Lets move to the next problem with matthew

[Guest]

Matthew 2:15
And was there until the death
of Herod: that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken of
the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Out of Egypt have I called my son.

we have a prophecy by matthew of jesus being called out of egypt, but we look at Hosea 11:1

11:1 When Israel [was] a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

in the hebrew bible and taken in context this verse has nothing to do with Jesus, or God's son, this speaks of the nation of israel being called out of egypt, the Exodus.

How does the writer take a verse out of context and says its a prophecy, I have a problem with this because as christians, we dont allow people to take Jesus' words out of context, ex

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34 NIV)
they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." (mark 16:18)

these are 2 examples, you will say read the verse in context, but hosea 11:1 in context also, it doesnt mention a messiah, jesus, or god.

Any objections would be gladly appreciated, if you want to spew about not liking me or this, save it. I only want objectins and factual responses.

If we take everything by faith and dnt analze the facts and go with the most credible facts, then why you do even defend the faith to anyone, I guarentee you will use verse upen verse to a mormonm and back it up with scripture.

you have to take the verse for what it says and it doesnt say that...if you want to go that route then we can say that

Just as jesus was the first Adam,, then Mary is the first Eve..

In the Old Testament, when the ark of covenant was carried and built, It had to be perfect to be able to hold Gods word in it, so since Jesus was Gods word, then what carried Jesus, none other than Mary, so she must be perfect(sinless). We can go on and on about other faiths taking scripture and using for there doctrines, Mormons use Ezekiel 37, the parable of the 2 sticks to say that the one is the Bible, the other is the book of mormon. Once you open the door for accepting what you are saying is accepted

The calling of Israel the Nation out of Egypt was a type and Shadow of the Messiah.

The writer of Hebrews speaks of these things and actions in the Old Testament being shadows of the more perfect thing to come. Which indeed was the Christ.


then everything goes and we have many beliefs, do you agree that this kind of guessing, or misusing phrases are dangerous to any faith. Hosea 11:1 says one thing and you cant read it for more than it is.

 

[Guest]

bump

 

[thessalonian]

bump

For the same reason you cannot see that Jesus spent three days in a tomb was forshadowed by Jonah spending three days in the belly of a whale. It's called allegory. It's all over in the Old Testament and it amazes me how many things such as you describe apply in an allegorical manner to Jesus.

 

[ThinkerMan]

bump

For the same reason you cannot see that Jesus spent three days in a tomb was forshadowed by Jonah spending three days in the belly of a whale. It's called allegory. It's all over in the Old Testament and it amazes me how many things such as you describe apply in an allegorical manner to Jesus.

But, is there any reason to believe that those events were prophecies or foreshadowing made true, as opposed to literary creations made to agree with the older writings?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

 

[Guest]

read the gospels again, Jesus sated the only sign they would see is that he would be in the belly of the earth 3 days and 3 nights right like Jonah?

Jesus was in the tomb only 2 nights and 2 days, so even there you have a descrapency with Jesus' own words, or actually Jesus never wrote anything in the NT, it was the apostles and mainly paul.

 

[Guest]

bump

For the same reason you cannot see that Jesus spent three days in a tomb was forshadowed by Jonah spending three days in the belly of a whale. It's called allegory. It's all over in the Old Testament and it amazes me how many things such as you describe apply in an allegorical manner to Jesus.

But, is there any reason to believe that those events were prophecies or foreshadowing made true, as opposed to literary creations made to agree with the older writings?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

again if we want to foreshadow then we can make a mess of everything, bottom line hosea 11:1 doesnt speak of a propehcy, jesus or anything, it doesnt say the Lord shall say.. you cant use any verse that looks good to say it fulfills this propehcy, can we?

 

[ThinkerMan]

bump

For the same reason you cannot see that Jesus spent three days in a tomb was forshadowed by Jonah spending three days in the belly of a whale. It's called allegory. It's all over in the Old Testament and it amazes me how many things such as you describe apply in an allegorical manner to Jesus.

But, is there any reason to believe that those events were prophecies or foreshadowing made true, as opposed to literary creations made to agree with the older writings?

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

again if we want to foreshadow then we can make a mess of everything, bottom line hosea 11:1 doesnt speak of a propehcy, jesus or anything, it doesnt say the Lord shall say.. you cant use any verse that looks good to say it fulfills this propehcy, can we?

DavidDavid.

Please reread my post. I agree with you completely.

I asked why we should believe they are prophecies, as opposed to "back-filled" literary creations (i.e. the deeds and life of Jesus) stretched to fit prior writings (i.e. the OT).

