Don't spin the verses. Print out the actual words and yiou willsee that they don't match.
John 4:25-26
The woman saith unto him, I know that Mes-si'-as cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.
Jesus flatly affirmed to the woman that he was the messiah.
Matthew 16:20
Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ
Why? Was he scared?
One could not seriously consider Jesus as a messiah for he did not allow his disciples to let any Jewish person know he was the messiah. How could the Jewish people follow him if he was hidden? Can the Jewish people be faulted for rejecting Jesus for what he would not let them know who he was?
John 19:
26. "...Woman behold thy son!" (Even on the cross Jesus disrespectfully refers to her mother as "Woman"!)
27. "...Behold thy mother!..." (Here Jesus tells the disciple that his own mother is now the disciple's.)
He showed complete disrespect for his mother by calling her Woman!
Clearly, he was incapable of creating peace (true to his word of division, witness the great divisions within Christianity itself!) so he was not the Prince of Peace but of Division.
Isaiah 11:
1. And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
Joseph was descended from the line of David, but he had TWO fathers: Jacob (See Matthew 1:16) and Heli. (See Luke 3:23.) Was the gospel of Divine origin? Even the genealogy of Jesus seems suspect! But Jesus was not the son of Joseph by Mark 1 "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, The Son of God;". Jesus was NOT a descendent of Jesse therefore Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy at all. Truly, Jesus could have been a son of God; but then so was Lucifer a son of God who appeared as an Angel of Light and deceived people into thinking he was 'God' so that he would be worshipped instead of God. Could Jesus, a son of God, really be 'killed' by humans? Could his 'death' be a fake to draw sympathy and sorrow?
Matthew 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. (Before Joseph even had a chance to exercise his spousal rights or duties, the unholy "Holy Ghost" beat him to it without permission or approval by impregnating Mary. If we are the children of God, would the Holy Ghost be committing incest? You can imagine how upset the Jewish priests must be been who believed in a holy God who is above all these base, sensual shenanigans.)
Luke 1:35
And the angel...said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. (My, my, my! How unholy this alliance is! This is an announcement of an act of Divine adultery as Mary was Joseph's wife and God did not seek prior permission or approval. If Joseph approved, would it not be like prostitution? This is a portrayal of God as an adulterer!
Matthew 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. (Could the pregnancy be the result of Mary being a liberated, young, beautiful swinger or that the "Holy Ghost" was so overcome by the young woman's charms that he plotted it ahead of time as it was announced to Joseph in a dream by an angel. This gospel portrays God as being inconsiderate of Joseph's rights as he was not consulted on the matter regarding his wife as long as the unholy "Holy Ghost" did his thing in order to fulfill a prophecy. The announcement was an admission of guilt after the fact but without remorse. Also, Joseph was encouraged to keep the "damaged" good - his violated wife.)
Isaiah 11:
2. And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD; (Jesus had no understanding of the Law as he was on the one hand saying he came to defend every word of the Law and the prophets - mere lip-service as it were - and on the other preaching by word and deed the breaking of the Fourth and Fifth Commandments. He was inconsistent. Leading by mouth in one direction and his feet going in the opposite direction.)
3. And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: (Jesus did not "fear the LORD" as he openly preached against the Fourth and Fifth Commandments and placed himself above them.)
4. But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
Jesus did not "judge". (See Matthew 7:1-2 "Judge not, that ye be judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Again, Luke 6:37 "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned:" Also, John 8:15 "...I judge no man.")
In fact, he preached against judging. He did not "smite" but was 'smitten' as our Jewish friends say. Obviously, he did not "slay the wicked" of his day "with the breath of his lips".
Isaiah 11:
6. The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together: and a little child shall lead them.
7. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
These miraculous events did not occur. But if the animals only represented nations, then they were describing the world political scene so the Middle East situation, the Indo-Pakistan impasse, etc. belie Jesus' claim to be the "root of Jesse". The world scene would be of global peace with large nations living next to little ones without signs of aggression and the "little child" being Israel would lead them as the "Law" shall go forth from Zion. But the world political situation, which is still in turmoil, as well as the role Jesus played did not match up to prophecies regarding the promised "root/branch of Jesse".
