Member
Using only what is found in the Tanakh, please demonstrate that the twenty-seven books which make up the New Testament, and only those books, need to be added to what is called 'scripture' or 'the scriptures'.
Why add twenty-seven?
Member
Numbers Chapter 14
כאוְאוּלָ֖ם חַי־אָ֑נִי וְיִמָּלֵ֥א כְבוֹד־יְהֹוָ֖ה
אֶת־כָּל־הָאָֽרֶץ:
There you go.
The New Testament is the glory of the Lord.
Loyal
Jeremiah 31:30-33 (CJB)
30 (31) “Here, the days are coming,” says Adonai, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Isra’el and with the house of Y’hudah. 31 (32) It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers on the day I took them by their hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt; because they, for their part, violated my covenant, even though I, for my part, was a husband to them,” says Adonai. 32 (33) “For this is the covenant I will make with the house of Isra’el after those days,” says Adonai: “I will put my Torah within them and write it on their hearts; I will be their God, and they will be my people. 33 (34) No longer will any of them teach his fellow community member or his brother, ‘Know Adonai’; for all will know me, from the least of them to the greatest; because I will forgive their wickednesses and remember their sins no more.”
Member
Neither response is a description of the twenty-seven books of the New Testament or a claim that scripture is going to be made longer.
Loyal
Cool...Please tell us the reason then?
Active
I propose Isa. 53, the undeniably acute prophecy of Messiah, only fulfilled by Jesus the Christ of God. The 27 NT books are inspired volumes pertaining to his message to man through the apostles, disciples, by the Holy Spirit.
Member
Nothing in the book of Numbers or Jeremiah tells me that Paul's letter to the Colossians is to be treated as scriptural but that Shepherd of Hermas is not. Neither even mentions an additional set of writings that are to be given the status of 'scripture'.
Come to think of it, when 'the scriptures' appears in the book of Acts and 'scripture' appears in the second epistle of Timothy, nothing there suggests that they are referring to anything additional to the Hebrew scriptures.
Come to think of it, when 'the scriptures' appears in the book of Acts and 'scripture' appears in the second epistle of Timothy, nothing there suggests that they are referring to anything additional to the Hebrew scriptures.
Active
So your wisdom concerning the scriptures trumps all the experts of multiple millennia, and even ignores the fact that only one man in history fulfilled every bit of that prophecy to the letter. You stand alone the exceptional expert as to who might be described in that book of the Tanach (Isa 53)? Please reconsider.
David, the TORAH is the first 5 books including Numbers, all of Moses. The Tanach is the rest of the Hebrew Bible. Jesus has met the requirements of most prophecies of the entire Hebrew Bible (OT), the balance not possibly met until he returns in the clouds.
David, the TORAH is the first 5 books including Numbers, all of Moses. The Tanach is the rest of the Hebrew Bible. Jesus has met the requirements of most prophecies of the entire Hebrew Bible (OT), the balance not possibly met until he returns in the clouds.
Active
At the time of Acts unfolding, Paul writing letters, Peter adding, Luke and Mark contributing, James & Matthew submitting theirs, written scriptures were still the Hebrew Bible. In the days of Jesus and beyond some help was available in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew texts. That's all there was, those two sources. The apostle's letters required many decades of copying to distribute to churches under extreme persecution and punishment for distributing the word of God. So the "scriptures" in Acts and Timothy referred to the OT. Then we find Peter was the first to refer to epistles of Paul's in 2 Peter 3:15-16 (KJV)
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Peter and Paul both relied heavily on scriptures of the Torah and Tanach, and so did Jesus. All Jesus had was the Hebrew Bible and of course what the Father supplied. He left the Holy Spirit in charge of adding further knowledge of the word of God. It's all interactive.
The Colossian letter dealt with the fact that Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the Law, answered the prophets, and warned of the consequences of returning to the Law. Jews were plaguing gentiles, demanding adherence to Moses. God warned Israel long before Jesus came that he would dismantle their nation and ways until the new millennium, when Israel will be restored in the proper glory with Jesus on the throne. Much of the NT makes little sense without knowledge of the old way, but that knowledge isn't required for a gentile to be saved.
Member
The Torah is part of the Tanakh, not something separate from it.
It is absurd to say that the 53rd chapter of Isaiah refers to Jesus. It does not even refer to a messiah. Chapters 52 to 54 are about Israel.
