The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah chapter 53

[joobz]

That's as maybe, but it's still not DOC answering a direct question and dodging around doing everything in his power to avoid it.


On the plus side, I got a good buzz on.

Ooohhhhhh. BUuuuuttttt I'mmm AAaaattt Wooorrroorrrk. I cannnnn''tt Drinnnnnnkk nooowwwww.

 

[Locknar]

Let's stay on topic folks.... This thread is about the "25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah chapter 53" and not Forum Management. Also, lets keep the converation civil.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

 

[DOC]

For the life of me I will never understand why they keep using Tacitus as a non-christian reference for the existance of Jesus.
All he does is mentioning a group of people that calls themselves christians and as any good historian explain where they say they take their name, nowhere does he mention the name Jesus noe does he refer to any other source than the christians for said events.

He doesn't for example say "hey I met this old soldier who was in Jerusalem when they nailed this dude to a cross, seems to have started a new religion or something"

Oh and he wrote about it ca 100 AD

From the article: "Who Said Jesus Existed"

"Because of his writings, the most famous of which are the Annals and Histories, {Tacitus} has been called the “greatest historian” of ancient Rome. Tacitus recorded at least one reference to Christ and two references to Christianity.

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Annals, 15.44)

Tacitus here affirms that a man named Christ did in fact exist, who “suffered the extreme penalty” (put to death) at the hand of Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. He also refers to Christians being named after “Christus” (Latin for Christ) and that their “superstition” (belief in the resurrection) started in Judea and made its way all the way to Rome."

http://biblicism.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/who-says-jesus-existed-follow-up/

 

[Lothian]

From the article: "Who Said Jesus Existed"

"Because of his writings, the most famous of which are the Annals and Histories, {Tacitus} has been called the “greatest historian” of ancient Rome. Tacitus recorded at least one reference to Christ and two references to Christianity.

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Annals, 15.44)

Tacitus here affirms that a man named Christ did in fact exist, who “suffered the extreme penalty” (put to death) at the hand of Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. He also refers to Christians being named after “Christus” (Latin for Christ) and that their “superstition” (belief in the resurrection) started in Judea and made its way all the way to Rome."

http://biblicism.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/who-says-jesus-existed-follow-up/

What has this to do with the subject? Did you miss the warning?

 

[joobz]

To summarize:
Here's a list of problems with attempting to link Jesus to Isaiah.

Now, to get on track.
Here's a list of problems I see with the link you are trying to make.

1.) If Jesus does Fullfill Isaiah, where are his children?
Did Jesus do it with Mary?
2.) Why is the prophecy written in past tense?
3.) What kind of insane crazy person thinks that being born as a baby is unattractive?
4.) If he was "He was despised and rejected by men", why did Jesus have followers?
5.) If he was "Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not", why did he have followers?
6.) "he was led like a lamb to the slaughter," The Gospel account says otherwise. In fact, according to the story, Jesus knew full well why he was being killed. How can this be rectified?
7.) "and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth." And this too if false. The different gospels have jesus saying multiple things during his crusifiction. from "why have you forsaken me" to "Lord to your arms I commend my spirit." How do you explain this inconsistency?
8.) " though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth." This too is false. Jesus explained that the whole point of his parables were to keep others confused about his message.Matthew 13:11-15 That's rather deceitful, don't you think?
9.) "and he will divide the spoils with the strong". Yet, jesus said, "Blessed are the meek..." Seems that Jesus wasn't interested in the "strong". How can you explain this inconsistency without being blatantly dishonest in interpretations?
10.) "by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities". This is a very weird one. Why would God refer to Jesus as "his servant"? I though Jesus was his son/him? Stranger and stranger...

Now, here's a list of the unanswered questions for you?

Please explain how Isaiah either follows the standard prophecy format, or why you are allowed special pleading for Isaiah 53.

Um...coming into this world as a baby is unattractive? What? how else should he have done it? UPS?

Nope.
You are bending words to retrofit your wishes into reality.

Sorry buy offspring and descendants are not children of god.


The irony here, DOC, is that you claim that "descendants" are a metaphor for christians as christians are called "the children of god".


