messianic prophecies

Originally posted by stellspalfie
you are basing your logic on the theory that the prophecy wasnt exciting enough, it need to be give a sun-newspaper style make-over to make it more appealing to the masses 'virgin gives birth' when it could clearly have been made to clarify that the messiah wouldnt be born to an older mother and therefore have elder siblings. it could in fact be anothe ...[text shortened]... ion they now think mary was not a virgin, would you change your opinion or stick to your guns?

no i am basing it upon the fact that a pregnant maiden is not a sign unless she happens
to be a virgin. This has nothing to do with Jehovahs witnesses, why you continually
seek to introduce the irrelevancy is known only to you.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
who can say what they thought, its useless to speculate, suffice to say, the majority never got the point of Judaism, for if they had, they would have embraced the messiah.

So, because the Christians reckoned that "the majority [of Jews] never got the point of Judaism", the Christians broke away and formed a new religion? On this, then, we can agree?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i am basing it upon the fact that a pregnant maiden is not a sign unless she happens to be a virgin.

Was the "fact", that Jesus' mother had given birth to him despite being a virgin, known or discussed during Jesus' lifetime?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
used according to you, fifty times, proving nada!

It proves that the word used for virgin in the OT, no less than fifty times, is not used at Isaiah 7:14.

Originally posted by FMF
So, because the Christians reckoned that "the majority [of Jews] never got the point of Judaism", the Christians broke away and formed a new religion? On this, then, we can agree?

No you asked for my opinion. What other Christians think is their affair.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
It proves that the word used for virgin in the OT, no less than fifty times, is not used at Isaiah 7:14.

which proves nada!

Originally posted by FMF
Was the "fact", that Jesus' mother had given birth to him despite being a virgin, known or discussed during Jesus' lifetime?

It was certainly known by the gospel writers and like his lineage was never disputed by
his enemies.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
which proves nada!

I'm not claiming it proves anything other than what i have already stated.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It was certainly known by the gospel writers.

Well the gospel writers were creating literature in the 1st century for a breakaway Christian religion focusing on Jesus. They wrote their gospels - and the stuff about "virgin birth" etc. [in 2 of the gospels, anyway] - decades after Jesus' death and they obviously never met him. Is there any evidence that Jesus "knew" about being born to a virgin or that he talked about it?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I'm not claiming it proves anything other than what i have already stated.

good to see you are not given to wild speculation 🙂

Originally posted by FMF
Well the gospel writers were creating literature in the 1st century for a breakaway Christian religion focusing on Jesus. They wrote their gospels - and the stuff about "virgin birth" etc. [in 2 of the gospels, anyway] - decades after Jesus' death and they obviously never met him. Is there any evidence that Jesus "knew" about being born to a virgin or that he talked about it?

creating literature? what percentage did Mathews create? how many of the 37
messianic prophecies that I listed did Matthew create? You said it, how many?
Obviously never met him? why is it obvious and on what basis are you saying that
they never met him? All the evidence we have about Jesus with the exception of a few
historical references is contained in the four gospels.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no i am basing it upon the fact that a pregnant maiden is not a sign unless she happens
to be a virgin. This has nothing to do with Jehovahs witnesses, why you continually
seek to introduce the irrelevancy is known only to you.

why does she have to be a virgin for it to be a sign?

Originally posted by stellspalfie
why does she have to be a virgin for it to be a sign?

because a normal birth is mundane and happens everyday and is not noteworthy, yah
think!😕 a virgin birth on the other hand is rather extraordinary, dont you think?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Obviously never met him? what is it obvious and on what basis are you saying that they never met him?

None of the gospel authors met Jesus in person. They were not his contemporaries. Do you believe that they were?

Originally posted by FMF
None of the gospel authors met Jesus in person. They were not his contemporaries. Do you believe that they were?

answer the questions,

1. how many of the messianic prophecy's did Matthew create? there were 37 given.
2. On what basis are you saying they never met Jesus?
3, You stated that its obvious, why is it obvious?

your usual because i say its true will not do, you have made the assertions, either
produce evidence or retract them.

Ill ask the question's if you dont mind.