Was Jesus the messiah of the Hebrew bible?

[Nickman]

Cholland said he would like to debate this point so here it is.

Was Jesus the the messiah as prescribed by the Hebrew bible?

What prophecies does he fulfill and why?

Can he be shown to not fulfill the Hebrew text?

Cholland your up.....

[The Tongue]

What evidence do you have that Mary slept with Joseph Bar Heli? There is no such thing in the bible. Why didnt the author write this down?

You really don't know your bible do you? Luke 3: 23; Jesus the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, don't worry too much about the added interpolation in brackets, (As was supposed) This Joseph the son of Alexander Helios (Heli) is about 40 generations from Nathan the adopted son of King David and should not be confused with Joseph the son of Jacob who is about the 24th descendant of Solomon and who had no sexual relations with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus the biological son of her half brother Joseph the son of Heli.

As was supposed though. You will have to show that Luke had his ducks in a row. Did Luke speak ofthe same Joseph as Matthew? Why not worry about the brackets though? because it makes your case look better? The as was supposed can easily be admission of a virgin birth.

Nah youngen, youre barking up the wrong tree again as per usual, It is not I, who has to show that Luke has his ducks in a row, It is you who have to prove that he does not.

Luke states that Jesus is the son of Joseph, who is the son of Heli, who is about 40 generations removed from his great ancestor Nathan the adopted son of King David, not Joseph who is the son of Jacob from the cursed line of Jehoiachin and who was about 24 generations removed from his ancestor Solomon who was the half brother to Nathan, who like Solomon, was a son of Bathsheba.

There never was no virgin birth matey, as I have pointed out a hundred times, the word virgin in relation to the mother of Jesus was not introduced into the bible until the 5th century by the deliberate erroneous interpretation of the Greek Parthenos by Jerome, in his attempt to substantiate the lie that was introduced by those, who like yourself, had abandoned the savior as taught by the apostles.

Alexander Helios, was a Macedonian Jew, who married Hanna the daughter of the high priest in Judaea and who sired Mary the half sister to Joseph the Levite from Cyprus=Macedonia.

Galatians 4: 29; Just as it was at that time, the child who was born according to the flesh (Ishmael) despised and persecuted him (Isaac) who was born according to the working of the Holy Spirit etc.

Isaac is a prototype of Jesus and like Jesus, Isaac was born of Gods promise according to the workings of the Holy Spirit. Both are seen as the seed that was promised to Abraham. Both Isaac and Jesus were the sons of parents who were both sired by the one Father. Terah, is the father to both Abraham and Sarah, while Heli, is the father of both Joseph and Mary. Both Mary and Sarah were informed by an angel that they would become Pregnant and bear the son of Gods promise. Isaac was offered up as a sacrifice by his physical father, Jesus was offered up by his spiritual father, who descended upon him in the form of a dove as the voice was heard to say, you are my beloved in whom I am well pleased, today I have become your Father. See the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 22; and Isaac was offered up on the same mountain at the very spot where Jesus was crucified.

In Luke 3: 22; (In place of Thou art my beloved son in who I am well pleased.) The following authorities of the second, third, and fourth centuries read, This day I have begotten thee, vouched for by Codex D, and the most ancient copies of the old latin (a, b. c. ff.I), by Justin Martyr (AD 140), Clemens Alex, (AD. 190), Methodius (AD. 290), among the Greeks. And among the Latins, Lactaitius (AD 300), Hilary (AD) Juvencus (AD. 330), Faustus (AD. 400) and Augustine. All these oldest manuscripts were changed completely. They now read, This is my son in whom I am well pleased. Whereas the original variant was, Thou art my Son. This day I have begotten thee.

This Joseph the Levite who is the descendant of Nathan, came from Cyprus and he had a half sister by the name Mary, (Same father Heli different mothers) who was the adopted mother of John, who Jesus had surnamed Son of Thunder, and who is identified with the young John who was surnamed Mark, which means Hammer, or The Hammerer. After the death of Jesus, this Joseph the Levite took his half sister Mary and young John up north into the land of Pamphylia, where today, in the town of Ephesus, the grave sites of Mary and John can still be visited

[Nickman]

No matey, Luke says as supposed to be the son of Joseph bar heli. It does not confirm it. It states as supposed. You wil have to show how supposed means that Joseph bar heli slept with Mary.

