepts of revelation, such as occurs in the frequently used phrase “the Word of the Lord”—which connoted ideas of God’s activity and power—and the Jewish view that Wisdom is the divine agent that draws man to God and is identified with the word of God. The author of The Gospel According to John used this philosophical expression, which easily would be recognizable to readers in the Hellenistic (Greek cultural) world, to emphasize the redemptive character of the person of Christ, whom the author describes as “the way, and the truth, and the life.”

The author of John is referencing a Jewish concept. Philo even references the OT at times when speaking of the logos. No one is arguing that it is a greek word. What I am saying is the concepts are not the same. Philo is very inconsistent with his use of the word.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 07:17 PM
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Philo of Alexandria was instrumental in correlating the Old Testament's Angel of the Lord with Plato's LOGOS. If you have evidence of pre-Philo documents assigning the concept of Plato's LOGOS to the Angel of the Lord I would love to see it.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 07:23 PM
Those are fantastic sources, Windword!

Classification of Logos
Logos examples may be classified according to the following categories.

Inductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning involves a specific representative fact or case which is drawn towards a conclusion or generalization. However, inductive reasoning requires reliable and powerful evidence that is presented to support the point.

Deductive reasoning
Deductive reasoning involves generalization at the initial stage and then moves on towards the specific case. The starting generalization must be based on reliable evidence to support it at the end.

Yeah - "reliable evidence" comes first in ANY case.

In some cases, both of these methods are used to convince the audience.

Just thought I'd leave this here.
I just don't understand how people are still buying in to this nonsense!!

edit on 8/18/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 07:44 PM
a reply to: windword

A personification of the Nation of Israel? How do you get that from :

The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of deep darkness
a light has dawned.
3 You have enlarged the nation
and increased their joy;
they rejoice before you
as people rejoice at the harvest,
as warriors rejoice
when dividing the plunder.
4 For as in the day of Midian’s defeat,
you have shattered
the yoke that burdens them,
the bar across their shoulders,
the rod of their oppressor.
5 Every warrior’s boot used in battle
and every garment rolled in blood
will be destined for burning,
will be fuel for the fire.
6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the greatness of his government and peace
there will be no end.
"He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever."
The zeal of the Lord Almighty
will accomplish this.

Cross reference for bolded section:
Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. 12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, 15 but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. 16 And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me.[c] Your throne shall be established forever.’” 17 In accordance with all these words, and in accordance with all this vision, Nathan spoke to David.

What happens to solomon:

therefore the Lord said to Solomon, “Since this has been your practice and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes that I have commanded you, hI will surely tear the kingdom from you and will give it to your servant. 12 Yet for the sake of David your father I will not do it in your days, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son. 13 However, iI will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son, for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem that I have chosen.”

This is all foreshadowing the coming of Christ. To fulfill the promise to David. How did Christ begin his kingdom? As the suffering servant.

"Who has believed what he has heard from us?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 For he grew up before him like a young plant,
and like a root out of dry ground;
he had no form or majesty that we should look at him,
and no beauty that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men;
a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief;
and as one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he has borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows;
yet we esteemed him stricken,
smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned—every one—to his own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
yet he opened not his mouth;
like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
so he opened not his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
9 And they made his grave with the wicked
and with a rich man in his death,
although he had done no violence,
and there was no deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him;
he has put him to grief;
when his soul makes an offering for guilt, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
11 Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied;
by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant,
make many to be accounted righteous,
and he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many,
and he shall divide the spoil with the strong,
because he poured out his soul to death
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and makes intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 54

"For your Maker is your husband,
the Lord of hosts is his name;
and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer,
the God of the whole earth he is called.
6 For the Lord has called you
like a wife deserted and grieved in spirit,
like a wife of youth when she is cast off,
says your God.
7 For a brief moment I deserted you,
but with great compassion I will gather you.
8 In overflowing anger for a moment
I hid my face from you,
but with everlasting love I will have compassion on you,”
says the Lord, your Redeemer."

