Jump to content
Christianlady

Fulfilling Prophecies to Israel

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 1/30/2017 at 6:07 AM, andres said:

Hi Christianlady.

I find it impossible to believe the flood story to be accurate. It could not have covered the entire earth. Noas boat was not large enough to pick up all landliving creatures either. I am also certainl the kangerooes in Australia did not make it to the ME in time to enter the ship. There are similar flood traditions in the ME. The oldest written over 1.000 years older than the Biblical that was composed around the Babylonian imprisonment. Some have proposed the myth to derive from the flooding of the Black Sea. Think it happened 6.000 BC.

I believe in a good and forgiving God. Do not think the term dictator can be used in heaven. But who knows. 

 

Salam Andres,

Please forgive me if you've already answered this. It's been awhile and I've forgotten.

Do you believe that Moses truly existed and truly led the Children of Israel out of Egypt via God's command? Thanks.

Peace and God bless you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christianlady said:

Salam Andres,

Please forgive me if you've already answered this. It's been awhile and I've forgotten.

Do you believe that Moses truly existed and truly led the Children of Israel out of Egypt via God's command? Thanks.

Peace and God bless you

I am absolutely convinced that if Moses existed, he did not lead 500.000 Israelite men +wives and children 40 years around in the desert without leaving any trace behind for archeologists to find. Did he lead a smaller group? Maybe. However the majority of historians and archeologists believe that the Israelites developed from the Canaaneans already living in the Holy land. The Israelites and Canaaneans 1.000AD had almost the same language and customs. The OT reveals they worshipped the same Gods. Baal, Ashera, El and Jahwe. Archeology supports OT on this. Makes good sense to me.

Edited by andres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2017 at 2:32 AM, Christianlady said:

Salam Onereligion,

Prophecies are not all fulfilled at the same time. 

For example, when Mary, who was a virgin at the time, gave birth to Jesus Christ, that did not fulfill all the prophecies, but rather this one:

"Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." - Isaiah 7:14

You did not answer my questions
 

Thank you so much!!! :) Peace and God bless you and your loved ones as well!!! :)

 

 

 

Walaykum as salaam wa rahmatullah,

Hope you are in the best of health along with family and loved ones.

- Regarding prophecies, I think one has to be fulfilled for you and me to realize that a prophecy has been fulfilled.  Otherwise, you are just squeezing someone into somewhere he or she does not fit.  We will see an example of it in the very next point.

- As for Isaiah 7:14, the most widely discussed NT interpretation "contrary to the literal and accepted meaning" of a Hebrew text is the dogma of the Virgin Birth, which Matthew bases on Isaiah 7:14, "Behold, the young woman shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel."  Matthew 1:22-23 says the virgin birth of Jesus happened to fulfill the words of the prophet Isaiah.  The writer of the Gospel of Matthew was probably using the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) as his "Old Testament," and the Septuagint translates the Hebrew word almah, meaning "young woman," as the Greek word parthenos, "maiden, virgin, unmarried girl," so that the Greek text may falsely be read, "a virgin shall conceive."  "Behold, the young maiden will conceive" does not mean she will be a virgin when she gives birth, nor does it imply that Yhwh will be the father.  In other words, the original Hebrew text of Isaiah never prophesied a virgin birth, only that a young woman would bear a child.

But that is by no means the worst problem!  Besides using a misinterpretation of the Hebrew, the NT takes Isaiah 7:14 totally out of context.  The passage actually refers to an imminent invasion of Israel by the Assyrians, which took place in the late 700s BCE.  The story of Isaiah 7-8 goes as follows.  During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, Kings Rezin of Aram and Pekah of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem (7:1).  Ahaz feared the worst, but Isaiah told him Yhwh would not allow the two kings to destroy Jerusalem.  Then Isaiah tells Ahaz that Yhwh will give a sign to prove the truth of what he says: the young woman will give birth to a son and call him Immanuel, and before the boy is old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, the land of the two kings, whom Ahaz fears, will be laid waste by the king of Assyria (Isa. 7:14-17).  Obviously the king of Assyria did not destroy Israel and Aram when Jesus was a boy--no, that happened in 732 and 722-21 BCE, so Jesus could not fulfill this prophecy.  The birth of the child in Isaiah was supposed to be a sign that the attack on Jerusalem in the 700s BC would fail.

