Of what value is the fulfillment of OT prophecy? - since the prophecies were acquired rather than intended

[St. SteVen]

How would it impact you personally if you could conclusively prove that the prophecies were divinely intended?

That's an interesting question, thanks.
I was already a believer before I knew anything about "fulfilled prophecy".
I learned about them as apologetics to prove that Christianity was true.

Later, in my own personal study, I discovered that something didn't add up.
The prophecies were not what we claimed in many cases.
It appeared that they were acquired rather than intended.
Meaning, the prophetic claims were concocted.

But to answer your question, no impact personally. As I said, I was already a believer.
My faith does not rest on the reliability of "fulfilled prophecy".

[

 

[MatthewG]

That's an interesting question, thanks.
I was already a believer before I knew anything about "fulfilled prophecy".
I learned about them as apologetics to prove that Christianity was true.

Later, in my own personal study, I discovered that something didn't add up.
The prophecies were not what we claimed in many cases.
It appeared that they were acquired rather than intended.
Meaning, the prophetic claims were concocted.

But to answer your question, no impact personally. As I said, I was already a believer.
My faith does not rest on the reliability of "fulfilled prophecy".

[

So you have no interest, in seeking out those notions either way despite what you rest your faith upon, Steven?

My question is this. Why?

You believe in some verses here and there of the bible, why not all of it?

 

[Hiddenthings]

That's an interesting question, thanks.
I was already a believer before I knew anything about "fulfilled prophecy".
I learned about them as apologetics to prove that Christianity was true.

Later, in my own personal study, I discovered that something didn't add up.
The prophecies were not what we claimed in many cases.

Do you have an example?

It appeared that they were acquired rather than intended.
Meaning, the prophetic claims were concocted.

But to answer your question, no impact personally. As I said, I was already a believer.
My faith does not rest on the reliability of "fulfilled prophecy".

[

Thanks

 

[St. SteVen]

Do you have an example?

Here are a couple. (we'll need to examine the context of the OT quotes)
Acquired rather than intended?

Mark 14:27 NET
Then[a] Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away, for it is written,
‘I will strike the shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered.’[b]

--- COMPARE ---

Zechariah 13:7 NET
“Awake, sword, against my shepherd,
against the man who is my associate,”
says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.
“Strike the shepherd that the flock may be scattered;[a]
I will turn my hand against the insignificant ones.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Matthew 1:23 NET
“Look! The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son,
and they will name him[a] Emmanuel,”[b] which means[c] “God with us.”[d]

--- COMPARE ---

Isaiah 7:14; 8:8, 10 NET
14 For this reason the Lord himself will give you a confirming sign.[a]
Look, this[b] young woman[c] is about to conceive[d] and will give birth to a son.
You, young woman, will name him[e] Immanuel.[f] ...
8 It will spill into Judah, flooding and engulfing, as it reaches to the necks of its victims.
He will spread his wings out over your entire land,[a] O Immanuel.”[b] ...
10 Devise your strategy, but it will be thwarted.
Issue your orders, but they will not be executed![a]
For God is with us![b]

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

Here are a couple. (we'll need to examine the context of the OT quotes)
Acquired rather than intended?

Mark 14:27 NET
Then[a] Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away, for it is written,
‘I will strike the shepherd,
and the sheep will be scattered.’[b]

--- COMPARE ---

Zechariah 13:7 NET
“Awake, sword, against my shepherd,
against the man who is my associate,”
says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.
“Strike the shepherd that the flock may be scattered;[a]
I will turn my hand against the insignificant ones.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Matthew 1:23 NET
“Look! The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son,
and they will name him[a] Emmanuel,”[b] which means[c] “God with us.”[d]

--- COMPARE ---

Isaiah 7:14; 8:8, 10 NET
14 For this reason the Lord himself will give you a confirming sign.[a]
Look, this[b] young woman[c] is about to conceive[d] and will give birth to a son.
You, young woman, will name him[e] Immanuel.[f] ...
8 It will spill into Judah, flooding and engulfing, as it reaches to the necks of its victims.
He will spread his wings out over your entire land,[a] O Immanuel.”[b] ...
10 Devise your strategy, but it will be thwarted.
Issue your orders, but they will not be executed![a]
For God is with us![b]

[

Are you suggesting that the prophecies in Zechariah and Isaiah were written, or perhaps added after the life, death, and resurrection of Christ?

