Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
27 online now:
CosmicChimp, PaulK (2 members, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,822 Year: 16,858/19,786 Month: 983/2,598 Week: 229/251 Day: 0/58 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are any of these prophecies fulfilled by Jesus?
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 58 of 255 (594226)
12-02-2010 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by ICdesign
11-30-2010 11:16 AM


Deuteronomy 18
ICDESIGN writes:

2 Peter 2:1 ....there will be false teachers among you,
who will secretly bring in destructive heresies....
and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the
tradition of men, according to the basic principles of
the world, and not according to Christ.

Hebrews 13:9 Do not be carried about with various
and strange doctrines.

Ephesians 4:14 ...we are no longer to be children,
tossed here and there by waves and carried about
by every wind of of doctrine, by the trickery of men
by craftiness in deceitful scheming...

2Timothy 3:16 ALL SCRIPTURE IS INSPIRED BY
GOD and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for
correction, for training in righteousness...

Matthew 24:35 Jesus said: Heaven and earth will
pass away, but my words will not pass away.

yes, the bible has quite a lot to say about false prophets. for instance, how to tell whether a prophet is false, and what the punishment is for pretending to be a prophet.

quote:
But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.' And if thou say in thy heart: 'How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?' When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken; the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Deuteronomy 18:20-22


and contrary to your point, it encourages viewing prophecy -- all prophecy -- with a high degree of skepticism. the test is not the fact that someone said something, or that it was written somewhere, but that the thing prophesied actually comes to pass.

unfortunately, many of these claimed christ prophecies simply aren't. most have to do with other things. for instance, the cited one from isaiah 7 was indeed fulfilled: roughly six hundred years before the birth of christ. it simply can't have been about jesus in way, shape, or form. context doesn't fit, literal grammar doesn't fit, and jesus was named yehoshua, not imanuel.

stretching prophecy in this way is highly dishonest, to the degree that it should fail that skeptical view encouraged by the old testament. if the prophet elijah said, "yahweh will send a holy fire down on mount carmel to consume the offering", and 2 years later, he rubbed some sticks together, none of the priests of baal would have taken him seriously. nor would anyone else.

god does not weasel. his proof leaves no doubt.

ICDESIGN writes:

The bible is by far the number one selling
book in all of history and by far the most loved
and the most read of any book ever written.

and sadly, by far the least understood. but keep trying, one day you will get it.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by ICdesign, posted 11-30-2010 11:16 AM ICdesign has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by cavediver, posted 12-02-2010 6:10 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 59 of 255 (594227)
12-02-2010 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by jar
11-30-2010 6:29 PM


Re: What IS prophecy?
jar writes:

frako writes:

How can they say a prophecy is furfilled if it is in both pars of the bible. Its like saying it was told that harry potter will slay that evil dude in book 1 and he slayed him in the last book (or so i think i did not read it or watch the movie yet). So the prophecy came true harry must be a real person and the best wizard ever.

Yes, if that happened it would just be fiction, and unfortunately in the case of most claimed prophecy that is EXACTLY what happens.

well, the thing is that it's possible for neatly tied prophetic story arcs in singular works of fiction. all (legitimate) harry potter books have a single author: jk rowling. so she can write that harry will defeat voldemort in the first book, have him do it in the 7th, and everything ties up nice and tightly. these books were all written by one person, and within a short period of time. but even if we extend the period of time, we start to run into problems. for instance, george lucas couldn't even keep historical data straight in the star wars series.

of course, even the highest degree of internal consistency doesn't say much about the historical accuracy of the text, does it? fiction can be internally consistent. but it's not always. perfectly consistent might even be a hint that something is fiction -- but so would a certain degree of inconsistency.

