Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok according to the Torah all prophecies must be fullfilled by the Messaih, and acording to Christians they were. My question is did all the prophecies have to be fulfilled as described by the Torah? Did they all have to be done just as it was done in the Torah or was it ok to change them around?
Jesus said he was not here to destroy the old law but to fullfill it (I'm paraphrasing don't jump me for this, feel free to quote the actual phrase), so being a good Jew, wouldn't he have stuck to the prophecies as written? Or because He was God did He just change around some of the rules and traditions of Judaism to make new ones?
He expanded the Law showing it is really spiritual in nature, looking at a woman with lust is adultery, hating someone without cause is murder. Maybe you should clarify your question!
I'm having a bit of trouble understanding your question. What prophecies in the Torah are you referring to? Can you name just one as an example?
Your right the question was probably not clear enough...but that's what I get for posting during and insomnia episode...LOL
Let's start with Jesus as the sacrificial lamb....according to Jewish tradition the lamb need to be unblemished, Jesus as we know was beaten and pierced...
The Messiah was to be born of men....Jesus was born of God, a demi-god sort of.
Then as far as laws and traditions go...if Jesus was a good Jew why is the Last Supper lacking in proper Jewish tradition? They ate at the wrong time, they ate the wrong bread, and they began eating before the blessing. Wouldn't he have wanted to be a good Jew in order to gain the devotion of the Jews?
Your right the question was probably not clear enough...but that's what I get for posting during and insomnia episode...LOL
Let's start with Jesus as the sacrificial lamb....according to Jewish tradition the lamb need to be unblemished, Jesus as we know was beaten and pierced...
The Messiah was to be born of men....Jesus was born of God, a demi-god sort of.
Then as far as laws and traditions go...if Jesus was a good Jew why is the Last Supper lacking in proper Jewish tradition? They ate at the wrong time, they ate the wrong bread, and they began eating before the blessing. Wouldn't he have wanted to be a good Jew in order to gain the devotion of the Jews?
It's all very confusing.
An umblemished sacrificial lamb would also be pierced. Are you saying that it would no longer be unblemished? The lamb only needed to be perfect, without any faults . Jesus was that - perfect, without any fault. The fact that he was beaten and pierced does not make him 'imperfect'. He was perfect, and that is why He is referred to as "the Lamb of God".
He also referred to Himself as son of Man, the lineage being traced through Mary (as it always is in Judaism).
And Jesus kept all the laws perfectly. He was the only one who could.
I'm not sure I know where you're going with your last question, irishmom.
An umblemished sacrificial lamb would also be pierced. Are you saying that it would no longer be unblemished? The lamb only needed to be perfect, without any faults . Jesus was that - perfect, without any fault. The fact that he was beaten and pierced does not make him 'imperfect'. He was perfect, and that is why He is referred to as "the Lamb of God".
He also referred to Himself as son of Man, the lineage being traced through Mary (as it always is in Judaism).
And Jesus kept all the laws perfectly. He was the only one who could.
I'm not sure I know where you're going with your last question, irishmom.
According to Jewish law the sacrifice needed to be without sin and unblemished at the time of death....yes Jesus was without sin, but he was definitely blemished from being beaten and pierced...is this explained why it ok somewhere in the NT that I haven't found?
Does Mary's heritage trace back to the house of David? If you don't know that's fine I'll look it up, but I do not remember seeing this in the NT.
The NT really doesn't adress too much about Jewish law in detail....but if you go through the accounts of Jesus' activities there are occaisions that Jewish Law in regard to certain practices are not done correctly....the Passover meal was an example of that. I guess I don't understand which laws were abolished and which weren't, and I really haven't found any detailed explanation regarding it.
According to Jewish law the sacrifice needed to be without sin and unblemished at the time of death....yes Jesus was without sin, but he was definitely blemished from being beaten and pierced...is this explained why it ok somewhere in the NT that I haven't found?
Does Mary's heritage trace back to the house of David? If you don't know that's fine I'll look it up, but I do not remember seeing this in the NT.
The NT really doesn't adress too much about Jewish law in detail....but if you go through the accounts of Jesus' activities there are occaisions that Jewish Law in regard to certain practices are not done correctly....the Passover meal was an example of that. I guess I don't understand which laws were abolished and which weren't, and I really haven't found any detailed explanation regarding it.
Matt 1:6-7 says Mary was related to David.
I think southward bound gave you the perfect answer to the first part of your question about Jesus being the unblemished Lamb.
I think southward bound gave you the perfect answer to the first part of your question about Jesus being the unblemished Lamb.
Actually Matt and Luke both trace Joseph back to David not Mary....Mary is only mentioned as the wife....since the lineage is traced back through Joseph and Joseph is not the father of Jesus...how is He traced back to David? Any help?
I'll get back to you on the unblemished thing...I'm getting tired.
Actually Matt and Luke both trace Joseph back to David not Mary....Mary is only mentioned as the wife....since the lineage is traced back through Joseph and Joseph is not the father of Jesus...how is He traced back to David? Any help?
I'll get back to you on the unblemished thing...I'm getting tired.
Oh yes you are correct, I'm getting tied too.....see you tomorrow.
"At any rate, one genealogy is for Jesus’ mother, Mary, and the other for Joseph. The differences between Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are that Luke traced his line through Mary while Matthew traced it through Joseph. Here is a more in-depth discussion on this that should help clarify.
Matthew and Luke present different genealogies of Jesus—one through David's son Solomon (the royal line) and the other through David's son Nathan (the non-royal line). The royal line is traced in Matthew; the “natural” line in Luke. Matthew’s genealogy goes only back to Abraham (to show the Jewish character of the King); Luke’s goes back to Adam (to show the universal aspect of the Savior). Matthew’s emphasizes Jesus’ royalty; Luke, his humanity.
It is generally accepted (but not unanimously) that the genealogy in Matthew belongs to Joseph’s family, and the one in Luke applies to Mary’s line. (The historical evidence is fairly strong that both Mary and Joseph were of the house of David.)
Both genealogies are ‘aware’ of the virgin birth: Luke adds the phrase ‘He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph” (3:23) and Matthew switches verbs from “X begat Y” to “Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom (feminine pronoun) was born Jesus.”
So, how does Joseph ‘step into’ Mary’s lineage? How does he ‘pick up’ her legal heritage?
“Mary's father (Heli?) had two daughters, Mary and the unnamed wife of Zebedee (John 19:25; Matt 27:56). If there were no sons, Joseph would become son of Heli on his marriage, to preserve the family name and inheritance (cf. Num 27:1-11; 36:1-12, esp. v. 8, which accounts for Mary marrying a man of the family of David.)”
by Bodie Hodge (who earned his undergraduate and master’s degrees in mechanical engineering from Southern Illinois University. Bodie is a speaker, researcher, and writer.) and Brad Jones
What this basically means is Jesus was born of man because of his mother, Mary, and he was a decendant of David through both his step-father and mother.
Last edited by mams1559; 06-18-2007 at 10:31 AM..
Reason: add'l info
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Regarding Jesus' Geneology...
