Spoken by the prophets? Yes, but where?

[Strider324]

You telling me what appeals to me is either a sorry attempt at mind reading - or just an intellectually lazy claim you can’t support without my input. I’ll let you clarify which it is.

 

[Matthias]

You telling me what appeals to me is either a sorry attempt at mind reading - or just an intellectually lazy claim you can’t support without my input. I’ll let you clarify which it is.

Does unbelief in God not appeal to you?

 

[Strider324]

Does unbelief in God not appeal to you?

No. What other naked assumptions would you like to make?

 

[Matthias]

No.

It isn’t appealing to me. If it isn’t appealing to you then why are you using the unbelief of the majority of Jews to support your atheism?

 

[talons]

What do you say specifically about Matthew 2:23?

“He came to a town called Nazareth and lived there. Then what had been spoken by the prophets was fulfilled, that Jesus would be called a Nazarene.”

(Matthew 2:23, NET)

What we have is a translation of the inspired word of God as delivered to us in the book of Matthew . Matthew has not been questioned as to being the author . Matthew said prophets as in plural , so was God revealing something to Matthew that we will never know , could be . All the words of God's prophets are not in the bible , not by a long shot I figure . We are told plainly we do not have all the things that Jesus did , which would surely include things He said .

25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

 

[Matthias]

What we have is a translation of the inspired word of God as delivered to us in the book of Matthew . Matthew has not been questioned as to being the author .

I agree.

Matthew said prophets as in plural , so was God revealing something to Matthew that we will never know , could be . All the words of God's prophets are not in the bible , not by a long shot I figure . We are told plainly we do not have all the things that Jesus did , which would surely include things He said .

25And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Thanks. When Matthew said prophets in the plural, I think he was probably referring to the collection of the writings by the major and minor prophets. It doesn’t require all of the prophets to say it, nor does it require more than one to say it. It is said somewhere in the works of the prophets.

None of the prophets explicitly say it. Not even one. We can quickly confirm this by consulting a Concordance.

It’s true that not all of the words of God’s prophets are preserved in the Bible. I take it that those which are essential for us to know have been preserved for us. (Search the scriptures to see if what is said is true.) Matthew had to have known that his remark would be challenged. “Show us that it is there” or “Show us where it is” would be reasonable requests. There is no record of that request being made. Whether it was or it wasn’t, I think Matthew would have anticipated it and been prepared to give an answer.

Who would ask him about it? The first ones which come to my mind are those who were not receptive of the remark. “God gave me a private revelation” isn’t going to persuade them. Matthew would like to persuade them.

But those who were receptive to the message should have inquired about it also. “God gave me a private revelation” would naturally evoke the suspicious question, “Why only to you? Why not to others also?” There might be a good answer for that but raising doubts in their minds isn’t a good way to try to persuade them.

Let’s try to put ourselves in a neutral position, as if we were hearing it ourselves for the very first time. (I know. That’s hard for us to do.) We’re Jews interested in what Matthew has said but we’re as yet undecided. We may or may not know about the tradition. We ask Matthew to elaborate on his remark.

Scenario 1. Matthew takes a deep breath, smiles and says, “It isn’t written in the scriptures which we have available to us. (Red flag?) I know it is there but it has been lost. (Red flag?) God told me about it in a dream. You’ll just have to take my word for it.” (We have a decision to make, and I’m leaning away.)

Scenario 2. Matthew takes a deep breath, smiles and says, “It is written in the scriptures which we have available to us. (Yellow flag?) It is found in Isaiah 11:1. Let’s read it together. (Green flag?) We read the passage with him and ask him to explain it to us. He does, pointing out the word-play in Hebrew. (We have a decision to make, and I’m leaning in.)

Was God revealing something to Matthew in a private revelation - which Matthew didn’t feel it important to point out to his audience - about some lost writing of the prophets? As you say, could be.

As a neutral but interested Jew, which would be you more drawn in by?

 

[Strider324]

It isn’t appealing to me. If it isn’t appealing to you then why are you using the unbelief of the majority of Jews to support your atheism?

What's appealing to me is living in Truth. And it's hardly appealing to me to live in a society where the majority consider me to be evil, blind, and foolish. This allegedly 'Christian' nation has said it would vote for a Muslim for president before an Atheist. So - not very appealing. The fact that the majority of Jews know that Jesus was not the Messiah offers zero support for my Atheism. All it does is inform my understanding that Christianity contains fatal flaws. Isaiah 7:14 is a perfect example. If you studied Biblical Hebrew under Jewish rabbis and scholars - you know that the perfect verb form rendering of 'harah' (to conceive) - as was always used in that verse prior to the Septuagint - indicates a completed action. So the honest translation should have been ...."the maid has conceived...". Whether the mistranslation into the Septuagint was an honest mistake or not - we may never know. But the fact remains that this is not a 'prophesy' of some birth 700 years later, rendering it worthless as a prophesy of any messiah, much less The Messiah. Further, any knowledgeable Jew - as the gospel authors and early church leaders are purported to have been - would have known of this error. That brings forth the likelihood of actual fraud. But I guess that's what happens when you invent a religion that depends on quote mining the OT to pretend it is speaking of your special 'Messiah' - while spitting on the teachings of those who have remained true to the original. Ay caramba - you can't even get 10 Christians in a room that can agree on which OT verses are Messianic. Is it 300? 600? 800? Or is every single verse a prophesy that points to Jesus, as a current wave of Christians claim? Since Judaism has never lied to me about the Messiah - and have the original Hebrew verse on their side - yes, I side with the Truth.