...and stretching context beyond belief? well. who knows what to make of that.

jar writes:

It was not always immediate, but the message was meant to be acted on right then.... The idea that God had to leave clues in obscure language with a people that have been dead for thousands and thousands of years for folk today or even in our future is just plain silly. God is perfectly capable of reaching folk today in our own media and those living in the future in theirs.

and it's important to remember this. prophecy is meaningless outside of its historical context: the people it was given to. and reading that makes it nonsense to the person listening to the prophet speak is nonsense itself.

jar writes:

Again, the problem is not the Bible or its contents, it is the readers misunderstanding.

the problem is that some of the readers of the bible also added to it. clearly, matthew reads isaiah 7 as applying to christ, when clearly it should not.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by jar, posted 11-30-2010 6:29 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 12-02-2010 6:37 PM arachnophilia has responded
 Message 62 by frako, posted 12-02-2010 7:22 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 63 of 255 (594271)
12-02-2010 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by jar
12-02-2010 6:37 PM


Re: What IS prophecy?
(cavediver: thanks! i've very recently been un-banned)

jar writes:

Exactly, as I tried to point out, a great example is the story of Joseph and the dreams. It's also though a pretty clear indication that the story is fiction.

i don't think that's the only indication, but it helps, yes. however, i don't think we should take fulfilled prophecy as an indication of fiction, presuming me can find any that's not internally fulfilled.

jar writes:

The idea that there is prophecy in the Bible that is still meant to come true has several serious flaws.

well, the major flaw would be that prophecy is meant for the initial audience, not the reader thousands of years later. that said, i don't find the idea wholly out of the realm of possibility. for instance, you find several apocalyptic prophecies describing the end of the world, as well as several messianic prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled, which you have kindly listed in this thread already.

jar writes:

First, it makes the god character look stupid.

well, bits like the destruction of tyre do, yeah. the failed ones don't go over so well. but the deuteronomist (see above) places the blame for failed prophecy on the prophet -- a kind of football double standard if you ask me. make that touchdown, thank god. fumble, blame yourself.

jar writes:

A great example was ICDESIGN trying to use Matthew 24:35 as support that the stories in the Bible are absolutely true.

As I tried to point out in Message 41, if they use Matthew 24:35 as proof that all is hunky dory then they have to deal with Matthew 24:34, and that's a really big issue. Instead of just admitting that the author of Matthew got it wrong, they have spent almost 2000 years trying to tap dance around the definition of "generation".

well, see, i have a problem with that. that reading can't possibly be right. matthew was written after that generation had already passed. either it means something else, or matthew is purposefully making christ out to be a false prophet.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 12-02-2010 6:37 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-02-2010 9:22 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 65 of 255 (594280)
12-02-2010 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by frako
12-02-2010 7:22 PM


putting a date on prophecies
frako writes:

And still one would have to define prophecy, one day a city will fall to the ground by an erthquake is not a prophecy to vague and can be fitted anywhere. A true prohecy should be like the one by that woman last month where she said that the 3d world ware would start in november 2010, she still could be right even though the month has passed if the ware starts in korea some time soon the actual start would be in november 2010 when they bombed that island. The prophecy is relativly straight forward, not vague, it gives a time line, and the event. Most of the biblical prophecies lack most or all of those things.

admittedly, i'm no scholar of prophecy. but most that i'm familiar with are pretty seated in their direct audiences. the more interesting stuff -- the messianic and apocalyptic prophecies -- are frequently more open-ended, yes.

but at least one extremely important example discussed in this thread has a definitive clock. actually, it is the clock. let's look at isaiah 7 again.

quote:
And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aram, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to war against it; but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying: 'Aram is confederate with Ephraim.' And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the forest are moved with the wind. Then said the LORD unto Isaiah: 'Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fullers' field; and say unto him: Keep calm, and be quiet; fear not, neither let thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands, for the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram, and of the son of Remaliah. Because Aram hath counselled evil against thee, Ephraim also, and the son of Remaliah, saying: Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let us make a breach therein for us, and set up a king in the midst of it, even the son of Tabeel; thus saith the Lord GOD: It shall not stand, neither shall it come to pass. For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin; and within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it be not a people; And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remaliah's son. If ye will not have faith, surely ye shall not be established.'

i've bolded the parts that are the actual prophecy in the chapter. the cliff-notes versions goes like this: israel and aram are waging war against judah, and god tells the prophet isaiah to go talk to ahaz, kind of judah, and let him know that god's on judah's side and not to worry about israel and aram because they're going away.

