Misunderstand by Jws and Protestants

[Rodger]

Admitting that Jesus was never called those things from Isaiah 9:6 is not a strike against me as you seem to be suggesting, but rather it’s to my advantage.

Now, do you want to see something really interesting? You won’t recognize Isaiah 9:6 translated from the Septuagint.

Esias 9 (LXX)​

6 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.​

The Jewish people who translated the Old Testament into Greek hundreds of years before the Trinitarians did didn’t see it the same way as how it’s seen in the modern day. See why Jesus the Son isn’t Everlasting Father or Mighty God now? It’s because it isn’t Biblical. The Bible has been fiddled with a lot over the millennia. We need to actually look into these things.

Isaiah 9:6 from the Septuagint I completely agree with.

It seems to me that you are promoting "modalism".

What you are posting, by your own words, say that the idea of modalism is that God has different "modes" of operation, kind of like an actor who simply appears with different masks in different situations playing different roles. If the same person is merely appearing in multiple forms simultaneously, there are some weird situations in Scripture that result, and have implications that are dicey.

Now you may noy admitt that, but to me, that is what you are doing.

Of course to say that and believe that you have to remove several Scriptures from the Word of God.
If you do not, then you will have God talking to Himself.

"This is my son, with whom I am well pleased".
If Jesus is just a different view of the same God, why would he say something like this, to himself? It makes God seem a bit arrogant, frankly.

"Father, Why have you forsaken me?"
How could he forsake himself if he is the same person forsaking and forsaken.

In Hebrews 9:14, "the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offer himself unblemished to God".
How can Christ offer his own blood to himself if he is the same person? Unless that were somehow possible, Substitutionary Atonement is also invalid. IF....IF substitutionary Atonement is invaled, then YOU and ME and everyone else is doomed to eternal hell my friend.

 

[Rodger]

I'm not mixing law and grace. I'm saying Jesus endured sin against Himself...and responded with grace. He didn't destroy the sinners who abused Him.

Then please interpret the passages I cited where God forbids substitutionary sacrifice.


I know. The problem is you're not seeing that every sin they committed against Jesus they were committing against God. The Son was showing mercy to sinners, instead of wiping them out, just as our Father does.

I told you why and you ignored me. You're not looking at how the passages you're citing mesh perfectly with what I'm citing. They're contrary your way.

Yes Rodger, His life makes atonement possible. He sprinkled His life (showed love, mercy, forgivness) on sinners making atonement with Him possible.

The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying, What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying,
The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasionany more to use this proverb in Israel. Eze 18:1-3 KJV

Interpret this proverb according to the chapter. What is God saying Rodger?

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deut. 24:16 KJV

What does Deut.24:16 mean to you Rodger?

I did not ignore you. You have the common problem of stating many thoughts and expecting others to sniff through them so as to give you a response.

If you are serious about wanting to know responses and Biblical answers...."Ask ONE question or make ONE comment" at a time and I will be blessed to respond to that ONE question at a time.

I can not and will not try and do that with 3 or 4 contained in one post. I just am not able to think that way.

In other words.....FOCUS!!!!

 

[Rodger]

Hi again Rodger

I should have done this in the beginning. As I said, I'm not familiar with the word 'proleptic'. So I went and looked it up.

proleptic​

[ proh-lep-tik ]SHOW IPA

---

adjective

1. (of a date) retroactively calculated using a later calendar than the one used at the time:To make comparisons more simple, all dates are shown using the proleptic Gregorian calendar—that is, the modern Western calendar extrapolated into the past.
2. involving or characterized by prolepsis, the anticipatory use of arguments, adjectives, etc.:The proleptic idiom “to be dead meat” uses a present-tense description to suggest one’s future doom.
3. anticipatory; foreshadowing:The proleptic detail of the borrowed scythe clearly reveals that the character’s life on stage will be of short duration.
   
   Honestly, I don't see that any of that defines the word as you seem to be. The proleptic idiom “to be dead meat” uses a present-tense description to suggest one’s future doom. Not that it's already happened in some sense when stated, but that it's a present-tense description to suggest one's FUTURE doom.
   
   God bless,
   Ted
   
   
   

Red....I appreciate your work. However, it may be that you found what you were looking for and stopped looking.

May I say to you that many, many years ago I leaned that In the Bible, prolepsis is used in various ways.

One is in the introduction of characters by names, descriptions, and epithets that will have relevance for the reality of that particular story which is yet to take place. Thus, the meanings of the patriarchal names Abraham (Great Father) or Sarah (Princess) both have significance as the progenitors of the Jewish People.

Abram WAS NOT the father of a great nation when that was stated, but Abraham will indeed be a father of a great nation, and real history has confirmed that prophecy.

Yhe Bible says that Sarah will be a princess but she was not one when that was stated. However, history has shown that she did indeed become a princess, the ancestral mother of all of us.