Isaiah 11:
9. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the seas. (Jerusalem has been in constant turmoil to this day. The earth is not "full of the knowledge" of God, but of Jesus, e.g. Christmas and the current dating system - 19XX A. D. (Anno Domini, "In the year of our Lord.") for Christians and C. E. (Common Era, for Jews and non-Christians.)
Jesus was not the branch nor the "root of Jesse" by blood as he was conceived by 'God', (See Luke 1:35 "...The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Shades of Zeus! Was not this Greek god that disguised himself as a swan to copulate with a young maiden? Some Helenization of the Hebrew God?! Also, Matthew 1:20 "...take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."), so he was a son of God but was not Lucifer reputed to be a son of God also?
Jesus did not appear to "fear the LORD" as he set himself above the Fifth Commandment. He did not perform the role of the "root/branch of Jesse" as specified nor did the world politics conform to the prophecy. Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.
Isaiah 42:
1. Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
Jesus was not "upheld"; he was crucified. Were prophecies
1) Isaiah 9:15 "Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day." and
2) Isaiah 9:16 "...and the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail."
fulfilled?
The phrase "soul delighted" could be meant that the servant was "funny"; Jesus was not shown to have a sense of humour. If the gospel writers understood this phrase as such who knows we might have had some really funny stuff! There were LOST opportunities, certainly, as Jesus mixed freely with prostitutes, 'sinners', and "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". One can only suggest that with this unsavoury crowd humour all kinds, both unspeakable and unprintable, would be floating around to say the least! Could they have been censored out for the records?
The phrase "bring forth judgment" could be meant "establish justice"; the Holocaust and the genocide of Bosnian Muslims show that justice has still not been established 2,000 years since Jesus' arrival on earth.
See Matthew 7:6
"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,".
Jesus' code word for gentiles, non-Jewish people, was "dogs". By this saying, Jesus did not want his teachings which are, of course, "holy" go to the "dogs"! Would anyone like to be called a dog?! Was Jesus prejudiced?
Again, Matthew 15:24
But he answered and said, I am sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Jesus plainly says he was not sent to preach to the gentiles so how can he "establish justice" with the gentiles if he does not feel he has to make any commitment with them?
In Mark 5:2
And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit.
Mark 5:13
And forth with Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.
Jesus had the unclean spirits enter into the herd of pigs which stampeded over a cliff into the sea and drowned them. The unclean spirits did not die, only the pigs.
Then in
Matthew 27:26
Then released he Bar-ab'-bas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.
in
Mark 15:15
And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Bar-ab'-bas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.
and in
Mark 15:
17. And they clothed him with purple, and platted a crown of thorns, and put it about his head,
18. And began to salute him, Hail, King of the Jews!
19. And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing their knees worshipped him.
20. And when they had mocked him, they took off the purple from him, and put his own clothes on him, and led him out to crucify him.
and in
Luke 22:
63. And the men that held Jesus mocked him, and smote him.
64. And when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee?
and in
John 19:
1. Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him.
2. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe.
3. And said, "Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.
Either Pilate was typical of conquerors to set the leader of the rebels as an example by scourging Jesus or Jesus somehow got them really riled up with his "miracle" of killing off the swines which was a subtle message aimed at the Romans as they were the swines filled with unclean spirits and Jesus was going to run them over a precipice. This interpretation could have been passed on to the Romans by his enemies. Hence the scourging and mocking.
In the following
Isaiah 11:12
"...he shall... assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth."
did Jesus in recognizing the unmistakably messianic requirement of the "root of Jesse", then make up his mind in conspiring to fulfill it?
In
Matthew 10:5-6
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
He even tells his disciples not to go to gentiles so he did not fulfill the prophecy to "establish justice" among the gentiles. Jesus did not come to 'save' gentiles at all!
Isaiah 42:
2. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. (Jesus was an itinerant preacher; he spread his gospel in the streets and open fields - a far cry from this prophecy!)
3. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
See Matthew 21:18-19 "Now in the morning as he returned into the city, he hungered. And when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforth for ever. And presently the fig tree withered away."
This awesome display of power of destruction on an innocent plant surely does not in the least bear any resemblance to "not break a bruised reed"!
If the fig tree represented Israel then this "miracle" was a symbolic act to show his displeasure towards his own tribe for not accepting him.
Isaiah 42:
4. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Psalm 119:142
Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.
