Does the book of Isaiah say anything about Jesus of Nazareth?

[SarahM32]

36. No. Jefferson was not an Apologist. And furthermore ...

First of all, the fact that Jefferson was a Deist proves he was not an “apologist for the Bible,” as you claim.

Deism is belief in God usually without trying to describe or identify God, and especially without any superstitious or supernatural claims. I suggest you read more of Jefferson’s writings regarding Christianity, clergy, and religion.

The term “Apologetics” is defined in the dictionary as: “The branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of Christianity.” But Jefferson was NOT defending or trying to provide proof of Christianity. In fact, by editing out all the superstitious and supernatural elements which he called “corruptions” from the New Testament Christian canon, he was refuting the theology of Apologetics (even though he made it clear he loved the core teachings of Jesus that are clearly universal and common to most religions).

As for you utter dismissal and reject of my “faith,” you don't know what it is. And your comments about the message I promote merely reveal that you have not bothered to see how comprehensive it is. You don't even know what it's really about, because it's as much about government as it is about religion and religious freedom.

As for the differentiation between "savior" and "messiah," it is an actual distinction, even though you dismiss it as “little more than verbal froth.” Apparently you can't debate without resorting to being rude, condescending, dismissive and arrogant, not to mention ignorant of what is written in A Messiah Is Not the Savior, Why the Messiah Is Hidden, and Prophecies Re: He Who Fulfills Them.

As for the authorship of the church canon, see my response in my next comment below.

Next, I do not rely on the Bible for my insights. In fact, neither did the author of the message.

Following his cosmic consciousness experience after being “carried away in spirit” to witness the Divine Light of God in 1971, he was first guided to study Qaballah (Western Kabbalah), Hinduism, and Buddhism, and it wasn’t until 1979 that he was shown why he had to address Christianity. That’s necessary because it’s the largest religion in the world, and very problematic, as is Islam, which is the next largest religion. He realized he had to address all three Abrahamic religions because they are the most prone to theocracy and “holy war.”

His mission was not to favor any particular religion, but explain how and why they all have, or should have, one basic, universal purpose — to teach humanity The Universal Divine Imperative: Treat all others as you would want to be treated if you were them. If you go to this Main Page, you will see how and why all major religions are based on that basic principle.

I doubt I will continue this debate with you. I’m sorry, but I don’t have the time to waste trying to get through to you. I agree to disagree with you. I hope you can too (though I suspect you can't).
.