How do we respond to jews who believe messiah hasn't come?

[bibleberean]

Why a hardened Jew cannot accept Jesus.

They will be shunned by family.

John 12:42 Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:

John 12:43 For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.

They prefer to have their eyes closed.

Matthew 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

The god of this world has blinded them because they received not a love of the truth.

2 Corinthians 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

2 Corinthians 4:5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.

2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Hardened Jews cannot acknowledge the obvious.

They have been scattered among the nations and become a hissing and a by word because they have rejected God's commandments and Jesus as the Messiah.

Jeremiah 29:18 And I will persecute them with the sword, with the famine, and with the pestilence, and will deliver them to be removed to all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a curse, and an astonishment, and an hissing, and a reproach, among all the nations whither I have driven them:

Luke 13:35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

What is the best way to reach Jews?

By telling them the truth...

John 8:23-24 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Acts 2:22-23 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Acts 2:24-32 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

The gospel is the power of God Christians must never compromise it and make it palatable for Jews for the sake of "getting along".

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Only believing the gospel can save a Jew just like all non-believers.

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

There is no hope for the Jew or the nation of Israel until they say,"blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord".

 

[DivineNames]

You very obviously are NOT a seeker of truth... or you would not have been so scared to have stopped listening.

You have endorsed an approach that tests Christianity against a certain set of criteria. (legal evidence rules). Christianity can't stand up to that set of criteria. If you are a "seeker of truth", then why don't you reject Christianity?

Were you serious about a critical examination of the evidence in the first place? I don't believe that you were.

 

[bibleberean]

Re: messiah

"All the writers of the New Testament were Jews" Really?? Gee, tell that to the author of LUKE :

You are right. I was in error.

Thanks for the correction,

Robert

However it is the apostles doctrine that the church is founded upon and they were all Jews.

Ephesians 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

 

[AHIMSA]

BB,

You continue to completely overlook my point.

Whilst almah can indeed refer to a virgin, it does not specifically mean virgin, nor does it always. If you wanted to refer specifically to a virgin the specfic Hebrew word is "Bethulah"

For example:

Proverbs 30:18:
"There are things that are too amazing for me,
Four things that I do not understand,
The way of an eagle in the sky
The way of a snake on the rock
The way of a ship on the high sea
The way of a man with a maiden (almah)"

As you can see this is implicit of a sexual relationship, "The way of a man with a maiden"
- "a male youth in the Old Testament was called na'ar or elem, the feminine forms of which were na'arah and 'almah respectively. The limited usage of elem (lad or stripling) in the Old Testament nowhere implied sexual purity; thus an 'almah was an adolescent female, virgin or not, just as an elem was an adolescent male.

- Aside from this, the Torah does, in fact, have an explicit word for virgin (betulah or bethulah), which is always used where the context requires virginity. (For confirmation, see Genesis 24:16 , Leviticus 21:14 , and Deuteronomy 22:15-19 ). Even Isaiah used it in 62:5 . Its nonuse in the "Immanuel" passage is a rather loud hint that Isaiah spoke only of a young woman, not specifically of a virgin.

-More to the point, nearly all modern commentaries agree with Talmudic scholars that Isaiah's "sign" had nothing to do with a messiah. Reviewing half a dozen for this article, I found only one dissenter. Significantly, it was one that spouted the fundamentalist party line on every other issue. Interested readers can jaunt to the library and peruse the massive Interpreter's Bible (Vol. 5, pp. 217-22), one of the most authoritative works in the field. Or more succinctly, try the popular Harper's Bible Dictionary (Paul J, Achtemeier, gen. ed., 1985), page 419, where this statement is found:

It is clear, however, that... Isaiah 7:14 did not speak of the miraculous birth of Jesus centuries later.... The sign of Immanuel offered by the prophet to Ahaz had to do with the imminent birth of a child, of a mother known to Ahaz and Isaiah, and signified God's presence with his people....
Indeed, Isaiah's word for "sign" was 'ot, which in the Hebrew Bible invariably indicated an imminent sign or omen, not one in the far future. Keep reading, in fact, and you will see Isaiah's sign appear just a few verses later (Is. 8:3-4 ), when a certain prophetess gives birth to a son--a child whom God called "Immanuel" in verse 8."
Source: http://www.infidels.org/library/magazin ... rgi93.html

 

[bibleberean]

AHISMA,


I didn't miss your point. Your point was simply and completely rejected.

 

[DivineNames]

The Jews and skeptics ignore the fact that a young woman having a baby (a daily occurrence) is not a significant sign natural or supernatural.

