Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: A question Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 9 Next >>
Author Message
Colin
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 23 September 2001
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1257
Quote Colin Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 3:49am

Originally posted by DavidC

I don't think I can handle the mathematics, Mishmish.

I flunked both Al-Jew-bra and Analytic Jew-ometry.

Ouch!

IP IP Logged
AnnieTwo
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 281
Quote AnnieTwo Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 5:18am
Originally posted by Maryah

Originally posted by AnnieTwo

Originally posted by bmzsp

Annie,

You were totally unable to answer or comprehend.   

I knew you will keep on failing to see my point.    Let me add an honest twist here for you. You dig up prophecies looking to justify the coming of Jesus, the forms of Jesus and the nature of Jesus in the Christian OT, which is neither supported by the Jewish Scriptures (Jewish OT) nor the Jews themselves.

I am sure you will be thrusting instead of piercing!  



Oh, but I did comprehend.

Let me put you out of your misery.  Whether a Christian reads the Old Testament in the Greek translated from the Hebrew or the English translated form the Hebrew, they come to the same conclusions about Jesus and the prophecies.

The proof of that is the Messanic Jews.  They read the Old Testament either in English from the Hebrew scriptures or directly from the Hebrew as many of them read and understand Hebrew and they come to the same conclusions that the Christians do.

So your effort to imply that Irenaeus wrote the Septuagint falls flat on its face.  Irenaeus had nothing to do with the writing of the Septuagint as I pointed out to you.

Annie

I was a Christian, and I didnt. The nicene council and Constantine rewrote sections of the Bible to reflect the "divinity of Christ"  The old testaments documents were originally written in Aramaic, NOT GREEK! Many scrolls have been found predating the Nicene council that show the differences. Cruise the web and you will see! You  are biased, that is ok, try to be objective!



The Nicea Council and Constantine did not rewrite sections of the Bible. The New Testament was in wide circulation before 325AD.  Name your sources.

The Gospels were written in Koine Greek.  Supposedly Matthew was written in Hebrew or Aramaic.  No one knows if it was a translation from the Greek or that Matthew was written in Greek and "Hebrew" at about the same time.

Annie


Edited by AnnieTwo
14If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified. 1 Peter 4

IP IP Logged
AnnieTwo
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 281
Quote AnnieTwo Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 5:34am
BMZ,

I did the write-up for you on Isaiah 7:14 yesterday.  However, it turns out I have a book written by a Jew who has a segment on the "virgin" and "young women" prophecy topic and there is a lot of good stuff in it and I read it last night.

The segment is 15 pages long and paints a picture.  This man has spent countless time over 30 years on this subject and has read the work of many Jews and Christians.

I need to get permission to quote from his book and I also need to verify with the Jews some of the things he said.  I need exact quotes from some of the Jewish souces.

I wish I could give you the real "teaser" and I could but I'm not going to do that until I have the facts verified.  It is an eyeopener.

All of this research could take a while.  I am hoping to have it for you in a week or so.  When I write the author, I am going to ask for all 15 pages of text.  He might do it.  I have nothing to lose by asking.  This project will take all of my free time until it is completed.

Nevertheless, I will present what I wrote yesterday.

 

Originally posted by BMZ

Let me do a switcheroo on you.

The Jewish Scripture: Isaiah 7:14 "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"

The child was never named Immanuel. The mother was supposed to call the child Immanuel but SHE DID NOT!

Strange, isn't it?  No Jew can tell you who was called "Immanuel" and there is no evidence that anyone was.  Neither can the Jews tell us who the woman was, some say it was Isaiah's wife and others think it is Ahaz.

Why didn't Mary call Jesus "Immanuel," "God with us?"

Let's look at Matthew 1:23 again. 

23"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"—which means, "God with us." NIV

 

23"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"—which means, "God with us." —which means, "God with us." NKJV

23Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. KJV

 

Notice it doesn't say that Mary will call Jesus "Immanuel."  It says they will call him "Immanuel."

