Evidence To Be Seen

[Wrangler]

Mathematical Certainty, 356 Prophecies Fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The odds that Jesus fulfilled all these prophecies and is not the Messiah is

1. Disputed in that: https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledge/articles/daniel-9-a-true-biblical-interpretation/
Based on the Hebrew original and context, Jews have very valid reasons for rejecting the Christian interpretation

Appeal to Diversion. The point here is, given the prophecies, what are the odds Jesus is NOT the Messiah?

Anyone can ‘dispute’ the conclusion. The question is about the analysis; what are the odds he is not the Messiah all things considered?

 

[Wrangler]

2. Micah doesn't say a ruling Messiah figure would be born in the city of Bethlehem. It says the ruler would come from the lineage of the clan of Bethlehem of Ephrathah.

Notice how you do not actually quote Scripture in making that claim?

 

[Wrangler]

3. Isaiah 7 was NOT Messianic. The writer of Matthew errantly tried to fit this into the narrative to support his assertions regarding Jesus. Read the context of Isaiah 7 and it is OBVIOUSLY speaking of someone who is NOT a 1st century messiah.

Agreed. We can take that one of the list.

 

[Wrangler]

5. John was written decades after Jesus would have lived and died, so calling it prophetic makes no sense.

Not all prophecies have already come true.

Notice how you did not quote an actual verse in Scripture?

 

[Wrangler]

6. Does Psalm 22 or Isaiah 53 even refer to Jesus of the 1st century? https://jewsforjudaism.org/knowledg...d-s-suffering-servant-is-israel-and-not-jesus

I think so. Still, I present Jesus fulfilling 356 prophecies and you claim 6 don’t apply. So, that makes the other 350 not valid? LOL

 

[Truth OT]

Appeal to Diversion. The point here is, given the prophecies, what are the odds Jesus is NOT the Messiah?

Anyone can ‘dispute’ the conclusion. The question is about the analysis; what are the odds he is not the Messiah all things considered?

The likelihood of him being the Messiah rests on whether what is written about him is indisputable fact. If that which is written is either NOT about him or NOT based in fact, then that weakens an already hard to believe case.

 

[theefaith]

Scholars do not agree. Many assign the prophecy as follows:
- The "prince who is to come" in verse 26b is typically seen by critical scholars as a reference to Antiochus IV
- In the 62 weeks period the city is rebuilt (verse 25b) and an "anointed one shall be cut off" (verse 26a); this "anointed one" is generally considered to refer to the High Priest Onias III as opposed to Jesus.
- The "covenant" in verse 27a most likely refers to the covenant between the Jewish hellenizers and Antiochus IV as reported in 1 Maccabees 1:11

Bottom line, no consensus, even among believers in the Old Testament narratives exists as it pertains to the meaning of the Daniel prophecy and each can give reasons for why their interpretation is right and others are wrong. That leave us with more ambiguity, a lack of specifics yet again, and that all results in uncertainty.

dan 9

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

From the rebuilt temple to messiah
Messiah is crucified cut off
Isa 53
The temple is destroyed 70 ad

all fulfilled in Jesus Christ and only Jesus Christ

the new covenant is the only covenant!
1 Tim 2:5 one mediator one covenant
Christ replaced david as king Lk 1:32-33
The new covenant church replaced Israel
Matt 21:43

Lk 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: (plural Peter and his successors)
32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

 

[Truth OT]

From the rebuilt temple to messiah
Messiah is crucified cut off
Isa 53
The temple is destroyed 70 ad

all fulfilled in Jesus Christ and only Jesus Christ

So says the likes of you and SOME churches, but that view is not accepted by all believers in the Hebrew God as a longer standing dissenting view is still widely accepted. The Maccabean chronology, then, is that which is indicated by the general context of the book of Daniel and is, in fact, the oldest attested interpretation of his apocalyptic vision, since it is that of 1 Mc 1.54, 59 (c. 100 b.c.), of the Septuagint rendering of Dn 9.24–27 [see Fraidl, 4–27; A. Bludau, Die alex. Uebersetzung des B. Daniel, Biblische Studien 2 (Freiburg 1897) 104–130], and probably of 1 Enoch ch. 85–90, esp. 89.59; 90.14 (see Fraidl, 11–15). It is the view now almost universally defended.

Seventy Weeks of Years | Encyclopedia.com

 

[theefaith]

So says the likes of you and SOME churches, but that view is not accepted by all believers in the Hebrew God as a longer standing dissenting view is still widely accepted. The Maccabean chronology, then, is that which is indicated by the general context of the book of Daniel and is, in fact, the oldest attested interpretation of his apocalyptic vision, since it is that of 1 Mc 1.54, 59 (c. 100 b.c.), of the Septuagint rendering of Dn 9.24–27 [see Fraidl, 4–27; A. Bludau, Die alex. Uebersetzung des B. Daniel, Biblische Studien 2 (Freiburg 1897) 104–130], and probably of 1 Enoch ch. 85–90, esp. 89.59; 90.14 (see Fraidl, 11–15). It is the view now almost universally defended.