A virgin having a baby is a very significant sign.

You ignore the fact that the significance of the 'sign' is not that someone will give birth. The significance of the child, is that before such and such a time a certain outcome will have been realized, so displaying God's providence.

Is a normal birth miraculous? No it isn't.

Is a prophet going around "barefoot and stripped" miraculous? No it isn't. If someone did that today it wouldn't be seen as a 'sign', except perhaps that the person was mentally unstable. I don't see you questioning that sign!

 

[bibleberean]

The Jews and skeptics ignore the fact that a young woman having a baby (a daily occurrence) is not a significant sign natural or supernatural.

A virgin having a baby is a very significant sign.

You ignore the fact that the significance of the 'sign' is not that someone will give birth. The significance of the child, is that before such and such a time a certain outcome will have been realized, so displaying God's providence.

Is a normal birth miraculous? No it isn't.

Is a prophet going around "barefoot and stripped" miraculous? No it isn't. If someone did that today it wouldn't be seen as a 'sign', except perhaps that the person was mentally unstable. I don't see you questioning that sign!

I totally agree that the time period is part and a partial fulfillment of the prophecy but with the rest of Isaiah speaking about the Messiah and the fact and that a clear fulfillment of the prophecy is recorded in the New Testament it becomes totally clear that their is much more to this prophecy.

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

A child was not born that was called the mighty God, the everlasting father and the prince of peace now was He?

A naked prophet was quite a sign for Israel.

It would be a little strange for the New Testament writers to think they could pull off a scam like the Virgin birth on the Jews of their day.

The Jews today are apostate and are in blindness until the time they say "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord".

Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

God became flesh and dwelt among us.

John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The Jews stumbled as do the skeptics...

Matthew 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

Matthew 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Praise God!

 

[DivineNames]

Re: messiah

We know that God cursed Jeconiah. God stated that no descendant of his would prosper on the throne of David, "For no man of his descendants will prosper sitting on the throne of David or ruling again in Judah," (Jer. 22:30).

Jeconiah is also called Coniah.

Jesus is not a biological descendant of Jeconiah, but through the other lineage -- that of Mary.

Jesus was Joseph's adopted son and gave Jesus the legal rights of Joseph to Jesus as a son but not the biological curse.

So God cursed the line, but you think there wouldn't be a problem if Joseph adopted? simple common sense should tell you that this is as suspect as it gets.


Also-

Can the 'legal rights' (as you put it) be passed via adoption?
Did Joseph actually adopt Jesus?

 

[bibleberean]

Re: messiah

We know that God cursed Jeconiah. God stated that no descendant of his would prosper on the throne of David, "For no man of his descendants will prosper sitting on the throne of David or ruling again in Judah," (Jer. 22:30).

Jeconiah is also called Coniah.

Jesus is not a biological descendant of Jeconiah, but through the other lineage -- that of Mary.

Jesus was Joseph's adopted son and gave Jesus the legal rights of Joseph to Jesus as a son but not the biological curse.

So God cursed the line, but you think there wouldn't be a problem if Joseph adopted? simple common sense should tell you that this is as suspect as it gets.


Also-

Can the 'legal rights' (as you put it) be passed via adoption?
Did Joseph actually adopt Jesus?

Jesus was Joseph's "supposed son". The fact is Jesus was God's son born of a virgin.

There is a problem with the fact that Jesus who is God's only begotten Son can sit on the throne of Israel?

Is it not God who chose Israel who raises up kings and brings them down?

Jesus has all the rights of a son without the curse of Jeconiah. Just as Jesus was born without sin because of the fact that He was born of the Holy Ghost He is also has all the qualifications to sit on the throne.

There was no legal adoption of Jesus by Joseph. He was treated as a son by Joseph and everyone assumed that he was Jospeph's son or else they assumed he was born through fornication.

Matthew 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

I believe the Old and New Testament and I don't believe you believe in either.

Am I wrong? Do you believe the bible is a God inspired book?

 

[DivineNames]

Re: messiah

There is a problem with the fact that Jesus who is God's only begotten Son can sit on the throne of Israel?

Is it not God who chose Israel who raises up kings and brings them down?

Jesus has all the rights of a son without the curse of Jeconiah. Just as Jesus was born without sin because of the fact that He was born of the Holy Ghost He is also has all the qualifications to sit on the throne.

Are you saying that Jesus had the qualifications to 'sit on the throne' because of the holy ghost?

There was no legal adoption of Jesus by Joseph. He was treated as a son by Joseph and everyone assumed that he was Jospeph's son or else they assumed he was born through fornication.