 

Here comes a little copying and pasting:

 

People and groups in the OT were often getting special 'place' names and temporary names, to be used for a specific purpose. Solomon, for example, got TWO names at his birth (II Sam 12.25)--Solomon and Jedidiah. No reference is ever made to Jedidiah after that, but it doesn't seem to be an issue. See also the story about Pashur in Jer 20:1-6.

 

  • Israel and Judah consistently receive 'temporary' and symbolic names in the Prophets (cf. Ezek 23 and Is 62.3-4)
  • Matthew is the one who quotes the 'Immanuel' passage one verse AFTER the he reports the angel's command to name the son JESUS, AND four verses BEFORE reporting that his parents called him 'Jesus'...he doesn't show the SLIGHTEST concern over this "problem"! (in other words, it WASN'T an issue in that culture). This is even more striking in that Matthew is the one arguing that the passage was fulfilled! --the name issue wasn't an issue.
  • If you had to call the kid 'Immanuel" for the prophecy to be fulfilled, what in the world are we gonna do with Is 9.6--where the child gets 4 names (i.e. wonderful counselor, mighty God, everlasting father, prince of peace)?!
  • And actually, we don't think it was his mother who had to call him 'Immanuel' anyway. Most modern bibles have a footnote at the 'she shall call him...' text, that explains that in the MSS, we have a couple of variants (he, she, they)...Matthew quotes it as 'they'...This could apply to ANYBODY who acknowledged that Jesus was God walking among his people--even John 1 would qualify for this.

This is just not generally considered a problem:

"There is no problem in referring the names Jesus and Emmanuel to the same person. This may well be the reason Matthew spells out the meaning of the name Emmanuel, meqÆ hJmw`n oJ qeov", “God with us” (LXX Isa 8:8, 10). Indeed this is not a personal name but rather a name that is descriptive of the task this person will perform. Bringing the presence of God to man, he brings the promised salvation—which, as Matthew has already explained, is also the meaning of the name Jesus (v 21b). “They” who will call him Emmanuel are those who understand and accept the work he has come to do. Matthew probably intends the words of Jesus at the end of his Gospel—“Behold I am with you always, until the end of the age” (28:20)—to correspond to the meaning of Emmanuel. Jesus is God, among his people to accomplish their salvation (see Fenton, “Matthew,” 80–82).

I mentioned this to Andalus:  According to Hebrew usage a name does not represent a title but a characterization, as in Isaiah 1:26 and 9:6.  The name "Immanuel" shows that Jesus really was "God with us."

 

And since you requested it, here is my answer for the "child."

 

Let's say that an angel came to your mother before you were born and said she should call you Bill and she does.  Let's say that she is told that they will call you "the best baseball player of the year."  The term "the best baseball player of the year" is not your given name because your given name is Bill.  But "the best baseball player of the year" is how you will be described.  It is the moniker what you will be known by.

 

Annie



Edited by AnnieTwo
14If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified. 1 Peter 4

IP IP Logged
AnnieTwo
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 281
Quote AnnieTwo Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 6:18am
Originally posted by Mishmish

O.K. When the dialogue gets down to who has more Jews, something has gone horribly awry.....

Oddly enough, I was watching a program last night where this Jewish guy was talking about Christians and the OT, and he was saying that they almost always interpret it incorrectly and that if you want a correct interpretation to ask someone Jewish, go to the source.



What would you expect a Jew to say?

Interesting that Muslims would go to the Jews for a "correct" interpretation when the Qur'an says that the Jews were messing around with their interpretations of scriptures.  So, why would a Muslim trust the Jews for correct interpretations of their scriptures today?

One of the main complaints from the Jews is that they believe that Jesus was unfit to be a prophet because Jesus broke the law which is something I have never heard a Muslim accuse him of.

Annie


14If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified. 1 Peter 4

IP IP Logged
Patty
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2382
Quote Patty Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 8:18am

Maybe this article sheds some light on the subject:

The Septuagint was probably the first translation in Greek. It dates from the Third century B.C. and was written by Jews in Alexandria. It Was on this text that the New Testament was based. It remained authoritative until the Seventh century A.D. The basic Greek texts in general use in the Christian world are from the manuscripts catalogued under the title Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican City and Codex Sinaiticus at the British Museum, London. They date from the Fourth century A.D.