 

[Matthias]

What's appealing to me is living in Truth. And it's hardly appealing to me to live in a society where the majority consider me to be evil, blind, and foolish. This allegedly 'Christian' nation has said it would vote for a Muslim for president before an Atheist. So - not very appealing. The fact that the majority of Jews know that Jesus was not the Messiah offers zero support for my Atheism. All it does is inform my understanding that Christianity contains fatal flaws. Isaiah 7:14 is a perfect example. If you studied Biblical Hebrew under Jewish rabbis and scholars - you know that the perfect verb form rendering of 'harah' (to conceive) - as was always used in that verse prior to the Septuagint - indicates a completed action. So the honest translation should have been ...."the maid has conceived...". Whether the mistranslation into the Septuagint was an honest mistake or not - we may never know. But the fact remains that this is not a 'prophesy' of some birth 700 years later, rendering it worthless as a prophesy of any messiah, much less The Messiah. Further, any knowledgeable Jew - as the gospel authors and early church leaders are purported to have been - would have known of this error. That brings forth the likelihood of actual fraud. But I guess that's what happens when you invent a religion that depends on quote mining the OT to pretend it is speaking of your special 'Messiah' - while spitting on the teachings of those who have remained true to the original. Ay caramba - you can't even get 10 Christians in a room that can agree on which OT verses are Messianic. Is it 300? 600? 800? Or is every single verse a prophesy that points to Jesus, as a current wave of Christians claim? Since Judaism has never lied to me about the Messiah - and have the original Hebrew verse on their side - yes, I side with the Truth.

Only one sect of Judaism hasn’t lied to you about the Messiah.

 

[Strider324]

I’m not a mind reminder. I’m listening to a Jewish rabbi explain what Matthew is talking about.



The God of Judaism - whom you don’t believe exists - explains what went wrong in Judaism.

Cool. Can you direct me the verses in the OT where this god says Judaism got virtually every one of the attributes of the Messiah wrong.

 

[Matthias]

Cool. Can you direct me the verses in the OT where this god says Judaism got virtually every one of the attributes of the Messiah wrong.

Certainly not.

 

[Strider324]

Certainly not.

That's what I thought.

 

[Matthias]

That's what I thought.

Thank God for that.

 

[talons]

Let’s try to put ourselves in a neutral position, as if we were hearing it ourselves for the very first time. (I know. That’s hard for us to do.) We’re Jews interested in what Matthew has said but we’re as yet undecided. We may or may not know about the tradition. We ask Matthew to elaborate on his remark.

I have to ask are we the assembled Jews he is speaking to hearing the whole second chapter of Matthew or just the one verse 2:23 ?

 

[Matthias]

I have to ask are we the assembled Jews he is speaking to hearing the whole second chapter of Matthew or just the one verse 2:23 ?

I wouldn’t make any decision on just Matthew 2:23. I wouldn’t even make a decision on just the second chapter of Matthew.

I’m firmly grounded in the Hebrew Bible. Matthew 2:23 taken alone would have had me leaning away from the movement. Matthew would have had to have acted quickly to keep me engaged with his message.

 

[talons]

Matthew 2:23 taken alone would have had me leaning away from the movement. Matthew would have had to have acted quickly to keep me engaged with his message.

Just the one verse taken alone I agree probably leaning away . I think the reality is that Matthew would have delivered a concise message as Chapter two is even with out the linage in chapter one . In chapter 2 before Matthew gets to verse 23 he has already referenced prophets THREE times relating to Jesus . I would think if I was an unbelieving Jew my mind would be reeling if I understood what the other three prophet references pointed to in the OT and by the time I hear verse 23 I would be just thinking I will figure this one out later .

I wouldn’t make any decision on just Matthew 2:23. I wouldn’t even make a decision on just the second chapter of Matthew.

What if the convicting power of the Holy Spirit has you to where your whole being feels like it is on fire as Matthew reads the words to you and you KNOW it is truth he speaks ? It might just be decision time . We can't discount the power of God's word delivered under the anointed power of the Holy Spirit . You have stood in the pulpit and delivered the God's word to others so you know this .

 

[Matthias]

What if the convicting power of the Holy Spirit has you to where your whole being feels like it is on fire as Matthew reads the words to you and you KNOW it is truth he speaks ? It might just be decision time .

It would be for me, but I’m cautious in general about making any decision based on how my body feels. One of my best friends is a Mormon. We spoke often about such things and he gifted me a copy of the Book of Mormon and a copy of The Pearl of Great Price before he moved across the country with his family. The last thing he told before he left was that he hoped I would read them - everything would have been fine if he had left it at that, but he didn’t. He continued that I would know that it is true if I felt a knock on the back of my neck.

I still have the books in my personal library and read from them once in a while, if I happen to be speaking with a Mormon or just looking something up. I’ve not felt a knock on the back of my neck but, if I ever do, that wouldn’t persuade me that what I was reading is true.

We can't discount the power of God's word delivered under the anointed power of the Holy Spirit . You have stood in the pulpit and delivered the God's word to others so you know this .

Amen to that.