Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Captain Chaos · Nov 13, 2006, 05:27 pm

I expect to be schooled by the Christian believers on this topic, but I am OK with that...

Doesn't the OT prophecy of a messiah speak of a ruler of Israel?

Without using after-the-fact rationalizations, how can Jesus be said to be that messiah if he never ruled Israel?

phoenix_fire · Nov 13, 2006, 06:08 pm

cite?

**Jack** · Nov 13, 2006, 09:48 pm

Micah 5:2 "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you one will go forth for me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity."

Jakob · Nov 13, 2006, 11:33 pm

Israel is used in the Bible as the people, not the place. And here, when it talks about ruling, it's talking about ruling the hearts and the lives, not legalistically ruling.

**Jack** · Nov 13, 2006, 11:37 pm

I take it you don't believe in a literal translation then. Is the Aramaic word for ruler when used for David different than the word for ruler when used in relation to Jesus?

Captain Chaos · Nov 14, 2006, 11:40 am

Quote:

Quote by: Jakob

Israel is used in the Bible as the people, not the place. And here, when it talks about ruling, it's talking about ruling the hearts and the lives, not legalistically ruling.

He did not rule the hearts and the lives of Israel either.

And - why do you say this is not referring to legalistic ruling? Is it a translation thing?

Poseidon · Nov 14, 2006, 08:32 pm

they are not talking about Israel physically they are talking about the people, as in he is ruler of the people, crowds of people followed him and he was an incon for the people, not counting that he was the son of god.

Poseidon · Nov 14, 2006, 08:39 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Captain Chaos

He did not rule the hearts and the lives of Israel either.

And - why do you say this is not referring to legalistic ruling? Is it a translation thing?

who sayis he didnt? many people followed his preachings and listened to his storyes that described how to follow god and being a good person "come and follow me, let the death burry the death" (i think, something like that) do to others what you want from them, so and so, ummmm about the ruling thing, example: the pope is the ruler of Catholic faith in earth he does not rule farther than the vatican but many people do what he comands because spiritually he is the mesenger from god........... like queen of pop, king of fashion and other termins like that

Captain Chaos · Nov 15, 2006, 10:22 am

Quote:

Quote by: Poseidon

they are not talking about Israel physically they are talking about the people, as in he is ruler of the people, crowds of people followed him and he was an incon for the people, not counting that he was the son of god.

Having crowds follow you just is not the same thing as being a ruler. What percentage of a population needs to be following you before you can be considered a ruler? Whatever it is, Jesus only had a small percentage of the population following him - so he clearly was not a ruler of Israel.

Captain Chaos · Nov 15, 2006, 10:24 am

Quote:

Quote by: Poseidon

who sayis he didnt? many people followed his preachings and listened to his storyes that described how to follow god and being a good person "come and follow me, let the death burry the death" (i think, something like that) do to others what you want from them, so and so, ummmm about the ruling thing, example: the pope is the ruler of Catholic faith in earth he does not rule farther than the vatican but many people do what he comands because spiritually he is the mesenger from god........... like queen of pop, king of fashion and other termins like that

But the Bible does not describe him as having ruled a majority, or even a large plurality, of the people of Israel.

Chancellor · Nov 15, 2006, 04:44 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Captain Chaos

I expect to be schooled by the Christian believers on this topic, but I am OK with that...

Doesn't the OT prophecy of a messiah speak of a ruler of Israel?

Without using after-the-fact rationalizations, how can Jesus be said to be that messiah if he never ruled Israel?

Not all prophecies have yet been fulfilled.

Captain Chaos · Nov 15, 2006, 05:27 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Chancellor

Not all prophecies have yet been fulfilled.

That is one of the biggest aspects of the scam nature of Christian prophecy. By not applying a time or deadline to most prophecy, believers can always say that any prophecy that cannot be shoehorned into having been fulfilled is just one that has not YET been fulfilled.

Totally lame.

Chancellor · Nov 15, 2006, 07:32 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Captain Chaos

That is one of the biggest aspects of the scam nature of Christian prophecy. By not applying a time or deadline to most prophecy, believers can always say that any prophecy that cannot be shoehorned into having been fulfilled is just one that has not YET been fulfilled.

Totally lame.

Is it lame? Why must all prophecy have ALREADY been fulfilled? Prophecy is a foretelling of FUTURE events; since there is still future that remains, it's reasonable that some prophecies would not be fulfilled yet. For example, one prophecy states that Jesus will return to literally reign on Earth for 1,000 years. Since there has not yet been any time in history subsequent to Jesus' crucifixion when He has done that, it's reasonable to conclude that it has not yet been fulfilled.

Whether you choose to believe in the validity of Bible prophecy is an entirely separate issue - please try to stick to the discussion at hand.

Captain Chaos · Nov 15, 2006, 07:40 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Chancellor

Is it lame? Why must all prophecy have ALREADY been fulfilled? Prophecy is a foretelling of FUTURE events; since there is still future that remains, it's reasonable that some prophecies would not be fulfilled yet.

What is not reasonable is that no time frame is given for when these prophecies are supposed to occur. I am not concerned that they have not occurred yet. What makes them suspect is that they could happen at any time, then be proclaimed to have come true. Projected dates or projected concurrent events would make prophecies more believable.

Quote:

Since there has not yet been any time in history subsequent to Jesus' crucifixion when He has done that, it's reasonable to conclude that it has not yet been fulfilled.

And if it never happens, you will always have the excuse that 'it has not happened yet'. If the prophecy had said that his reign will begin in 2200 years or something like that, then we would be able to test for its veracity.

Quote:

Whether you choose to believe in the validity of Bible prophecy is an entirely separate issue - please try to stick to the discussion at hand.

The prophecised messiah was supposed to rule Israel. He didn't. Therefore he was not the prophecized messiah.

You can always find a way to shoehorn things - saying that this is supposed to happen during his second coming is one such shoehorning. It comes across as a lame excuse for a failed prophecy.

Nov 13, 2006, 05:27 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
Captain Chaos Shifting Paradigms Location: Flowery Branch, GA Posts: 3,102	Jesus never ruled Israel I expect to be schooled by the Christian believers on this topic, but I am OK with that... Doesn't the OT prophecy of a messiah speak of a ruler of Israel? Without using after-the-fact rationalizations, how can Jesus be said to be that messiah if he never ruled Israel? Do all things with love.

Nov 13, 2006, 06:08 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
phoenix_fire Paladin Location: Narnia Posts: 4,277	cite? Place me like a seal over your heart, like a seal on your arm; for love is as strong as death, its jealousy unyielding as the grave. It burns like blazing fire, like a mighty flame. -- Song 8:6

Nov 13, 2006, 09:48 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Jack formerly Isherwood Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 14,209	Micah 5:2 "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you one will go forth for me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity." The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant)

Nov 13, 2006, 11:37 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
Jack formerly Isherwood Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 14,209	I take it you don't believe in a literal translation then. Is the Aramaic word for ruler when used for David different than the word for ruler when used in relation to Jesus? The Forum Rules Radical Atheist Heathen Queer Let's agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be. (Ashleigh Brilliant)

Nov 14, 2006, 08:32 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Poseidon Migthy Wave Posts: 30	they are not talking about Israel physically they are talking about the people, as in he is ruler of the people, crowds of people followed him and he was an incon for the people, not counting that he was the son of god. *You may call me a Noob since I am young, my bocabulary is still growing, please bare with me*

Nov 13, 2006, 11:33 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Jakob Molten Ash Posts: 68	Israel is used in the Bible as the people, not the place. And here, when it talks about ruling, it's talking about ruling the hearts and the lives, not legalistically ruling.