The proleptic knowledge that Sarah is barren gives us a clue in advance of the importance of that detail when, in real history we read of the birth of Isaac to very elderly parents.

Allow me to give you another example. I am sure that you remember when Bathsheba is first introduced in the story of David and Bathsheba, she is described as being the daughter of Eliam in 2 Sam. 11:3.
This detail is unnecessary in that particular story, but is proleptically given in anticipation of the fact that Ahitophel, David’s chief advisor, will later join Absalom’s revolt against David in 2 Sam. 15:31. Eliam, we will be later told, is the son of Ahitophel (23:34), so Bathsheba is none other than Ahitophel’s granddaughter. Ahitophel’s rejection of David is now made clear to us. He did it because of David’s outrageous treatment of his granddaughter and her husband: David had an illicit affair with Bathsheba, and had Uriah, her husband, killed.

In as loving as a way as I can say, It appears to me that you are not really interested in leaning something that you were not aware of.

Having said that in Christian love, allow me now to say that Prolepsis in the Bible, is viewed as a rhetorical feature that allows the narrator to mingle present and future events; a technique indicating the certainty of future events. The narrator can report future events in the present, and, by this means, emphasize the certainty of the performance of the acts described.

That fact of understanding then allow us to realize that when Isaiah wrote 9:6.....He was viewing the birth of the Messiah to a virgin as an event that had already taken place.

Prolepsis in Literature: Examples​

1. “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson:
   • Prolepsis is employed through subtle foreshadowing, creating an ominous atmosphere before the shocking revelation in the conclusion.
2. “The Cask of Amontillado” by Edgar Allan Poe:
   • The narrator’s retrospective storytelling serves as a prolepsis, heightening the suspense leading to the story’s climactic event.
3. "A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner:
   • Faulkner employs prolepsis by revealing Emily’s death at the beginning, shaping the reader’s understanding of her isolated life.
4. “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant:
   • The proleptic twist at the end, where the true nature of the necklace is revealed, adds depth to the narrative.
5. “The Tell-Tale Heart” by Edgar Allan Poe:
   • The narrator’s insistence on their sanity at the beginning serves as a prolepsis, foreshadowing the unfolding madness.
   • Source........english-studies.net/prolepsis-in-literature/#:~:text=The%20Ghost’s%20revelation%20about%20the%20future%20demise%20of,guiding%20the%20trajectory%20of%20Hamlet’s%20action“A Rose for Emily” by William Faulkner:

 

[Rodger]

Hi Rodger

Apparently you're missing my point. 'IF' all of the prophecies given by God will come to pass, as God Himself has said, then if proleptic means that what God says will come to pass, I find it a rather redundant word. I'm also not in agreement that God sees His prophecies as already having been completed. He's just giving us a method by which we can be assured that He knows the beginning from the end. When Daniel wrote his prophetic writing, the city of Jerusalem had not been rebuilt. When God's word tells us that the virgin will be with child. Mary wasn't already pregnant. So, I'm a simple guy and I don't understand this gobbledegook word that's supposed to infer to us some deep spiritual truth that the events prophesied had already happend. God knew they were going to happen, but I don't think what you're describing as proleptic really has any purpose but to confuse and confound. And whether it comes out of some fine university or not, we are to test everything by the word and the testmony of Jesus.

And please, feel free to use that word if it supports your position, but I'm fine with God's prophecies 'will' always come to pass. That's the verb that God used. I honestly can't find anyplace in the Scriptures where God infers or says that what He tells us through His prophecies has already happened.

God bless,
Ted

Ted...........I did not say---" that God sees His prophecies as already having been completed. "

I said,.......:The WRITER in the Scriptures saw what he stated as a done deal.

Now, to be Biblically real here......You do realize that there is nothing that happens in which God does not already know the end story!!!!

I apologize that you feel confused and are unable to comprehend what I has stated. That is never my plan.

Actually, I am a simple old country boy. I have tried to explain what a word and its function means to you. I am very sorry you do not understand it.

You said......
" When God's word tells us that the virgin will be with child. Mary wasn't already pregnant.".

Luke 1:30-32
"And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. 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".

Now Ted......Did Mary conceive?????
Did she deliver the baby, Lord Jesus the Christ????
Is He called the Son of God?????

Can you not see the results of what Mary was told?​

 

[Runningman]

It seems to me that you are promoting "modalism".

What you are posting, by your own words, say that the idea of modalism is that God has different "modes" of operation, kind of like an actor who simply appears with different masks in different situations playing different roles. If the same person is merely appearing in multiple forms simultaneously, there are some weird situations in Scripture that result, and have implications that are dicey.

Now you may noy admitt that, but to me, that is what you are doing.

Of course to say that and believe that you have to remove several Scriptures from the Word of God.
If you do not, then you will have God talking to Himself.

"This is my son, with whom I am well pleased".
If Jesus is just a different view of the same God, why would he say something like this, to himself? It makes God seem a bit arrogant, frankly.