YET, you also claim that "Son of God" means the actua son of god, even though that was historically used as a metaphor.

So I ask, why is "Son of god" not a metaphor, yet descendant is a metaphor?


Let me give the honest answer to that question: Because you want it to be.

 

[Cactus Wren]

You were warned twice about this type of post in my "Evidence for why we know the New Testament Writers told the truth" (History and Literature section) by moderators. Obviously you don't give a darn about what the moderators tell you or the Randi rules.

I have not lied in any of my threads and you have not given any evidence of one lie in the 2 and a half years I"ve been on this system. This kind of unproven post and behavior hurts the credibility of the Randi system if it is allowed to continue. And not only that, although you might not realize it, it seriously hurts your own credibility by continuing to break Randi rules even though warned. I will report this post.

ETA: Your a habitual rule breaker and you should be off the system if your rule breaking behavior continues.

Can we add "pathetic attempts at netcopping" to the Drinking Game?

 

[zooterkin]

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Annals, 15.44)

So, you believe that Christianity is a mischievous superstition, evil, hideous and shameful? Or do you choose to only believe the words of Tacitus which suit you? You also seem to be at odds with him on another point; all sorts of things reach Rome and become popular, something which I seem to remember you claimed indicated that Christianity was true.

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

Tacitus here affirms that a man named Christ did in fact exist, who “suffered the extreme penalty” (put to death) at the hand of Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. He also refers to Christians being named after “Christus” (Latin for Christ) and that their “superstition” (belief in the resurrection) started in Judea and made its way all the way to Rome."

http://biblicism.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/who-says-jesus-existed-follow-up/

Wait a second. Do you think there existed a man named Christ in the first century?

Really? I mean, even if you want to neglect Geezer's (welcome to the forum) message -- which is that this, as has been pointed out to you frequently, a reference to Christians and what they believed and not a direct reference to Jesus (which wasn't his name either) -- you don't actually think Christ or Christus was his name do you?

 

[paximperium]

From the article: "Who Said Jesus Existed"

"Because of his writings, the most famous of which are the Annals and Histories, {Tacitus} has been called the “greatest historian” of ancient Rome. Tacitus recorded at least one reference to Christ and two references to Christianity.

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Annals, 15.44)

Tacitus here affirms that a man named Christ did in fact exist, who “suffered the extreme penalty” (put to death) at the hand of Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. He also refers to Christians being named after “Christus” (Latin for Christ) and that their “superstition” (belief in the resurrection) started in Judea and made its way all the way to Rome."

http://biblicism.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/who-says-jesus-existed-follow-up/

Why are you ignoring the mod warning? "And not only that, although you might not realize it, it seriously hurts your own credibility by continuing to break Randi rules even though warned."

Are you some "...habitual rule breaker and you should be off the system if your rule breaking behavior continues."?

 

[Geezer]

From the article: "Who Said Jesus Existed"

"Because of his writings, the most famous of which are the Annals and Histories, {Tacitus} has been called the “greatest historian” of ancient Rome. Tacitus recorded at least one reference to Christ and two references to Christianity.

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures of a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular.” (Annals, 15.44)

Tacitus here affirms that a man named Christ did in fact exist, who “suffered the extreme penalty” (put to death) at the hand of Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. He also refers to Christians being named after “Christus” (Latin for Christ) and that their “superstition” (belief in the resurrection) started in Judea and made its way all the way to Rome."

He affirms nothing of the sort, he simply states that they are named after Christus (which is the Latin of Christos which is greek meaning the anointed)
This is not proof that Christ existed, only that people says he did and they named themselves after him. This does not prove he existed anymore than the fact that there are Trekkies proves that Star Trek is real.

And you still haven't showed us why Jesus fits the Isaiah prophecy better than Harry Potter

 

[paximperium]

He affirms nothing of the sort, he simply states that they are named after Christus (which is the Latin of Christos which is greek meaning the anointed)
This is not proof that Christ existed, only that people says he did and they named themselves after him. This does not prove he existed anymore than the fact that there are Trekkies proves that Star Trek is real.

