Fulfillments of Bible Prophecy

quote:

---

So you are saying Theology is as objective as Physics and Mathematics? Interesting. I guess I never knew that math could have multiple interpretations. Like 4+4 doesnt always = 8?

​

Laws of physics are just guidelines?

​

Because if Theology is as objective as Physics and Math then there must be lots of interpretations. Because there certainly are a lot of Theological interpretations. For example, look at evolution. The Catholic Church teaches that evolution fits perfectly fine within its theology, now the fundamentalist churches(some baptists, Missouri Synod, Lutheran Church) teach that evolution is not true and only the creation story of the bible is true. Now these religions are based on the same book. If that isn't subjective, what is?

​

Is your argument that the one is wrong? That they do not know true theology or know how to correctly do biblical interpretation.

---

I'm saying that both have only one correct interpretation. Finding this in Scripture is the job of biblical interpretation.

quote:

---

There is one way to correctly explain and interpret the symbols in Maxwell's equations. Any other explanation is objectively wrong.

---

And there is one way to correctly explain and interpret the symbols in Scripture. Any other explanation is objectively wrong, in exactly the same sense of "objective".

quote:

---

There are multiple ways to explain and interpret symbols in your bible.

---

Yes. Many are wrong.

quote:

---

There is no way to prove conclusively what is the "correct" way to interpret them.

---

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Some people ignore the disproofs, just as in science. (Have you heard of cold fusion?)

quote:

---

All explanations are subjective. If they weren't then there would be only one explanation.

---

False. Existence of many wrong explanations doesn't mean that the right explanation is subjective. Look at any disputed scientific claim for an analog. (Have you heard of cold fusion?)

quote:

---

To declare all others wrong and yourself correct is extremely arrogant. But typical christian.

---

I have not declared this. I maintain that one correct interpretation exists, not that I have necessarily found it with absolute certainty.Edited by kbertsche, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I didn't know that this forum was closed to anyone that disagreed with you.

---

Why would someone want to post in a forum subtitled "What does the Bible really mean?" when he believes that it doesn't really mean anything???

quote:

---

I am not arguing that people interpret the bible. My argument is that you cannot know the original intent of the write. You can infer a lot, but you can never KNOW for sure what the original intent is.

---

I understand your argument. I disagree completely. You argue not only against me, but against the entire field of biblical hermeneutics, a field which you do not seem to have studied or to understand very well.

I'll use the NET Bible for Scripture quotations; you can check it online at Matthew 1 | NET BibleI probably should have started with Is 52:13, because v. 14 has a prophecy of Jesus' execution: OK, now to Is 53:

quote:

---

The author of John said that even after the miraculous signs the people still would not believe in Jesus.

---

Exactly. Jn 12:38 matches Is 53:1a.

quote:

---

They didn't like verse 2 apparently

---

??? I don't know what you mean. My first verse-by-verse post was not claimed to be comprehensive. The "twig" (or "root" or "shoot") recalls the choosing of David as King (1 Sam 16:5-13) and was mentioned earlier in the book of Isaiah in a clear reference to the Messiah who was to come: This clarifies for us (in case we wondered) that Is 53 really is speaking of the Messiah.Next verse:

quote:

---

I don't see that the author deemed this a fulfillment. How does that verse make the Isaish 3 verse specifically about Jesus?

---

It seems like a pretty good match to me. This prophecy was fulfilled by Jesus.Next verse:

quote:

---

I don't see that this matches at all for what Jesus was doing.

---

It seems like a match to me; He healed people.But I agree with you that the rest of the verse seems to apply this to Jesus' substitutionary sacrifice, taking our sins on Himself: Perhaps the original prophecy has a dual reference (not uncommon in biblical prophecy).Next verse:

quote:

---

Paul doesn't claim this as a prophecy fulfillment of Isaiah.
The author of 1 Peter also does not claim this as a prophecy fulfillment.

---

??? I don't know what you're talking about. They may not specifically say "This is a fulfillment of prophecy", but they intentionally used phrases from the prophets, implicitly presenting this as a fulfillment of prophecy.

quote:

---

How does this fulfill one verse of Isaiah?

---

This seems to be a clear fulfillment of phrophecy. Isaiah was predicting Christ's vicarious suffering for our sins, and our vicarious healing as a result.Next verse:

quote:

---

Did Jesus claim to be taking all mankind's or believer's sins upon himself as a scapegoat to die with him on the cross?