In fact, the very next chapter in Isaiah, chapter eight, continues the story.  Isaiah goes to the prophetess and she conceives and bears a son.  In verses 3-4, they call him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz ("quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil") because before the boy is very old the king of Assyria will "plunder" and "spoil" Damascus and Samaria.  And verses 8 and 10 again refer to Immanuel ("God is with us"), because Yhwh will save Ahaz and because even though the Assyrians will sweep all the way into Judah (701 BCE), their plans against Jerusalem will not succeed.  Whether Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and Immanuel are the same child or two different children matters not; both belong in time to the 700's BCE and to chapters 7 and 8 of Isaiah. Isaiah 8:18 even lets the reader know that the children in chapters 7-8 belong to Isaiah himself: "Here I am, and the children Yhwh has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel" (Isaiah's other child was Shear-Jashub, "a remnant will return," Isa. 7:3 and 10:21). 

To summarize this issue, the writer of the Gospel of Matthew both used a mistranslation of Isaiah 7:14 and conveniently ignored 7:15-17 and the context of the "Immanuel" verse, as he misused Isaiah to support the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus. But in the Greco-Roman world, the virgin birth of a divine or semi-divine hero was a common motif.

- I am not obliged to answer any questions.  You have made a positive claim regarding prophecies being fulfilled to Israel.  I am only presenting a more coherent alternative that is more believable from OT itself.

With peace and blessings!

Edited by onereligion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2017 at 6:23 PM, andres said:

I am absolutely convinced that if Moses existed, he did not lead 500.000 Israelite men +wives and children 40 years around in the desert without leaving any trace behind for archeologists to find. Did he lead a smaller group? Maybe. However the majority of historians and archeologists believe that the Israelites developed from the Canaaneans already living in the Holy land. The Israelites and Canaaneans 1.000AD had almost the same language and customs. The OT reveals they worshipped the same Gods. Baal, Ashera, El and Jahwe. Archeology supports OT on this. Makes good sense to me.

Salam Andres,

 

Thanks so much for answering my question. I do 100% believe Moses existed and that God led the Children of Israel out of slavery in Egypt through Moses, and that God gave the Children of Israel the law through Moses.

Jesus Christ talks about Moses, which is important. He confirms that Moses existed and that the Tanakh is true.  I believe that Jesus is also the prophet like Moses, as well as the Messiah/Christ/Anointed One on the throne of King David.

Peace and God bless you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2017 at 8:12 PM, onereligion said:

Walaykum as salaam wa rahmatullah,

Salam Onereligion,

Wasalaam :)

Quote

Hope you are in the best of health along with family and loved ones.

Thank you so much.My family are well, thank God, but I am so sad for my loved ones who are refugees in other countries and who are suffering bloodshed and harm or disease. :(

I hope you and your family and loved ones are doing very well. God bless you!!!

Quote

 

- Regarding prophecies, I think one has to be fulfilled for you and me to realize that a prophecy has been fulfilled.  Otherwise, you are just squeezing someone into somewhere he or she does not fit.  We will see an example of it in the very next point.

- As for Isaiah 7:14, the most widely discussed NT interpretation "contrary to the literal and accepted meaning" of a Hebrew text is the dogma of the Virgin Birth, which Matthew bases on Isaiah 7:14, "Behold, the young woman shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel."  Matthew 1:22-23 says the virgin birth of Jesus happened to fulfill the words of the prophet Isaiah.  The writer of the Gospel of Matthew was probably using the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) as his "Old Testament," and the Septuagint translates the Hebrew word almah, meaning "young woman," as the Greek word parthenos, "maiden, virgin, unmarried girl," so that the Greek text may falsely be read, "a virgin shall conceive."  "Behold, the young maiden will conceive" does not mean she will be a virgin when she gives birth, nor does it imply that Yhwh will be the father.  In other words, the original Hebrew text of Isaiah never prophesied a virgin birth, only that a young woman would bear a child.

 

When I was a young woman, I was a virgin. I was a virgin till I married at age 23. My parents (I thank God now, I didn't thank God at the time) were very strict and I was not allowed to hang out with people of the opposite gender unless a trustworthy chaperone was observing. (My hubby likes to joke that my family are Amish, though they're not.)

Anyways, in the time of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, women in the Jewish culture were even more strict than my Gentile Christian parents were. It makes sense that young unmarried women = virgin, so it makes sense that the terms were interchangeable. Mary was a Jewess (whose age we don't know) who was a virgin in both definitions of the word: a young woman and a virgin.