The "failure" could not have been more spectacular as it is now known world-wide yet people fell for it. The power of brainwashing! Justice "has still not been set on the earth" and "the isles do not wait for his law" for he 'died'.)
Clearly, Jesus was not the servant of God who would gently preach justice to all the non-Jewish people whom Jesus looked upon as "dogs". (See Matthew 15:26 "But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to dogs.") Jesus probably had an animal code word for every group of people on the face of the earth. Ever wonder who the "pigs" and "camels" might be? Could "pigs" represent pork-eaters; "camels", descendants of Ishmael; "dogs", gentiles in general or even homosexuals; and "sheep" or "children of god", the Israelites or believers? Hello "dogs"!
Some suggest "camel" was a mis-translation from the Aramaic word for rope so in Matthew 19:24 "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel (rope/descendent of Ishmael?) to go through the eye of the needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
Matthew 18:3
And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
If children represented religious Jews then the message for those who want to enter heaven is to become a Jew especially as he was preaching to non-observant Jews.
Isaiah 42:
6. I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles: (Jesus' "hand was not held and was not kept" as he was crucified.)
7. To open blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
The whole of Jesus' ministry was based on blind belief - operative word is "faith". Most of Jesus' parables amounted to nothing more than fear mongering similar to what a child would do when faced with an adversary he/she cannot handle by threatening his/her opponent with "when my daddy comes he is going to beat you up!". Jesus was preaching that if you did not believe him "Big Daddy", or God, will beat you up but good by denying you life in heaven and ensuring a life in hell. Another ploy to establish belief in him and inculcate fear was that a natural disaster of some sort would befall the unbeliever. Also, skeptics were labeled as demonic or associated with the devil. Jesus was blinding people thus 'imprisoning' them in a house of blind belief, not "opening blind eyes". Taking a cue from Jesus, his followers after his 'death' elevated him to the status of 'God' and placed Jesus in the role of "Big Daddy". They now use Jesus to instill fear as "Big Daddy", Jesus will come to punish unbelievers! Is this not a 'prison' of belief?
The following parables fall in this category:
1) Wise and foolish builders (Matthew 7:24-27, Luke 6:46-49.)
2) The sower (Matthew 13:1-23, Mark 4:1-20, Luke 8:9-15.)
3) The kingdom (Matthew 13:24-50, Mark 4:26-34, Luke 13:18-30.)
4) The two sons (Matthew 21:28-32.)
5) The wicked tenants (Matthew 21:33-41, Mark 12:1-9, Luke 20:9-16.)
6) The marriage feast (Matthew 22:1-14.)
7) Faithful and unfaithful servants (Matthew 24:45-51, Luke 12:41-48.)
8) The ten maidens (Matthew 25:1-13.)
9) The watching servants (Luke 12:35-40.)
10) The great banquet (Luke 14:15-24.)
Clearly, Jesus was not the servant of God who would "open" the eyes of blind people. In fact, he was the source of blindness, a captor of belief through fear mongering that kept believers in a 'prison' of belief. (See Isaiah 14:21 "...that opened not the house of his prisoners?") He did not fulfill this prophecy of "opening blind eyes"
Isaiah 42:
18. Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see.
19. Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the LORD's servant?
20. Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not.
21. The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.
Also, amazingly this servant of the LORD is mentioned as being "blind and deaf". Jesus appeared to know he was the messiah as he deliberately planned the ride through Jerusalem on an ass (See Mark 11:1-10) to fulfill the requirements of the messiah(?) as mentioned in
Zechariah 9:9
"...behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
But in Matthew 21:4-11 "And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and set him thereon.", Jesus rode uncomfortably on an ass AND a colt, TWO animals! Are the gospels of Divine origin?
In John 4:25-26
The woman saith unto him, I know that Mes-si'-as cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.
Jesus flatly affirmed to the woman that he was the messiah. In
John 8:12
Then Jesus spake unto them, saying, I am the light of the world:
Jesus appropriated the title of "light to the world", the servant of the LORD, on himself. Case of tooting one's horn?
John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
By this claim, Jesus places himself squarely between God and humankind which is a clear violation of the First Commandment (See Exodus 20:3 "Thou shalt have no other gods before me."), which means there should be no other gods between God and people for the LORD is always observing humanity or listening to our prayers. Anyone who places him/herself before God comes between God and humankind, especially when people are communicating with God during/through prayers. People are being cut off from God by this subtle claim as the prayers are misdirected.