"Father, Why have you forsaken me?"
How could he forsake himself if he is the same person forsaking and forsaken.

In Hebrews 9:14, "the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offer himself unblemished to God".
How can Christ offer his own blood to himself if he is the same person? Unless that were somehow possible, Substitutionary Atonement is also invalid. IF....IF substitutionary Atonement is invaled, then YOU and ME and everyone else is doomed to eternal hell my friend.

I am not a modalist, but a unitarian. I do not believe Jesus is God or a mode God uses. If God has different masks He uses and His masks are called the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit then the masks aren’t aren’t God either, contrary to what the Bible says.

All of your questions are answered by the fact that Jesus and God aren’t the same person.

Otherwise, yes, God forsaking himself, God dying, God having sin laid on Him, God sending God, are all confusing ideas.

So why is the Father or Holy Spirit never called the image of God, or that the fullness of God dwells in them, but of Jesus it’s said? Is God an image?

 

[miamited]

Hi Rodger

"Father, Why have you forsaken me?"
How could he forsake himself if he is the same person forsaking and forsaken.

Actually, I don't think the issue of being forsaken by God, is what those words that Jesus spoke was intending.

In ancient days of the old covenant, Scriptures were not broken up by chapter and verse which is how we get on the same page when a teacher is teaching. Your pastor probably says something like, "I'd like everyone to turn to Isaiah chapter 34 verse 1. That's where I'll be teaching from today and you can follow along in your copy of the Scriptures".

Ahhh but a rabbi in ancient Israel couldn't do that. Jesus was a rabbi! Mary called him one and a few others referred to him as rabbi. Rabbi is a Hebrew term that means teacher of God. So, there is a passage in the Psalms where David wrote down a fairly complete description of what was happening before their very eyes as Jesus hung on that cross. As a rabbi giving his last lesson, he was calling the Jewish leaders to look at a piece of Scripture that would confirm for them exactly what was going on in real life on the day that they crucified him. So he cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

His intention, just as every rabbi would do during synagogue, was to draw their attention to the place in the Scriptures that they were teaching about. That's why Jesus spoke those words. That's why God gave David that prophecy to write down hundreds of years before the event. God's plan was that they reject him and crucify him. But God's plan was also that He was giving it one last effort, even though Jesus was going to die in the next few moments. to draw His people to read in the scrolls of the psalms this passage describing what was going on.

Consider it my friend. And that's not my learned position. We actually had a visiting teacher to come to our fellowship and teach on it. You can actually verify that this is how a rabbi in ancient Israel would have opened any teaching of God's word to the people. He would merely quote the first few words of a passage.

From engediresourcecenter.com:

Alluding to the Scriptures​

Another method Jesus used was alluding, or hinting to, his scriptures. He would use a distinctive word or phrase from a passage in the Old Testament as a way of alluding to all of it.[3]

This was common in his time. In Medieval times this technique was called Remez. Even though Jesus wouldn’t have used that term, he often filled his sayings with references to the scriptures that would have been obvious to his biblically knowledgeable audience. For example, Jesus was probably alluding to a scene in 2 Chronicles 28:12-15 when he told the parable of the Good Samaritan. He would have expected his audience to remember the earlier story in order to interpret the later story.

Sometimes, rabbinic teachers would hint to not just one scripture but two or more that shared a common word, and tie the two together in order to preach a message. Jesus did this when he said “My house is to be a house of prayer, but you have made it (my house) a den of thieves.” (Matt. 21:13) He is quoting both Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7 and tying them together, because they both contained the word beiti, “my house.” He is contrasting God’s greatest vision for the temple — Isaiah 56:7 describes all the nations of the world worshiping there — with the worst possible abuse of it, which was being used as a refuge for thieves and murderers, as in Jeremiah 7:11.

Jesus similarly cried out, "My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me?" Because he wanted those Jewish leaders to look at that Scripture. That the passage referenced would show them that all that was happening had already been prophesied to happen. That, in fact, they were doing the will of his Father in crucifying him.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi again Rodger

:The WRITER in the Scriptures saw what he stated as a done deal.

Honestly, it's my humble opinion that most of the prophecies written by God's prophets, especially ones that would take centuries to come to fulfillment, had no idea of what the things they were writing actually meant or would turn out.

Now, to be Biblically real here......You do realize that there is nothing that happens in which God does not already know the end story!!!!

Yes, brother. And that's exactly what I'm telling you!!! Everything that happens, as regards God's established will... will happen just as God has said.

and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David".

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. God gave unto Jesus the throne of his father, David. Jesus is God's servant and Son, not God himself.

I'm going to leave it to God as to which one of us is correctly dividing the Scriptures.

