|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
 Posted - 01/06/2003 : 15:09:56
|
|
This is a place to discuss various prophecies.
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 15:18:10 [Permalink]
|
| Micah 5:2 refers to a military leader emerging from the family of Ephrathah of the House of Lekhem (beit-lekhem). It's a reference to a clan, not a city. Isaiah 53 is even less compelling. More importantly, even were this not the case, the far more parsimonious and rational explanation of any such 'fullfillment of prophecy' is sloppy attempts at reverse engineering on the part of early Christian apologists. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
 |
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 18:14:38 [Permalink]
|
I'm a bit puzzled that the prophesied Messiah was supposed to be of the line of David, but Jesus, not being the actual son of Joseph, of whom the Gospels of Matthew and Luke trace back to David, is not of the line of David. Surely being a stepson doesn't count...
The books are quite clear that they are referring to Joseph's line, not Mary's, before that tired argument is brought up. |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 21:41:30 [Permalink]
|
[quote]Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
I'm a bit puzzled that the prophesied Messiah was supposed to be of the line of David, but Jesus, not being the actual son of Joseph, of whom the Gospels of Matthew and Luke trace back to David, is not of the line of David. Surely being a stepson doesn't count...
The books are quite clear that they are referring to Joseph's line, not Mary's, before that tired argument is brought up.
It would not be out of the question or a contradiction to what is written that Mary was also of the lineage of David. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 22:15:49 [Permalink]
|
[quote]Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Micah 5:2 refers to a military leader emerging from the family of Ephrathah of the House of Lekhem (beit-lekhem). It's a reference to a clan, not a city.
"...shall come a governor that shall rule my people Israel" Clearly more than a simple military leader. Consider also the account of the wise men from the east coming to Jerusalem. They were looking for the Christ and the religious rulers used this text to guide them to Bethlehem. Perhaps they understood it better than you. Herod understood it well enough to send his soldiers to kill all the children 2 and under in that region to try to eliminate the Christ.
Isaiah 53 is even less compelling.
Let's see: "wounded, bruised, chastised/stripes, numbered with transgressors, made intercession for transgressors, pleased the Lord to bruise him (indicating he was fulfilling the will of God), By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities (even the reason was given)"
yet you can see no correlation in that prophecy to the death of Jesus. Wow, take another closer look. At least six specific descriptive details directly relating to the death of Christ, including the means of death (by execution), tortured ahead of time (bruises and whipping), with whom he was punished (other transgressors), even buried with the rich (a rich man's grave, hewn in rock). The reason and/or redemption of sinners is described: the same message Christ told his disciples and they preached. That's quite a bit of prophecy that was fulfilled packed in one small chapter written hundreds of years before the events.
More importantly, even were this not the case, the far more parsimonious and rational explanation of any such 'fullfillment of prophecy' is sloppy attempts at reverse engineering on the part of early Christian apologists
So, to explain away this amazing prophecy you think it was rewritten by Christians. Wow, that's quite a charge. Not even the Jews have come up with that one. They acknowledge the book to be original. Besides, there are numerous other books with prophesies of Christ throughout the law, prophets, and Psalms. Were they all changed without the Jews noticing? Let's see, Matthew quoted from Isaiah 53, so he would have had to change the book of Isaiah before writing his account of Christ. Pretty amazing. Time to get another theory to shore up your unbelief.
|
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 01/06/2003 : 23:02:52 [Permalink]
|
"...shall come a governor that shall rule my people Israel" Clearly more than a simple military leader.
Clearly a politician.
Consider also the account of the wise men from the east coming to Jerusalem.
Magi were astrologer / priests of the Mithrains and the Zoroastrians. They couldn't have given a rat's arse about the "king of the Jews." They would have been on the look out for the Second Coming of the savior Mithra. There were no Jewish Magi.
Herod understood it well enough to send his soldiers to kill all the children 2 and under in that region to try to eliminate the Christ.
The story of the evil king who murders hordes of infants to catch the baby hero is a myth that would have been around for thousands of years, and used in many different legends, by Herods time. There is no record of Herod actually doing any such thing.
At least six specific descriptive details directly relating to the death of Christ…
The story of Jesus is a work of fiction. There is no evidence that Jesus is even base on an historic person from this period. (There's a better case for a teacher from 100 BCE being the historic character. He, of course, worked no miracles.)
It is easy to fulfil prophecy when you are only a literary invention.
So, to explain away this amazing prophecy you think it was rewritten by Christians.
First, it isn't a prophecy.
Second, it wasn't rewritten by Christians…although they were the ones who decided to declare it a prophecy. It was the Jesus fiction that was written by Christians.
Were they all changed without the Jews noticing?
The Jews certainly noted that their bible was completely reorganized by the Christians to make it seem as if it lead up to Jesus.
Let's see, Matthew quoted from Isaiah 53, so he would have had to change the book of Isaiah before writing his account of Christ. Pretty amazing.
Matthew (you know that there wasn't a Matthew, don't you? No one knows the name of the author of this book) quoted Isaiah 53 while writing his novel. There was no need to change it. He was making up his Jesus story.
Time to get another theory to shore up your unbelief.
You seem to be so brain washed by this nonsense that you are unable to see the obvious.
I hope you don't take Matthew too seriously 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 06:34:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
It would not be out of the question or a contradiction to what is written that Mary was also of the lineage of David.
I've heard it said that Mary was of the tribe of Levi, not Judah, thus is not descended from David.
Anyone have any knowledge of this?
[Edit: I found this site:
quote:
Who were Mary's forefathers? Does the Bible tell us so? Undeniably, unquestionably, unequivocally, the answer is YES...
An angel speaking to Mary said, "And behold, your kinswoman Elizabeth..." (Luke 1:36)
This indicates that Mary was related to Elizabeth. Who was Elizabeth descended from?
