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

[St. SteVen]

The majority uses two rules for the Bible.

Rule number one: There is nothing wrong with the Bible.
Rule number two: If you find something wrong with the Bible, see rule number one.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

The gifts have everything to do with what was accomplished in and through his death. You may want to consider that in the mind of Paul he is capturing far more of the wisdom and purpose of God than is written with ink on a page. I've no doubt he has the whole Psalm in view in Ephesians 4.

Quote the part of the Psalm that makes this work.
And if so, why didn't Paul quote that part?

What you are suggesting seems to be a workaround to meet your presumption.

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

Here's another one in chapter five of Ephesians. (misquote)
What is this quoting?

Ephesians 5:14
This is why it is said:
“Wake up, sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

Isaiah 51:17
Awake, awake!
Rise up, Jerusalem,
you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord
the cup of his wrath,
you who have drained to its dregs
the goblet that makes people stagger.

Isaiah 52:1
Awake, awake, Zion,
clothe yourself with strength!
Put on your garments of splendor,
Jerusalem, the holy city.
The uncircumcised and defiled
will not enter you again.

Isaiah 60:1
“Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord rises upon you.


Here's an article trying to explain.

What scripture is Paul referring to in Ephesians 5:14?​

this is no direct quote of any biblical passage, so I imagine Paul simply puts it in his own words to apply it to the context. But what is 'it'; what scripture is he paraphrasing here which fully suits the context? Why is it an appropriate verse to quote in this context?

[

"For anything that becomes visible is light"

Paul is remarkably skilled at weaving together multiple themes in his exposition, truly a master! He treats the Word of God as fully authoritative, which allows him to uncover and illuminate the deeper principles carried into the New Testament. (Pun absolutely intended!)

 

[Hiddenthings]

Quote the part of the Psalm that makes this work.
And if so, why didn't Paul quote that part?

What you are suggesting seems to be a workaround to meet your presumption.

[

There’s no way around it.

Open your mind to the possibilities:

Christ truly died and was raised with Eternal Life. In doing so, he received many gifts: a name above all names, an inheritance, and more. And with that victory, he led many captive freeing those bound by the flesh to follow him.

It's about being guided by the Spirit which blows in any direction it so pleases. Paul is illuminating sections of OT scripture and opening its light to show you what was achieved in Christ.

 

[Hiddenthings]

@St. SteVen, it seems you're suggesting there’s a specific set of rules (unlike you I think) that governs how an Apostle should quote and interpret an Old Testament passage.

I can sense though it bothers you Paul isn't quoting word for word - lets take your example assuming Pauls mind is in at least Isaiah 60:1

Isaiah 60:1 (ESV):
“Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you.”

Ephesians 5:14 (ESV):
“Awake, O sleeper,
and arise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

Both texts are conveying the same message and who knows if I studied this more Indepth I might find Paul's mind is elsewhere in the OT writings.

The truths of these two texts are plain for all to see

• wakening from sleep / death → A call to spiritual resurrection
• Light has come / Christ shines → Christ as the light, fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy
• Glory of the Lord / Christ's shining → Christ as the manifestation of God's glory

It's rather beautiful is it not to think Paul can craft exposition like this?

If cynicism trumps divine wisdom, can you see how this could be a major stumbling stone in your reading and appreciation of the writings?

 

[Wick Stick]

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.

Have you considered the phenomenon of multiple fulfillment of prophecies?

I find it reasonable that the prophets may have prophesied about events of their own day, and also that those same prophesies may have been re-fulfilled in the life and works of Jesus.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. The original intention/understanding of the prophet isn't necessarily the ultimate intention/understanding of God who gave the prophecy.

 

[Wick Stick]

Here's another one in chapter five of Ephesians. (misquote)
What is this quoting?

Ephesians 5:14
This is why it is said:
“Wake up, sleeper,
rise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”

Isaiah 51:17
Awake, awake!
Rise up, Jerusalem,
you who have drunk from the hand of the Lord
the cup of his wrath,
you who have drained to its dregs
the goblet that makes people stagger.