Using anything besides the Tanakh to give legitimacy to the New Testament as scripture requires that something else to prove its own legitimacy. That Paul's writings were treated as scripture by a New Testament writer is not sufficient grounds, neither is an appeal to 'the Holy Spirit', unless you want to get to the back of the queue of cults and sects each claiming their own personal revelation which you are supposed to accept.
It is absurd to say that the 53rd chapter of Isaiah refers to Jesus. It does not even refer to a messiah. Chapters 52 to 54 are about Israel.
Using anything besides the Tanakh to give legitimacy to the New Testament as scripture requires that something else to prove its own legitimacy. That Paul's writings were treated as scripture by a New Testament writer is not sufficient grounds, neither is an appeal to 'the Holy Spirit', unless you want to get to the back of the queue of cults and sects each claiming their own personal revelation which you are supposed to accept.
Moderator
Staff Member
So, the question to you is: Are there any parts of the Tanakh that give legitimacy to Jesus being the Messiah?
Member
No.
Active
You are revealed now as a Judaizer or disbeliever in Christ in general, and it's quite understandable why you would post such things.
We Christians accept Jesus as fulfillment of Isa. 53. Verse one is quoted in
John 12:37-41 (KJV)
37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
again in
Romans 10:13-21 (KJV)
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.
21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
Disbelieving is a serious effort that greatly displeases God. Some synagogues currently avoid attention to Isa 53 because of that link to Jesus, but if they read it, they interpret it to the future restoration of Israel. It doesn't fit well enough for many rabbis to get into it in conservative synagogues.
Jesus also fulfilled Isaiah 61:1-2 (KJV)
1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
He applied that to himself in
Luke 4:18-21 (KJV)
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
That synagogue loved it until Jesus put the rest of the truth to them. Modern "Jews" are still resisting. Most will perish, of course, but a very small remnant will believe in the end.
Moderator
Staff Member
@David Young
I assumed as such from some of your replies and your bio.
I'm also assuming that you do believe in a Messiah, at least through the Words of the Tanakh. You have probably done this already, but may I suggest that you compile all the verses that do provide the prophetic words concerning Him. At the very least you and others here can converse on how they apply or don't to Jesus being the Messiah. For assuredly there are Tanakh areas i.e. Isaiah 53, which one side views as being prophetic to the Messiah, while the other side (yours) does not. Their must be some that both sides will agree on. I'm just curious which ones you see that do apply.
I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, because clearly you knew the type of site you were joining, with the beliefs that you have, and that eventually they would come to light. Your continued attendance here will undoubtedly create problems, for the simple reason that belief of Jesus Christ as the Messiah that this site is based on, cannot co-exist well with one whose belief is that Jesus is not the Messiah, and is not truly seeking to understand the alternative, but rather will only seek to push their own position/belief. Eventually it will come to a head unless one or the other changes. Talk Jesus will not change, and any attempt to Evangelize those to how you believe, will only be met with resistance and eventually banishment.
So, the choice becomes yours until it becomes ours.
With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
<><
I assumed as such from some of your replies and your bio.
I'm also assuming that you do believe in a Messiah, at least through the Words of the Tanakh. You have probably done this already, but may I suggest that you compile all the verses that do provide the prophetic words concerning Him. At the very least you and others here can converse on how they apply or don't to Jesus being the Messiah. For assuredly there are Tanakh areas i.e. Isaiah 53, which one side views as being prophetic to the Messiah, while the other side (yours) does not. Their must be some that both sides will agree on. I'm just curious which ones you see that do apply.
I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, because clearly you knew the type of site you were joining, with the beliefs that you have, and that eventually they would come to light. Your continued attendance here will undoubtedly create problems, for the simple reason that belief of Jesus Christ as the Messiah that this site is based on, cannot co-exist well with one whose belief is that Jesus is not the Messiah, and is not truly seeking to understand the alternative, but rather will only seek to push their own position/belief. Eventually it will come to a head unless one or the other changes. Talk Jesus will not change, and any attempt to Evangelize those to how you believe, will only be met with resistance and eventually banishment.
So, the choice becomes yours until it becomes ours.
With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
<><
Active
Synagogues read the Law alound in Hebrew once a year, plus a selection from the Prophets. The Law is emphasized, quite a separate collection of 5 books of Moses. That collection is stand-alone. Christians usually emphasize the Prophets collection in conjunction with fulfilled prophecy in the New Testament, and the Scriptures (Writings). The Tanakh was added to the Torah collection right up until Malachi.