The Church is the Bride of Christ and ancient Jewish wedding customs mimic the exact way in which Christ relates to the Church.
Three stages
Stage 1: signing the "ketubbah" contract (Creating the marriage bond/Sinner's Prayer)
This is symbolic of what occurs when a person comes to Christ. At this point the two were considered 100% married. In this the bride price would be negotiated. The Bride Price is symbolic of Jesus's sacrifice. The price he paid God for his church.
Stage 2: The "chuppah": (sexual consummation)
The groom would depart for and extended amount of time raise money for the bride price and build a home and come to gather his bride. This is where we are now. Jesus has left and we are waiting on his return. Symbolic of the age of grace.
Stage 3: The wedding feast
This is what occurs in Revelation 19:6-9.

Please if your going to say Jesus doesn't fit these things explain to me why you think that he doesn't.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 07:52 PM
oh wow, Servant.

Wall of text is just "no."

Break your stuff up into sentences, please.

I'm a good, diligent, slow reader, but even I won't read through something like that.
Make your point.

Oh, and also -
notice my signature.
Use your own words. The Bible is a giant yawn.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 08:02 PM
a reply to: chr0naut

Eleven of the 12 Disciples of Jesus were put to death at different times and locations becase they would not recant their faith. Seems a bit extreme to do for fan fiction.

You're using fan fiction to prove that fan fiction wasn't fan fiction. chr0, with all due respect, you don't know anything of the sort to be "true." It's what you have been told. It's what you read. Does not make it fact.

After Jesus return from Egypt as a child, there is no evidence that He travelled further than 124 miles from around Jerusalem.

Yes, there is evidence.


The suggestion that He travelled more than 4,000 miles and that outside of the Roman Empire across lands held by hostile kingdoms, or by sea (there were only two trade routes in the first century) does not sound reasonable.

He knew the way. There were trade routes. It wasn't hard to travel from Palestine to India.

The Fifth Gospel: New Evidence from the Tibetan, Sanskrit, Arabic, Persian and Urdu Sources About the Historical Life of Jesus Christ After the Crucifixion

The Lost Years of Jesus:
The Life of Saint Issa

The Best of the Sons of Men

Ancient scrolls reveal that Jesus spent seventeen years in India and Tibet
From age thirteen to age twenty-nine, he was both a student and teacher of Buddhist and Hindu holy men
The story of his journey from Jerusalem to Benares was recorded by Brahman historians
Today they still know him and love him as St. Issa. Their 'buddha'.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 08:14 PM
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

A personification of the Nation of Israel? How do you get that from :

Who is God’s Suffering Servant?

Despite strong objections from conservative Christian apologists, the prevailing rabbinic interpretation of Isaiah 53 ascribes the “servant” to the nation of Israel who silently endured unimaginable suffering at the hands of its gentile oppressors.
The broad consensus among Jewish, and even some Christian commentators, that the “servant” in Isaiah 52-53 refers to the nation of Israel is understandable. Isaiah 53, which is the fourth of four renowned Servant Songs, is umbilically connected to its preceding chapters. The “servant” in each of the three previous Servant Songs is plainly and repeatedly identified as the nation of Israel.

Christian missionaries will claim that the Jewish Biblical commentator Rashi made up the association of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 with the People of Israel personified. This is simply untrue, which can be proven from the writings of Christians themselves well before Rashi was born. In 'Contra Celsum,' written in 248 C.E. (some 800 years before Rashi), the Christian Church Father Origen records that Jews contemporary with him interpreted this passage as referring to the entire nation of Israel. He wrote:
'I remember that once in a discussion with some whom the Jews regard as learned I used these prophecies [Isaiah 52:13-53:8]. At this the Jew said that these prophecies referred to the whole people as though of a single individual, since they were scattered in the dispersion and smitten, that as a result of the scattering of the Jews among the other nations many might become proselytes.' (Origen, Contra Celsum, trans. Henry Chadwick, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Book 1.55, 1965, p. 50) This can also be found on the internet at Early Christian Writings. Scroll down to Chapter LV.

This shows that Jews subscribed to the belief that the people of Israel were the suffering servant spoken of throughout the entire passage, and this pre-dates Rashi by many centuries.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

edit on 18-8-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:10 PM
The Hebrew word מָשִׁיחַ
is transliterated mashiach(messiah) and translated into Greek as christos.It means the same thing…anointed.

The meaning(anointed) is not specific to any language just like most words it has a root meaning then the word is modified by the social context.In its base form it means to rub on oil.To postulate that it always meant “a savior” etc etc.. is twisting it’s meaning to serve an agenda.