this btw actually happens. it's a real historical event. assyria conquers israel (and aram, and a lot of other small city-states). the tribes of israel never return. unmentioned by the prophecy is that very soon afterward, babylon conquers assyria and then judah, but whatever. but isaiah steps it up again:

quote:
And the LORD spoke again unto Ahaz, saying: 'Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God: ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.' But Ahaz said: 'I will not ask, neither will I try the LORD.' And he said: 'Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that ye will weary my God also? Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Curd and honey shall he eat, when he knoweth to refuse the evil, and choose the good. Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou hast a horror of shall be forsaken. The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria.'

so the sign that this prophecy is coming to pass will be a specific child named "imanuel" or "god is with us" (ie: "on our side"). by the time he becomes a man, probably ritualistically at age 13 or so, the problem of israel will be dealt with.

now, i can't find too much scholarly work to back this up, but there's some quirks of the grammar of the key verse in hebrew. first is that the woman is referred to as הָעַלְמָה, the woman, without being previously mentioned. this indicates that she was likely present to the conversation -- indeed, later context points to isaiah's own wife. second is that the verbs seem to me (i could be very wrong here) to switch tense. הָרָה looks like simple present tense to me, and וְיֹלֶדֶת implies a future tense. meaning, that i read it as saying "the woman is pregnant and will bear a son".

this puts a clock of about 13 from the prophecy to the assyrian exile of israel, and about 85 until they cease being a distinct group of people.

now, i don't have the exact dates for you, but ahaz stopped ruling around 715 BCE, and the assyrian exile of israel happened roughly 720-ish BCE, during his reign. so that's probably close enough to be reasonably accurate.

does this prophecy have anything to do with jesus? no, most assuredly not. and i hope the reason why is now completely obvious: it completely breaks the clock on the prophecy. having a sign that occurs 700 years after the prophecy is foretells makes no sense.

Edited by arachnophilia, : edit: SoRrY MoOsE, DiDn"t SeE YoUr MeSsAgE UnTiL AfTeR I HaD AlReAdY PoStEd.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by frako, posted 12-02-2010 7:22 PM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by frako, posted 12-03-2010 5:53 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 67 of 255 (594526)
12-03-2010 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by frako
12-03-2010 5:53 PM


Re: putting a date on prophecies
frako writes:

And for this prophecy to be a true prophecy it would also haveto be written before the events took place. Actual evidence from someplace else then the bible say a letter or something mentioning the prophecy dating before the events.

well, yes, but now we're shifting goal posts. isaiah was almost certainly written after the assyrian exile. however, nearest i can tell, this represents most of biblical prophecy: given a time-frame, but already "fulfilled" by the time the book was written, or internally fulfilled as part of the story.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by frako, posted 12-03-2010 5:53 PM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by frako, posted 12-04-2010 7:05 AM arachnophilia has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 78 of 255 (594952)
12-05-2010 7:17 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by frako
12-04-2010 7:05 AM


Re: putting a date on prophecies
frako writes:

So all those prophecies would have to be cut from the list of furfilled prophecies in the bible. If not i can prophecise that A german will be borne around 1900 that will shake the world with his army. I must be a prophet if you look at the history Hitler fits the prophecy.

sure, it'd just look silly coming so late. really, most of biblical prophecy fits this description because the books were last altered, or compiled, well after the subject matter they dealt with. it's possible that this has the affect of adding fictionalization to the accounts -- we really can't tell if isaiah, who lived before the assyrian exile, said what he's supposed to have said when he was supposed to have said it. the prophets themselves don't seem to have written the book, rather, their later disciples. sort of like with christ.

but it's an easy mistake to think that the power of prophecy is in prediction. it's not.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by frako, posted 12-04-2010 7:05 AM frako has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by lokiare, posted 03-23-2014 9:46 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 79 of 255 (594954)
12-05-2010 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by frako
12-04-2010 7:17 AM


frako writes:

Tram law writes:

You have one verse read by a hundred people, you'll get a hundred different interpretations. If the Bible was so immutable, why should there be this many interpretations and versions?