At the beginning of the Fifth century A.D., Saint Jerome was able to produce a text in latin using Hebrew documents. It was later to be called the Vulgate on account of its universal distribution after the Seventh century A.D.

For the record, we shall mention the Aramaic version and the Syriac (Pesh*tta) version, but these are incomplete.

All of these versions have enabled specialists to piece together so-called 'middle-of-the-road' texts, a sort of compromise between the different versions. Multi-lingual collections have also been produced which juxtapose the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac, Aramaic and even Arabic versions. This is the case of the famous Walton Bible (London, 1667). For the sake of completeness, let us mention that diverging Biblical conceptions are responsible for the fact that the various Christian churches do not all accept exactly the same books and have not until now had identical ideas on translation into the same language. The Ecumenical Translation of the Old Testament is a work of unification written by numerous Catholic and Protestant experts now nearing completion[5] and should result in a work of synthesis.

Thus the human element in the Old Testament is seen to be quite considerable. It is not difficult to understand why from version to version, and translation to translation, with all the corrections inevitably resulting, it was possible for the original text to have been transformed during the course of more than two thousand years.

(If anyone is interested in reading more, you can click on this link.)

http://www.tempemasjid.com/maurice/3old.htm

God's Peace and Blessings to All.



Edited by Patty
Patty

I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future.
IP IP Logged
AnnieTwo
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 May 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 281
Quote AnnieTwo Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 8:34am
Originally posted by Patty

Maybe this article sheds some light on the subject:

The Septuagint was probably the first translation in Greek. It dates from the Third century B.C. and was written by Jews in Alexandria. It Was on this text that the New Testament was based. It remained authoritative until the Seventh century A.D. The basic Greek texts in general use in the Christian world are from the manuscripts catalogued under the title Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican City and Codex Sinaiticus at the British Museum, London. They date from the Fourth century A.D.

At the beginning of the Fifth century A.D., Saint Jerome was able to produce a text in latin using Hebrew documents. It was later to be called the Vulgate on account of its universal distribution after the Seventh century A.D.

For the record, we shall mention the Aramaic version and the Syriac (Pesh*tta) version, but these are incomplete.

All of these versions have enabled specialists to piece together so-called 'middle-of-the-road' texts, a sort of compromise between the different versions. Multi-lingual collections have also been produced which juxtapose the Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac, Aramaic and even Arabic versions. This is the case of the famous Walton Bible (London, 1667). For the sake of completeness, let us mention that diverging Biblical conceptions are responsible for the fact that the various Christian churches do not all accept exactly the same books and have not until now had identical ideas on translation into the same language. The Ecumenical Translation of the Old Testament is a work of unification written by numerous Catholic and Protestant experts now nearing completion[5] and should result in a work of synthesis.

Thus the human element in the Old Testament is seen to be quite considerable. It is not difficult to understand why from version to version, and translation to translation, with all the corrections inevitably resulting, it was possible for the original text to have been transformed during the course of more than two thousand years.

(If anyone is interested in reading more, you can click on this link.)

http://www.tempemasjid.com/maurice/3old.htm

God's Peace and Blessings to All.



Patty, go to the "home" page and what do you find?

http://www.tempemasjid.com/

Annie


14If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified. 1 Peter 4

IP IP Logged
Mishmish
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 01 November 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1694
Quote Mishmish Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 10:19am

Originally posted by DavidC

I don't think I can handle the mathematics, Mishmish.

I flunked both Al-Jew-bra and Analytic Jew-ometry.

I don't think math is extremely important for interfaith. You actually need Jew-do and Jew-jit-su...

It is only with the heart that one can see clearly, what is essential is invisible to the eye. (The Little Prince)
IP IP Logged
Patty
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2382
Quote Patty Replybullet Posted: 12 June 2006 at 6:40pm

"Patty, go to the "home" page and what do you find?"

Well, well.   I wondered about some of the "wording".  Leave it to me....I could mess up a two man parade!

God's Peace.

Patty

I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 9 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com