The word "Tanakh" is actually an acronym from the Hebrew names of the three very separate collections, from Torah-Nevi'im-Ketuvim.
The Christian "Bible" usually includes the "Old Testament" (Hebrew Bible based on the Gr. Septuagint) and the New Testament. Our emphasis is on the latter, so many "Bibles" are actually a book of New Testament books.
The issue I'm taking is emphasis in practice. The Law is primary among Jews, while the NT is primary for Christians. The two share a secondary emphasis in the Prophets (Nevi'im). Technically the Torah is listed as part of the Tanakh, but stands alone from it in the reading of the Torah once a year.
I have never heard of a synagogue scroll being read from that held the entire Tanakh.
Active
I've looked back to Hebrew Roots beliefs, found this question a favorite to present in Christian discussion groups. I've spent untold hours answering them on forums. Many Christians have left the forums over confusion caused by those users, similarly caused by persistance of Muslims. Hebrew Roots is a false cult (non-Christian) that parallels the Judaizers who continually sought to divide Christians from the first century onward. All such predators feed on the general ignorance of many Christians who don't study the scriptures enough to recognize error. None recant, but sometimes just drop out unless joined by a team that works 24/7 drowing out resistance.
Loyal
Mr Young...According to your bio you re not even born again...What understanding of Gods Word can you possibly have...You study the word intellectually but its a spirit thing no matter what some may tell you. We worship Him in SPIRIT and in truth....Learning about him, and getting to know Him is a form of worship. John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
Member
I recently read the Bible in its entirety, for the second time, and an explicit prediction of a messiah came fourth in the list of things I didn't find which various groups are convinced I should have found.
There is quite a lot about what the Jews believed was going to happen when their God made his return, and someone sitting on the throne of David was a component of that, but I think that a lot of the description of this character is influenced more by later writings, such as the First Book of Maccabees and, obviously, the Talmud. I would say that I am still fifty-fifty on whether I would agree with the idea that the Tanakh itself speaks of 'a messiah'.
There is quite a lot about what the Jews believed was going to happen when their God made his return, and someone sitting on the throne of David was a component of that, but I think that a lot of the description of this character is influenced more by later writings, such as the First Book of Maccabees and, obviously, the Talmud. I would say that I am still fifty-fifty on whether I would agree with the idea that the Tanakh itself speaks of 'a messiah'.
Loyal
David, are you saying that you did not find a prediction about a messiah? Or about Jesus? I'm sorry. I find your writing style to be a bit vague.
Active
Isaiah wrote of one of several "anointed" people, for example namely the conqueror Cyrus in Isa 44:28-45:4, called by name by God before he was born, brought to power for the sake of Israel. That deliverer appeared later in Daniel. The Hebrew" "מָשִׁיחַwas translated to Aramaic "māshîaḥ", then Eng "anointed" and "Christ", "Immanuel". The man fulfilled that prophecy in Isaiah. The point is that the word we know as Messiah, as referring to the eternal heavenly Anointed who would establish a perfect society in the end for Israel, is in fact a concept established in the Tanakh, from Genesis onward. There were numerous candidates considered "anointed" saviors, such a David, but also priests, other kings, and non religious people. Two classes of messiahs existed among the Jews, flesh and spiritual. It wasn't until after the Maccabees that Israel suffered so much under the iron heel of Rome that they began hoping for a fleshly anointed savior, (a THE Messiah), a forerunner of the last on the list of Messiahs that would rescue them. God sent Jesus, but they rejected Him, so suffered beyond comprehension for two thousands of years.
The other prophecies related to Christianity, according to inspired knowledge from the Spirit, and historical facts such as from Josephus and other Church Fathers, those prophesies I wrote about above, are only possibly fulfilled line by line by Jesus of Nazarath, God's Anointed for rescue then and on to now and beyond, for he is the only one that remains, having risen from the grave. The last earthly accepted anointed one was the High Priest of Jesus' time, who failed as subordinate acting king of the Jews, out-performed by the Roman appointed king Herod. From then on a few activists resisting Rome were hoped to be messiahs until Israel was dispersed. upon the siege of Jerusalem in 70AD
Keep searching. I have not shown you the sole of my sandals.