Yesu si Mungu, Paulo ana kesi ya kujibu

Status
Not open for further replies.
Isaiah 7:1 When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it.

Allow me to set the scene. In 743 BC, Israel was still divided into two nations, Israel and Judah. Ahaz was 20 years old at the time and had just succeeded his father as the King of Judah ( 2 Chronicles 28:1, 2 Kings 16:2).
Allow me to set the scene. In 743 BC, Israel was still divided into two nations, Israel and Judah. Ahaz was 20 years old at the time and had just succeeded his father as the King of Judah ( 2 Chronicles 28:1, 2 Kings 16:2).

To the north of Judah were Ahaz’s rowdy neighbors, King Pekah and King Rezin. Pekah ruled Israel (sometimes referred to as Ephraim, because Ephraim was the primary tribe), and Rezin ruled Syria (sometimes referred to as Aram or Damascus, because Damascus was located in Syria at the time). These three nations were stacked on one another like an ice cream cone, with Syria on top, Israel in the middle, and Judah on the bottom.

To the east lived a big-bad-wolf named Assyria; a rising superpower that wanted to devour this tasty ice cream cone. Concerned about this threat, King Pekah (Israel) and King Rezin (Syria) agreed to join forces to fight Assyria if necessary, but King Ahaz (Judah) refused to join their coalition (most likely due to past tensions).
In what is now referred to as the Syro-Ephraimite War(736 BC-732 BC), Israel and Syria attacked areas of Judah with some success ( 2 Chronicles 28:5-6), but neither was able to independently capture Ahaz or the city of Jerusalem (Isaiah 7:1, 2 Kings 16:5, 2 Chronicles 28:16), so they decided to join forces.
Isaiah 7:2Now the house of David was told, “Aram [Syria] has allied itself with Ephraim [Israel]”; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.

When King Ahaz heard about their collaboration, he feared the worst.
Ahaz was no friend of God, but Ahaz did represent the Davidic line, so it’s said that God took pity on him and sent Isaiah to reassure him that these two tyrants would not overthrow him.
Isaiah 7:3Then theLordsaid to Isaiah, “Go out, you and your son Shear-Jashub, to meet Ahaz at the end of the aqueduct of the Upper Pool, on the road to the Launderer’s Field.4Say to him, ‘Be careful,keep calm and don’t be afraid.

Do not lose heart because of these two smoldering stubs of firewood—because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and of the son of Remaliah.5Aram, Ephraim and Remaliah’s son have plotted your ruin, saying,6“Let us invade Judah; let us tear it apart and divide it among ourselves, and make the son of Tabeel king over it.”

The two kings to the north wanted to defeat King Ahaz and capture Jerusalem so they could share the spoils and put someone else in power whowouldhelp them in their fight against Assyria.

God tells Ahaz to keep calm, and to not be afraid, and refers to the northern kingdoms as “two smoldering stubs of firewood” that are on their way out.
Isaiah 7:7Yet this is what the SovereignLordsays:“‘It will not take place,it will not happen,8for the head of Aram is Damascus,and the head of Damascus is only Rezin.Within sixty-five yearsEphraim will be too shattered to be a people.9The head of Ephraim is Samaria,and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah’s son.If you do not stand firm in your faith,you will not stand at all.’

Again, God reassures Ahaz that this invasion will not happen. Isaiah also gives us an important time-frame for this prophecy: within 65 years, the tribe ofEphraim (Israel) will be shattered.

Isaiah 7:10Again theLordspoke to Ahaz,11“Ask theLordyour God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights.”12But Ahaz said, “I will not ask; I will not put theLordto the test.”
God offers Ahaz a sign to verify what Isaiah has spoken and to strengthen his faith. Normally Ahaz would’ve been correct not to test god, but since God was offering, God (presumably) knew Ahaz needed a sign. When Ahaz refuses God’s offer, Isaiah rebukes him for acting as if he didn’t need one.
Isaiah 7:13Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also?

14Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign:The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.15He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,16forbefore the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.

If it seems a little odd to jump from a story about Ahaz and his naughty neighbors to the north, to a prophecy about the virgin birth of Jesus, that’s probably because it is. Let’s take a look at what has been prophesied so far and see if Jesus fits the bill.
 
Unlike some prophecies which can be vague, this one is reasonably clear. Isaiah is predicting that:

1.A child will be born to a virgin (or a young maiden).

2.His mother will name him Immanuel (“God is with us”).

3.His birth will serve as a sign to Ahaz.

4.Before the child matures, the two kingdoms “will be laid waste.”

5.The two kingdoms will be scattered within 65 years.

In comparing this prophecy to Jesus:
1.It’s claimed that Jesus’ mother was a virgin.

2.The angel Gabriel instructs Mary to name him Jesus (“God saves”), not Immanuel (“God with us”).

3.Jesus’ birth could not serve as a sign to Ahaz, since Ahaz had died hundreds of years earlier.

4.The two kingdoms were destroyed long before Jesus was born, so their destruction did not take place between his birth and his maturing.
5.Jesus was not born within 65 years of the prophecy.

Taken at face value, Jesus is no match.
There are, of course, a litany of explanations offered by Christians to address these discrepancies, but there is no consensus. Let’s take a look at some of the most popular explanations.
“Jesus was literally ‘God with us.'”
It’s true that Jesus came to be known as the physical incarnation of God on earth, but was thisreallywhat Isaiah was predicting?

The Hebrew grammar makes it clear that Immanuel (“God with us”) was the name to beliterallyassigned to the child by his mother. The verse reads, “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Immanuel is what she names him after giving birth, it is not a title he earns later in life.

We see a parallel to this in the next chapter (chapter 8). When Isaiah has a son, God tells him toname him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. Isaiah doesn’t give him some other name, heliterallynames him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz (against his better judgement). This sort of thing happens several other times throughout the Bible (see 1 Chronicles 22:9, Luke 1:13, and Luke 1:31).

Also in chapter 8, Isaiah speaks about how he and his sons serve as signs:
Here am I, and the children theLordhas given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel from theLordAlmighty, who dwells on Mount Zion.

~Isaiah 8:18
In Isaiah’s day, it was normal for children (and even objects) to be given names that represented signs and symbols, or that spoke to the nature of God. Isaiah’s sonMaher-Shalal-Hash-Baz’s name meant “quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil,” but that didn’t mean he would literally be the one plundering, nor did Isaiah’s sonShear-Jashub‘s name mean that he would literally be the “remnant that returned.” Likewise, to Ahaz, the name Immanuel meant that God would keep his promise and remain with them during this difficult time.

It’s ridiculous to suggest that Isaiah may have thought Immanuel was going to beGod in the flesh.If Isaiahdidthink this, why did he only mention Immanuel twice (in Isaiah 7 and 8)? Other than serving as a sign, Immanuel was an irrelevant character.

1) The passage reads: “Ahaz said, ‘I will not ask; I will not put theLordto the test.’Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans?Will you try the patience of my God also?” Who was it that was trying the patience of humans and God? At that moment it was Ahaz, who had just refused to choose a sign.

2) Verse 7:2 also refers to the “house of David” when reporting on current events, so there’s no reason to think Isaiah isn’t also referring to the present house of David. (It’s likely that Isaiah was addressing King Ahazandhis counsel, the royal court of Judah.)

3) Verse 16 emphasizes that the two kingdoms will be destroyed before the child matures. The birth of the child signals that these events are about to take place. Had this truly been about Jesus, there would be no need to emphasize the time between the child’s birth and when he matures; God could’ve said, “These kingdoms will be destroyed long before Immanuel is born.”

