Why does Jesus misquote the Old Testament so often?

(John 7:38) Jesus said, "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." No such statement in the Old Testament scriptures has ever been located.(Luke 24:46) Jesus speaking to his disciples on the night of his alleged resurrection said, "Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."That the resurrection of Christ on the third day was prophesied in the scriptures was claimed also by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4: "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures."In two different places, then, New Testament writers claimed that the resurrection of the Messiah on the third day had been predicted in the scriptures, however such versus don’t exist.Jesus incorrectly said that he was mentioned by Moses in his law (Luke 24:44), this too cannot be found in the Old Testament.Why does Jesus misqoute the Old Testament so often?

It's part of a nasty issue that most xians don't like to admit: That the bible isn't some sacred unified text, but a book pieced together by committee by Jewish (and later Xian) scholars from known, differing traditions. Some things were included, some were left out, and some were merged together to make them harmonize. It very well may be that Christ was quoting from *a* scripture, just not one that made it in the cannon. Furthermore, he could have actually been referencing the oral tradition.Or, he could just be wrong.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Do some research next time.Introduction to 1 Corinthians 15 - Meaning and Commentary on Bible VerseIntroduction to 1 Corinthians 15 - Meaning and Commentary on Bible VerseLuke 24 Commentary - John Gill's Exposition of the BibleJohn 7 Commentary - John Gill's Exposition of the BibleUse it, dont use it. If you still dont understand, sorry I doubd't I can help any further.Z[This message has been edited by Zealot, 11-18-2003]

Jesus did not intend to directly quote the OT. His point was that he must become the sacrificial lamb for sin, though Hosea 16:10 where it is stated that his soul will not decay or remain in Sheol is the best reference coupled with Isaiah chapter 53. These tell it all though there are other supporting scriptures to support the intent of his statements. Anyone who wishes to discredit Biblical scripture can always nit pick their way to do it, especially when they're outa their field in understanding of Biblical truth.

Thanks for the links Z. I can agree with you on the John 7:38 (I was reading this verse wrong, I now believe).However, I will take issue on the Luke 24:44 as your link to Crosswalk points me to a number of verses in the Bible, but only one of the verses was from "Moses Law", GE 3:15, "And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." And I don't see what this has to do with Jesus.Also, I see no referance in any of the verses that Crosswalk points to (Isaiah 26:19, Psalms 16:10, 68:18, 110:1,7 and Hosea 6:2) that refer to JESUS being buried and rising on the 3rd day. The only thing close is Hos 6:2 and this is clearly not refering to Jesus.Could you point me to specific verses that say these things, or is this as good as you got?

Could I remind members that the reply button at the bottom of the message box makes it easier for others to follow the debates.Thankyou.AdminBrian.

Buz, if Jesus says he's quoting scripture, and he's not, what sort of message is that giving to those listening to him? If I were to tell someone, "The CRC says that concentrated hydrochloric acid is safe to drink.", would it be relevant to the listener if I didn't actually *mean* that hydrochloric acid is safe to drink, or that the CRC did say that it is safe to drink dilute carbonic acid?Are those who listen to Christ's teachings expected to have read the whole OT, realized that what he said wasn't in there, but hold as a premise that Christ is infallable, and from that premise interpret that he didn't actually mean what he said, but something else entirely?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

He did'nt say he was quoting scripture. He alluded to information which was written in scripture. That's a no brainer for serious students of the Bible, but when you're out to do nothing but find fault, you nitpick.

quote:

---

".....and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures."

---

Note the wording......."according to the scriptures." Jesus himself made reference to Noah being in the fish's belly when informing of his soon to come death while alive as a sign of his death and resurrection. So likely either Paul's subsequent statement above was alluding to that or he was alluding to the Psalms statement about not being left in the grave to decay....... or possibly both.
At any rate there's enough info in scripture to cover both for objective and serious students of scripture. Those to whom he was speaking were very familiar with the OT scriptures.

Hi Buz, You mean 'Jonah' here don't you?I know that Noah is a 'typological' Christ as well though.One problem here with comparing Jesus and Jonah. Jonah was not actually dead when he was in the whale's/fish body, perhaps Jesus wasn't actually dead inside the tomb?Brian.