And you still haven't showed us why Jesus fits the Isaiah prophecy better than Harry Potter

Ahhh, you learn fast Young Apprentice. Your dark and evil powers will grow as you practice your powers on the practice dummy apologetist.

 

[slingblade]

Ahhh, you learn fast Young Apprentice. Your dark and evil powers will grow as you practice your powers on the practice dummy apologetist.

No doubt, that's some good stuff there. Welcome, Geezer.

 

[DOC]

What has this to do with the subject? Did you miss the warning?

Actually I did miss the warning, but Geezer posted his post about Tactitus before the warning, and it has to do with whether or not Jesus existed (which most scholars believe he did).

If people don't believe Christ actually existed (unlike most scholars) you have to show them the evidence he did exist before you can talk about Isaiah prophecising the Messiah.

By the way Isaiah was one of Jesus' favorite books of the Bible and Jesus quoted it often. I have a feeling Jesus knew a little more about the Old Testament and Isaiah then the people in here.

 

[paximperium]

By the way Isaiah is claimed to be was one of Jesus' favorite books of the Bible and Jesus is claimed to have quoted it often.

Edited for correction

I have a feeling Jesus knew a little more about the Old Testament and Isaiah then the people in here.

Your feelings are irrelevant. How about answering all those questions you have continued to run away from?

 

[DOC]

By the way Isaiah was one of Jesus' favorite books of the Bible and Jesus quoted it often. I have a feeling Jesus knew a little more about the Old Testament and Isaiah then the people in here.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_Old_Testament_texts_did_Jesus_quote_most_often

 

[paximperium]

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_Old_Testament_texts_did_Jesus_quote_most_often

I do love a great wiki-answer which does not nothing support a claim. Jesus is claimed to have quoted from Isaiah continues to be valid.

Now would like to answer those multitude of questions or keep derailing your own thread? Remember the mod warning or are you some "habitual rule breaker"?

 

[kmortis]

I do love a great wiki-answer which does not nothing support a claim. Jesus is claimed to have quoted from Isaiah continues to be valid.

Now would like to answer those multitude of questions or keep derailing your own thread? Remember the mod warning or are you some "habitual rule breaker"?

Ooo...Ooo I know this one. Hold on...[mutter]and then there's the two....carry the one...with a grapefruit? Well, I guess it helps the duck...[/mutter]

He's a habitual rule breaker?

Yeah, he's a habitual rule breaker that couldn't stay on topic with a tube of crazy glue and a thumbtack.

 

[DOC]

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_Old_Testament_texts_did_Jesus_quote_most_often

I do love a great wiki-answer which does not nothing support a claim. Jesus is claimed to have quoted from Isaiah continues to be valid.

Now would like to answer those multitude of questions or keep derailing your own thread? Remember the mod warning or are you some "habitual rule breaker"?

So I'm derailing my own thread when I show how Jesus of the Bible quoted Isaiah often???

And just to show how important prophecy was to Jesus one can read how he helped explain it to his followers following his resurrection in the Gospel of Luke chapter 24 verses 25,26.

From the article "The Old Testament in the New Testament" by Scott Ashley:

"What did Jesus Christ do immediately after His resurrection? He asked two of His followers, "Why is it so hard for you to believe what the prophets said would happen to the Messiah?" And then, from the five books of Moses and the writings of the prophets, He showed how everything that had happened was prophesied to happen. He confirmed the validity of the Scriptures.

Later He appeared to the 11 disciples and other followers. "Then He said to them, 'These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.' And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures" (verses 44-45). Christ did not do away with "the Scriptures"-the Hebrew Bible-but helped His followers to better understand and comprehend them."

http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn15/otnt.htm

 

[JimBenArm]

Just for your edification. Just because you start a thread doesn't mean you own it and can't derail it.

[/derail]

 

[joobz]

If people don't believe Christ actually existed (unlike most scholars) you have to show them the evidence he did exist before you can talk about Isaiah prophecising the Messiah.

This isn't true. I can easily discuss many stories without believing the players in those stories were true.

By the way Isaiah was one of Jesus' favorite books of the Bible and Jesus quoted it often.

It was his favorite book?
Then he'd have known that Isaiah 53 wasn't a prophecy.