[The Tongue]

No matey, Luke says as supposed to be the son of Joseph bar heli. It does not confirm it. It states as supposed. You wil have to show how supposed means that Joseph bar heli slept with Mary.

And as I have said (As was supposed) in brackets, was a later interpolation.

Luke reveals that Joseph the son of Jacob from the cursed genetic line of Jehoichin had never consummated their union until the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli was born, by saying that Joseph (The son of Jacob) went from Nazareth of Galilee to Bethlehem of Judaea with the pregnant Mary who was PROMISED in marriage to him. The were not at that time married, their union had not at that time been consummated, and you and I are not so naive as to believe the lies of the universal church of Constantine, who would distort and add their filthy yeast to the unleavened bread of God, in order to deceive the gullible into believing that Jesus was born of some supposed virgin.

Like Isaac, a prototype of Jesus, who was born of God's promise according to the workings of the holy spirit, who was the son of Abraham and his half sister Sarah who were both sired by Terah and born of two different mothers, so too, Jesus who was the promised seed of Abraham was born of the union between Mary and her half brother Joseph according to the workings of the Holy Spirit, who were both sired by Alexander Helious (Heli) and born of two different mothers.

And whether you choose to believe Luke or not is totally irrelevant to me, my young friend.

[Nickman]

Tongue, please show me how the bracket of Luke is an interpolation. I want to believe you. The problem is the bracket plus Matthews version.

[The Tongue]

Tongue, please show me how the bracket of Luke is an interpolation. I want to believe you. The problem is the bracket plus Matthews version.

In 1973, an ecumenical edition of RSV was approved by both Protestant and Catholic hierarchies, called the common bible. As a matter of fact, I have in front of me, A New English Translation of the Bible, published in 1970 and approved by the council of churches in England, Scotland, Wales, the Irish council of churches, the London Society of Friends, and the Methodist and Presbyterian churches of England. And what do we read in Isaiah 7: 14; A young Woman is with child, and she will bear a son. I also have before me The Good News Bible, catholic Study Edition, with imprimatur by Archbishop John Whealon: and on turning to Isaiah 7: 14; and what do you know? It says here, A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc.

When will it ever sink into that blind and stubborn atheistic brain of yours that Matthew was not referring to any pregnant virgin?

I will continue to repeat this time and time again until it finally smashes the mixture of that brain of yours that is all mixed up and set as hard as concrete.

The word Virgin in reference to the mother of Jesus was first introduced in the 5th century Latin Bible The Vulgate, due mainly to the effort of Jerome who was commissioned to make a revision of the books that had already been translated to Latin by, in most cases, persons unknown, and with those books translated by Jerome himself, which revision was completed in 405 A.D. became the official bible of the universal church that had been established by its unorthodox and non-christian champion, King Constantine, who had his father Constantius deified and was accorded the same honour himself after his death.

In translating the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an Almah an unmarried female is with child and will bear a son, into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for virgin, the authors of the Septuagint and Matthew, correctly used the Greek word Parthenos, which carries a basic meaning of girl, or unmarried youth, and denotes virgin only by implication.

A more accurate rendering of the Greek parthenos is a person who does not have a regular sexual partner, a widow with a family of children, would be a parthenos, Hanna who nursed the baby Jesus before Mary performed the ceremony of purification, was a widow of seven years, and is referred to as a parthenos for seven years, but she was in no way, a virgin.

Was Luke who used the Greek "Parthenos, when referring to Hanna, trying to tell you that the old woman who had lost her husband 7 years previously was still a virgin? NO! Of course not. Wake up to yourself son.

To translate something from the Hebrew to the Greek, or from any language to another, one must not lose the essence of the original, and the original was, that A young woman was with child. Therefore, as the greater majority of churches now admit, that the words of Isaiah, which refer to a child that had been sired by him, was, A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc. Matthew 1: 23; should now read, Now all this happened to make come true what the Lord had said through Isaiah, A young woman who is pregnant will have a son, etc. Because they all now admit that those were the words of Isaiah 7: 14.

