Reality Check: What Must Be the Case if Christianity is True?
13) That Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy even though there is not one passage in the Old Testament that is specifically fulfilled in his life, death, and resurrection that can legitimately be understood as a prophecy and singularly points to Jesus as the Messiah using today's historical-grammatical hermeneutical method.
24 comments:
What's the deal with this "DM" character? Get help. You have psychological issues, sir.
...and why exactly do you insists on using today's historical-grammatical hermeneutic, when that clearly wasn't the case in second-temple Judaism, let alone the NT (Gal. 4:24) ?
Lvka.
A simple comparison of most of Matthew's OT prophecies he claimed were fulfilled in Jesus, will reveal they had nothing to do with Jesus, nor is there a good reason to believe they have double hidden meanings.
nor is there a good reason to believe they have double hidden meanings.
Tell it to the first-century Jews.
Lvka.
What first century Jews?....Matthew?
It as the gentiles who lacked understanding of Jewish religion and history who bought into these concepts......most of the Jews never believed in Christ!
Lvka.
If what you say is true, that OT prophecies had double meaning, then any OT scripture can be pointed out as a fulfilled prophecy regarding almost anything?
Prophecy is held up as evidence of God's omniscience; His foreknowledge received and uttered by the prophet.
Foreknowledge precludes free will. We don't have REAL choices if the result is known in advance; we only have the illusion of free will.
So either:
Prophect is real and our free will is illusory
OR
we really DO have free will, and prophecy is a myth (along with all the other magical stuff in the bible).
I'm choosing door number two, Monty...
Josh McDowell in his book, Evidence For Christianity gives over 61 OT prophecies fulfilled by Jesus and gives excellent rebuttal to common objections associated with negative assertions beginning on Pg. 230 of the same book.
You can say OT prophecies weren't fulfilled all day, but the NT authors, evangelists and church certainly thought and preached that they were fulfilled in Jesus and their teachings are specific toward that end. Then they had another element which you come no place close to having and that's the insight and the illumination of the Holy Ghost.
So I'll take their word any day over yours for facts sake, because they knew the scriptures and knew the cost if they were wrong, and also because of illumination of the Lord and the willingness to walk in it.
BTW,
Freewill is only illusionary under teh materialists worldview. It's the material processes that make you act and respond in accordance with your genetic pattern. Those thigns aren't subject to change.
So if there's any illusions, they are on the part of athesitic materialist and true freewill cannot and does not exist under that construct...
District, give me what you consider to be the best attested prophecy that was fulfilled in Jesus. I now know you have not read my book nor are you interested in doing so.
John,
Your books are repetitive and the second adds no new insight, only diverse heresy from multiple sources.
As I stated there are over 61 various areas of specific prophecy to Jesus all are equally as strong I almost don't know where to begin... Isa. 53 suffering servant which Israel claims is the nation but cannot be a nation under any circumstance. In fact that apologetic was developed by the Jews to debunk the preaching of Jesus. Then there's Dan. 7:14 which Jesus applied to himself consistently as the one who fulfilled and would fulfill that statement. Not to mention what the Apostles such as Peter preached in Acts 2:16 relating the fulfillment of biblical prophecy of Joel 2:28 to the event on Pentecost.
I've read many of of the assertions and arguments used to debunk biblical prophecy and all of them are failures. As far as I can tell you seem to revise many of Richard Carriers arguments and many of his are bogus to begin with and it tells in his debates also.
So if we are to use "historical-grammatical hermeneutical method" as you state it really doesn't matter from genealogy on I don't see where you have a leg to stand on or call into question any OT prophecy or utterance regarding Jesus or him being the Messiah.
Harvey, Psalms 2, according to Christians, expresses hope for the Messiah, the anointed one. Even if this is the case, any Jew writing about his hope for a future Messiah could have said these same hopeful things. A hope is not a prediction. But, in fact, according to Joseph Fitzmyer in his book, The One Who is to Come, “Psalm 2 is not ‘messianic’ in any sense.” “There is not even a hint of a ‘messianic’ connotation of the term or of a remote future, when a Messiah might appear.” Besides, Psalms 2 and 110 were most likely to be read at the coronation of Jewish kings. Psalms 110:1 reads: “The Lord says to my lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for you feet.’” The New Testament writers make a big deal out of the belief that David wrote this Psalm in which he calls someone else “lord.” This supposedly refers to David’s future Messianic son, Jesus—his divine nature and mission. But it’s fairly obvious that if David wrote this Psalm, he did it upon the coronation of his son Solomon, whom he subsequently called “lord.” He did this because of Solomon’s new status, which placed him as a ruler even above the aged David himself. The fact is that David probably didn’t even write Psalm 110, if we’re to believe he was on his deathbed when Solomon was crowned his successor (1 Kings 1–2:12). Given the prevalence of pseudonymity in the Bible, it’s more likely that someone else did. Nonetheless, Fitzmyer claims Psalm 110 “could hardly refer to any eschatological ideal in the distant future.”