Isaiah 52:1
Awake, awake, Zion,
clothe yourself with strength!
Put on your garments of splendor,
Jerusalem, the holy city.
The uncircumcised and defiled
will not enter you again.

Isaiah 60:1
“Arise, shine, for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord rises upon you.


Here's an article trying to explain.

What scripture is Paul referring to in Ephesians 5:14?​

this is no direct quote of any biblical passage, so I imagine Paul simply puts it in his own words to apply it to the context. But what is 'it'; what scripture is he paraphrasing here which fully suits the context? Why is it an appropriate verse to quote in this context?

[

Let's say that we accept the proposition that the apostles and other New Testament authors do not quote the Old Testament according to our own modern accepted principles for interpreting the Bible.

Shouldn't our next step be to re-think our modern principles for interpreting the Bible? Do we really think we know better than Matthew, John, or Paul?

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Quote the part of the Psalm that makes this work.
And if so, why didn't Paul quote that part?

What you are suggesting seems to be a workaround to meet your presumption.

There’s no way around it.

Open your mind to the possibilities:

I don't reject the NT passage. I reject the misappropriation of the OT passage.
Paul seems to be spouting from memory (or lack thereof) off the top of his head.
It's obvious that the OT passage had nothing to do with what he was writing about.
He's making a connection where none exists.

I feel a bit like the boy in the story of The King's New Clothes.

Christ truly died and was raised with Eternal Life. In doing so, he received many gifts: a name above all names, an inheritance, and more. And with that victory, he led many captive freeing those bound by the flesh to follow him.

It's about being guided by the Spirit which blows in any direction it so pleases. Paul is illuminating sections of OT scripture and opening its light to show you what was achieved in Christ.

I agree. That's not the issue.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

If cynicism trumps divine wisdom, can you see how this could be a major stumbling stone in your reading and appreciation of the writings?

I'm pointing out problems that others read right over.
I still appreciate the writings.

I don't reject the scriptures in question. Just wonder at the poor handling of OT scriptures.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Let's say that we accept the proposition that the apostles and other New Testament authors do not quote the Old Testament according to our own modern accepted principles for interpreting the Bible.

But a quote is a quote and a misquote is a misquote.
Same with a misappropriation. There should be an ethical treatment.

The fulfillment of an OT prophecy should be solid. IMHO
Should include:
- An OT scripture that says, In the future this will take place.
- A corresponding NT scripture that says, this took place to fulfill that OT scripture.

Shouldn't our next step be to re-think our modern principles for interpreting the Bible? Do we really think we know better than Matthew, John, or Paul?

I agree that we should consider the cultural and practical aspects of what we find.
But we could certainly do better than misquotes and misappropriations.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Here's another one. Out of curiosity.

Philippians 2:15 NIV
so that you may become blameless and pure,
“children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.”[a]
Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky

Deuteronomy 32:5 NIV
They are corrupt and not his children;
to their shame they are a warped and crooked generation.

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

Here's another one. Out of curiosity.

Philippians 2:15 NIV
so that you may become blameless and pure,
“children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.”[a]
Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky

Deuteronomy 32:5 NIV
They are corrupt and not his children;
to their shame they are a warped and crooked generation.

[

Paul draws on numerous Old Testament references in this exposition, so it's unreasonable to expect his Spirit-inspired words to conform to an unrealistic ideal that lacks any real merit at all. It's often taking the context of the OT and illunmiating into the context of the NT community.

What's ironic about the struggle you're expressing is that Paul's genius far surpasses ours, he knew the Old Testament by heart and could recite it in full! So your grievance isn't really with Paul, but with the Holy Spirit working through him to encourage and exhort both his original audience and us today.

In every case I'm assured you could find the truth of the matter - just need to remove this mind block.

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Here's another one. Out of curiosity.