So Jesus had no father, and wasn't adopted by Joseph. (not that adoption would necessarily mean anything)

Am I right in thinking that Jesus wouldn't belong to any tribe?

I believe the Old and New Testament and I don't believe you believe in either.

Am I wrong? Do you believe the bible is a God inspired book?

Neither the O.T. or N.T. is the "word of God" in my view.

 

[DivineNames]

The Jews and skeptics ignore the fact that a young woman having a baby (a daily occurrence) is not a significant sign natural or supernatural.

A virgin having a baby is a very significant sign.

You ignore the fact that the significance of the 'sign' is not that someone will give birth. The significance of the child, is that before such and such a time a certain outcome will have been realized, so displaying God's providence.

Is a normal birth miraculous? No it isn't.

Is a prophet going around "barefoot and stripped" miraculous? No it isn't. If someone did that today it wouldn't be seen as a 'sign', except perhaps that the person was mentally unstable. I don't see you questioning that sign!

I totally agree that the time period is part and a partial fulfillment of the prophecy but with the rest of Isaiah speaking about the Messiah and the fact and that a clear fulfillment of the prophecy is recorded in the New Testament it becomes totally clear that their is much more to this prophecy.

My point is that there is no reason to believe that it would have to say "virgin". The context, the 'sign', would not require it. (whether it does say "virgin" is a different matter.)

I'm sure if the New Testament says X then you will interpret the Bible in keeping with X. That doesn't necessarily make it true.

 

[DivineNames]

As the word Messiah means "the anointed", "anointed one" or whatever, was Jesus ever actually anointed?


(And please don't say he was anointed with the Holy Ghost... Acts 10:38)

 

[bibleberean]

Mary the Mother of Jesus and was of the tribe of Judah.

Anointing with oil is a type representing the Holy Ghost.

Jesus was anointed by the Holy Ghost. Just as David was anointed and did not become King immediately Jesus will not sit on the throne until He returns at the second coming.

Don't forget Jesus is God manifested in the flesh.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

His Kingdom is not yet of this world.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Jesus will return and sit upon the throne.

Jesus is called the son of David.

Matthew 9:27 And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us.

Matthew 12:23 And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?

Matthew 21:9 And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.

Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

 

[bibleberean]

Matthew 2:1-6 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

Jesus was born King and His anointing comes from God.

Not that it would matter to a person who neither believes nor accepts the Old or New Testament as God's word.

 

[einstein]

messiah

For Gary: You wrote : "Only gene-carrying descendants are considered as descendants. This assumption is demonstrably false.

Not according to God's word in the Tanach:
1) 2 Sam 7:12-...then I will raise up your seed that shall issue from your body after you and I will establish his kingdom
2)Ps 132:11: The Lord has sworn in truth to David,from which He will not turn back, of the fruit of your body I shall seat upon the throne.

You then wrote:" Jesus got his genes from Mary and his legal standing from Joseph (thru the marriage of M+J)."...."PROBABLY through the law of levirate marriage" I want to make sure I understand your (or Glenn Miller's) position. Are you saying that if Heli had no sons, then Joseph, by marrying into Mary's family, preserves the inheritance of that line?

 

[bibleberean]

Matthew 22:41-46 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?

They say unto him, The Son of David.


He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

 

[einstein]

Isaiah 9

Here is the KGB translation of this famous passage followed by 2 versions properly translated from the orginal Hebrew.

Is 9:6 (KJB)- For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder. and his name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Is 9:5 - For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us and the authority has been placed upon his shoulder and (he) called his name: Wondrous Advisor, Mighty God (or Mighty Hero), Eternal Patron (or Father), Ruler (or Prince) of Peace.

Is 9:5 - For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us and the authority has been placed upon his shoulder, and the Wondrous Advisor, Mighty God (or Mighty Hero), Eternal Patron (or Father) called his name, "Ruler (or Prince) of Peace."

I will only mention 2 problems with the KJB in this post. First, the KJB translates the tenses in this passage in the present and future whereas the proper translation of the verbs in this passage are in the PAST tense.
One example will suffice.

The verb" yiqra" is a conjugation of the root verb "kara" (to) call in the 3rd person, singular masculine future tense which normally translates as "(he) shall call". However, the verb used in this passage is "vayiqra" i.e. it has a special preposition "va" in front called the the conversive vav. The net effect of this vav is to translate ' and' and reverse the normal tense. (BTW all the OTHER verbs do not have the conversive vav- they are all conjugated in the standard past tense). Thus "vayiqra" becomes "and (he) called."