One should examine this insidious claim closely. It was not a direct assault on God's Law, the Ten Commandments, but by the observance of it the consequence of which would lead to a violation of the First Commandment. It also shows the pride of this speaker as he took on the role of God by asserting he was the truth and the life. Surely, no human, a mere mortal, would dare to magnify oneself so! However, to be charitable could it not be a clever insidious subversion of the First Commandment but simply a mis-interpretation of the "servant's" role "to bring forth judgment unto truth" and "set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law."
This servant will bring justice to the earth as the sole agent. Also, in Psalm 37:20 "But the wicked shall perish," means the sinner will die. Now the law brought by the servant would be a life saver. Therefore, the sole agent saves lives by means of the law (way) which turns into the corruption "the way, the truth, and the life" and the sole agent becomes ": no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."
Jesus did not "magnify the law" but himself as he preached to break it and to abrogate it (See Luke 16:16 "The law and the prophets until John:", which meant they were good until John the Baptist) and if anything he diminished it. He reduced the law to two commandments which were: 1) to love God and 2) to love one's neighbour as oneself. Neither of which he was the originator. (Witness the Dead Sea Scrolls' "Teacher of Righteousness" preachings.)
Jesus was not the "blind and deaf" servant of the LORD who would "magnify the law and make it honourable". He did not fulfill this prophecy.
Isaiah 49:
2. And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword: in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me.
There is no doubt Jesus' tongue was "sharp" but he "was not hidden in the shadow of His hand nor His quiver" as he was revealed at birth by no less than 'angels' to shepherds in the fields, even King Herod knew of it and also the 'wise' men from the East in Matthew 1:18-25 and 2:1-23.
Isaiah 49:
5 "...to bring Jacob again to him..."
The Holocaust, brought about by the Christians, (See Isaiah 14:20 "Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people:") has made many Jewish people atheists. The very opposite of the prophecy! The Holocaust was done by Christians in his name so Jesus fulfills this Lucifer prophecy.
Isaiah 49:
6. "...be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel:"
Jesus did not "raise up the tribes of Jacob" but lowered them in Matthew 19:28 where his followers would be on thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel. He did not "restore the preserved of Israel" but nearly destroyed them in the Holocaust.
Again, Jesus was not the servant of God who was "hidden", would bring the Jewish people back to Him and be a "light to the world".
Isaiah 52:
13. Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted extolled, and be very high. (Jesus did not "deal prudently" in spreading his message; he was crucified.)
14. As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men. (People were astonished at Jesus' words and behaviour more than by his appearance. By all accounts from present images and paintings of Jesus, he appears to be rather comely - certainly not marred!)
15. So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.
Jesus during his ministry did not go outside of Israel as his mission was to Jews only. So he did not "sprinkle many nations" neither with water to baptize nor with words of wisdom, if taken to be the spiritual water to quench the thirst for salvation or redemption.
In Luke 23:
8. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.
9. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing.
11.And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and
arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate.
King Herod did not "shut his mouth at" Jesus.
Isaiah 53:
1. Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?
There were many claimants to the Messiahship as Judea was under Roman rule. The region was rife with messiahs as there was the Jewish hope that God would send a deliverer to overthrow and remove the burden of Roman rule, which by most ancient standards, was somewhat moderate as the Jewish religion was given as much respect as any other religion in the empire and not as oppressive as the previous Seleucid power. Messianism was definitely in the air. So the arrival of the gospel was no surprise as there was an expectation. Where there was no expectation and people totally discounted the appearance of a messiah/servant of God or did not feel the need for one, then the appearance of someone like a servant of God would be unbelievable.
Isaiah 53:
3. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Jesus was not "despised" before the trial as he rode triumphantly on an ass in Jerusalem with the crowds chanting "Hosanna." (See Matthew 21: 8-11.) Jesus was not "acquainted with grief" except his own as he had little regard for his parents. Jesus, at age twelve, did not inform his parents of his whereabouts for three days when he stayed in the temple. (See Luke 2:40-48.) His parents could have torn their hair out as any parent of a 'missing child' would. Jesus obviously did not care for them. Not only that, after Jesus' 'miraculous' birth with 'angels', no less, announcing his 'greatness', they did not understand his purpose and interest in the temple. Imagine that! Could those 'angels' have appeared in the gospel pages (only?) long after Jesus' 'death'? Was he 'wise beyond his years'? Not by this display!