Why do you think the first bibles where only in latin and only the priests could interpret them because they could say yust about anything and get their support from the bible.

don't be silly. the first collections of biblical texts were in hebrew, and greek for the christian stuff. the jewish people actually have a quite rich tradition of heatedly debating interpretation. allowing the general population access was an important enough concern that when greek became the common language, the jewish scholars set to work translating the bible into greek. this is some 200 years before christ.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by frako, posted 12-04-2010 7:17 AM frako has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


(1)
Message 80 of 255 (594955)
12-05-2010 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by ICdesign
12-05-2010 4:36 PM


context is everything
ICDESIGN writes:

A prophecy doesn't have to be in context with the entire paragraph it is encased in. That is one reason why so many like jar get it wrong.

...uh, sorry, but yes it does. you can't just bend an author's words to mean whatever you like. christians love to claim their adoration of the bible, but strangely have little issue with misrepresenting it. if you really have no problem understanding why context is important, i leave you with the following bible verses:

quote:
There is no God

Deuteronomy 32:39


quote:
There is no God

First Kings 8:23


quote:
There is no God

Second Kings 1:16


quote:
There is no God

Second Kings 5:15


quote:
There is no God

Second Chronicles 6:14


quote:
There is no God

Psalms 14:1


quote:
There is no God

Psalms 53:1


quote:
There is no God

Isaiah 44:6


quote:
There is no God

Isaiah 44:8


quote:
There is no God

Isaiah 45:5


quote:
There is no God

Isaiah 45:14


quote:
There is no God

Isaiah 45:21


i think the surrounding words are important. don't you?


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by ICdesign, posted 12-05-2010 4:36 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by ICdesign, posted 12-05-2010 8:20 PM arachnophilia has responded
 Message 86 by bluescat48, posted 12-05-2010 9:33 PM arachnophilia has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 81 of 255 (594957)
12-05-2010 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by jar
12-05-2010 7:13 PM


riding into jerusalem on (a) donkey(s)
jar writes:

Some we have already dealt with. for example the mention of riding into town on an ass clearly is nothing but a created after the fact prophecy, a false prophecy.

well, no. zechariah does say that messiah will enter jerusalem on a donkey (but not two donkeys as matthew has it, lol), and the point is that the coming messiah will be of humble origins.

but, um, it's just not exactly prophetic, in that it doesn't make someone the messiah. how many people do you suppose rode into jerusalem on donkeys the same day that christ did? hypothetically? nevermind the question of that that year. that decade, that century... or ever?

the important factor in zechariah 9 is what comes directly after that verse: the messiah will end all war and rule the world. ending all war would make someone the messiah. riding a donkey does not. matthew had to have done this on purpose -- how do you miss the big stuff for the sake of the insignificant?


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by jar, posted 12-05-2010 7:13 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by jar, posted 12-05-2010 7:54 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 84 of 255 (594962)
12-05-2010 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by ICdesign
12-05-2010 8:20 PM


Re: context is everything
...uh, sorry but NO it doesn't. The author doesn't even know he is speaking a prophecy at the time.
He is usually making a totally different point.
...
Yes. When it isn't a prophecy, I totally agree with you.

oh, of course. but you see, what i posted is prophecy. the authors just didn't know it at the time.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by ICdesign, posted 12-05-2010 8:20 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 89 of 255 (594970)
12-05-2010 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by bluescat48
12-05-2010 9:33 PM


Re: context is everything
bluescat48 writes:

Just goes to show how ridiculous quote mining can be.

yup. but rarely do fundamentalists admit what they're doing as openly as ICDESIGN just did right there.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by bluescat48, posted 12-05-2010 9:33 PM bluescat48 has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 98 of 255 (595289)
12-07-2010 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by ICdesign
12-06-2010 1:12 PM


context is everything: zechariah 13
ICDSIGN writes:

Here we go with gospel according to jar again. The text does not say any of this. Again what the scripture clearly states in Mark 14:49 is ..."THIS HAS TAKEN PLACE TO FULFILL THE SCRIPTURES"!

yes, it does clearly state that. however, we have the benefit of having said scriptures, with which we can compare such a statement.