(Zechariah) had a wife of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. (Luke 1:5)
According to the Bible Elizabeth was descended from Aaron. Aaron was of the tribe of Levi. (Exodus 4:14) Therefore Mary was a descendent of the tribe of Levi, not the tribe of Judah from whom King David was descended.
|
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 01/07/2003 06:45:40 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 08:27:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
I've heard it said that Mary was of the tribe of Levi, not Judah, thus is not descended from David. Anyone have any knowledge of this?
Undeniably, unquestionably, unequivocally, the answer is ... we haven't a clue.  Imagine, for example, Elizabeth as Mary's cousin: one could easily construct a family tree wherein Mary's mother was the sister of Elizabeth's father, while Mary's father was of the tribe of Judah. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 09:23:24 [Permalink]
|
Good point.
I searched around and found a few xian sites that just claimed that the Luke geneaology was Mary's, without any explanation as to why they thought so (it seems to me to be obvious that both are Joseph).
However, one site claimed that there was a Jewish law/custom that forbade intermarriage of tribes, therefore Joseph wouldn't have married Mary unless she also was of the tribe of Judah. |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 14:21:25 [Permalink]
|
Concerning Doomar's claims of prophesy fulfillment from another thread, I would like to add the following about Micah 5:2 to that which has already been presented.
Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be1 little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Did it ever occur to you, Doomar, that the word ‘Bethlehem' is most likely referring to a person, the son of Ephratah, (1 Chronicles 4:4, 1 Chronicles 2:50)?
Furthermore, thousands of children have been born in the town of Bethlehem. Wouldn't this verse give each the right to claim to be a messiah?
Next, I am trying to remember when Jesus was the “ruler in Israel,” or is these prophesy actually yet to happen?
Finally, if we were to stay consistent, then the word “everlasting” in the KJV should be more accurately translated from the original Hebrew as meaning something in the long past, as in Amos 9:11, Isaiah 63:9, Malachi 3:4, and Deuteronomy 32:7.
If you would care to discuss the rest of Micah 5, I would be happy to oblige you. Plus, I will try to get back to you on Isaiah 53. I haven't much time. Work is an unforgiving task master.
However, I would like to ask how you can reconcile Matthew's claim in Matthew 27:9? I have yet to find this prophesy in the book of Jeremiah, or anywhere else in the OT. I would like to know it's source.
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 16:15:30 [Permalink]
|
I have to add to the Micah so called prophesy, if it is a prophesy it is either not of Jesus or is blatantly false:
Micah 5:6
And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.
It never happened.
This article does a much better job than I ever could of describing the errors of trying to make this verse a prophesy for Jesus.
http://members.aol.com/JAlw/bethlehem_birth_prophecy.html
The keys here being that Bethlehem Ephratah was most likely a person of one of the thousands of clans. In fact the NIV translates it as follows: "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans (or, rulers) of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel..."
It would be unrealistic to assume this is a town since there wouldn't have been 1000's of towns in Judah, but could well have been 1000's of families.
The other kicker is that the Assyrian power ceased 600 years before Jesus was even born, hard to kill an enemy that no longer exists.
So now we are left with the fact that Micah wasn't predicting Jesus so Matthew was wrong in claiming he was. Junt another typical error in your Bible. |
|
|
|
Dr Shari
Skeptic Friend
135 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 17:07:20 [Permalink]
|
| If you wait long enough you will find something that "fullfills" everyone of the Bibles prophacies, plus thoughs of Nostradamus and every other fool who thinks he knows the future. Bible prophacies were suppossed to take plce sometime in the near future from when they were written not millennias later. The Catholic Church feel that Revelation foretold the fall or the Roman Empire not the End Times todays Fundamentalists fear. The idea of a prophacy is to influence the behavior of people right away not thousands of years later. Early Christians expected to see the Second Coming in their lifetimes not ours. Holding on to the past keeps the future in jepordy. |
Death: The High Cost of Living
It is easier to get forgiveness then to get permission! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 18:16:24 [Permalink]
|
In case anyone doubts Shari, Jesus is a false prophet Matthew16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Again in Matt 23:36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
And, verily with a hey nonny nonny, one more time for good measure in Matt 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
|
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 18:53:00 [Permalink]
|
Tokyodreamer
Keep in mind that a kinsman doesn't necessarily mean you are of the same tribe. Consider a simple senario: Mary's dad: David's line, Mom from Levi line. Thus a relative to Elizabeth. Lineage is figured through the man, though, so it may be a moot point, considering that Jesus came into Mary via the Spirit of God. I have wondered about this point many times, but Matthew, the writer of the first gospel and Luke, of the third gospel didn't seem to see any problem. They knew all we know plus the Hebrew ways and to them it was proof indeed. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 19:08:38 [Permalink]
|
However, one site claimed that there was a Jewish law/custom that forbade intermarriage of tribes, therefore Joseph wouldn't have married Mary unless she also was of the tribe of Judah.
I know this is not true and can show you from scripture. Marrying outside of your Hebrew race (all twelve tribes), however, was frowned on, though not always practiced. See Numbers 36for details about this. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/07/2003 : 19:17:53 [Permalink]
|
Dear Slater,
Just too much gobblegook to wade through. Consider reading the Book without these skeptics aides you seem to use. I've read parts of those crazy books and they have no merit with true Biblical scholars. If you are trying to disproove the Book, you must go much deeper. Even believers take verses out of context and use them to "prove a point" called "proof-texting". This is not considered valid reasoning. The more I've studied, the more I see that it is an extremely deep book and far more cohesive than we realize. You can skim over the top like a water skier or start diving (saying of a pastor friend). |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