And that piece I just wrote about "My God, my God... " You're going to find that a whole bunch of christians think that God forsook Jesus because he was doing exactly what God had asked him to do, but he had all kinds of sin upon his body. It was even my understanding until I was taught this history lesson concerning the practice of the rabbi at synagogue calling out the first words of a passage to bring it up for teaching. Why would God forsake him for that? That's exactly what God had asked Him to do. God's promise is that for those who do His will, He will never abandon or forsake. Hmmmm. I'm pretty sure that Jesus was doing the will of God more than anyone who had ever lived upon the earth. And He promised never to forsake such a trusted child.

Trust me... or don't. Jesus cried out that statement not because he was being forsaken, but because he was drawing the Israelites attention to the Scriptures that prophesied the very things that were happening before their eyes. By God's Holy Spirit He had David write that prophetic account of Jesus' suffering just so Jesus could cry it out as He died.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Rodger]

Hi again Rodger

Honestly, it's my humble opinion that most of the prophecies written by God's prophets, especially ones that would take centuries to come to fulfillment, had no idea of what the things they were writing actually meant or would turn out.

Yes, brother. And that's exactly what I'm telling you!!! Everything that happens, as regards God's established will... will happen just as God has said.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. God gave unto Jesus the throne of his father, David. Jesus is God's servant and Son, not God himself.

I'm going to leave it to God as to which one of us is correctly dividing the Scriptures.

And that piece I just wrote about "My God, my God... " You're going to find that a whole bunch of christians think that God forsook Jesus because he was doing exactly what God had asked him to do, but he had all kinds of sin upon his body. It was even my understanding until I was taught this history lesson concerning the practice of the rabbi at synagogue calling out the first words of a passage to bring it up for teaching. Why would God forsake him for that? That's exactly what God had asked Him to do. God's promise is that for those who do His will, He will never abandon or forsake. Hmmmm. I'm pretty sure that Jesus was doing the will of God more than anyone who had ever lived upon the earth. And He promised never to forsake such a trusted child.

Trust me... or don't. Jesus cried out that statement not because he was being forsaken, but because he was drawing the Israelites attention to the Scriptures that prophesied the very things that were happening before their eyes. By God's Holy Spirit He had David write that prophetic account of Jesus' suffering just so Jesus could cry it out as He died.

God bless,
Ted

Ted, All of the prophets did what was called....."Near and Far" prophecies. The "near" were the ones that were meant for the people that the prophet ministered to. He spoke the Word of God as if it was God speaking for a specific purpose. A prophecy is made, and the first fulfillment comes to pass relatively soon thereafter. Later, there is a second fulfillment to the prophecy, and that second fulfillment is usually fuller and more literal. So, there is a “near” fulfillment and a “far” fulfillment. A prophecy having a dual fulfillment helps to unify Scripture and emphasizes God’s masterful control of events. There are several examples of prophecies with a double fulfillment.

This "near & Far" or as some call it....."The dual fulfillment of Bible prophecy" is one more reason to praise the Lord who says in Isaiah 46:10.........
“I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please’”.

Daniel 2:20-21 says.......
“Praise be to the name of God for ever and ever;
wisdom and power are his.
He changes times and seasons;
he deposes kings and raises up others.
He gives wisdom to the wise
and knowledge to the discerning”.

So in a sense you are correct due to the fact that the "far" prophecies would uselly take place hundreds of years later.

I agree in that there are No coincidences with God.

Now you said...........
"Trust me... or don't. Jesus cried out that statement not because he was being forsaken, but because he was drawing the Israelites attention to the Scriptures that prophesied the very things that were happening before their eyes. By God's Holy Spirit He had David write that prophetic account of Jesus' suffering just so Jesus could cry it out as He died."

I do not agree Ted and I only trust the Word of God not men. From your own words you have completely missed the message in those words......
" “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” (Mark 15:34).

Ted, It is not that he bears some vague relation to sinners. He is one of them, numbered with transgressors. Indeed, he is all of them. He is sin as seen in 2 Corinthians 5:21, condemned to bear its curse; and he has no cover. No one-None can serve as his advocate. Nothing can be offered as his expiation. He must bear all, and El will not, cannot, spare him till the ransom is paid in full because God the Father can not even look upon sin and His Son has been made sin so that YOU could be saved.

 

[miamited]

Hi Rodger

Yes, I suppose I am a dullard. I don't see any connection between your response here and my claim. I guess you think that David was crying out to God that he had been forsaken and it happened to also be a reference to Jesus' time of crucifixion. I have offered you the evidence that rabbis in the days of Jesus called out the beginning of a Scriptural passage to draw the attention of his listeners to where the teaching was coming from.

But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by everyone, despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads.
8 “He trusts in the LORD,” they say, “let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.”

When did the people stand around David and claim that he trusts in the Lord, let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him. Can you point to the fulfillment of this part of the prophecy in David's life? I can show you where it was fulfilled in Jesus' life and death.

Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast.

Is it your understanding that God made David trust in him? Where does David say that? Actually, David speaks of his being born in sin from his mother's womb.

Do not be far from me, for trouble is near and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me; strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions that tear their prey open their mouths wide against me.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax; it has melted within me.
When was the prophecy in David fulfilled that all of his bones were out of joint, and his heart turned to wax and melted within him?