Philippians 2:15 NIV
so that you may become blameless and pure,
“children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.”[a]
Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky

Deuteronomy 32:5 NIV
They are corrupt and not his children;
to their shame they are a warped and crooked generation.

Paul draws on numerous Old Testament references in this exposition, so it's unreasonable to expect his Spirit-inspired words to conform to an unrealistic ideal that lacks any real merit at all. It's often taking the context of the OT and illunmiating into the context of the NT community.

There's nothing unrealistic about expecting a quote to be an actual quote.
Anyway, this one is more out of curiosity than complaint.

What's ironic about the struggle you're expressing is that Paul's genius far surpasses ours, he knew the Old Testament by heart and could recite it in full! So your grievance isn't really with Paul, but with the Holy Spirit working through him to encourage and exhort both his original audience and us today.

Wow. Seriously?
If Paul knew the Old Testament by heart and could recite it, why did he misquote and misappropriate it?
And I am definitely not blaming the Holy Spirit for these problems. (observations)
I do wonder why they happened. It boils down to unethical journalism.
Possibly human meddling in the handling of these texts.

In every case I'm assured you could find the truth of the matter - just need to remove this mind block.

I'm not the one with the mind block. I can see what others read right past.

[

 

[Hiddenthings]

unethical journalism.

This made me smile, thanks, St.

God’s Word is a living, unfolding truth, like a scroll being unrolled, not a university assignment bound by referencing guidelines .

I think I’ll leave it here for now, I’m feeling the need to move on to weightier studies. Appreciate the conversation.

 

[Lambano]

@St. SteVen:
Not quoting scripture. ECHOING scripture. This literary technique uses similar phrasing to evoke mental cross-references with familiar passages of scripture.

Credit Richard Hays’ Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul for pointing this out. I will also note that Dr. Hays’ mom was a friend of mine; our Bible study group often met in her apartment. I miss her. She was a dear.

…

In my work with certain industry standards bodies, we use “shall” as a keyword to indicate that a particular section of a spec is considered normative and binding on the implementer versus merely informative text. I’ve often wondered if any of my colleagues have caught the echo of the “Thou shalt” (or “Thou shalt not”, future indicative rather than imperative voice) statements in the Bible?

 

[MatthewG]

@St. SteVen:
Not quoting scripture. ECHOING scripture. This literary technique uses similar phrasing to evoke mental cross-references with familiar passages of scripture.

Credit Richard Hays’ Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul for pointing this out. I will also note that Dr. Hays’ mom was a friend of mine; our Bible study group often met in her apartment. I miss her. She was a dear.

…

In my work with certain industry standards bodies, we use “shall” as a keyword to indicate that a particular section of a spec is considered normative and binding on the implementer versus merely informative text. I’ve often wondered if any of my colleagues have caught the echo of the “Thou shalt” (or “Thou shalt not”, future indicative rather than imperative voice) statements in the Bible?

Isn't that just Paraphrasing?

 

[Lambano]

Isn't that just Paraphrasing?

No, echo is different. The purpose is to evoke a mental connection between scripture and your subject in the mind of the reader.

 

[MatthewG]

No, echo is different. The purpose is to evoke a mental connection between scripture and your subject in the mind of the reader.

Can't connect stuff without the Spirit.

 

[marks]

I find it reasonable that the prophets may have prophesied about events of their own day, and also that those same prophesies may have been re-fulfilled in the life and works of Jesus

Certainly!

That Jesus was called out of Egypt, the prophecy when you first read it was historical of the Jews. "I shall be a Father to Him, and He shall be My Son", this was first spoken of Solomon.

I think this is a much better understanding of what we are talking about here. Not that the NT writers appropriated Scriptures to claim for prophecies, that weren't prophecies, as the OP asserts, which is to make the NT writings dishonest and untrue, but that some of these passages have a dual intent, as revealed by the NT writers.

In the one case, he declares the Bible false, in the other case, we affirm it's truth.

Much love!

 

[Lambano]

Can't connect stuff without the Spirit.

Oh, I can’t, can I? Here, hold my beer and watch this!