The state of virginhood, by the way, is God's ideal for young women until they get married.

Anyways, the Qur'an agrees that Mary was a virgin, correct?

Quote

But that is by no means the worst problem!  Besides using a misinterpretation of the Hebrew, the NT takes Isaiah 7:14 totally out of context.  The passage actually refers to an imminent invasion of Israel by the Assyrians, which took place in the late 700s BCE.  The story of Isaiah 7-8 goes as follows.  During the reign of King Ahaz of Judah, Kings Rezin of Aram and Pekah of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem (7:1).  Ahaz feared the worst, but Isaiah told him Yhwh would not allow the two kings to destroy Jerusalem.  Then Isaiah tells Ahaz that Yhwh will give a sign to prove the truth of what he says: the young woman will give birth to a son and call him Immanuel, and before the boy is old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, the land of the two kings, whom Ahaz fears, will be laid waste by the king of Assyria (Isa. 7:14-17).  Obviously the king of Assyria did not destroy Israel and Aram when Jesus was a boy--no, that happened in 732 and 722-21 BCE, so Jesus could not fulfill this prophecy.  The birth of the child in Isaiah was supposed to be a sign that the attack on Jerusalem in the 700s BC would fail.

In fact, the very next chapter in Isaiah, chapter eight, continues the story.  Isaiah goes to the prophetess and she conceives and bears a son.  In verses 3-4, they call him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz ("quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil") because before the boy is very old the king of Assyria will "plunder" and "spoil" Damascus and Samaria.  And verses 8 and 10 again refer to Immanuel ("God is with us"), because Yhwh will save Ahaz and because even though the Assyrians will sweep all the way into Judah (701 BCE), their plans against Jerusalem will not succeed.  Whether Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and Immanuel are the same child or two different children matters not; both belong in time to the 700's BCE and to chapters 7 and 8 of Isaiah.

While I understand why many people reject Isaiah 7:14 as being for the Messiah, I also understand that God gave Matthew and the other disciples of Jesus understanding that the virgin birth is a miraculous prophecy God fulfilled in Jesus, the Jewish Messiah/Mashiach/Anointed One/Christ.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Christianlady said:

Salam Andres,

 

Thanks so much for answering my question. I do 100% believe Moses existed and that God led the Children of Israel out of slavery in Egypt through Moses, and that God gave the Children of Israel the law through Moses.

Jesus Christ talks about Moses, which is important. He confirms that Moses existed and that the Tanakh is true.  I believe that Jesus is also the prophet like Moses, as well as the Messiah/Christ/Anointed One on the throne of King David.

Peace and God bless you

But do you believe they were 600.000 men +wives and children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2017 at 8:12 PM, onereligion said:

Isaiah 8:18 even lets the reader know that the children in chapters 7-8 belong to Isaiah himself: "Here I am, and the children Yhwh has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel" (Isaiah's other child was Shear-Jashub, "a remnant will return," Isa. 7:3 and 10:21). 

 

Salam again,

I apologize for my reply being in 2 posts. I was talking to my hubby and got signed out before I finished my reply.

Interestingly, Jesus Christ calls his followers his children, which many Christians, including me, believe fulfills Isaiah 8:18 concerning the spiritual children of the Messiah: (I boldened some.)

"My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come." - John 13:33 (NIV)

(Jesus was talking to his Jewish followers here. "The Jews" Jesus refers to in the phrase "and just as I told the Jews" are the Jewish leaders who rejected him as the Messiah. Please note that Jesus never ever commanded his Jewish followers (or Gentile followers) to persecute Jewish people who rejected him. Rather, Jesus taught his followers to love.)

"When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” - Mark 2:5 (NIV)

"Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.” And the woman was healed at that moment." - Matthew 9:22 (NIV)

Hebrews 2 quotes Isaiah 8:18, along with other verses:

"In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered.  Both the one who makes people holy and those who are made holy are of the same family. So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters. He says,

“I will declare your name to my brothers and sisters;
    in the assembly I will sing your praises.”[Psalm 22:22]

And again,

“I will put my trust in him.”[Isaiah 8:17]

And again he says,

“Here am I, and the children God has given me.”[Isaiah 8:18]

- Hebrews 2:10-13 (NIV)
 

Quote

 

To summarize this issue, the writer of the Gospel of Matthew both used a mistranslation of Isaiah 7:14 and conveniently ignored 7:15-17 and the context of the "Immanuel" verse, as he misused Isaiah to support the doctrine of the virgin birth of Jesus. But in the Greco-Roman world, the virgin birth of a divine or semi-divine hero was a common motif.