4) If we insist this sign is intended for a future generation, it takes away from the story of Ahaz. Suddenly this poor schmuck is left with no sign at all. While Ahaz may have refused to ask for a sign, God wasnotpunishing him for his shortcomings, Godstillknew Ahaz needed a sign, and the sign God offers him isdirectly relatedto the situation at hand (the upcoming destruction of the two kingdoms).

5) Analmost identical incidentplays out years later with Ahaz’s son Hezekiah ( Isaiah 38). God sends Isaiah to speak to King Hezekiah who is on his deathbed.God promises to add fifteen years to his life anddeliver him from the Assyrians, and then seals this message with a sign.

“‘This is theLord’s sign to you that theLordwill do what he has promised:I will make the shadow cast by the sun go back the ten steps it has gone down on the stairway of Ahaz.’” So the sunlight went back the ten steps it had gone down.

— Isaiah 38:7-8
Just as Hezekiah received a sign to show that the Lord would do as promised, Ahaz was also to receive a sign
 
mgesa said:
Alivyokua duniani Yesu alijivua uungu. Ndo mana akawa anamtegemea Mungu baba!
Angekua Mungu akati yuko duniani hasingezaliwa, hasingesikia njaa, hasingeweza jaribiwa na hasingekufa. Yesu alichukua ubinadamu ili aishi duniani.
Click to expand...
Ila hii imani yenu inabidi ujitoe akili kidogo ili uendane nayo sawa.
 
Tehe tehe Waislamu mpk lini mtahangaika na Uungu wa Yesu?

Elungata unajisumbua tu na hizo article zako potofu unabii wa Isaya unatimia kwa Yesu Messiah. Km unabisha niambie tuanze kujadili na kuulizana maswali.
 
But if the prophecy was for Ahaz, then it’s not about Jesus… unless there is some kind of dual meaning. A dual meaning might seem like an ideal solution, but it’s not without consequences.

First, Matthew strongly suggests thatallthe events surrounding Jesus’ birth represent adirect fulfillmentof Isaiah’s prophesy.

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

— Matthew 1:22-23
While Matthew maywantto believe this prophecy is about Jesus, he doesn’t bother to explain howthe restof the prophecy applies to Jesus, or what it would mean for Ahaz. (Perhaps this is why Matthew and Luke are the only New Testament authors to cite the virgin birth as evidence.)

Second, not all Christians agree with the dual-meaning, because dual meanings are subjective, easily faked, and impossible to prove.

1.Isaiah’s prophecy was no secret to New Testament authors (#2). In fact, Isaiah is more frequently alluded to in the New Testament than any other book of the Old Testament. Early Christians who were invested in trying to persuade others that Jesus was the Messiah would’ve had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to fabricate this virgin connection (#4, #7, #19).

2.In their eagerness to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, followers ignored the other prophetic details in Isaiah 7 thatdid notpoint to Jesus (#8).
3.The virgin birth, while highly improbable (#5), is valueless as prophecy because it is easily lied about and impossible to verify (#19).

4.To its credit, Isaiah’s prophecy is not “eternally pending” (#17), and sets a deadline of 65 years. But then this important deadline is either discarded or reinterpreted by Christians who want it to be about something else.
5.Because the remaining prophetic details don’t match up, Christians must shoehorn Jesus into a prophecy that was never considered Messianic (#9, #18).

… it should be noted that no known Jewish writings prior to Matthew interpret this passage as a reference to the virgin birth of the Messiah.
— Isaiah, Volume 1, by Terry R. Briley, p. 125

While Mary’s virginity is impossible to verify, itispossible to show that Isaiah 7:14 was never intended to be viewed as Messianic, and that Jesusdoes notfit its description.

If Godtrulywanted to give a prophecy about Jesus, he could’ve said: “The Messiah will be born of a virgin in 725 years, and he shall be named Jesus.” Sure, skeptics could still argue that Jesus’ story was manufactured to match up with Isaiah’s prophecy, but at least we wouldhavea match;at leastwe could say the prophecy was spot-on.
What we have here is not a match, it’s a prophecy aboutanotherchild, who was to be born inanothertime, foranotherpurpose, and we’re forced to resort to fuzzy logic and mental gymnastics to force Jesus’ slipper onto Immanuel’s foot.