 

[St. SteVen]

Are you suggesting that the prophecies in Zechariah and Isaiah were written, or perhaps added after the life, death, and resurrection of Christ?

No.
I'm suggesting that the "prophecies" were adapted (acquired) to add prophetic significance to NT events.
When Jews hear about these claims they say the OT scriptures have nothing to do with the prophetic claims.

Post #2 and #3 of this topic give 70 examples.

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

No.
I'm suggesting that the "prophecies" were adapted (acquired) to add prophetic significance to NT events.
When Jews hear about these claims they say the OT scriptures have nothing to do with the prophetic claims.

Post #2 and #3 of this topic give 70 examples.

[

Sorry, St. Steven, I’m not quite following your point about the word “acquired.”

Regardless of what the Jews say, this doesn’t diminish the significance or application of these prophecies for our faith, correct?

Maybe more explanation is required.

 

[St. SteVen]

Sorry, St. Steven, I’m not quite following your point about the word “acquired.”

It appears that the NT writers are recalling something in the OT scriptures to claim a fulfillment of "prophecy".
In some cases they are even misquotes. Here's a good example. Which is it, "gave gifts" or "received gifts"?

Ephesians 4:8 NIV
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

--- COMPARE ---

Psalm 68:18 NIV
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.

Regardless of what the Jews say, this doesn’t diminish the significance or application of these prophecies for our faith, correct?

I'm saying many of them have no significance or application to our faith at all. That's the problem.
As usual, we just believe what we have been told without applying any critical thinking.

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

It appears that the NT writers are recalling something in the OT scriptures to claim a fulfillment of "prophecy".
In some cases they are even misquotes. Here's a good example. Which is it, "gave gifts" or "received gifts"?

Ephesians 4:8 NIV
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

--- COMPARE ---

Psalm 68:18 NIV
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.


I'm saying many of them have no significance or application to our faith at all. That's the problem.
As usual, we just believe what we have been told without applying any critical thinking.

[

Okay I understand where you are coming from now, thanks.

Take your above example - now I'm only being the devil's advocate here, so please don't shoot me ;) but what if there was a good reason for the change? I'm not saying I have one, rather what if one existed and you accepted that reason.

I know of one such quote in Romans 11 which has very good reason for the change.

I'm also interested why you call these "misquotes"

 

[St. SteVen]

Okay I understand where you are coming from now, thanks.

Take your above example - now I'm only being the devil's advocate here, so please don't shoot me ;) but what if there was a good reason for the change? I'm not saying I have one, rather what if one existed and you accepted that reason.

I know of one such quote in Romans 11 which has very good reason for the change.

I'm also interested why you call these "misquotes"

The only good reason I can think of was that these quotes in the NT were divinely inspired as written.
But that the OT quotes were misquoted from memory. And/or the culture of that day put more stock in
the connection being made than the accuracy or intent of the original. ???
But it still boils down to misinformation at a minimum.

Someone pointed out that in one of my examples that it matched the Septuagint (Greek OT)

Ephesians 4:8 NIV
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

--- NO IT DOESN'T! ---

[

 

[St. SteVen]

The only good reason I can think of was that these quotes in the NT were divinely inspired as written.
But that the OT quotes were misquoted from memory. And/or the culture of that day put more stock in
the connection being made than the accuracy or intent of the original. ???
But it still boils down to misinformation at a minimum.