 

[Guest]

ohhhh, lol :

 

[yesha]

Matthew 2:15
And was there until the death
of Herod: that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken of
the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Out of Egypt have I called my son.

we have a prophecy by matthew of jesus being called out of egypt, but we look at Hosea 11:1

11:1 When Israel [was] a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

in the hebrew bible and taken in context this verse has nothing to do with Jesus, or God's son, this speaks of the nation of israel being called out of egypt, the Exodus.

How does the writer take a verse out of context and says its a prophecy, I have a problem with this because as christians, we dont allow people to take Jesus' words out of context, ex

Taking verses out of context was apparently not a problem in Jesus's day. Reading verses in the context of the author, as opposed to reading it in ones own context, is a modern concept I believe.
The NT is full of prophecies, and uses of scripture that may take the verse out of it's apparent context.

Of course reading something in the authors context is usually a valid thing to do. But one is not necessarily limited to restricting one's interpretation to a authors context only approach as is made evident in the very way that scripture uses scripture.

Hos 11:1 is a messianic prophecy. No doubt because of the words "my son". This was probably considered a messianic prophecy before Jesus was born, and by stating it's fulfillment is probably fulling an interpretation of scripture that existed before the writing of Mt.

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34 NIV)

If someone were to use this verse as support to a make up statement that Jesus expected his followers to make war with the romans the immediate response would be that they are taking the verse out of context. I would say that their interpretation is incorrect. Now suppose someone else uses this verse as support that on Jesus's second coming there will be a sword of judgement. This might be taking the verse out of context but I do not think that their interpretation is necessarily incorrect. So todays science of interpretation is meant to give rules that if followed will lead one to a correct interpretation of scripture is fundamentally flawed. Although it may give a decent interpretation most of the time, it is insufficient, and in it's self cannot guarantee a proper understanding of the scriptures.

 

[Guest]

do you believe anything you just wrote, in other words if it fits what you believe then the prophecy is right.

 

[Imagican]

No, I kinda figured you'd be confused by what he said. Let me try and make it a little more 'simple'.

What he offered is in part this:

The scriptures of the past and prophecy is not ONLY meant for those reading it in the time period that it was written. Often, those reading it or even writing it for that matter were totally unaware of it's meaning. It took the happening or event of said scripture in a future time for the understanding to become apparent. Much of it is meant to prove itself in the future when events are fulfilled, not necessarily at the time that it was written.

 

[Guest]

ok, then why arent any mormon prophecies from the OT and NT true for mormons, why arent any OT and NT prophecies correct for Islam or Jehovah Witness's. So let me get this right, only prophecies that back up christainity are correct and all other religions are wrong, well because they arent christians, even though they can also say that a prophecy was fulfilled by this and this act or whatever any other religion claims. Even thoguh these prophecies are from the hebrew bible, but forget them because they dont fit into christian theology either.

This is the most closed minded thing I have ever heard, but then again thats what christians are taught to be from the bible, close minded and have no will of your own but to follow the bible.

 

[Imagican]

ThinkerMan,

And let me cure this malignancy before it begins to grow. If what you offer had even a hint of 'truth' to it, the Jew's would have been all over it two thousand years ago. You make it sound like the entire Bible was 'made up' in 1611. Nice try. And this may work with the uninformed that I guess you attempt to influence, but all you could hope for making these kinds of statements on a Christian forum is argument for it's own sake.

The truth of the matter is that the books of the Bible that offer much prophecy in the OT were already written for hundreds if not thousands of years before the NT. But what you offer is that these may have been the truth, but the life and times of Jesus Christ are not. Do you doubt the existence of the man Jesus Christ?

I must admit that there is the last part of Mark that seems to reek of what you speak, but even if it were written to jive with acts rather than the actual words of Christ, one would still have to admit that these acts did indeed take place nevertheless even if they weren't actually spoken by Christ himself.

As I said, nice try, but you won't sway any here unless there happen to be fledgling babes among us or others like yourself. You speak as if there were those of the time that had the ability and cunning to create this massive conspiracy that has been perpetuated for two thousand years. Boy, if these guys were smart enough and capable enough to pull that one off, they certainly deserve as much credit as the 'real' thing.

 

[Imagican]

ok, then why arent any mormon prophecies from the OT and NT true for mormons, why arent any OT and NT prophecies correct for Islam or Jehovah Witness's. So let me get this right, only prophecies that back up christainity are correct and all other religions are wrong, well because they arent christians, even though they can also say that a prophecy was fulfilled by this and this act or whatever any other religion claims. Even thoguh these prophecies are from the hebrew bible, but forget them because they dont fit into christian theology either.

This is the most closed minded thing I have ever heard, but then again thats what christians are taught to be from the bible, close minded and have no will of your own but to follow the bible.