Jesus did not "honor" his family. He denied his mother and brothers in front of his followers by saying that his own followers were his mother, brothers and sisters. Jesus practised breaking the Fifth Commandment which required that one was to honor one's father and mother. (See Mark 3:31-35 "When came his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.") Would the "will of God" be to break His own Law?
John 19:
28. "...Woman behold thy son!" (Even on the cross Jesus disrespectfully refers to her mother as "Woman"!)
29. "...Behold thy mother!..." (Here Jesus tells the disciple that his own mother is now the disciple's.)
Jesus showed such disrespect to his mother one can only wonder. Was a spoilt child who did as he pleased? With the incident of the temple where he overstayed there for three days, he shows no fear of his parents giving a whipping not only for his absence but his insolent tongue to rhetorically ask his parents how come they sought him as he was about his "Father's" business? Was he an illegitimate child where the village children continually chided for being a bastard? (We know how children came be so blunt and cruel!)
People did not "hide their faces from him" but faced him as he preached. In fact, Jesus not only had twelve followers but crowds followed him wherever he preached so he was not "rejected of men." There was a dearth of information concerning his personal life, habits and dealings prior to the start of his ministry. Could the gospel writers had censored material which showed Jesus in poor light, or contrary to the prophecies as they understood them? His followers were not above, as shown by history, suppressing, destroying and subtly altering incriminating material. They would go even so far as to persecute the human elements involved. All they had to do was use the 'magic' words 'evil', 'heresy', 'demon', etc. The human skeptics would be demonized and all hell would break loose! So much for Jesus' dictum to "Love thy enemies..." in Matthew 5:44, as it falls by the wayside. Then in Luke 14:26 "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." Are people aware of Jesus' words? He was preaching hatred for one's nearest and dearest as well as taking away even one's reason for being, which one's life, wife or children - all for his sake and pride. Jesus was anti-family, preached suicide and hatred. Case of hypocrisy? Case of vengeful morals? Case of confused principles? Could you worship a man who says these things?
Matthew 5:
38. Ye have heard that it hath been said, AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH:
39. But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Jesus instructs disciples that revenge or getting even is not right.)
Matthew 18:
21. Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
22. Jesus said saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.
Luke 17:
3. Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.
4. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.
Jesus instructs his disciples on repeated forgiveness.
Matthew 11:
32. Whosoever shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
33. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. (Is this not "eye for an eye"?)
Jesus seems to straddle both sides of the issue on forgiveness. On non-personal matters he instructs his disciples on repeated forgiveness and against "eye for an eye" yet on a personal level he practises "eye for an eye" or tit-for-tat. Also, on earthly temporary level he advocates forgiveness while on a heavenly permanent level he operates on the Mosaic "eye for an eye". A case of do as I say but not as I do. Another case of hypocrisy?
See Isaiah 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" Is this not a condemnation of reversing opposites? See:
1) Mark 9:35 "...If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all..."
2) Matthew 5:39 "...resist not evil..."
3) Matthew 5:39 "...whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."
4) Matthew 5:44 "Love thy enemies..." and
5) Luke 14:26 "...hate...his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life..."
If this is not promoting 'reversing opposites', what is? Is this not a subtle subversion of the natural order of things, hence the Divine condemnation?
Did Jesus practise what he preached? His enemies were Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees and this was what he unkindly said about them in Matthew 23:13-36 from which only a selection are presented:
1) "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!;...ye shall receive the greater damnation...; proselyte...is...the child of hell...;...Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" Can Lucifer?
2) Then in John 8:44 "Ye are of your father the devil,". Jesus says to the Jews with cutting words about Abraham- or even God - suggesting their origin was the devil or that they worshipped the Devil.
3) Then, in Mark 14:21 of Judas Iscariot, Jesus says "good were it for that man if he had never been born." Did Jesus 'turn the other cheek'? Why the venom if he knew that Judas was merely following a script from God whom he says he one with and so intimately intertwined, after all in the end all will be turn out fine and result in the fulfillment of Divine prophecy?