Deuteronomy 18:15 - The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet ...Deuteronomy 18:15That classify as a Mosaic book ? RoR, will I convert you into a Christian by discussing this with you ?I dont think so. So, why would you like me to preach to you something you can find out with enough time and effort on google ?Jesus, like most rabbi's was fluent in the OT. That he would 'misquote' the OT (as your topic suggested) is indeed laughable. Most likely you and Rei (note how quick Rei is to agree to any Biblical criticism on ToE) and others dont know the text well enough, or dont care to understand the text.I'm off on a 2 month holiday in a weeks time. I'll leave you with some advice.1. If you dont believe in the Biblical text. Feel free, your choice. Just say ' I just dont believe it ' and get on with your life. Christians wont get angry at you. I have Athiest friends that ... just don't believe and its their choice! Just don't go under the pretense that you care to discuss the text... we have too many here already 2. Searching on google for 'errors in bible' will only confirm your belief that the Bible is junk.3. If you do find something you dont "understand" or think is an error, ASK, dont imply. Your topic screams "I dont want to believe". Few Christians will even take the time to discuss it with you. Do a search on the web. Otherwise, join a Christian forum to help you out, or search for that specific passage online.4. Learn more about the Bible and Jesus. Read up about him. I can recommend some excelent books.5. Eventually when you join the 'The Canon and all Christian Scriptures have been mistranslated, doctored and fixed' , keep in mind that HAD it been altered, surely all these 'discrepancies' you now mention would have been cleared up... LOL. You can lead a horse to water...Welcome to the forums RoR.Z

Wow, Z, so angry! Sounds like you could use the vacation!To answer your question, yes you could convert me to a Christian if you could clear up all the problems I have with the Bible. I personally believe the only reason to believe in Christianity would be if the Bible were actually a revelation from God. Without the Bible, Christianity has no evidence, it doesn't matter how many people believe in it. The main problem I have with the Bible is the (I believe) untrue picture it paints of God. It strikes me as blasphamy. Now if there were no question in my mind that the Bible was acurate then I guess that really is God's nature. However, I find many faults in the Bible. The least of which I have started to post here. At any rate, you are actually proving your point to me as the referance to Deut. is a perfect one. Also point taken on the "implications" of my topic, sorry.But I'm still not going to buy the cross referances to Jonah, etc. unless there is a reason to believe that it refers to Jesus. I'll do some looking into it myself and read more into the verses crosswalk referances, you enjoy your vacation and we will talk more about it when you return?

I dont get angry that fast RoR, but when you've been around here a while, you pick up patterns pretty fast. What if I cant clear up all the problems you have with the Bible ? You think I dont have questions about the Bible ? At some point you have to have faith. If you dont, everytime you someone mentions a problem you've not encountered, you have to abandon your belief. Not a great system to go by. Hopefully you've taken aboard some things I mentioned in my previous post. Remember not even the most educated of pharisees understood all the text, Jesus had to explain alot to them. When you find Christ, he can give you the answers. But expecting to find them all before you accept Christ, shows a lack of faith.Spend time searching for the answers yourself. But much as I hate to say it EvC is probably not where you will find your answers. You dont need to buy the cross reference.Hosea 6vs2 "He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him. " Sure,
stay wellZ

quote:

---

At any rate there's enough info in scripture to cover both for objective and serious students of scripture. Those to whom he was speaking were very familiar with the OT scriptures.

---

Are you saying that all "serious" students of scripture are not objective in their view of it? That would mean that anyone who's serious about the Bible allows their study of it to be tainted by subjective judgments... surely not your intent.

quote:

---

5. Eventually when you join the 'The Canon and all Christian Scriptures have been mistranslated, doctored and fixed' , keep in mind that HAD it been altered, surely all these 'discrepancies' you now mention would have been cleared up...

---

Are you now arguing divine inspiration is implied by errors in the text?Excuse me while I crawl back to my chair and remove myself from the floor.The reason the sloppy deconfliction still exists is more likely this: for centuries, the masses were deprived of the right to read the Bible in their own languages. All the while, the clergy were building and fortifying the tradition of believing that Scripture is uniform (one canon), divinely inspired, inerrant, and self-consistent. With the actual writing under lock and key, some contradictions went unnoticed or at least unchallenged. Let's call it "minimal selective pressure toward self-consistency." By the time the Bible began to find its way into the hands of the common man, the canon and actual wording of books were beyond revision ("strong stabilizing selection"), so the fight remained centered in the area of interpretation - maintaining a tradition that understands various facts in just the way that is required to consider them logically consistent.It is incredibly bizarre to shift the blame for self-contradicting scripture from human hands to a divine creator in your effort to maintain your assertion about the inspiration of the text.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Could you point me to specific verses that say these things, or is this as good as you got?

---

LOL. You can lead a horse to water...

---

Seems premature and rather arrogant to imply that the problem is his, when you know nearly nothing of him personally. It is also damning to your argument that you belittle his understanding instead of providing a factual answer. Why do you feel the need to assume that there is something wrong with someone who does not draw the same conclusion you draw? Do you think this view is actually supported by the fact that when he asks for facts to back up your opinion, you make insulting analogies rather than just explaining yourself? That tends to hinder good-faith debate, you know.