The clear fact is Yahoshua was not the conquering mashiach the religious Jews were waiting for or they would not have set him up to be murdered.The false assumption is they did know he was the Jewish mashiach and that is why they set him up.That is Christian rhetoric to prove their Jesus is the Jewish messiah.

The contextual meaning is YAHOSHUA(Yahweh the creator God is deliverance) IS the mashiach(power of the creator God) because that is what Yahoshua’s “name” was(nature and character).The religious have twisted the name to Jesus Christ and made it into a sorcerous incantation when spoken/invoked “in the name of”.They have no idea they are actually blaspheming(spurn,despise,revile) the very person they say they believe in.

It all goes hand in hand with the Jesus believers attempting to prove their Jesus existence because the Jesus they believe in is a religious idol of their extreme confirmation bias.Without this proof they believe is in the bible(and other sources) their belief in Christianity is in vain(meaningless).They will not be plucking their eye out because they cannot perceive they are blind and have stumbled into the ditch that blind men led them to.

The only thing that can be done that is reasonable is to deny their ignorance with reason not more false rhetoric.To believe and propagate ridiculous false theories that are even more outrageous and unbelievable than the ones Christians believe is to fall into the ditch on the other side of the road.

The fact is the person Yahoshua cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to ever have existed.That does not mean Yahoshua couldn’t exist because the same could be said of many of the famous ancient men.They could just as well be myths and heavily embellished stories.The verification of Yahoshua is at a reasonable impasse.To add insult to injury of a true Yahoshua does not verify he didn’t exist it just makes for a very unreasonable argument and emphasizes the lack of credibility of the arguers.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:17 PM
a reply to: windword

Philo of Alexandria was instrumental in correlating the Old Testament's Angel of the Lord with Plato's LOGOS. If you have evidence of pre-Philo documents assigning the concept of Plato's LOGOS to the Angel of the Lord I would love to see it.

Genesis 16
The angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to fShur. 8 And he said, “Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?” She said, “I am fleeing from my mistress Sarai.” 9 The angel of the Lord said to her, “Return to your mistress and submit to her.” 10 The angel of the Lord also said to her, g“I will surely multiply your offspring so that they cannot be numbered for multitude.”

Genesis 19
Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven.

Amos 4:11
“I overthrew some of you, as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and you were as a brand plucked out of the burning; yet you did not return to me,” declares the LORD. (The speaker is God refer to God in the third person?)

Exodus 3
3 Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2And the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. 3 And Moses said, “I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.” 4 When the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.”

Take note that both the angel of the Lord and God are in the burning bush.

Exodus 23
20 “Behold, I send an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. 21 Pay careful attention to him and obey his voice; do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgression, for my name is in him.

22 “But if you carefully obey his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries.

Take note that what makes this angel that has been singled out unique is that God's name is in him.

Deut 12
4 You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way. 5 But you shall seek the place that the Lord your God will choose out of all your tribes to put his name and make his habitation[a] there.....

11then to the place that the Lord your God will choose, to make his name dwell there, there you shall bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tithes and the contribution that you present, and all your finest vow offerings that you vow to the Lord.

The word HaShem which as we know is a jewish reference to God that means "the Name" when avoiding the word Adonai this is known as a circumlocution. It is another way of referring to YHWH himself.....

Look at how it is used here in Psalm 20:

May the Lord answer you in the day of trouble!
May the name of the God of Jacob protect you!

Some trust in chariots and some in horses,
but we trust in the name of the Lord our God.

and again 2 Samuel 6:1-2
He and all his men went to Baalah in Judah to bring up from there the ark of God, which is called by the Name, the name of the LORD Almighty, who is enthroned between the cherubim on the ark.

The ark was called the Name. It is associated with the very presence of God.

And Isaiah 30:27

27Behold, the name of the LORD comes from a remote place; Burning is His anger and dense is His smoke; His lips are filled with indignation And His tongue is like a consuming fire;

Here the name is a he. His lips, His anger His tongue.

I give these to return to Exodus 23. When God says to Moses my Name is in him he is telling Moses the very presence of God and essence of God is in Him.