My mouth is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death.
16 Dogs surround me, a pack of villains encircles me; they pierce my hands and my feet.
17 All my bones are on display; people stare and gloat over me.
When did David have his hands and feet pierced and his bones on display as people stared and gloated over him? Is here a refernce in the Scriptures that David had a time in his life when his mouth was dried up like a potsherd and his tongue sticking to the roof of his mouth? I can show you where that happened to Jesus.

They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.
Do you have a Scriptural reference that David's clothing was ever divided by casting lots? I mean you are claiming that this prophecy was fulfilled in David and also in Jesus, right? Ok, I'm willing to consider that. Show me where any of these passages applied to an historical or biblical account given us about David's life and death.

I'll await your response, thanks.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Rodger]

Hi Rodger


Actually, I don't think the issue of being forsaken by God, is what those words that Jesus spoke was intending.

In ancient days of the old covenant, Scriptures were not broken up by chapter and verse which is how we get on the same page when a teacher is teaching. Your pastor probably says something like, "I'd like everyone to turn to Isaiah chapter 34 verse 1. That's where I'll be teaching from today and you can follow along in your copy of the Scriptures".

Ahhh but a rabbi in ancient Israel couldn't do that. Jesus was a rabbi! Mary called him one and a few others referred to him as rabbi. Rabbi is a Hebrew term that means teacher of God. So, there is a passage in the Psalms where David wrote down a fairly complete description of what was happening before their very eyes as Jesus hung on that cross. As a rabbi giving his last lesson, he was calling the Jewish leaders to look at a piece of Scripture that would confirm for them exactly what was going on in real life on the day that they crucified him. So he cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

His intention, just as every rabbi would do during synagogue, was to draw their attention to the place in the Scriptures that they were teaching about. That's why Jesus spoke those words. That's why God gave David that prophecy to write down hundreds of years before the event. God's plan was that they reject him and crucify him. But God's plan was also that He was giving it one last effort, even though Jesus was going to die in the next few moments. to draw His people to read in the scrolls of the psalms this passage describing what was going on.

Consider it my friend. And that's not my learned position. We actually had a visiting teacher to come to our fellowship and teach on it. You can actually verify that this is how a rabbi in ancient Israel would have opened any teaching of God's word to the people. He would merely quote the first few words of a passage.

From engediresourcecenter.com:

Alluding to the Scriptures​

Another method Jesus used was alluding, or hinting to, his scriptures. He would use a distinctive word or phrase from a passage in the Old Testament as a way of alluding to all of it.[3]

This was common in his time. In Medieval times this technique was called Remez. Even though Jesus wouldn’t have used that term, he often filled his sayings with references to the scriptures that would have been obvious to his biblically knowledgeable audience. For example, Jesus was probably alluding to a scene in 2 Chronicles 28:12-15 when he told the parable of the Good Samaritan. He would have expected his audience to remember the earlier story in order to interpret the later story.

Sometimes, rabbinic teachers would hint to not just one scripture but two or more that shared a common word, and tie the two together in order to preach a message. Jesus did this when he said “My house is to be a house of prayer, but you have made it (my house) a den of thieves.” (Matt. 21:13) He is quoting both Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7 and tying them together, because they both contained the word beiti, “my house.” He is contrasting God’s greatest vision for the temple — Isaiah 56:7 describes all the nations of the world worshiping there — with the worst possible abuse of it, which was being used as a refuge for thieves and murderers, as in Jeremiah 7:11.

Jesus similarly cried out, "My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me?" Because he wanted those Jewish leaders to look at that Scripture. That the passage referenced would show them that all that was happening had already been prophesied to happen. That, in fact, they were doing the will of his Father in crucifying him.

God bless,
Ted

I hate to keep doing this my friend, but again you are incorrect and the person who came to your fellowship and taught you that is also incorrect and a false teacher.

Jesus said exactly what He intended to say.

Yes, the cry of Jesus on the cross is a fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, and it is one of many parallels between that psalm and the specific events of the crucifixion.

Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us as recorded in Galatians 3:13.

He was made a sin-offering, and He died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, that intensified His sufferings and part of why Jesus said, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some unexplained way, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. The suffering He endured was due to us, and it is that suffering by which we can be saved from eternal death.

You say that He said those words to point the Jews to Psalms 22 but in reality, how many Jews cared??? Hoe many were at the cross to hear???? FOUR! FOUR women. No Jews. No Rabbi's. No disciples. Only FOUR women and if you look at the Jews today can you say that they listened to the words of Jesus and are saved?
Is Israel, the land of the Jews a Christian nation?

 

[Rodger]

Hi Rodger

Yes, I suppose I am a dullard. I don't see any connection between your response here and my claim. I guess you think that David was crying out to God that he had been forsaken and it happened to also be a reference to Jesus' time of crucifixion. I have offered you the evidence that rabbis in the days of Jesus called out the beginning of a Scriptural passage to draw the attention of his listeners to where the teaching was coming from.