There are over 200 identical instances of "vayiqra" in the Hebrew bible including 4 within Isaiah. Outside of Isaiah the 3rd book of the Torah is called "Vayiqra" (Leviticus) because the first word in the book in Hebrew is "vayiqra" Here is the KJB translation of that passage: "And the Lord CALLED unto Moses...

The four instances in Isaiah are Isaiah 9:5(6), 21:8, 22:12 and 36:13. In the last 3 the KJB translates the verb as "and he cried",and" did...call",and "and cried". Only in Isaiah 9:5(6) is the future tense used to suggest a future messianic prophecy. The obvious inconsistency here demonstrates the purposes of the mistranslation. This passage is NOT a messianic prophecy at all. (Other reasons to be given later). It is a passage describing an event already taken place in Jewish history, namely, the birth of Hezekiah and a prophecy about his future as King of Judah.

The second more obvious problem is that the KJB inserts the definite article "THE" in front of all the name descriptions with CAPITALS to emphasize the divine nature of Jesus. More accurate Jewish translations omit the definite article since the word "ha" is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew text

 

[Guest]

The LXX was not translated by the Jews, the 70 Jewish men translated only the first 5 books. So the carm website is wrong, the rest of the tanach was translated by gentiles. The writers of the NT were Jews but used the greek language, the majority of manuscrips are written in greek, the main language by these jews was not the original hebrew.

Again the word Lord in the Hebrew does not have the same divinty as the other word Lord in that Psalms, but is a different word, used to describe king, or man of power, not God. The mistranslated version used by christian bibles doesnt say that.

Psalms22, the pslam that says they periced my hands and feet, the word in the hebrew is like a lion. How do we get pierced my hands and feet from that?

Speaking of using verses out of context, the christians always blame mormoms, witness's, islam for doing this, but what about the prophecies by matthew, this book uses so many "prophecies" that are just taken out of context to fit the writing and "prophecies"

 

[Gary]

The LXX was not translated by the Jews, the 70 Jewish men translated only the first 5 books.

Proof please.



Here are the arguments that the LXX was translated by Jews.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm

also...

...When were the other books besides the Pentateuch turned into Greek? To this no definite answer could be given: we may however be certain that various interpreters were occupied in translating various parts, and in all probability the interval between the commencement and the conclusion of the work was not great.

http://www.ccel.org/bible/brenton/intro.html

In estimating the general character of the version, it must be remembered that the translators were Jews, full of traditional thoughts of their own as to the meaning of Scripture; and thus nothing short of a miracle could have prevented them from infusing into their version the thoughts which were current in their own minds. They could only translate passages as they themselves understood them. This is evidently the case when their work is examined.

http://www.ccel.org/bible/brenton/intro.html

 

[Guest]

REFUTING CHRISTIAN "PROOF TEXTS"
While traveling through a forest, a person noticed a circle marked on a tree with an arrow shot perfectly into the center. A few yards away he noticed several more targets, each with arrows in the center. Later, he met the talented archer and he asked him, "How did you become such an expert that you always get your arrows into the center of the bull's-eye?" "It's not difficult," responded the archer, "First I shoot the arrow and then I draw the circle."

When examining Christian "proof texts" that claim to point to Jesus as the promised Messiah, we should always ask the following question. "Has an arrow been shot into a circle or has a circle been drawn around an arrow?" In other words, has the passage been mistranslated, misquoted, taken out of context or fabricated?

Here are examples of several ways that missionaries "draw a circle around the arrow" to prove their point.

Example 1: THE VERSE HAS BEEN FABRICATED AND DOES NOT EXIST IN the HEBREW SCRIPTURES

The easiest prophecy to fulfill is one you yourself have invented. The New Testament certainly bears witness to this principle, fabricating a number of "prophecies" out of thin air and attributing them to our Hebrew Scriptures.

The New Testament book of Matthew claims that Jesus was the Messiah since he lived in the city of Nazareth. The New Testament utilizes the following "proof text" to make its point: "He [Jesus] came and resided in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled. "He shall be called a Nazarene.'" (Matthew 2:23) Since a Nazarene is a resident of the city of Nazareth and this city did not exist during the time period of the Jewish Bible, it is impossible to find this quotation in the Hebrew Scriptures. It was fabricated out of thin air.

Example 2: THE VERSE IS MISTRANSLATED

An effective missionary will work with crude English retranslations of earlier Greek mistranslations, and will avoid looking at the original Hebrew.