---

Exactly. He took our sins on himself and died in our place. In return, He places His righteousness on us. This vicarious, substitutionary atonement is central to the gospel message.

quote:

---

You do realize that sin is not something that can be transferred don't you?

---

The fact that sin was transferred to Christ is central to the gospel!This takes us through Is 53:6. The next few verses are even more specific in describing Jesus, but the post is getting long, so I'll stop the verse-by-verse here for now and hope to pick it up later.A friend of mine wrote a summary of the prophecies of Jesus in Is 53. He identifies these:
1) Born humbly (v.2)
2) Lived sinlessly (v.9)
3) Rejected widely (v.3)
4) Tried unjustly (v.8)
5) Suffered silently (v.7)
6) Whipped cruelly (v.5)
7) Volunteered willingly (v.12)
8) Executed disgracefully (v.9)
9) Crucified vicariously (v.5)
10) Buried honorably (v.9)
11) Raised gloriously (v.12)
12) Forgives abundantly (v.11)My friend writes of the prophecies in Is 53, "There is only one person in recorded history to whom they can refer." Can you think of anyone other than Jesus who fits all of these descriptions?

quote:

---

I don't appreciate having to do this again with a different translation, but I will use the NET Bible as you wish. Once more with feeling.

---

Sorry! You're free to use your Septuagint translation if you wish, or you might like the NIV (I think it leans more heavily toward the Septuagint?) I prefer NET or NASB.It is best to work from the Hebrew, of course. Second best is to study a number of English translations. We are trying to get at the original meaning and message, and don't want to get misled by the wording of any particular translation.

quote:

---

That's past tense, not the future. ...
This rhetorical question is in the present, not future; so it has nothing to do with John 12:38. ...
Notice that the group is acknowledging that the servant suffered, not will suffer. Already done. ...
Please notice verse 53:2 is also past tense. He grew up, not will grow up.

---

Don't be so concerned about the English tenses. Here's where it is necessary to know a bit about biblical Hebrew. Hebrew verbs do not have past, present, and future tenses. They only have two "tenses", perfect and imperfect, which function differently than western tenses. Hebrew tenses do not designate time so much as certainty. Past events are generally (but not always) in the perfect. Future events are generally (but not always) in the imperfect. Divine prophecy, being certain, is usually in the perfect rather than the imperfect, and this is often translated to English as a past tense even though it was a future event at the time of writing.

quote:

---

The wording doesn't suggest an execution or described what we know of Jesus at his execution even poetically.

---

Sorry, my wording was probably not precise. Is 52:14-15 describes the events of Christ's passion, immediately before the cricifixion itself. There was scourging, beating, etc. as Mel Gibson showed in his movie "The Passion of the Christ".

quote:

---

So this also would not fit with Jesus. He didn't have a military.

---

This confused the Jews of the first century, too. This is suggested in Is 53:1--Messiah was not what they expected. Messiah was prophecied (and awaited) to be a king who would rule and set things right. Jesus was celebrated as this king only a week before His cricifixion, on what we call "Palm Sunday."This detail DOES fit with Jesus, its just that this part of the prophecy is yet future (see, e.g., the last few chapters of Zechariah, the books of 1 and 2 Thessalonians). He will return as the conquering King and will set things right.

quote:

---

saiah 11:1 just says the person will come from Jesse's line. They're an agricultural people, so their metaphors are derived from what they know. It isn't the same word used in Isaiah 53:2. The word used here describes a branch growing out of a tree. Family tree.

​

Isaiah 53:2 is saying he grew up just like a young plant grows up. The word used here describes a growing plant, not a tree. Yes, a tree is a plant, but that isn't the image the word is to present.

---

Good point--I hadn't noticed that the two words were different in the original.

quote:

---

The NET notes suggest that the root out of parched soil is a metaphor that suggests insignificance.

​

I don't think Jesus was ever portrayed as growing up insignificant

---

Yes he was. He was born in a stable and raised in a hick town, a backwater (see Jn 1:46).This prophecy was very unexpected for the future King of Israel (which is what Messiah was prophecied to be). Messiah would have a humble beginning, not a regal one. Jesus fulfilled this prophecy.