Parthenos, was often used in reference to non-virgins who had never been married. Homer uses it in reference to unmarried girls who were no longer virgins, and Homer was the standard textbook for learning Greek all throughout antiquity, so any writer of Greek, including Matthew, who translated Isaiahs words, that (An unmarried woman would be with child etc) while being well aware of this words versatile and indefinite meaning; was in no way implying that Mary was a virgin.

For the Hebrew has a specific term for virgin, Bethulah which word is used in every instance in the Old Testament where a woman who has never had sexual intercourse with a man is referred to, which is obviously not the case with the unmarried woman/Almah, who is mentioned in Isaiah 7:14.

In Pergamos, as one of the final stages in the quest for enlightenment, the initiated adept would participate in sex with the Temple Virgin/Parthenos.

"Parthenos" did not mean possessing an intact hymen. A parthenos was simply an unmarried woman, a woman who claimed ownership of herself.

And as far as your professed desire to believe anything that is recorded in the Holy Scriptures, that's simply a load of old crock, you are so set in your hatred toward the biblical God and his followers, you ain't never gonna change in no hurry matey.

But others who browse these threads will at least see you for who you are.

[ThatGirlAgain]

The word Virgin in reference to the mother of Jesus was first introduced in the 5th century Latin Bible The Vulgate, due mainly to the effort of Jerome who was commissioned to make a revision of the books that had already been translated to Latin by, in most cases, persons unknown, and with those books translated by Jerome himself, which revision was completed in 405 A.D. became the official bible of the universal church that had been established by its unorthodox and non-christian champion, King Constantine, who had his father Constantius deified and was accorded the same honour himself after his death.

Matthew 1:22-23

Latin Vulgate
hoc autem totum factum est ut adimpleretur id quod dictum est a Domino per prophetam dicentem
ecce virgo in utero habebit et pariet filium et vocabunt nomen eius Emmanuhel quod est interpretatum Nobiscum Deus

Douay-Rheims
Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying:
Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

http://www.latinvulgate.com/lv/verse.aspx?t=1&b=1

Virgo:maiden, virgin, young girl.

http://humanum.arts.cuhk.edu.hk/Lexis/Latin/

The Latin word virgo has the same multiple connotations as the Greek parthenos. Jerome did not change anything here. (Nor, despite persistent urban legend, did Constantine have anything to do with the contents of the Bible.)

The idea of Mary being a literal physical virgin being in the popular imagination can be seen as early as the mid-2nd century Protoevangelium of James, where Mary is a virgin not only before but during and after the birth of Jesus.

Protoevangelium of James

XL 2 And behold an angel of the Lord stood before her saying: Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace before the Lord of all things, and thou shalt conceive of his word. And she, when she heard it, questioned in herself, saying: Shall I verily conceive of the living God, and bring forth after the manner of all women? And the angel of the Lord said: Not so, Mary, for a power of the Lord shall overshadow thee: wherefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of the Highest. And thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins. And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord is before him: be it unto me according to thy word.

XIII. I Now it was the sixth month with her, and behold Joseph came from his building, and he entered into his house and found her great with child. And he smote his face, and cast himself down upon the ground on sackcloth and wept bitterly, saying: With what countenance shall I look unto the Lord my God ? and what prayer shall I make concerning this maiden? for I received her out of the temple of the Lord my God a virgin, and have not kept her safe. Who is he that hath ensnared me ? Who hath done this evil in mine house and hath defiled the virgin?

XIV. I And Joseph was sore afraid and ceased from speaking unto her (or left her alone), and pondered what he should do with her. And Joseph said: If I hide her sin, I shall be found fighting against the law of the Lord: and if I manifest her unto the children of Israel, I fear lest that which is in her be the seed of an angel, and I shall be found delivering up innocent blood to the judgement of death. What then shall I do ? I will let her go from me privily. And the night came upon him. 2 And behold an angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying: Fear not this child, for that which is in her is of the Holy Ghost, and she shall bear a son and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. And Joseph arose from sleep and glorified the God of Israel which had shown this favour unto her: and he watched over her.

XIX. I And behold a woman coming down from the hillcountry, and she said to me: Man, whither goest thou ? And I said: I seek a midwife of the Hebrews. And she answered and said unto me: Art thou of Israel ? And I said unto her: Yea. And she said: And who is she that bringeth forth in the cave ? And I said: She that is betrothed unto me. And she said to me: Is she not thy wife? And I said to her: It is Mary that was nurtured up in the temple of the Lord: and I received her to wife by lot: and she is not my wife, but she hath conception by the Holy Ghost.