But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by everyone, despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads.
8 “He trusts in the LORD,” they say, “let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him.”

When did the people stand around David and claim that he trusts in the Lord, let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him. Can you point to the fulfillment of the part of the prophecy in David's life?

Yet you brought me out of the womb; you made me trust in you, even at my mother’s breast.

Is it your understanding that God made David trust in him?

Do not be far from me, for trouble is near and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me; strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions that tear their prey open their mouths wide against me.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax; it has melted within me.
When was the prophecy in David fulfilled that all of his bones were out of joint and his heart turned to wax and melted with him?

My mouth is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death.
16 Dogs surround me, a pack of villains encircles me; they pierce my hands and my feet.
17 All my bones are on display; people stare and gloat over me.
When did David have his hands and feet pierced and his bones on display as people stared and gloated over him?
They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment.

Do you have a Scriptural reference that David's clothing was ever divided by casting lots? I mean you are claiming that this prophecy was fulfilled in David and also in Jesus, right? Ok, I'm willing to consider that. Show me where any of these passages applied to an historical or biblical account given us about David's life and death.

I'll await your response, thanks.

God bless,
Ted

Again........Ted, list ONE question at a time! I can not do what you ask with 5 questions at a time.

I will say however, that what you seem to be trying to say is to take away from the diety of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Is that your goal?

 

[Rodger]

I am not a modalist, but a unitarian. I do not believe Jesus is God or a mode God uses. If God has different masks He uses and His masks are called the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit then the masks aren’t aren’t God either, contrary to what the Bible says.

All of your questions are answered by the fact that Jesus and God aren’t the same person.

Otherwise, yes, God forsaking himself, God dying, God having sin laid on Him, God sending God, are all confusing ideas.

So why is the Father or Holy Spirit never called the image of God, or that the fullness of God dwells in them, but of Jesus it’s said? Is God an image?

OK. Thanks for your honest answer. That answers a lot of questions I was going to ask you.

As A Unitarian then you do not believe that Jesus was the Christ and therefore is not God in the flesh. Did you realize that??????

That also means that you are not born again which then tells us the answer for your confusion and inability to grasp the theological doctrines of the Bible.

You see, by rejecting the Trinity you are rejecting what God in Christ did for you. The relationship between God and Jesus is a cornerstone of Christian faith. But this very idea has also led many skeptics and believers alike to question: Is God and Jesus Christ the same person?

So then, allow me to answer your question. The answer to the question “are God and Jesus the same person?” really depends on what is meant by the same person.

Then the answer would be “Yes—Jesus is fully divine. He has all the attributes of God”.

Colossians 2:9..........
" For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

However, the question could be interpreted another way, which would require a different answer. Theologically speaking, Jesus and the Father are different Persons of the Trinity. They are one in nature and essence, but they are different in personhood.

There is an ancient heresy called modalism (and a more modern variation called Oneness theology), which teaches that God does not exist in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons, but only one.

You say that you do not accept that teaching but According to modalism, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three individual Persons but simply three modes of revelation. Isnt that what you are saying??????

Sometimes God reveals Himself as the Father, other times as the Son, and still other times as the Holy Spirit. If the question is asked, “are Jesus and God the Father the same person?” the modalist would answer “yes,” but biblical Trinitarians would answer “no.”

 

[journeymanisnothing]

I did not ignore you. You have the common problem of stating many thoughts and expecting others to sniff through them so as to give you a response.

I asked you about this

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deut.24:16 KJV

and asked you to look at Ezekiel 18. Tell me what is God saying in these passages?

 

[miamited]

Hi Rodger

Jesus said exactly what He intended to say.

Well, of course he did. I don't think that either of us are arguing that he didn't mean to say what he said. We're differing over the 'why' he said it.

Ted, It is not that he bears some vague relation to sinners. He is one of them, numbered with transgressors. Indeed, he is all of them. He is sin as seen in 2 Corinthians 5:21, condemned to bear its curse; and he has no cover. No one-None can serve as his advocate. Nothing can be offered as his expiation. He must bear all, and El will not, cannot, spare him till the ransom is paid in full because God the Father can not even look upon sin and His Son has been made sin so that YOU could be saved.

And again, I have no idea how that applies to this discussion. I'm not arguing any of that. I'm merely arguing that when Jesus cried out, "My God, my God..." That he wasn't being forsaken, he was drawing the Jewish people around him to find and read and understand where those words were written in the Scriptures and what they revealed in that Psalm. Yes he was condemned to bear its curse. But God didn't forsake him for doing exactly what God had set as His plan and working out of our salvation.

You say that He said those words to point the Jews to Psalms 22 but in reality, how many Jews cared???

And why would that matter, if Jesus was giving a teaching about the things that they were standing there doing and seeing?