In Romans 11:26, the Christian Bible quotes Isaiah 59:20 as saying, "The deliverer will come from Zion, he will remove ungodliness from Jacob," thus attempting to establish scriptural support for the Christian belief that the Messiah will take away our sins. How-ever, a careful examination of the Hebrew original reveals a powerful dilemma. Isaiah 59:20 actually says the opposite: "A redeemer will come to Zion and to those who turn from transgression in Jacob, declares the Lord." The Messiah's role is not to take away our sins; rather, when we turn away from our sins, the Messiah will then come! It is also noteworthy that many New Testaments translate this verse correctly in Isaiah and incorrectly in Romans.

Example 3: THE PASSAGE IS MISTRANSLATED AND READ OUT OF CONTEXT

In an attempt to prove the concept of the "virgin birth," the book of Matthew 1:22-23 states: "Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, "Behold a virgin shall be with child and will bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel,' which translated means, G-d with us." Missionaries claim that this is the fulfillment of a prophecy recorded in Isaiah 7:14, that actually reads: "Behold, the young woman is with child and will bear a son and she will call his name Emmanuel."

There are numerous inaccuracies in the Christian translation. For example:

1) The Hebrew word, "almah -," means a young woman, not a virgin, a fact recognized by biblical scholars1;

2) The verse says "ha'almah--," "the young woman," not a young woman, specifying a particular woman that was known to Isaiah during his lifetime; and

3) The verse says "she will call his name Emmanuel," not "they shall call."

Even apart from these inaccuracies, if we read all of Isaiah Chapter 7, from which this verse is taken, it is obvious that Christians have taken this verse out of context.

This chapter speaks of a prophecy made to the Jewish King Ahaz to allay his fears of two invading kings (those of Damascus and of Samaria) who were preparing to invade Jerusalem, about 600 years before Jesus' birth. Isaiah's point is that these events will take place in the very near future (and not 600 years later, as Christianity claims). Verse 16 makes this abundantly clear: "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken."

In fact, in the very next chapter this prophecy is fulfilled with the birth of a son to Isaiah. As it says in Isaiah 8:4, "For before the child shall know to cry, "My father and my mother' the riches of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria." This verse entirely rules out any connection to Jesus, who would not be born for 600 years.

Example 4: VIEWED IN CONTEXT, THE VERSE COULD NOT REFER TO JESUS

In Hebrews 1:5, the New Testament quotes a verse from II Samuel 7:14, "I will be a Father to him, and he shall be a son to Me." This is said to be a prophetic reference to Jesus as the son of G-d. However, if we look at this verse from II Samuel in its entirety, the verse doesn't end with the phrase quoted in the New Testament, but continues: "When he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men." This cannot possibly fit the Christian Bible's view of a "sinless" Jesus. In addition, the verse is speaking specifically about King Solomon, as is obvious from I Chronicles 22:9-10, "His name shall be Solomon . . . he shall build a house for My name and I will be a Father to him and he will be a son to Me."

The Bible frequently refers to individuals as G-d's "son." In fact, G-d refers to the entire nation of Israel in the following manner, "Israel is My son, My firstborn." (Exodus 4:22)

Example 5: THE PASSAGE IS NOT A PROOF

Missionaries incorrectly claim that Jesus fulfilled a prophesy that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. They attempt to utilize Michah 5:2 as their proof text:

"But you Bethlehem Ephratah, though you are small among the thousands of Judah, out of you will come to Me one who will be ruler in Israel, whose goings out are from ancient time, from days of old."

This verse is not a prophesy that the Messiah will be born in Bethlehem. The passage simply states it has been preordained that the Messiah would be able to trace his roots back to Bethlehem. This is consistent with the Biblical statement that the Messiah will be a descendant of King David, who was from Bethlehem, as seen in I Samuel 16:18.

There is another problem with this missionary proof text. A major distinction must be made between a scripture that serves as a proof that someone is the Messiah and a scriptures that simply states a requirement of the Messiah. A proof must be something so exclusive that only one individual can fulfill it. For example: One criterion of the Messiah is that he must be Jewish. If an individual is Jewish, he has fulfilled this particular requirement; however, in and of itself, this is obviously not a proof that the individual is the Messiah since millions of individuals are Jewish and they all meet this criterion. Therefore, the claim that Jesus was born in Bethlehem would not prove a thing, since thousands of children were born there.

SUMMARY

These examples demonstrate the confusion created when missionaries shoot an arrow first and then draw a circle around it. Our advice is to always take the time to examine and read passages carefully and in their entirety. If you follow this advice, the correct interpretation will be abundantly clear.