The other Psalms do not predict anything at all. They are prayers to be interpreted within the range of the writers’ experiences alone. Any extrapolation of them to Jesus is reading Jesus into the text, and not justified by the text itself. After discussing several of the key “Messianic Psalms,” Fitzmyer concludes, “The attempt to interpret these Psalms anachronistically in a ‘messianic’ sense is misguided.” It is more probable that the New Testament writers were influenced in the construction of their stories about Jesus by making his life fit some of these details.
When it comes to the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53, in the context of Post-Exilic 2 Isaiah, the servant was not a redeemer messiah, since even Christians think no one in Jesus’ day thought that text referred to such a person, otherwise they would not have crucified him. In the book of Isaiah the suffering servant is identified with the people of Israel themselves (42:18–24; 44:1–2; 49:3). Fitzmyer argues there is no room here to see a Messiah as a ruler of the age of salvation. In fact, “there is no passage in the book of Isaiah that mentions a “‘Messiah’ in the narrow sense, and all attempts to speak of Isaiah’s ‘messianic prophecies’ are still-born.” He claims that the Servant Song of Isaiah 53 “has no messianic connotation” per se. And “The idea of a suffering Messiah . . . is found nowhere in the Old Testament or in any Jewish literature prior to or contemporaneous with the New Testament. It is a Christian conception that goes beyond the Jewish messianic tradition.” According to Christian scholarship, Isaiah’s servant is “almost certainly to be identified with Israel” [Anchor Bible Dictionary] The identification of Isaiah’s servant with Jesus was based upon the Christian recasting of Isaiah 52–53 in light of the apocryphal book of The Wisdom of Solomon (chapters 1–6).
Harvey Mark 13:
23So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.
24"But in those days, following that distress,
" 'the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
25the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'[d]
26"At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. 27And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.
It would appear Jesus was referring to someone else.
Joel 2:
19 The LORD will reply [a] to them:
"I am sending you grain, new wine and oil,
enough to satisfy you fully;
never again will I make you
an object of scorn to the nations.
20 "I will drive the northern army far from you,
pushing it into a parched and barren land,
with its front columns going into the eastern sea [b]
and those in the rear into the western sea. [c]
And its stench will go up;
its smell will rise."
Surely he has done great things. [d]
21 Be not afraid, O land;
be glad and rejoice.
Surely the LORD has done great things.
22 Be not afraid, O wild animals,
for the open pastures are becoming green.
The trees are bearing their fruit;
the fig tree and the vine yield their riches.
23 Be glad, O people of Zion,
rejoice in the LORD your God,
for he has given you
the autumn rains in righteousness. [e]
He sends you abundant showers,
both autumn and spring rains, as before.
24 The threshing floors will be filled with grain;
the vats will overflow with new wine and oil.
25 "I will repay you for the years the locusts have eaten—
the great locust and the young locust,
the other locusts and the locust swarm [f]—
my great army that I sent among you.
26 You will have plenty to eat, until you are full,
and you will praise the name of the LORD your God,
who has worked wonders for you;
never again will my people be shamed.
27 Then you will know that I am in Israel,
that I am the LORD your God,
and that there is no other;
never again will my people be shamed.
The Day of the LORD
28 "And afterward,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your old men will dream dreams,
your young men will see visions.
29 Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days.
-----------
Afterward?
In those days?
The context describes events that would take place in Joel's days. To insist they are for the future robs this passage of any context. If you found anyone else exegeting a passage like this so slipshod you would condemn it. But because Peter on the day of Pentecost does so you accept it like the blind leading the blind.
For a specific look at how the New Testament writers wrote their stories based upon the Old Testament, notice that Matthew 21:2 has Jesus requesting both a donkey and also a colt to ride into Jerusalem on, based upon a misunderstanding of Zechariah 9:9, which reads: “Rejoice . . . your king comes to you . . . gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” Zechariah’s prophecy is an example of Hebraic parallelism in which the second line retells the point of the first line. There is only one animal in Zechariah, but Matthew thinks he means there is a donkey and also a colt, so he wrote his story based upon this misunderstanding in order to fit prophecy! The gospels of Mark (11:1) and Luke (19:30) both say it was a “colt.” John’s gospel (12:14–15) says it was a “donkey,” and then he misquoted Zechariah 9:9 as saying: “your king is coming, seated on a donkey’s colt.”