- I am not obliged to answer any questions.  You have made a positive claim regarding prophecies being fulfilled to Israel.  I am only presenting a more coherent alternative that is more believable from OT itself.

With peace and blessings!

 

Do you disagree with the Qur'an concerning the miraculous birth of Jesus Christ to Mary, who was a virgin?

Peace and God bless you! :)

Edited by Christianlady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

It is interesting that Jesus himself reads from and quotes the prophet Isaiah. It is obvious that Jesus knew how to read and that Jesus considered the passage he read to be about himself: (I boldened some.)

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15 He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.

16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

18 The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
    because he has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
    and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,

19     to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.
[Isaiah 61:1,2 (see Septuagint); Isaiah 58:6]

20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

- Luke 4:14-21 (NIV)

Peace and God bless!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Christianlady said:

Salam,

It is interesting that Jesus himself reads from and quotes the prophet Isaiah. It is obvious that Jesus knew how to read ...

 

Why would you speculate that Jesus-a.s. could not read? He was a rabbi --John 6:25

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

Why would you speculate that Jesus-a.s. could not read? He was a rabbi --John 6:25

Salam Hasanhh,

I don't speculate that Jesus could not read. I know Jesus could (and can) read. :) I quoted a passage where Jesus reads from the scroll of Isaiah and after reading, states, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4:21b) 

Peace and God bless you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Christianlady said:

Salam Andres,

Could you please state the Biblical reference for the above number? Thanks.

Peace and God bless you

Exodus 12:

37 Now the sons of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, aside from children.
38 A mixed multitude also went up with them, along with flocks and herds, a very large number of livestock.
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, andres said:

Exodus 12:

37 Now the sons of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, aside from children.
38 A mixed multitude also went up with them, along with flocks and herds, a very large number of livestock.
 
 

Salam Andres,

Is there another number in the Bible that contradicts this number? I ask because I know that some scribes have gotten numbers confused. If there is no contradiction in another part of the Bible, then yes, I believe this number to be true.

In cases where there are verses with numeral contradictions, I believe one to be true and the contradictions to be scribal errors. Definitely I understand that scribes made some errors. However the errors are minor and do not change the overall meaning of the text. 

Peace and God bless you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Christianlady said:

Salam Andres,

Is there another number in the Bible that contradicts this number? I ask because I know that some scribes have gotten numbers confused. If there is no contradiction in another part of the Bible, then yes, I believe this number to be true.

In cases where there are verses with numeral contradictions, I believe one to be true and the contradictions to be scribal errors. Definitely I understand that scribes made some errors. However the errors are minor and do not change the overall meaning of the text. 

Peace and God bless you

Understanding helps if one accepts that the Exodus was written 800 years after it was supposed to have happened. Myths tend to exaggerate. Had the number been 60 men instead  of 600.000 + kids and wives, travelling 40 years in the Desert, this would explain why no traces of them have been found in the Desert. However the message of the Bible is not dependent on historical correctness

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, andres said:

Had the number been 60 men instead  of 600.000 + kids and wives, travelling 40 years in the Desert, this would explain why no traces of them have been found in the Desert. 

The absence of traces can also be explained by storms, cyclones, floods, earthquakes. etc.

And we have no detailed records of those things.

So we cannot say that 600,000 men were not there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, baqar said:

The absence of traces can also be explained by storms, cyclones, floods, earthquakes. etc.

And we have no detailed records of those things.

So we cannot say that 600,000 men were not there.

No. The absence of traces of maybe 2 million people living 40 years in the Sinai cannot be explained by storms and earthquakes. Had Sinai been flooded this would have left traces. No reports of such a large minority of Israelites living in Egypt and no traces of them fleeing into the desert or even settling in Palestine 1300BC, make certain the number cannot be that large.

 How can we know there were no polarbears in Sinai 1.300BC? Since there are no detailed records , we cannot know?  Can storms and floods have erased the evidence.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2017 at 5:15 PM, Christianlady said:

When I was a young woman, I was a virgin.

Anyways, in the time of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, women in the Jewish culture were even more strict than my Gentile Christian parents were. It makes sense that young unmarried women = virgin, so it makes sense that the terms were interchangeable.

Anyways, the Qur'an agrees that Mary was a virgin, correct?