Look, I get that you trust in your fine knowledge and education, just as I believe that I have knowledge of the Scriptures, so to do you. But there is a truth. And I'm asking you to show me how David fulfilled some 'near' prophecy that is written in Psalm 22. Can you? Where's your evidence that any of those things that are written in the first eighteen verses of this Psalm of David, happened to David. Show me the 'near' fulfillment of the first eighteen verses.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi Rodger

I am going to encourage you to do as I do. Go to the Lord and ask Him, through the power of His Spirit within you, to give you understanding of the things that you're reading. Pray diligently. Just throw out all that you have believed for one hour and ask the Lord to give you understanding. I have given you the proof that it was a regular practice in the synagogue for a rabbi to quote a few words of Scripture. As the information that I sent you explains. The Jewish people, especially the rabbis knew the Scriptures well enough that they could find parts of the Scriptures in this way. Do you deny that's how rabbis taught in ancient Israel?

If so, then I'd say you're not really well versed in 'how' the synagogue teachings were handled before there were chapter and verse divisions in the Scriptures. If not, then I'd really encourage you to just take it up with the Lord. Surely you have read:

James 1:5
If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you.

Go ahead! Put God to the test in this. Trust me, He gives generously to all without finding fault.

Just as I wrote to you before about the anointing of Jesus. I went to the Lord and beseeched Him for understanding. And lo and behold, He put a response in front of me within 3 days of my asking. You might also do some google research and find some others who have worked this particular conundrum, because everyone thinks it strange that God would forsake His Son. It's one of the most common questions about this particular passage. Why did God forsake His Son. I believe that the truth is that He didn't. He promised He wouldn't.

Psalms 37:28
For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed ; the offspring of the wicked will perish.

Psalms 94:14
14 For the LORD will not reject his people; he will never forsake his inheritance.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Runningman]

OK. Thanks for your honest answer. That answers a lot of questions I was going to ask you.

As A Unitarian then you do not believe that Jesus was the Christ and therefore is not God in the flesh. Did you realize that??????

We can quote the Bible that says Jesus is the Christ, but there isn't a quote about being God in the flesh. So why would you said I don't believe Jesus is the Christ? Being Christ doesn't require being God. God was the one who made Jesus both Lord and Christ. Acts 2:36.

That also means that you are not born again which then tells us the answer for your confusion and inability to grasp the theological doctrines of the Bible.

Yes I am born again. I understand the Bible just fine.

You see, by rejecting the Trinity you are rejecting what God in Christ did for you. The relationship between God and Jesus is a cornerstone of Christian faith. But this very idea has also led many skeptics and believers alike to question: Is God and Jesus Christ the same person?

Your stated opinion is that I reject what God did in Jesus for me. While I am sure that's what you believe, that isn't what I believe. You're taking this from the perspective of a Trinitarian. I am obviously not going to see here and nod my head in agreement with your claims that I am not born again or that I have an inability to understand theology.

So far, I have merely been having a conversation with you.

So then, allow me to answer your question. The answer to the question “are God and Jesus the same person?” really depends on what is meant by the same person.

Then the answer would be “Yes—Jesus is fully divine. He has all the attributes of God”.

So is Mary the mother of God?

Luke 1
43And why am I so honored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

Colossians 2:9..........
" For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

Same thing applies to normal Christians.

Ephesians 3
19of the love of Christ, and to know this love that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.

However, the question could be interpreted another way, which would require a different answer. Theologically speaking, Jesus and the Father are different Persons of the Trinity. They are one in nature and essence, but they are different in personhood.

And yet, God isn't a nature or essence. Having the divine nature is not the same thing as being God or else Christians also become God. This problem goes away when you realize Jesus isn't even himself God.

2 Peter 1
4Through these He has given us His precious and magnificent promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, now that you have escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

There is an ancient heresy called modalism (and a more modern variation called Oneness theology), which teaches that God does not exist in three co-equal, co-eternal Persons, but only one.

What do you mean by "in" three co-equal persons? Is God in them or is one or all of them God? Is God a person or an it in your perspective?

You say that you do not accept that teaching but According to modalism, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not three individual Persons but simply three modes of revelation. Isnt that what you are saying??????

No I don't believe that. I believe the only true God is the Father and Jesus is His Son. The Holy Spirit isn't another person in addition to the Father, but is the Father. Isn't the Father both holy and Spirit? That makes Him the Holy Spirit.

Seems too simple right? Well, it's powerfully simple. There is not more than one Holy Spirit God in the Bible, yet the Father is the holy Spirit. Think about it.

Sometimes God reveals Himself as the Father, other times as the Son, and still other times as the Holy Spirit. If the question is asked, “are Jesus and God the Father the same person?” the modalist would answer “yes,” but biblical Trinitarians would answer “no.”

I wouldn't bother with modalism, but theoretically God can take on any mode He wishes can't He? It's one of those not so easily falsified beliefs because it's plausible, but not what is really described of God in the Bible.