How Matthew’s gospel uses the Old Testament is a case in point for us.
Just look at three more from Matthew. First, 2:14–15: “Then Joseph got up, took the child and his mother by night, and went to Egypt, and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet, ‘Out of Egypt I have called my son.’” According to the conservative Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures: “This is a reference to Hosea 11:1, which does not seem to be a prophecy in the sense of a prediction. Hosea was writing of God’s calling Israel out of Egypt into the Exodus. Matthew, however, gave new understanding to these words. Matthew viewed this experience as Messiah being identified with the nation.” “The total disassociation of that quotation from its context is completely at odds with our own exegetical preferences.” “Matthew naturally understand his quotation from Hosea as prophetic; he did not share the insight, common since Zwingli . . . and Calvin . . . that his interpretation does not correspond to the original meaning.”
Second, 2:17–18 sees Jeremiah 31:15 as fulfilled when Herod the king ordered all boys two years old and younger in Bethlehem to be killed. But Jeremiah is mourning for those who will be cast into Babylonian captivity. According to R. Schnackenburg, “it seems far-fetched to quote this text as fulfillment of prophecy.”
Third, 2:22–23: “Then after being warned by God in a dream, he left for the regions of Galilee, and came and lived in a city called Nazareth. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophets: ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” Again, according to The Bible Knowledge Commentary, “The words ‘He will be called a Nazarene,’ were not directly spoken by any Old Testament prophet, though several prophecies come close to this expression. Isaiah said the Messiah would be ‘from [Jesse’s] roots’ like ‘a Branch’ (Isa. 11:1). ‘Branch’ is the Hebrew word nezer, which has consonants like those in the word ‘Nazarene’ and which carry the idea of having an insignificant beginning.” But none of these so-called prophecies specifically say that the Messiah would be from the town of Nazareth. That’s a clear misreading of the texts.
No wonder professor C. F. D. Moule claims that Matthew’s use of the Old Testament “to our critical eyes, [is] manifestly forced and artificial and unconvincing.” And if this is the case, then with S. V. McCastland we can legitimately ask how Matthew distorts his other sources when writing his gospel: “What we have observed about the liberties Matthew took with passages of Scripture he quoted suggests that he may have done the same thing with his more contemporary sources of the life and saying of Jesus.” Why not then be skeptical of his whole gospel?
John,
EVERYTHING that you present is Sunday school material overcome by 12 and 13 year olds...
You presentd nothing new and certainly nothing of value...yes I'll take peter's interpretation of scripture over yours primarily because he KNEW it...he lived it and studied it along with the other Jews of his day...
Unlike you and I they were in a culture where they learned and knew this from the youth up. I don't care what a scepticak wanna be scholar has to say...if you don't believe in God you have no idea what prophecy is fulfilled and or why...Summarily looking over your apologetic against Is. 53 is ridiculous and jacked up...The jews considered this to be one of the most descriptuive messianic passages contained within their text and your bogus answer is that "no it's not about the Messiah"
LAUUGHABLE!
I'll pick out the parts that you seem to be most proud of and get back later...radicals are too funny!
John,
You said:”Harvey, Psalms 2, according to Christians, expresses hope for the Messiah, the anointed one. Even if this is the case, any Jew writing about his hope for a future Messiah could have said these same hopeful things. A hope is not a prediction.”
That doesn't matter John. The scope and the interpretation of Jewish literature was common to the Jews of that day. We also find that the Jews understood the word to be inspired, sent and ordered by God. The interpretation that these scriptures were about Jesus is not problematic because it is uniquely Christian and preached by the first Christians as an authenticator of the person of Jesus. Since this is the case we consistently see Jews interpreting the scriptures in a way that was pertinent to their current struggle in every age. In fact the Messiah was looked for and awaited on in every generation. This was nothing new.
The problem for the critic is further compounded by the fact that there was no particular time other than the time of Jesus when all scriptures could be fulfilled regarding the Jewish understanding of Messiah. It was a unique time, unique opportunity and that couldn't be constructed to fit the scriptures. What the “spiritless” or “carnal” man, such as yourself, considers simple words, those that interpret the scriptures with current and modern relevance understand how to look and read then for all they that give or divulge.
It's amazing to me that to defend your premise you would use a Catholic theologian whom you would bash otherwise. That's telling.