And the midwife said unto him: Is this the truth? And Joseph said unto her: Come hither and see. And the midwife went with him.

2 And they stood in the place of the cave: and behold a bright cloud overshadowing the cave. And the midwife said: My soul is magnified this day, because mine eyes have seen marvellous things: for salvation is born unto Israel. And immediately the cloud withdrew itself out of the cave, and a great light appeared in the cave so that our eyes could not endure it. And by little and little that light withdrew itself until the young child appeared: and it went and took the breast of its mother Mary.

And the midwife cried aloud and said: Great unto me to-day is this day, in that ! have seen this new sight.

3 And the midwife went forth of the cave and Salome met her. And she said to her: Salome, Salome, a new sight have I to tell thee. A virgin hath brought forth, which her nature alloweth not. And Salome said: As the Lord my God liveth, if I make not trial and prove her nature I will not believe that a virgin hath brought forth.

XX. 1 And the midwife went in and said unto Mary: Order thyself, for there is no small contention arisen concerning thee. And Salome made trial and cried out and said: Woe unto mine iniquity and mine unbelief, because I have tempted the living God, and lo, my hand falleth away from me in fire. And she bowed her knees unto the Lord, saying: O God of my fathers, remember that I am the seed of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob: make me not a public example unto the children of Israel, but restore me unto the poor, for thou knowest, Lord, that in thy name did I perform my cures, and did receive my hire of thee. 3 And lo, an angel of the Lord appeared, saying unto her: Salome, Salome, the Lord hath hearkened to thee: bring thine hand near unto the young child and take him up, and there shall be unto thee salvation and joy. 4 And Salome came near and took him up, saying: I will do him worship, for a great king is born unto Israel. And behold immediately Salome was healed: and she went forth of the cave justified. And Io, a voice saying: Salome, Salome, tell none of the marvels which thou hast seen, until the child enter into Jerusalem.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... james.html

Seeing that this story connects closely with Matthew 1 with respect to Josephs fear of infidelity and its resolution by an angel and with the general theme of conception by the Holy Spirit in conjunction with the overwhelming insistence of James on the physical virginity of Mary, is there any reason to think that this is not how Matthew 1 was received by its original audience?

In any case, Matthew makes it plain that Joseph is not the biological father.

Matthew 1
18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: 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 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, 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 (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.

If the Holy Spirit did not make her pregnant, who did? And whoever it was, obviously God approved. Otherwise what does all that Holy Spirit business mean? Great start for the Messiah, right?

The mismatch between one connotation of parthenos, physical virginity, that is not present in the original almah is irrelevant. Matthew is intentionally misrepresenting it to serve his own agenda, to maximize the importance and authority of Jesus. Misrepresenting scripture is par for the course with Matthew.

[Student]

Did Matthew deliberately misquote scripture, or did he relate what he found in his version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint?

From the extant text of the Septuagint we find at Isaiah 7:14
.see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and you shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[. , ]

Matthew 1:23 copies this almost word for word:
see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and they shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[ , ]

At the time that Isaiah was originally translated into Greek it is more than likely that parthenos carried the same primary sense as originally pertained in Attic, that is, a young unmarried girl. However, over time, through the process of semantic change, the meaning of parthenos gradually evolved, until by Matthews time it had come to mean virgin.

It is also possible that at some time the text of the Septuagint might have been corrupted, perhaps by scribal error, with [exei = she shall be having] replacing [echei = she is having] and in so doing changing the meaning from the young girl having already conceived to her conceiving in the future.

[I appreciate that my hypothesis is based entirely upon conjecture, but it would allow the original meaning the Septuagint to conform almost exactly to the meaning of the Hebrew text i.e. see the pregnant young girl]

So Matthew goes quote mining for references for the Messiah and, by a happy coincidence, finds in Isaiah the prophesy of a virgin birth which he readily applies to Jesus.

[Lotan]

So Matthew goes quote mining for references for the Messiah and, by a happy coincidence, finds in Isaiah the prophesy of a virgin birth which he readily applies to Jesus.