We shouldn’t have to resort to these kinds of tactics to defend a legitimate prophecy.
 
G'taxi said:
Kama ni muweza wa kila jambo mpaka la kesho tusilolijua anashindwa nini kuweka work plan yake akayatiisha mambo kwa siku tatu asizokuwepo mpaka alipofufuka?inawezeka kwa MUNGU na kwa binadamu haiwezekani
Click to expand...
mungu gani sasa huyu anapigwa mitama na binadamu aliowaumba,wanambebesha msalaba kisha anakula misumari nnchi kama 6hivi,dah huyu mungu mbona dhaifu namna hii.alafu kuna mahali anaomba ewe baba kamayewezekana kikombe hiki kiniepuke sasa kama yeye mungu alikuwa anamuomba mungu yupi tena?tumia akili vizuri utapata ma jibu yasiyo na ukakasi
 
Isaya 9:6
[6]Maana kwa ajili yetu mtoto amezaliwa, Tumepewa mtoto mwanamume; Na uweza wa kifalme utakuwa begani mwake; Naye ataitwa jina lake, Mshauri wa ajabu, Mungu mwenye nguvu, Baba wa milele, Mfalme wa amani.

Yesu ni Mungu 100℅
 
Kama hawezi wewe hapo una madhaifu mangapi aliyokuzuia unayafanya na anakutazama tu.kutwa kucha kwenye mapombe au guest house na alikuzuia likini anakuvumilia tu.ashindwe kukuvumilia kumpiga mitama ila akudhihilishie nyekundu ni ipi na nyeupe ni ipi.

MUNGU anaweza fanya lolote na ukabaki mdomo wazi
 
Ntuzu said:
Tehe tehe Waislamu mpk lini mtahangaika na Uungu wa Yesu?

Elungata unajisumbua tu na hizo article zako potofu unabii wa Isaya unatimia kwa Yesu Messiah. Km unabisha niambie tuanze kujadili na kuulizana maswali.
Click to expand...
mbona hizo arguments huzijibu?,
ushaambiwa matayo alikuwa anadukua toka agano la kale anatengeza story ya kumfit yesu,
jesus story was manufactured to matchup with isiah prophecy,wakati details za huo unabii hazifit kwa yesu kuachia neno moja tu virgin ambalo laweza kuwa liliwekwa makusudi kwa malengo maalumu.

Hebu soma hiyo isaya kuanzi fungu la 1 hadi 13 uone kama detail zinamfit jesus.
Isaya alikuwa akimtabilia mfalme ahaz wa yuda baada ya mfalme wa israel na wa syria kuungana pamoja kuishambulia yudah, baada ya mfalme ahaz wa yuda kugoma kuungana na ufalme wa syria na israel kupambana na ufalme wa ASYRIA.

MATHAYO si mara yake ya kwanza kukopy toka agano la kale na kuja kuunda story kwa kutumia quote toka agano la kale
 
Nimesema hivi hizo article hazina lolote ndio maana sizijibu. Nataka wewe ktk uelewa wako tujadili.
 
martini enock said:
Isaya 9:6
[6]Maana kwa ajili yetu mtoto amezaliwa, Tumepewa mtoto mwanamume; Na uweza wa kifalme utakuwa begani mwake; Naye ataitwa jina lake, Mshauri wa ajabu, Mungu mwenye nguvu, Baba wa milele, Mfalme wa amani.

Yesu ni Mungu 100℅
Click to expand...
mkuu yakupasa uelewe kuwa neno mungu lilikuwa likitumika sana mda huo,hawa watu hawakuwa na upeo mkubwa sana na kila kitu cha ajabu kwao wao wanakipa uungu fulani,hata hivyo isaya 9 inaongea mtoto ambae tayari kazaliwa,kwahiyo yesu hapo mkuu hahusiki na isaya 9.