While I understand why many people reject Isaiah 7:14 as being for the Messiah, I also understand that God gave Matthew and the other disciples of Jesus understanding that the virgin birth is a miraculous prophecy God fulfilled in Jesus, the Jewish Messiah/Mashiach/Anointed One/Christ.
 

- I always respected you, however, my respect for you has grown after what you said (regarding preserving your chastity).

- This is not a "then versus now" situation.  The Hebrew word "almah" means "young woman", not young unmarried woman, as you have us to believe.  A young woman can also be a young married woman who can then give birth. 

- Qur'an agrees that Mary (as) was a virgin and we believe it wholeheartedly.  For that, I need neither Matthew nor Isaiah.

- In the Islamic tradition, we believe that the people of Moses (as), or Jews, were promised a series of Prophets (as) one of whom was Jesus (as).  However, textually speaking, Isaiah is not a foundation for Matthew (whatever there is regarding virgin birth) because Isaiah, as I have highlighted, is speaking of something that Jesus (as) could not fulfill because it was before his time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2017 at 6:30 PM, Christianlady said:

Interestingly, Jesus Christ calls his followers his children, which many Christians, including me, believe fulfills Isaiah 8:18 concerning the spiritual children of the Messiah: (I boldened some.)

Do you disagree with the Qur'an concerning the miraculous birth of Jesus Christ to Mary, who was a virgin?

Peace and God bless you! :)

- A very shallow argument which is why I will not comment on the verses you had quoted because your premise (for the argument), from the very get-go, is flawed (hence, no need to cross-examine the verses you quoted as supporting evidence).

The story in Isaiah 7 (someone born to "almah") is continued in Isaiah 8.  Allow me to re-quote:

" In fact, the very next chapter in Isaiah, chapter eight, continues the story.  Isaiah goes to the prophetess and she conceives and bears a son.  In verses 3-4, they call him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz ("quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil") because before the boy is very old the king of Assyria will "plunder" and "spoil" Damascus and Samaria.  And verses 8 and 10 again refer to Immanuel ("God is with us"), because Yhwh will save Ahaz and because even though the Assyrians will sweep all the way into Judah (701 BCE), their plans against Jerusalem will not succeed.  Whether Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and Immanuel are the same child or two different children matters not; both belong in time to the 700's BCE and to chapters 7 and 8 of Isaiah."

To say it differently, the child born was either "Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz" or "Immanuel" both of whom were born around 700 BCE, well before Jesus (as).  So just because Jesus (as) referred to a few individuals as "my children" or "my son" or the equivalent does not give us the right to squeeze him into Isaiah.  We need to support our beliefs with textual proof; we do not give our whims, thoughts or emotions proof from the text.  The problem in Christianity is the latter!

- I believe in every word of the Qur'an.  What the Qur'an says regarding Jesus (as) is 100% truth and I believe in it one hundred percent.

- May God's peace and blessings be upon you, your family, loved ones and friends.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2017 at 7:22 PM, andres said:

Understanding helps if one accepts that the Exodus was written 800 years after it was supposed to have happened. Myths tend to exaggerate. Had the number been 60 men instead  of 600.000 + kids and wives, travelling 40 years in the Desert, this would explain why no traces of them have been found in the Desert. However the message of the Bible is not dependent on historical correctness

Salam Andres,

The Children of Israel had/have a great gift in passing down their history from generation to generation.

For example, Purim is coming up soon. It's amazing to me personally how Jewish people around the world celebrate and observe an event that happened around 355 BC.

"3406 Mordechai PROCLAIMED THE CELEBRATION OF Purim. -355" http://www.askmoses.com/en/article/679,2107657/Timeline-of-Jewish-History.html

That is impressive, to be sure!!! Personally, I have no clue of what my ancestors were doing around 355 BC, and have no yearly celebration to mark an important event in my ancestors' history. (I'm not jealous; I'm just stating a fact, that shows how much the Children of Israel impress me with their meticulous preservation of their history!)

Peace and God bless you

Edited by Christianlady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2017 at 10:27 PM, onereligion said:

- I always respected you, however, my respect for you has grown after what you said (regarding preserving your chastity).

Salam One Religion,

Thank you. I respect you too.

Quote

- This is not a "then versus now" situation.  The Hebrew word "almah" means "young woman", not young unmarried woman, as you have us to believe.  A young woman can also be a young married woman who can then give birth. 

The Hebrew word does not rule out a young unmarried woman. Regardless, Mary was engaged to be married to Joseph.