My favorite bit of this 'amazing prophecy' is the inherent contradiction of names. Christian apologists are so enthralled with the meaning of 'Immanuel' that they are incapable of seeing it...

And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins. So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which is translated, God with us. Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name JESUS. Matt. 1:21-25

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14

...and for a second opinion...

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. Luke 1:31

Nowhere else in the NT is Jesus referred to as Immanuel. By anyone.

[The Tongue]

Did Matthew deliberately misquote scripture, or did he relate what he found in his version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint?

From the extant text of the Septuagint we find at Isaiah 7:14
.see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and you shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[. , ]

Matthew 1:23 copies this almost word for word:
see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and they shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[ , ]

At the time that Isaiah was originally translated into Greek it is more than likely that parthenos carried the same primary sense as originally pertained in Attic, that is, a young unmarried girl. However, over time, through the process of semantic change, the meaning of parthenos gradually evolved, until by Matthews time it had come to mean virgin.

It is also possible that at some time the text of the Septuagint might have been corrupted, perhaps by scribal error, with [exei = she shall be having] replacing [echei = she is having] and in so doing changing the meaning from the young girl having already conceived to her conceiving in the future.

[I appreciate that my hypothesis is based entirely upon conjecture, but it would allow the original meaning the Septuagint to conform almost exactly to the meaning of the Hebrew text i.e. see the pregnant young girl]

So Matthew goes quote mining for references for the Messiah and, by a happy coincidence, finds in Isaiah the prophesy of a virgin birth which he readily applies to Jesus.

[Student wrote].......At the time that Isaiah was originally translated into Greek it is more than likely that parthenos carried the same primary sense as originally pertained in Attic, that is, a young unmarried girl. However, over time, through the process of semantic change, the meaning of parthenos gradually evolved, until by Matthews time it had come to mean virgin.

So, according to you, when Luke referred to Hanna as a "PARTHENOS,", the old woman who nursed the baby Jesus before Mary performed the ceremony of purification, the old woman who had lost her husband seven years earlier, he was actually saying that she was a "VIRGIN." I think not.

In translating the Hebrew words of the prophet Isaiah, that an Almah an unmarried female is with child and will bear a son, into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for virgin, the authors of the Septuagint and Matthew correctly used the Greek word Parthenos, which carries a basic meaning of girl, or unmarried youth, and denotes virgin only by implication.

A more accurate rendering of the Greek parthenos is a person who does not have a regular sexual partner, a widow with a family of children, would be a parthenos, Hanna who nursed the baby Jesus before Mary performed the ceremony of purification, was a widow of seven years, and is referred to as a parthenos for seven years, but she was in no way, a virgin.

[ThatGirlAgain]

Did Matthew deliberately misquote scripture, or did he relate what he found in his version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint?

From the extant text of the Septuagint we find at Isaiah 7:14
.see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and you shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[. , ]

Matthew 1:23 copies this almost word for word:
see the parthenos in belly she shall be having and she shall be bringing forth [a] son and they shall be calling the name of him Emmanuel.

[ , ]

At the time that Isaiah was originally translated into Greek it is more than likely that parthenos carried the same primary sense as originally pertained in Attic, that is, a young unmarried girl. However, over time, through the process of semantic change, the meaning of parthenos gradually evolved, until by Matthews time it had come to mean virgin.

It is also possible that at some time the text of the Septuagint might have been corrupted, perhaps by scribal error, with [exei = she shall be having] replacing [echei = she is having] and in so doing changing the meaning from the young girl having already conceived to her conceiving in the future.

[I appreciate that my hypothesis is based entirely upon conjecture, but it would allow the original meaning the Septuagint to conform almost exactly to the meaning of the Hebrew text i.e. see the pregnant young girl]

So Matthew goes quote mining for references for the Messiah and, by a happy coincidence, finds in Isaiah the prophesy of a virgin birth which he readily applies to Jesus.

Keep in mind that Matthew already had the example of Paul calling Jesus the apparently one and only son of God and saying that Jesus came from heaven and became human. A virgin birth (perhaps inspired by Philo as already discussed elsewhere) would seem to be essential to 'proving' that Jesus came directly from God. Making Jesus the son of God in a very literal sense would fit in with Matthean methodology. Remember the overly literal two animal entry into Jerusalem?