So what is your belief about John 17:3? Do you believe it?

 

[miamited]

Hey you two,

How about I throw out the definition of 'Christ'.

Christ comes from Christos, a Greek word that means “the anointed one,” or “the chosen one.”

Does that help?

I must agree with Runningman that just calling Jesus the 'Christ', doesn't seem to make any inference to his being God. It seems to mean the 'anointed one', which is what the angel Gabriel said about the Messiah, or 'the chosen one' which is what God said about His Servant.

God bless,
Ted

 

[miamited]

why did jesus say my god my god why hast thou - Search Videos

www.bing.com

 

[miamited]

And from CARM.org

In Matthew 27:45-46, it says, “Now from the sixth-hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?” If Jesus is God, why would He say this?

Jesus quoted Psalm 22:1 which begins with, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?” Jesus quoted this Psalm in order to draw attention to it and the fact that He was fulfilling it there on the cross. Consider verses 11-18 in Psalm 22:

“Be not far from me, for trouble is near; For there is none to help.12 Many bulls have surrounded me; Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me. 13 They open wide their mouth at me, As a ravening and a roaring lion. 14 I am poured out like water, And all my bones are out of joint; My heart is like wax; It is melted within me. 15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And my tongue cleaves to my jaws, And Thou dost lay me in the dust of death. 16 For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. 17 I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me; 18 They divide my garments among them, And for my clothing they cast lots.

The term ‘dogs’ was used by the Jews to refer to Gentiles (cf. Matt. 15:21-28). His heart has melted within Him (v. 14). During the crucifixion process, blood loss causes the heart to beat harder and harder and become extremely fatigued. Dehydration occurs (v. 15). Verses 16b-18 speak of piercing His hands and feet and dividing His clothing by casting lots. This is exactly what happened as described in Matt. 27:35.

Psalm 22 was written about 1,000 years before Christ was born. At that time, crucifixion had not yet been invented. Actually, the Phoenicians developed it, and Rome borrowed the agonizing means of execution from them. So, when Rome ruled over Israel, it became the Roman means of capital punishment imposed upon the Jews whose biblical means of execution was stoning. Nevertheless, Jesus is pointing to the scriptures to substantiate His messianic mission.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Why did Jesus say why have you forsaken me?

Why did Jesus say why have you forsaken me? Buy my books here When Jesus is on the cross he cries out My God my God why have you forsaken me? Matthew 27:46 And

www.followintruth.com

Jesus was using psalm 22 to answer their question was he the Christ, that he had previously told them if he answered they would not believe. Here he was not simply declaring he was the Christ verbally he was physically demonstrating the fact and using the scriptures to validate his answer.
YES I AM THE CHRIST …and I am fulfilling the very scriptures of the Christ right in front of your very eyes. I am even quoting the very scripture that talks about what is happening.

But his point, just as it mostly still is today, was completely missed, Some of the people even believed he was calling Elias and waited for Elias to come and save him.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Father who loved His Son with the greatest love that anyone could ever feel or imagine for another, did not abandon the Son that He loved. According to the Scriptures, God and Jesus have existed eternally together. And Jesus knew what was going to happen. He knew that in three days he would rise again. Why would he then cry that his God had abandoned him. He knew that all that was happening was supposed to happen for the salvation of the world and that God was not abandoning him, but that he was completing God's plan of redemption for us. Why would he think that God had abandoned him?

Friend, he was merely making a last final effort to show the people that he was the promised Messiah.

For Rodger

Were you able to put together the Scriptures that show that David's clothing was divided by lot? How about that his hands and feet were pierced? Or maybe you found where he suffered some agonizing death that caused his tongue to be stuck to the roof of his mouth because of his dehydration? How about when men were standing around David in some terrible agony of his life and mocked him and said to David or those around him, "He trusted in God. Let God come down and save him."

I'm really anxious to hear where you find confirmation of some fulfillment of Psalm 22 in David's life. As you may have read above, the method of putting people to death by driving nails through the parts of their body to hang them to a tree hadn't even been invented or thought of in David's day.

Anything?

Jesus died still teaching us who he was.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Runningman]

Hey you two,

How about I throw out the definition of 'Christ'.

Christ comes from Christos, a Greek word that means “the anointed one,” or “the chosen one.”

Does that help?

I must agree with Runningman that just calling Jesus the 'Christ', doesn't seem to make any inference to his being God. It seems to mean the 'anointed one', which is what the angel Gabriel said about the Messiah, or 'the chosen one' which is what God said about His Servant.

God bless,
Ted

Yes, it generically means an anointed one. Jesus received the Christ anointing from God in Acts 10:38 and regular believers can have it according to 1 John 2:20. It isn’t intuitive in my opinion until you look at the Greek. Jesus received enchrisen and believers received chrisma. Jesus is the definitive Christ but believers can be “in Christ” meaning in the Christ anointing. It doesn’t make someone God.