Again, there are prophecies in the Tanakh that have double fulfillments, though in different ways.

Quote

- Qur'an agrees that Mary (as) was a virgin and we believe it wholeheartedly.  For that, I need neither Matthew nor Isaiah.

- In the Islamic tradition, we believe that the people of Moses (as), or Jews, were promised a series of Prophets (as) one of whom was Jesus (as).  However, textually speaking, Isaiah is not a foundation for Matthew (whatever there is regarding virgin birth) because Isaiah, as I have highlighted, is speaking of something that Jesus (as) could not fulfill because it was before his time.

It is not normal for a virgin to give birth, is it? What would you think if a woman engaged to be married said that she was having a baby without engaging in sexual relations first? Would you believe her?

Joseph at first did not believe Mary, not until the angel of the Lord came and told him. After that is when this prophecy is mentioned. Most of Jesus' apostles and disciples didn't even mention the virgin birth of Jesus, interestingly enough.

The Apostle Matthew is the one who shares what the angel of the Lord told Joseph, which helped him accept the fact that his fiance Mary was miraculously pregnant. 

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about[d]: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.

19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet[e] did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,[f] because he will save his people from their sins.”

22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”[g] (which means “God with us”).

24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. - Matthew 1:18-25 (NIV)

Joseph, by the way, could have had Mary killed, but it sounds like instead, he just wanted to divorce her quietly. Thank God for His intervention!

Anyways, the Apostle Matthew was very interested in how Jesus fulfills prophecy. He refers to the Tanakh many times.

 

Quote

 

- A very shallow argument which is why I will not comment on the verses you had quoted because your premise (for the argument), from the very get-go, is flawed (hence, no need to cross-examine the verses you quoted as supporting evidence).

The story in Isaiah 7 (someone born to "almah") is continued in Isaiah 8.  Allow me to re-quote:

" In fact, the very next chapter in Isaiah, chapter eight, continues the story.  Isaiah goes to the prophetess and she conceives and bears a son.  In verses 3-4, they call him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz ("quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil") because before the boy is very old the king of Assyria will "plunder" and "spoil" Damascus and Samaria.  And verses 8 and 10 again refer to Immanuel ("God is with us"), because Yhwh will save Ahaz and because even though the Assyrians will sweep all the way into Judah (701 BCE), their plans against Jerusalem will not succeed.  Whether Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and Immanuel are the same child or two different children matters not; both belong in time to the 700's BCE and to chapters 7 and 8 of Isaiah."To say it differently, the child born was either "Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz" or "Immanuel" both of whom were born around 700 BCE, well before Jesus (as).  So just because Jesus (as) referred to a few individuals as "my children" or "my son" or the equivalent does not give us the right to squeeze him into Isaiah. 

 

Definitely there are many Jewish people who don't believe Jesus is the Messiah who would agree with you.

However, Jesus himself attributed prophecies that God gave via the prophet Isaiah to himself, as shown in Luke 4:14-21, where Jesus stated, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.after reading from the scroll of Isaiah (Isaiah 61:1-2). 

Jesus referring to people as my children does indeed give reason for his disciples to believe he fulfills these prophesies. After all, Jesus taught his disciples about how he fulfills Scriptures after he rose from the dead:

He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!  Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?”  And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself. - Luke 24:25-27 (NIV)

Quote

We need to support our beliefs with textual proof; we do not give our whims, thoughts or emotions proof from the text.  The problem in Christianity is the latter!

I have provided texts from the Tanakh (Old Testament) and New Testament. Please remember that the disciples who walked and talked with Jesus believed that Jesus fulfills prophecies in Isaiah and in other prophecies accounted in the Tanakh. If they didn't believe, they would not have accepted Jesus as the Messiah/Christ/Anointed One.

Quote

 

- I believe in every word of the Qur'an.  What the Qur'an says regarding Jesus (as) is 100% truth and I believe in it one hundred percent.

 

Out of curiosity, does the Qur'an mention Isaiah and any prophecies of Isaiah, like the New Testament does? Thanks.

Quote

- May God's peace and blessings be upon you, your family, loved ones and friends.

Thank you so much! Peace and God bless you and all of your loved ones as well! :)

 

Edited by Christianlady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christianlady said:

Personally, I have no clue of what my ancestors were doing around 355 BC, and have no yearly celebration to mark an important event in my ancestors' history. (I'm not jealous; I'm just stating a fact, that shows how much the Children of Israel impress me with their meticulous preservation of their history!)

