dear JaniceA...
I'm sending you a pm if you'd like to hear a christian's response to your post. If you don't, that's okay too :)
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
dear JaniceA...
I'm sending you a pm if you'd like to hear a christian's response to your post. If you don't, that's okay too :)
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
But you did argue my point about the holy texts. You twisted what I said in your argument but you certainly took the opportunity to argue my point.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
dear OnTheWayOut...
Since you took the time to reply:
I didn't make any claims that the author(s) of the bible weren't men.
I didn't make any claims that others besides christians and jews held any reverence for the bible, only that it was considered the holy text of the christians and jews.
Because you assure me you don't have a reading comprehension problem then is there some other reason why you don't answer straight forward questions, some other reason why you dodge them? For your convenience and just in case you are struggling with the aforementioned disability as well, I've made this diagram to help you answer my last question.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
You have a distinct lack of reading comprehension.
You have a nice evening too.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
So, the fact that the OT is and has been considered by most people (with an opinion) to have sprung from the hebrew ethos IS something you'd argue?
AND, the fact that the NT is and has been considered by most people (with an opinion) to have sprung from the christian ethos is something you'd argue?
The floor is open to you. Please move forward with your argument against those claims.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
dear OnTheWayOut...
The bible is inarguably considered to be the holy text of christians and jews. It's not the holy text of any other religions.
I'm not arguing the fact that some people lift certain elements of the text to supplement their own "texts". Clearly mohammad did, the bahais did it, Hanged Man did it, it happens. At this point, I'm wondering why you think I shouldn't be giving priority to the theology that is obviously contained in the text. That being, jewish and christian?
Thank you. I am aware that there are CERTAIN scriptures that are controversial as to who they are referencing, within both the jewish and christian theologies. I'm the one that drew attention to the fact that there is that to consider as far as the prophecy of isaiah 53 is concerned. Not every OT text is contriversial, however, the two portions I cited are considered (by both jews and christians) to be referring to A messianic figure. There is no dispute there. The christians believe that messianic figure to be Jesus. The jews believe that it was not Jesus but someone else who has YET to be revealed. Again, there is NO controversy as to the fact that the text is talking about an individual messianic figure. There is no controversy as to what those 2 portions in isaiah I cited mean...as far as the messianic figure being a light (someone who illuminates the masses) and as far as the messianic figure causing the gentiles/nations to turn to the God of the OT. To my knowledge both jews and christians believe it is only ONE messianic figure that will accomplish these two tasks.
My argument is for the fact that both of those tasks were indeed accomplished by Jesus almost 2000 years ago. The prophecy has been fulfilled in Jesus even if the jews don't accept it.
If you're at all interested in knowing why the jews don't accept it, I can tell you but it has to be understood I'm not preaching to you, just laying down the facts from a biblical perspective.
Anyway...my reason for believing the 2 portions of scripture I cited can only point to Jesus is simple and logical. He was the first to cross the finish line according to those established rules. (Isaiah 9:1-2; isaiah 52:13-15)
love michelle
i was born january 15, 1947in mt.
carmel hospital, detroit, michigan.. within six months of my birth, my mother would bundle her baby boy into a blanket and board an american airlines propeller-driven plane--in effect, leaving my father behind--to return to her hometown, ft. worth, texas.. my dad had an excellent job working for cadillac as an inspector.
it was a union job.
Happy Birthday Terry!
xo
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
OnTheWayOut...
Duck and run...Classic.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
Yes, Vander...
I didn't reference that scripture intentionally. That scripture is regarded by christians as speaking about Jesus but by jews as speaking about the israelites. In other words, it's referrant and therefore truthfulness is in the eye of the beholder. The two scriptures I referenced in my argument are believed to be Messianic by both christians and jews, there is no added controversy I had to cut through before I unpackaged the statements themselves for unbelievers.
what are everyone's thoughts on this, how his legs weren't broken, he was pierced with a spear and he wore a thorny crown?.
i'm pimo and very much not wanting to believe, but like the daniel statue prophecies, these ones about jesus stick in my mind and give me "hmmm, maybe" moments..
OnTheWayOut...
Let me put it to you this way...
Do you deny that jerusalem society was greatly and irreversibly impacted by a noteable person of jewish descent in the 1st century? (A luminary, so to speak)
Do you deny that it is that same person who was essentially responsible for gentile interest or belief in the God of the OT?
I'm not asking you to let your mind wander into territory where you have to see things through the eye of faith or see things in a "spiritual" sense. The only way to regard those 2 prophecies I mentioned as unfulfilled is to deny reality.
The specific prophecy about none of Jesus' bones being broken is a different matter, that prophecy being fulfilled is taken on faith. There is no concrete way of "measuring" the statement that they weren't broken, at this time.