Jesus exhorted his disciples to give their lives for him in
Matthew 5:44 "...hate...his own life..." and in
Luke 12:4 "...Be not afraid of them that kill the body," yet, in
John 7:1. Jesus wisely went to Galilee in fear for his life "...he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him."
This "fear for his life" was noticeable so it begs the question - was Jesus really more fearful and shocked (See Luke 22:44 "And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.") at his capture but the accounts were written to portray him as the victim of a kangaroo court?
Or was the crucifixion an inexorable event and unerringly the result of his accumulative efforts of rebellion against the Jewish faith and the Jewish people and not a matter of personal choice?
Could the accounts have been tailored to present not a 'dope' but a self-sacrificing, suffering and saintly 'saviour'?
Did this change of image in midstream immeasurably help their cause? Jesus even with the little that we know of him, still failed to show that he was the "rejected" servant of the LORD, "a man of sorrows". Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.
Isaiah 53:
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my peolple was he stricken.
Jesus was never in a prison so he could not hav been "taken from rison". "cut off" could be meant killed, excommunicated, or isolated from the "land of the living" which could be land of the Law as the Law means life.
Isaiah 53:
9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Jesus did not die permanently so he does not have a grave.
Isaiah 53:
10. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hands.
Jesus was not married, had no descendent and "his days were not prolonged" according to the gospels. People did not turn to God and worship Him. In fact, people are worshipping JESUS himself so "the pleasure of the LORD did not prosper" in Jesus' hands. Once again, Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.
Isaiah 53:
11. He shall see the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he bear their iniquities.
See
Matthew 27:46
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Jesus showed he was not "satisfied" for he accused God of forsaking him. There is no other explanation as he said this in a loud voice, hardly a question. Again,
Matthew 27:50
Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
Up to his last moment Jesus was again not "satisfied". Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.
Jesus' 'dying' words showed his realization that "arm of the LORD was not revealed to him" by a miracle in which his life would be spared and that "his days would be prolonged and he would see his seed" hence his anger and accusation.
This was not the only time he failed to foresee events or was lacking in foresight as in
Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
he frankly admits to not knowing everything. Then in
Luke 8:45
And Jesus said, ?'Who touched me?' When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, ?'Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, ?'Who touched me?'
even in his presence Jesus could not tell who touched him.
Then in
Matthew 16:15
He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? (Jesus did not know what they thought of him so he asks them.)
Matthew 16:17
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed be thou, Simon Bar-jo'-na: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. (Jesus liked Peter's answer so he attributed his answer to God. Jesus admits that God knows everything not him.)
Jesus did not foresee his own fulfillment of Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" with the help of the gospel writers and John in Revelation 22:16 "...I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
In Mark 13:30 "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place." If 20 years is a generation then, at least, 95 generations and counting have "passed away", not to mention the original generation in Jesus' time. How could a (Divine?) prediction be so far off the mark? Amazingly enough, the world has not yet ended?
Jesus did not foresee the coming of Prophet Mohammed, the founder of a great religion - Islam.
In Revelation 1:11 where John describes the End-of-the-World scenario, the seven churches of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea have succumbed to history and no longer exist. Any wonder for the healthy dose of End-of-World skepticism?
It is quite clear Jesus did not fit the description of the 'suffering' servant of God all that well either so he did not fulfill the prophecy. He did not "justify to God the many by his knowledge" and therefore he did not "bear the iniquities of the many". Jesus did not bear the sins of the world nor did he 'die' for the many as he was not the 'suffering' servant of the LORD. His followers were riding unwarranted on the coat-tails of the noble 'suffering' servant of the LORD for centuries. At best, a case of 'mistaken identity' and at worst, fraudulence and intentional misrepresentation? Is it time to cut the coat-tails?
Nowhere is/are the mysterious servant(s) named. In the case of a child born with a name at all, it is Immanuel. (See Isaiah 8:8.) Surely, the Jewish name for Jesus, which is Joshua, is not Immanuel. So the mysterious servant(s) could be anyone. The many prophecies concerning the unnamed servant(s) of the LORD described not only the personal characteristics of the servant(s) but also his/her/their doings and world surroundings well beyond the control of any individual. Some of the prophecies appear on the surface at least to conflict with each other and well nigh impossible(?) for one person to fulfill. Which brings us to the intriguing question. Could they refer not to ONE person but many?