Peace and God bless you

Israelites of 4th century BC are most likely also your and my ancestors. Myths or no myths, the OT is a part of our heritage. Other, both younger and older cultures also have preserved many myths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Christianlady

Salaam alaykum,

With too much on my plate, I will return to address your post.  However, the majority of your post - the bulk of what you have shared with us (quoting verses and what not) - does not address the issue.  What is relevant to our discussion is the following statement you made: "I have provided texts from the Tanakh (Old Testament) and New Testament."

Yes, you have presented texts but these are (mis)interpreted, according to your own preferences and liking, as I have proved with "almah" which you mistranslated to "virgin" and then restricted to "young unmarried woman".  Now you claim that "almah" does not rule out a "young unmarried woman".

As we have seen, there are endless possibilities on how to interpret that word.  Furthermore, Isaiah 8 informs us of the one who was born.  How you, and the Christian world, try to take a huge number of possibilities and a character already identified in Isaiah 8 to be none other but Jesus (as) completely baffles me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2017 at 4:16 PM, andres said:

Israelites of 4th century BC are most likely also your and my ancestors.

Salam Andres,

Why do you think that? I don't have any evidence of that.

Quote

Myths or no myths, the OT is a part of our heritage.

The OT is true, and you're right that it is a part of our heritage. :) For example, many Jewish people around the world just celebrated Purim. Queen Esther is a hero, a wonderful female role model not only for many Jewish people, but also for many Gentiles like me who learn a lot from her courageous example!!! :) 

Quote

Other, both younger and older cultures also have preserved many myths.

True, but again, I believe the OT and the NT are true - not myths. 

Why? Because I trust that God protected His Word, in spite of the human errors made by scribes throughout the centuries.

Peace and God bless you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Christianlady

We all have 2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 greatgrandparents. If you continue counting only 1.000 years back, you will find that 40 generation ago the number  is over a billion, in that generation only. There were not that many persons living on earth 1000 years ago, so many of them appear both on your maternal and paternal side. Nobody knows the exact faily tree 1.000 back, but if one of that billion in your family tree was a Jew, which is more than likely, his or her ancestors 1.000 earlier, in Jesus time, also would count a billion, and so most likely every Jew living in ME would be his or her ancestor. And therefore also your ancestor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Salam. If the person lives in another country and has the wish to be buried in Iraq, there are governmental regulations about shipping a person's remains. The country where that person lives has laws that need to be followed. For example, the person who died would need a medical statement that the body is not contagious. The casket would need to be inside a lead box that would not leak, then placed inside a wooden crate which is nailed shut and has special seals that show if there was tampering or opening. The funeral home would need government permission to transport the body by airline and not all airlines provide that service. The licensed funeral home worker would need to drive the prepared package with the person's remains to the licensed airline and make sure that the remains were placed on the airplane. At the arrival in the airport in Iraq, the person's remains would be in the customs area and the customs workers would wait for the person who would need to personally claim the body and sign documents that the body was picked up. Because the whole thing is very heavy and would not fit inside an ambulance or hearse, the wooden crate would need to be opened which means workers or relatives of the deceased would need to use crowbars to remove it. After lifting the lead box into the vehicle, the deceased would need to be transported to the cemetery location where the bodies are washed. The cemetery would take care of everything but of course the price will depend on the location of the cemetery. The most expensive part of the international burial is the western country (funeral home, trip to airport, airline shipping) and could reach $15,000. The price of the cemetery plot, washing the body, wrapping the body in kaffan, is a separate price. The temporary grave marker with the name written in chalk on it is probably free, but the grave stone with the name carved on it would be a separate price. This does not answer your question of whether someone can be buried in Iraq, but I just want you to know that the person needs to save his money if he has such a wish. May Allah SWT grant all halal wishes.  
    • That is the crux of the issue here brother. I am trying to understand what/who determines which parts to accept and which parts to reject.
    • Or this question: Can I use body wash to wash my hair?  
    • There isn't even unity among shias. You call non-twelver Shias heretics. Do you think you are ready to unity with Sunnis?
    • I suppose it all depends on the person. But yes, if someone took a literalist approach and did believe that the many strories of scripture were all true in a black and white way, and they simultaneously were consistent in believing all things they viewed as miracles, then yes they would believe both in the literal story of Adam and Eve, and the literal story of the virgin birth.
×