We have to remember that they didn't have the same tools we have today for accurate citations.
They would have to find the scroll.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Ephesians 4:8 NIV
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

--- NO IT DOESN'T! ---

What does this tell us about divine inspiration and inerrancy?

[

 

[St. SteVen]

I know of one such quote in Romans 11 which has very good reason for the change.

Let's discuss, if you like.

[

 

[lforrest]

You ascribe too much agency to the prophets, they just wanted to release the pressure that the Holy Spirit put on their soul.

The intention of the legitimate Old testament prophets was to speak the words God gave them to speak... As to remain silent as in Jeremiah 20:9, felt like fire in the bones. This is the result of the power of the Holy Spirit.

The same Spirit brings forth spontaneous praise and worship, which is prophetic as in the Psalms. Yet it is similar in the sense that it is an overflowing.

 

[St. SteVen]

You ascribe too much agency to the prophets, they just wanted to release the pressure that the Holy Spirit put on their soul.

The intention of the legitimate Old testament prophets was to speak the words God gave them to speak... As to remain silent as in Jeremiah 20:9, felt like fire in the bones. This is the result of the power of the Holy Spirit.

The same Spirit brings forth spontaneous praise and worship, which is prophetic as in the Psalms. Yet it is similar in the sense that it is an overflowing.

I couldn't agree more.
Do you agree that many of the OT prophecies used in the NT were acquired rather than intended? (by the OT Prophets)
I assume that's what you mean by ascribing too much agency. ???

[

 

[MatthewG]

I couldn't agree more.
Do you agree that many of the OT prophecies used in the NT were acquired rather than intended? (by the OT Prophets)
I assume that's what you mean by ascribing too much agency. ???

[

Steven,

Yahavah placing his wrath upon his own people, was because of their rejecting of the Messiah.


Are you cool with Yahavah pouring out the Wrath on his own people because of the covenant they had made prior?

Or is that just to barbaric?

 

[marks]

What an absolutely CRAZY thought with the above!

Your doubting about Old Testament prophecy reveals you treat what Apostle Peter said as a LIE!

2 Peter 1:20-21
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
KJV

How utterly rebellious one is against God by even suggesting that those Old Testament prophets got those prophecies from any other... source than GOD Himself!!!

Yes, the OP posits that what we call prophecy was actually OT jargon stolen and relabeled, yet one more thread to cast doubt on the Bible, and on God. That seems to be what this member is here for, given the number of these sorts of threads.

This is continued attack on God and His Word, and on His children.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Sorry, St. Steven, I’m not quite following your point about the word “acquired.”

Regardless of what the Jews say, this doesn’t diminish the significance or application of these prophecies for our faith, correct?

Maybe more explanation is required.

What he is saying is that the OT writers were not writing prophecy about Jesus, but were writing other things. Then the NT writers came along and plucked out parts that were not prophecy about Jesus, saying that they were, making out the NT writers to be liars.

I'd call that heresy, and the promoter of such suggestions an heretic.

Much love!

 

[lforrest]

I couldn't agree more.
Do you agree that many of the OT prophecies used in the NT were acquired rather than intended? (by the OT Prophets)
I assume that's what you mean by ascribing too much agency. ???

[

No, by agency I mean their will to influence what their prophecies were about. They would not have control.

As for any stories or prophecies that may have proceeded biblical prophecy, I have no problem with God having prophets outside of Israel that were told mysteries before. I also expect all those prophecies were in some way corrupted if not by the prophet themselves, then by the rulers or in the oral tradition.. Israel had the structure in place to preserve the biblical prophecies. And they treat the words of God with reverence.

 

[St. SteVen]

Yes, the OP posits that what we call prophecy was actually OT jargon stolen and relabeled, yet one more thread to cast doubt on the Bible, and on God. That seems to be what this member is here for, given the number of these sorts of threads.

This is continued attack on God and His Word, and on His children.

Wrong.
I am pointing out questionable claims made about the Bible.
Do you have answers to the questions on posts #2 and #3?

[