“Isaiah 9 also speaks about a child, who appears to be the Messiah.”
Isaiah chapter 9mayactually be about the Messiah, and so some Christians attempt to link the child in Isaiah 9 with Immanuel in Isaiah 7.
For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the greatness of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
There are good reasons to doubt this theory.

1) Jews do not believe that Isaiah 9 is Messianic prophecy, because it describes a child who hasalreadybeen born (most likely King Hezekiah).

2) Even if we assume the child in Isaiah 9isthe Messiahandhe is also the child Immanuel, the Messiah wouldstillneed to be born within 65 years of Isaiah’s prophesy.

3) There are no details linking these two children. The child in Isaiah 9 is never called Immanuel, nor is it said he was born of a virgin. Likewise, it’s never stated that Immanuel would reign on David’s throne, or bring about a new government of everlasting peace.

4) To make matters worse, between Isaiah 7 and 9 there isanotherchild, Isaiah’s child. There are actuallymorereasons to speculate thatMaher-Shalal-Hash-BazisImmanuel. However, Isaiah’s wife was no virgin (or young maiden), nor did she name him Immanuel, so it appears these are two separate children.

In all likelihood, Isaiah is speaking of three separate events and three separate children, one in each chapter.

Conclusion
An honest evaluation of the evidence should lead us to conclude that Isaiah was speaking of a child to be born within 65 years, not 700 years in the future
 
Maandiko ya zamani ya kina isaya,zakaria,zaburi etc kipindi kile cha yesu hayakuwa siri,yalikuwa ni maandiko yako open na watu wakiyatumia katika masinagogi,kwahiyo mtu yeyote aliweza kudesa na kutengeza scene,
hapa chini tutaona namna matayo alivyochemka akicopy maandiko ya zacharia na kujaribu kuyafanya yafit na tukio la yesu kuingia jerusalem akiwa kapanda mwanapunda,
Zechariah 9:9-10
As you’ll recall, God (speaking through his mouthpiece Zechariah) had encouraged the Jewish remnant to rebuild his temple, which he promised to protect forever. How was God going to accomplish this? He promises (as well as predicts) that a new king would soon arrive, who would save the Jews from their enemies and bring about world peace.
“Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!
Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem!
Behold, your King is coming to you;
Heisjust and having salvation,
Lowly and riding on a donkey,
A colt, the foal of a donkey.
I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim
And the horse from Jerusalem;
The battle bow shall be cut off.
He shall speak peace to the nations;
His dominionshall be‘from sea to sea,
And from the River to the ends of the earth.’”
— Zechariah 9:9-10
Our first authentic messianicprophecy!
This should go without saying, but messianic prophecies should be prophecies… about the messiah, and I appreciate that Zechariah 9:9-10 is just that. There is no need to convert a non-prophecy into a prophecy, or imagine that the messiah is hidden within a passage that’s also speaking to something else. Prophecies need to be specific.
Having reasonable standards for evaluating prophecy not only helps us to validate legitimate prophecy (should such a thing exist), but it also protects good prophecy from fraudulent claims. If the Bible is truly a divinely inspired work, then its prophecies should stand out from the crowd, but if others can perform the same prophetic tricks, then the Bible’s prophecies are not unique.
Zechariah makes several predictions here, and each one should be evaluated independently, since every prediction will have its own probability of coming to pass and its own potential for trickery and false-positives.
The Messiah will arrive on a colt
The first prediction is that a future king is forthcoming, and that he will arrive on a colt.
While itcouldbe argued that this was a metaphor for a king who comes in peace — as opposed to one who arrives on a war-horse — each of the four gospels report that this prophecy was fulfilledliterally( Matthew 21:1-7, Mark 11:1-10, Luke 19:28-38, and John 12:12-15).
As they approached Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples,saying to them, “Go to the village ahead of you, and at once you will find a donkey tied there, with her colt by her. Untie them and bring them to me.”
— Matthew 21:1-2
The next day the great crowd that had come for the festival heard that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem.They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, “Hosanna!” “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” “Blessed is the king of Israel!” Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it, as it is written: “Do not be afraid, Daughter Zion; see, your king is coming, seated on a donkey’s colt.”
— John 12:12-15
The donkey and colt debate
Interestingly, Matthew is the only gospel where Jesus requests both a coltanda donkey, and his apostles return withtwoanimals. In Mark and Luke, Jesus asksonlyfor a colt, and that’s all they are said to return with (Mark 11:7, Luke 19:30). John gives a little different account, where Jesus locates the colt on his own, and then sits upon it, almost as an impromptu response to the fortuitous spotting of a colt; but still no mention of a donkey.
 