Nevertheless his interpretations don't hold for a number of reasons, you offer so much hearsay and fluff I won't even begin to address other parts of it...
You said:"When it comes to the “Suffering Servant” of Isaiah 53, in the context of Post-Exilic 2 Isaiah, the servant was not a redeemer messiah, since even Christians think no one in Jesus's day thought that text referred to such a person, otherwise they would not have crucified him. In the book of Isaiah the suffering servant is identified with the people of Israel themselves (42:18'24; 44:1'2; 49:3)."
The Jews today apply Isaiah 53 to modern Israel as a nation. Rabbi's began to teach this in response to this scripture being used to teach Jesus and preach that he was the Messiah. You see as recorded in the bible Jews were converted when this was preached because they knew the scripture and were able to understand.
The only problem with the current Jewish belief that this referred to a nation is that Israel was never ’asham or an offering for sin (Isaiah 53:10) Therefore there is no way this could refer to a nation of people. They understood that it was the Messiah, a person, that would be responsible for removing the sins of the world.
According to those same scriptures it was Messiah who suffered and died, and it is by his wounds that we are healed (Isaiah 53:5). It was he who was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and it was he who bore our sins (Isaiah 53:7, 12 and Leviticus 16:22). Read the passage for yourself instead of through some supposed scholar offering a fringe interpretation of the text.
Jews faithful to the scriptures recognized and understood Jesus sayings and actions according to those scriptures
“The writers of the New Covenant were Jews who recognized that Messiah had come to atone for the sins of his people. They based their beliefs on the Hebrew Scriptures, and on the Hebrew Scriptures alone. And so, when Yeshua died and rose from the dead in accordance with key prophecies in those very Scriptures, they had all the confirmation they could ever want that he indeed was the promised Messiah. If he had not fulfilled those essential prophecies then they would not have followed him. They recognized him because he did the work Messiah had to do” JESUS-YESHUA: WHO IS HE? by Michael L. Brown, Ph.D.
Those are simply 2 of your misinterpretations and misreadings, I guess this could go on for weeks with you...
John,
Your reference to Mk. 13 saying "t would appear Jesus was referring to someone else."
or more aptly it would appear that Jesus was using apocolytic language to refer to a future event or the advent of his judgement. He says this later in the same chapter:
Mk. 13-32-37~"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. 33-Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is. 34-[For the Son of man is] as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch.35-Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: 36-Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. 37-And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch."
John,
You referred to Joel as being taken out of context assuming that the words would be fulfilled in his days...that wasn't the interpretation or the expectation of the scripture...Why do you think Peter preached this on Pentecost? because it was an expectation of restoration which was what Pentecost was about.
The scripture "revealed" a new dimension of understanding unique to Christianity and accepted by over 3000 Jews that heard it that day. What did they know that you didn't? The scripture and the expectation of scripture.
You miss the greater part and interpretation of Zechariah's prophecy as displayed by Mt. you think his misinterpreted, but what he did was even greater by representing 2 horses one old and the other young, it's offspring signifying the OT and the NT that Jesus was over or in control of...I remember you did that on your blog some years back...it was wrong then and it's wrong now.
If any writer knew language and how to interpret and use it it was Matthew and he displays in the writing of the narrative from beginning to end.
Short of the long John, Since these scriptures weren't fulfilled in their day, and since they couldn't possibly be fulfilled now, who then could they possibly refer to?
You say nobody because they aren't real...I say yea right!
ooh well...
Harvey, you would not read any books I would suggest for you to read while I have probably read most of the books you would suggest to me.
Why is that so?
What, is this how you do research? Read all of your Christian resources and then read only snippets here and there from skeptics?
What a shame. If you really would like to research this topic say so and I will suggest some books to read on it.
If not, you're mind is not open to consider this possibility.
John,
In your world, when one doesn't come to the conclusions and confusion that you came to, that indicates a lack of research...
That's the problem. Looking at alternate interpretives and opinions etc, doesn't have to shake one's faith or cause doubt.
For me, many things have peaked curiosity and interest and even sparked further study and research, but doubt...I don't.
So far as the books you recommend, when you begin to submit balance, then I would pay greater attention to them. You don't. You only present radicals who are sometimes equally as radical as yourself and some of them are all across the board.
All roads don't lead to Rome John. There is a spiritual dimension that doesn't work in spite of the facts, but works because of the facts and helps to clarify the facts that exist.
I still don't see why nobody points out that the Bible containing a prophecy fulfilled in the Bible is about as amazing as Harry Potter containing a prophecy fulfilled in Harry Potter...
Post a Comment