RE: Virgin Birth or Son of Joseph?
(11-01-2010 02:25 PM)sheep wrecked Wrote:
(10-31-2010 09:29 PM)sari83 Wrote: What are the Hebrew myths I believe?
Here are some of your statements that show you are affiliated with or have learned from, and still believe that are the "mantra" of Hebrew Roots:
"Either way, Israel is still Israel. Gentiles are grafted into the olive branch."[dubious statement - can mean something different than you have written it].
"In this new covenant, God says He will write His law on their hearts. It is a new covenant 1285 beriyth (ber-eeth'); It is not a new law ( 8451 towrah (to-raw');"
"What I don't understand is people who think His words would actually pass away when He says otherwise. For so long people didn't even bother to read the Old Testament because they were taught it has passed and was no longer applicable"
"It has been only in the last two years that on my own in my personal time, I've really delved into the Old Testament whole heartedly. It has had such an amazing impact on my life. I feel like I know more of who God is. Although there is so much more I need to learn. So I was speaking from my own personal experience when I said that some consider the Old Testament just a collection of old writings. The very fact that we have labeled the Hebrew Bible "OLD" significantly displays this very mindset."
To me it is illogical to say that the Hebrew Bible was given the label "Old Testament" because it contains the Old Covenant. The fact is that [b]the Old Covenant is officially outlined in only five or so of the biblical books.
This fast in Acts 27:9 is specially speaking of the Day of Atonement.
Over the past week I've been reading a lot about anti-semitism and the early church fathers. One doesn't have to look far to see that this is a strong spirit that infected Christianity in it's early stages and permeates to this day.
I've been thinking a lot about Matt 5:18, and I've concluded that Christ is literally speaking of all being fulfilled when His Kingdom comes to earth. That is why He used the analogy of heaven and earth passing away.
I beg to differ, Jesus and the disciples were Jews (Israelites), and the first generations of the church were predominantly Jewish Christians. The ill words spoken by Jesus were to the religious leaders and authorities of His day. (not the people, not Israel) It is evident in Jesus' words, the gospels, and other NT books the He was sent to redeem the House of Israel, and that Israel is still and always will be a part of His plan.
I believe the original texts of the NT are the inspired Word of God. Anything added later would not fall under this authority. For example, we know the book of Mark was added to. It did not originally contain verses 16:9-20. Therefore it's also possible that the birth of Jesus in the books of Matthew and Luke may have been modified.
I believe the original texts of the NT are the inspired Word of God ...
When I started researching the lost books of the bible, and realized that the early Christians read these books (until about A.D. 300), yet they aren't found in our bibles today because a group of men didn't canonize them.
I followed some of your links to messianic leaders. Many of the ones you called false prophets fully affirm the virgin birth.
For the lineage "bloodline" of the Hebrew Messiah to come through King David is of the utmost importance. That is why I was saying the lineage or kingship is not passed through an adoptive father.
The book of Enoch contains many similar sayings that are found in Matthew. Also the book of Jude bears witness to Enoch's prophecies.
So, I was merely stating that I've investigated, and did not find this to be the case among messianics. In fact I've read that the messianic movement was started by Christians in an effect to convert Jews. So, you see I have never read this information at any such place nor do I think it's common among them as you've stated.
Thank you for the further explanation. Over the last month I've been studying anti-semitism and its origins. Being a Christian my whole life, I had never known this dark history. Combine this new knowledge with my love for the Hebrew bible, Jewish relatives and friends, and the study of Judaism, this has created in me a deep sympathy for the Hebrew people.
Your use of Yahuah, Yahuashua, and the Hebraic Names in the NT that were changed from their Greek names on the Yah forum in the NT Scriptures you quote on that forum. As you have not disassociated yourself from that sari83, we assume it is you. It is a Hebrew Roots forum where you posted agreement with their positions.
I like to use the personal names of the Father and His Son. Most gods do have a personal name, why shouldn't ours?
Denying the virgin birth does not deny Christ's divinity. There are no scriptures that state one must believe the virgin birth. Believe he's the Son of God, Messiah, God in the flesh..yes. That he was born of the virgin Mary...not one.
Your constant use of "Messiah" instead of Christ.
The importance you put on Jesus as the "fruit of David's loins", the "seed of David", that He is on David's throne, etc.
Quote:You said God's Word always took the forefront, yet you don't believe it to be true.
Quote:I was referring to growing up as a Christian, not my adult years.
This is what you wrote, referring to it again:
"We stayed together for years and continued in our beliefs, though not without imperfection. We were married and spent our newlywed years studying the bible, and in daily prayer and meditation. We also picked up a Strong's Concordance to help further our studies. "
So you were not an adult when you were married and had children?
The problem is that you don't believe what God has said through Matthew and Luke, which means you do not believe they are inspired of God. That in turn means you have no authoritative Scripture if all your sources and commentaries keep plugging away at "modifications" and additions/deletions" compared to the "oldest and best" mss > which we indicated to you are corrupted.
Quote:How about the Ebionites? Would you say their claims as followers of Christ were false?
They did not believe in the Deity of Christ, denied His virgin birth, kept some parts of the Mosaic Law, believe in a Ebionite Gospel that is an abrigdge falsified version of Matthew, etc. So yes, their claims are false. What a surprise that you appear to have some common ground with them ....
Quote:It was up to you to answer the questions and clarify any misunderstanding we might have because you were given every opportunity to do so. You wouldn't answer. That was your choice because in not answering it validated our statements and conclusions.
Quote:On page 3 of this topic, I gave my belief statement:
[Jesus said that God is Spirit. John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. (KJV) I believe that Jesus is, the anointed Son of God, the physical manifestation of God, according to the flesh, the fruit of David's loins. Acts 2:30 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; (KJV) Rom 1:3-4 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
But you doubt the virgin birth and dance around His Deity - if you doubt any of the verses dealing with Christ, His Deity, any part of His life, ministry, suffering, death, or resurrection, and words that He spoke that are recorded in the NT you have denied all of Him.
Why is it so hard for you to say: Jesus is God?
I would still like to clarify that I've studied on my own for the past 9 years. Everything I know is from my own personal studies. The desire to know everything there is to know about the Father and His Son have led me to extensive research in addition to my scriptural studies. I want to learn everything there is to know about Him, including the way he lived and walked as a person.