And your point being............................?

 

[yesha]

ok, then why arent any mormon prophecies from the OT and NT true for mormons, why arent any OT and NT prophecies correct for Islam or Jehovah Witness's.

Clearly mormon prophecies, whatever you are referring to, are true FOR mormons. If someone believes something, then for them it is true.

Two people can read the same thing and come to two different interpretations of it's meaning. This leads to the question who's interpretation is correct? Is it the authors? Is it the readers? In the scope of the bible, I would say that it is God's interpretation (who would be the author) that is ultimately correct.

2 Pet 1:20-21
20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
(NIV)

So a muslim might say that the NT prophecises muhammad. A Christian might respond by saying that if they didn't change the words, and read the other half of the sentence, then they would see that it doesn't. So if God's interpretation is correct, how does one know that they share God's interpretation? One can't prove that a particular interpretation is God's any easier then someone can prove to an unbeliever that there is a God. There will be differences of opinion in interpretation, and only God can reveal the truth.

So let me get this right, only prophecies that back up christainity are correct and all other religions are wrong, well because they arent christians, even though they can also say that a prophecy was fulfilled by this and this act or whatever any other religion claims. Even thoguh these prophecies are from the hebrew bible, but forget them because they dont fit into christian theology either.

This is the most closed minded thing I have ever heard, but then again thats what christians are taught to be from the bible, close minded and have no will of your own but to follow the bible.

Are you suggesting that it is wrong for someone to judge for themselves whether or not something is a prophecy and whether or not is has been fulfilled? There are reasons (more complex then simply looking at context) why a Christian might reject a muslim, for example, interpreation. Do you really think that a Christian should accept a muslim interpretation of scripture just because it exists? Further you say they are closed minded for rejecting it. I would say they are open minded if they even consider it.

Rom 15:4
4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.
(NIV)

 

[ThinkerMan]

ThinkerMan,

And let me cure this malignancy before it begins to grow. If what you offer had even a hint of 'truth' to it, the Jew's would have been all over it two thousand years ago.

They were. That's one reason why Jews remain.

You make it sound like the entire Bible was 'made up' in 1611. Nice try. And this may work with the uninformed that I guess you attempt to influence, but all you could hope for making these kinds of statements on a Christian forum is argument for it's own sake.

I made no such claim. I agree with you that the bible was complied around the 3rd and 4th centuries, and I agree it was based on ancient texts.

You and I might disagree slightly as to when exactly the NT was written, but I have no problem placing most of them in the 1st century.

The truth of the matter is that the books of the Bible that offer much prophecy in the OT were already written for hundreds if not thousands of years before the NT. But what you offer is that these may have been the truth, but the life and times of Jesus Christ are not. Do you doubt the existence of the man Jesus Christ?

I have some doubt about whether he actually existed or not. I have strong doubt over his biography. And I do not believe in the miracles or divinity of Jesus, just to be clear.

I concur that the writings of the OT greatly predate these supposed events, however these prophecies appear to be a combinations of forced interpretations, bad interpretations, and fabrications (such as the prediction of the destruction of the temple).

I must admit that there is the last part of Mark that seems to reek of what you speak, but even if it were written to jive with acts rather than the actual words of Christ, one would still have to admit that these acts did indeed take place nevertheless even if they weren't actually spoken by Christ himself.

I agree that the ending of Mark is highly problematic, and in my opinion indicative or other such "borrowings" and potential fabrications.

My basic contention is that given the choice between prophecy, and fabrication made to fit forced prophecies, I am inclined to be skeptical of the supernatural aspects of it. Great evidence is needed to prove that they are indeed prophecies. I have no burden to prove they are not.

For example, with respect to the destruction of the temple. This prediction in the bible cannot be shown to have been written prior to the actual destruction of the temple. In fact, it appears it was written at or around that time. Given that fact, I think my skeptical position is completely rational.

As I said, nice try, but you won't sway any here unless there happen to be fledgling babes among us or others like yourself. You speak as if there were those of the time that had the ability and cunning to create this massive conspiracy that has been perpetuated for two thousand years. Boy, if these guys were smart enough and capable enough to pull that one off, they certainly deserve as much credit as the 'real' thing.

Do you no deny that false religions can by created and launched successfully without divine intervention? The Mormons, for example, fit exactly the mold you describe above. Yet you do not believe this somehow qualifies that faith as legitimate.

It doesn't have to be a conspiracy necessarily. Paul may have truly believed what he preached....his disciples and followers similarly so believed, and expanded the theology and biography of Jesus as the years went on. It's not a stretch to at least entertain the possibility, given that we see new religions take off every day.