I could go on but for those interested in this here is Michael Heiser going over it:

This idea was around before Philo in Jewish tradition. You don't need Philo you just need the OT. Jews as far back as 200 B.C. had a doctrine known as the Two powers in heaven because the jews knew their scriptures well and knew of the odd things above. (Reference Alan Segal and Michael Heiser) Segal argues that this idea was not heretical until around 100 C.E.

From the Two Powers in Heaven Alan Segal :

"The extra-rabbinic evidence allowed the conclusion that the traditions were earlier than the first century. Furthermore, in comparing the literature, it was possible to define a number of dangerous scriptural interpretations central to the heresy and show how the rabbis countered them by bringing in other scriptures which unambiguously stated God's unity. From this evidence it became clear that the basic heresy involved interpreting scripture to say that a
principal angelic or hypostatic manifestation in heaven ivas equivalent to God."

This Logos John describes is not the same as Plato's Logos.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:26 PM
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

What? Those scriptures do nothing to tie "The Angel of the Lord" to Plato's LOGOS. And, Christians don't believe that Jesus and the Angel of the Lord are one in the same. So, whatever point you were trying to make is moot.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:54 PM
a reply to: windword

1. The servant of Isaiah 53 is an innocent and guiltless sufferer. Israel is never described as sinless.

2. The prophet said: "It pleased the LORD to bruise him." Has the awful treatment of the Jewish people really please God, as is said of the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53:10 ? It doesn't make sense to say it is Israel it makes perfect sense to say that God was pleased to have Messiah suffer and die as our sin offering to provide us forgiveness and atonement.

3. The person mentioned in this passage suffers silently and willingly. When is the true of the Jews? Definitely not in the Holocaust.

4. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 53:10 for "sin-offering" is "asham." A term meaning "sin-offering." See is uses in Leviticus chapters 5 and 6. Isaiah 53 describes a sinless and perfect sacrificial lamb who takes the sin of others onto itself so they may be forgiven. Are you really trying to claim that the terrible suffering of the Jewish people atones for the sins of the world? The figure in Isaiah 53 suffers and dies in order to provide a legal payment for sin so that others can be forgiven. This cannot be true of the Jewish people as a whole, or of any other mere human.

5. It is the prophet who is speaking in this passage. He says: "who has believed our message." The term "message" usually refers to the prophetic message. So the message of the speaker is the message of a prophet telling us what God has done to save his people.

6. The prophet speaking is Isaiah himself, who says the sufferer was punished for "the transgression of my people," according to verse 8. Who are the people of Isaiah? Israel. So you are saying Israel suffered for Israel's transgressions but the transgressions weren't Israel's own? Your view makes no sense.

7. The figure of Isaiah 53 dies and is buried Isaiah 53: 8 - 9. This doesn't occur to Israel.

8.The person is Isaiah 53 is described as a korban how do you get an entire nation from that?

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:55 PM
a reply to: windword

Michael Heiser is Christian and he believes that. I think he makes some great points.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:58 PM
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Well, we're going to just half to agree to disagree on that. But, the fact is, Jesus didn't fulfilled messianic prophecy, not Isaiah's, not Daniels.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 09:59 PM
a reply to: Raggedyman

I don't answer these responses for them. I answer them for other believers. I suppose the knowledge I am sharing cannot be seen by him for he simply doesn't want to see it.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 10:02 PM
a reply to: windword

Well, we're going to just half to agree to disagree on that. But, the fact is, Jesus didn't fulfilled messianic prophecy, not Isaiah's, not Daniels.

Yea sure, but just asserting Jesus didn't fulfill these prophecies . Then you say it is referring to Israel. I give you 8 problems I have with that idea and you can't address any of them? I even asked some questions. I don't mind us disagreeing, but this seems like a cop out to me.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 10:04 PM
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Michael Heiser is Christian and he believes that.

What? That Jesus of Nazareth was the incarnation of the Angel of the Lord? There is no Jewish tradition that says that "The Messiah" would be the incarnate of the Angel of the Lord.

posted on Aug, 18 2016 @ 10:08 PM
a reply to: Akragon

Im waiting on something from the 1st century to add the proverbial nail

I think the James Ossuary is a good one from the First. If we use Christian Sources, I's start with Paul and his visit to Israel shortly after his death.

new topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in