Seventy Weeks of Years | Encyclopedia.com

In 70 ad the temple was destroyed and the daily sacrifice ceased

no way for the messiah to come after that

 

[Wrangler]

The likelihood of him being the Messiah rests on whether what is written about him is indisputable fact

No. Anything can be 'disputed' beyond all reason. This is why the legal standard to convict someone of a crime is beyond reasonable doubt, not ANY doubt.

The question is; why would hundreds of people give testimony to Jesus fulfilling 356 prophecies of what they saw with their own eyes, if there were not an element of truth to it? Furthermore, why would 1,000's martyr themselves when denouncing Jesus would let them live? If you would rather die than deny something, you must think it is true.

And I can see you are limiting yourself to the witnesses who saw Jesus, not commenting on the evidence of world wide flood, irreducible complexity or the 4D of information contained in all DNA. Common sense tells us that if we were walking in the woods and happened on writings, there must be a writer. DNA is code, programming, not in simple 2D like men write on paper but 4D of information! Most scientists now realize the Big Bang Theory is unsatisfactory, the logically, a Creator flows more consistent with the available evidence. Staggering implications.

 

[Truth OT]

If you would rather die than deny something, you must think it is true.

Martyrdom doesn't make what the martyr believed to be worth dying for true. Many dissenting faiths have martyrs or those willing to die for their beliefs.

The question is; why would hundreds of people give testimony to Jesus fulfilling 356 prophecies

It has been shown that many of those prophecies were disputed or not even about a 1st century messianic figure so that number is meaningless. Additionally, we are still lacking eyewitness account testimony.

evidence of world wide flood

Such evidence of a flood as described in Genesis is SEVERLY lacking.

irreducible complexity

Is the argument that certain biological systems cannot have evolved by successive small modifications to pre-existing functional systems through natural selection, because no less complex system would function. The theory of facilitated variation challenges irreducible complexity. The theory of facilitated variation challenges this idea of irreducible complexity by explaining how random mutation can cause substantial and adaptive changes within a species. It explains how the individual organism can change from a passive target of natural selection, to an active player in the 3-billion-year history of evolution. Kirschner and Gerhart's theory thereby provides a scientific rebuttal to modern critics of evolution who champion Intelligent Design.

 

[theefaith]

No. Anything can be 'disputed' beyond all reason. This is why the legal standard to convict someone of a crime is beyond reasonable doubt, not ANY doubt.

The question is; why would hundreds of people give testimony to Jesus fulfilling 356 prophecies of what they saw with their own eyes, if there were not an element of truth to it? Furthermore, why would 1,000's martyr themselves when denouncing Jesus would let them live? If you would rather die than deny something, you must think it is true.

And I can see you are limiting yourself to the witnesses who saw Jesus, not commenting on the evidence of world wide flood, irreducible complexity or the 4D of information contained in all DNA. Common sense tells us that if we were walking in the woods and happened on writings, there must be a writer. DNA is code, programming, not in simple 2D like men write on paper but 4D of information! Most scientists now realize the Big Bang Theory is unsatisfactory, the logically, a Creator flows more consistent with the available evidence. Staggering implications.

truth ot is your messiah going to be a suffering servant?

 

[Wrangler]

Martyrdom doesn't make what the martyr believed to be worth dying for true.

Not an answer to my question.

 

[Wrangler]

It has been shown that many of those prophecies were disputed or not even about a 1st century messianic figure so that number is meaningless.

Meaning is in the eye of the beholder. I can see your faith wholly depends on disputing beyond reason. Just because something is disputed does not make it untrue.

 

[theefaith]

let me know what you’re wife thinks of this

Let us take our helper and intercessor the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, so that she, who from the moment of her conception (21) overcame Satan may show her power over these evil sects, in which is revived the contumacious spirit of the demon, together with his unsubdued perfidy and deceit.

(21) Gen 3:15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

Lk 1: 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Lk 1:28 Hail Mary, full of grace!

It only by the power of the Holy Spirit thru the immaculate purity of Mary that the virgin-mother brings forth the Holy son of God!

 

[theefaith]

Not an answer to my question.

What do you think ez 36:25-27 means or refers to?

 

[Truth OT]

What do you think ez 36:25-27 means or refers to?

A post-Babylonian captivity time over 2100 years ago.

 

[theefaith]

A post-Babylonian captivity time over 2100 years ago.

that’s what you call Christian baptism?

notice this is a promise of God
A promise of God is a sacred oath
And a sacred oath is a sacrament

 

[Truth OT]

that’s what you call Christian baptism?

No, Christian baptism began in the 1st century. The timeline for what Ezekiel mentioned was likely referring to a time centuries earlier.

 

[theefaith]

No, Christian baptism began in the 1st century. The timeline for what Ezekiel mentioned was likely referring to a time centuries earlier.

Sprinkling with water?
New heart?
Filled with spirit?

christian baptism began at Pentecost

Romans 5:5
And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

ez 36 is the promise found in acts 2:38-39