if i told you yesterday "i'll give you back that five dollars tomorrow", and today i gave you fifty cents and said "obligation fulfilled!" you'd look at me a little funny and demand your $4.50. just the fact that i said i have fulfilled something doesn't mean that i have.

i understand that the bible gets a special pass with you, and most fundamentalist christians, but there's really no good reason why this should be the case. it is a simple logical disconnect -- $0.50 never equals $5.00. when you have the contract to compare the payment to, it's relatively easy to check. in this case, the "fulfilled" prophecy is zechariah 13. let's check it.

quote:
In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for purification and for sprinkling. And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered; and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land. And it shall come to pass that, when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begot him shall say unto him: 'Thou shalt not live, for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD'; and his father and his mother that begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth. nd it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be brought to shame every one through his vision, when he prophesieth; neither shall they wear a hairy mantle to deceive; but he shall say: 'I am no prophet, I am a tiller of the ground; for I have been made a bondman from my youth.' And one shall say unto him: 'What are these wounds between thy hands?' Then he shall answer: 'Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.' Awake, O sword, against My shepherd, and against the man that is near unto Me, saith the LORD of hosts; smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered; and I will turn My hand upon the little ones. And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; they shall call on My name, and I will answer them; I will say: 'It is My people', and they shall say: 'The LORD is my God.'

Zechariah 13 (full chapter)


since i know you didn't read that just now, i'll give you the cliffs notes.

  1. purification of the house of david (ie: the kings of judah) and the city of jerusalem
  2. end of false prophecy
  3. war comes to judah
  4. leader cursed by god
  5. 2/3rds of judah destroyed
  6. third part carried through, and purified as a result
now, there are two traditional readings of zechariah, and this part is generally relegated to the post-messianic section in both. but i'd like to suggest a different, more sensible reading.

because numbers 1 through 5 of those things actually happened in jewish history. josiah, king of judah and from the house of david, did in fact purify jerusalem, removed idols, and kill false prophets. after josiah's death, jehoahaz briefly reigns and then is succeeded by jehoiakim. babylon invades. jehoiakim is replaced by jeconiah, who is cursed by the prophet jeremiah. judah is carried off into babylonian exile, with about a 1/3rd of the population remaining under babylonian rule.

considering that zechariah is writing at the time of the babylonian exile, it's quite silly to think he's talking about something else that just happens to be almost identical to the major political situation in his world. zechariah is primarily concerned with re-establishing the temple in jerusalem, and purifying judaism, and when persia -- darius the great -- takes over, he is one of the people that helps establish second temple judaism.

but let's look at the shepherd again.

quote:
Awake, O sword, against My shepherd, and against the man that is near unto Me, saith the LORD of hosts; smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered; and I will turn My hand upon the little ones.

note the rest of the verse which has obviously been omitted in the "fulfilled prophecy". if we are to suppose that the shepherd is christ (and not the cursed king jeconiah, and not the coming messiah as in jewish tradition), where is the part where god smites the christians? surely, i have missed that part of the gospel. oh, and lest you think the "wounded hands" bit above is another random christ reference, remember that zechariah is talking about false prophets.

in closing this chapter just fits its historical context too well to even be prophecy (in the sense that you mean) in the first place. most of the part christ is claiming as fulfilled prophecy (by him) in mark had already been "fulfilled" well before zechariah even wrote. the only bit that zechariah is actually predicting is the return from exile, and the re-establishment of the jewish religion.

this is a bit like me saying, "i'll give you back that five dollars tomorrow", giving you back five dollars the next day, and then 600 years later also giving you a nickel so that my obligation has been fulfilled.

edit:

The Old Testament were the only scriptures there were at that time.

it's worth noting that the old testament likely wasn't fully canonized during the time of christ. there was quite a lot of debate during that period about what should go in the third section of jewish scripture.

christ refers repeatedly to "the law (torah) and the prophets (nevi'im)" which are two sections of jewish scripture. the law (torah) is the five "books of moses" and the prophets (nevi'im) are joshua, samuel/kings, isaiah, jeremiah, ezekiel, and the 12 minor prophets (including zechariah). the other books, like job, psalms, esther, ruth, etc, were likely not part of the official canon yet. jesus does refer to the psalms, however.

it's also worth noting that there is a wealth of extra-canonical literature that simply never made the cut.

Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by ICdesign, posted 12-06-2010 1:12 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 101 of 255 (597968)
12-26-2010 5:57 AM


isaiah 7, in dawn's thread.
i have officially given up trying to direct dawn to this thread. he wants to make claims regarding prophecy, but does not wish to participate in this thread where his claims and our arguments would be on-topic. at the same time, he wants to pretend like we don't have an argument, because we try to keep discussions in their appropriate tactics. this is a particularly devious debating technique, and one i suspect nearly everyone can see straight through.

however, in an effort to actually explain our argument in his thread, slightly off-topic though it may be, i have contributed a rather lengthy hand-holding reading comprehension analysis of isaiah 7 to his thread. it is complete with historical context showing how it was already fulfilled around the time it was given, and a demonstration regarding how it really cannot have anything to do with jesus.

people may wish to hold a more enlightened discussion on the topic here, in the appropriate thread. i imagine this will totally derail dawn's thread, as it has dome many a prophecy thread. as if dawn's thread was really ever on any rails to begin with, right?


אָרַח

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by arachnophilia, posted 12-28-2010 9:22 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 102 of 255 (598167)
12-28-2010 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by arachnophilia
12-26-2010 5:57 AM


isaiah 7:14, a more enlightened analysis
okay, so thanks to iTanakh, i have found a particularly interesting doctoral thesis on the topic of isaiah 7:14.

it's about 300 pages, so i haven't by any means read all of it yet. but i've skimmed through some important sections of the first two chapters, and it largely confirms what i've been saying. it does, however, hint at an interesting take on matthew's reading of isaiah 7:14, but does not seem to elaborate.

it quotes some scholarship (ch2, II, 1) that tries to affirm the nonsense that dawn has been spouting -- he doesn't get this stuff from nowhere. not scholarship, of course, but scholarship filtered through clergy, filtered through fundy pastors. of course, it goes on to rebut those claims in much the same way i have: i devalues the prophecy and turns it into nonsense, and prophets were not fortune-tellers.

in any case, the text argues, on the whole, that imanuel was king hezekiah. this in part due to the context of the two assyrian invasions, the structure of proto-isaiah, and some of the textual details. for instance, it affirms my less than standard analysis that הָרָה "is pregnant" is essentially present tense, while קָרָאת שְׁמוֹ "will call his name" is essentially future tense. (biblical hebrew lacks actual time-related tenses, but it's not too hard to figure out, and generally works much the same way as modern hebrew) the author also points to the fact that the LXX translations "you will call his name" and not "she will call his name", indicating that the LXX translators understood that king ahaz was the father -- imanuel was his son.

i would quote the pertinent sections, but copying is disabled. i don't particularly feel like finding a work-around, or re-typing it all myself. and if the author has copy-protected it, it's likely because he wants people to read it in its source.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by arachnophilia, posted 12-26-2010 5:57 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 236 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 202 of 255 (669846)
08-03-2012 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by ScottyDouglas
05-17-2012 1:24 PM


oh, are we doing this thread again?
ScottyDouglas writes:

Re: Isaiah 7
KJV-R (Webster) Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

This is what was fulfilled.

Mat 1:18-25

so my last contribution to this thread, almost two years ago, was this pair of posts: Message 101 and Message 102. the first post links to Message 385 in another thread, that rather thoroughly explains the translation and context of the verse. i suggest you read it, carefully, but the tl;dr version is that child is a clock for the prophecy, not the prophecy itself. the prophecy is that, roughly 13 years after israel and aram declared war on judah, israel would be destroyed by assyria. the war began in 732 BCE, and ended in 720 BCE when assyria destroyed israel. the child is inexorably linked to these two events, and thus cannot be jesus.

in fact, there is every reason to think that the child is king hezekiah, as the link in my second post supports.

Edited by arachnophilia, : link added for the lazy


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by ScottyDouglas, posted 05-17-2012 1:24 PM ScottyDouglas has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019