Ntuzu said:
Nimesema hivi hizo article hazina lolote ndio maana sizijibu. Nataka wewe ktk uelewa wako tujadili.
Click to expand...
kwa maana igine unataka tujadili bila reference si ndio?,
utavumilia kweli maana bila reference maneno yanakuwa makavu kwelikweli,nadhani nawe hutatumia reference au labda unataka kunilimit mimi tu nisitumie reference.?

Hata hivyo niko tayari
 
Elungata said:
kwa maana igine unataka tujadili bila reference si ndio?,
utavumilia kweli maana bila reference maneno yanakuwa makavu kwelikweli,nadhani nawe hutatumia reference au labda unataka kunilimit mimi tu nisitumie reference.?

Hata hivyo niko tayari
Click to expand...
Rejea ninazotaka tutumie ni maandiko ya biblia kuthibitisha kua Yesu ni Mungu na kwamba Unabii wa Isaya unamuhusu Yesu.

Km uko tayari niambie
 
Dukeson said:
ETI MUISLAM,HATA QURAN YENYEW HUJUI NA UNAIKATAA,UTAIWEZ BIBLE?NIMEKUWEKEA HIYO SURA UNAYOIKANA(ETI NIMEDANGANYA THEN ONYESHA WAP NIMEBADILISHA)MUISLAM UBWABWA!!.View attachment 408677Quotation yang ilikuw aya ya 3!!..
Click to expand...

Na ukaichanganya na aya ya biblia , ukamalizia kumpakazia yesu UMungu ???

hivi aya hiyo ya tatu iko sawa na hichi ulichokitupa uwanjani

 
mgesa said:
Alivyokua duniani Yesu alijivua uungu. Ndo mana akawa anamtegemea Mungu baba!
Angekua Mungu akati yuko duniani hasingezaliwa, hasingesikia njaa, hasingeweza jaribiwa na hasingekufa. Yesu alichukua ubinadamu ili aishi duniani.
Click to expand...

kwa hivyo yesu ni baba na ni mwana au vipi ??? hii inaingia akilini na ipo kwenye lugha gani ????

Alipokuwa duniani alikuwa kama mchezaji theatre ???
 
surangumu said:
KAMA YESU MUNGU BASI
HATA MIMI MUNGU PIA

Yesu ni mtume wa mungu aliyetumwa kwa wana wa israel kamwe hakudai kuwa yeye ni mungu.
Hivi enyi wagaratia mnaodai yesu ni mungu ni nani aliye warogaaa????
Click to expand...
Ni kweli mkuu, Yesu siyo mungu,ni Mungu. Kumbuka mungu siyo Mungu, halafu neno sahihi ni wagalatia siyo wagaratia, inaonekana upstairs una matatizo maana you are too naive and low in thinking
 
Ndefu mpaka inaboa
 
mungu apewe kibano na viumbe alio waumba?hii haijakasawa mkuu ukubali ukatae huyu jamaa cyo mungu aafu mungu gani anatahiriwa mkuu tuliza mkuu alafu cyo wote walevi na wazinzi ila lete hoja Acha kutokwa povu
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…