|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
Play online chess!
Messianic Prophecies
« Back to club forum
| |||||||
| From | Message | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
 Vic 04:10 & 04:15Your question assumes that Daniel was written in Babylon. But leaving that to one side, I point out that there WAS no Julian Calendar date at the time. If perchance someone with genuine astronomical and calendrical expertise can provide what that date would have been IF the Julian calendar was in operation, I could be convinced. But the mish-mash of different calendars given in the 'explanation' destroys the credibility of your post. But even given that might be true, there would be no difficulty in a 2nd-century author accessing this date and quoting it. That doesn't justify the arbitrary fiddling and switching between calendars and the choice of 'key dates' that just happen to fit together (once shoe-horned). I get back to the basic question. Where is the Sitz im Leben? <I’d rather focus on Daniel 9:24-27 as a potential (in my view actual) Messianic prophecy than broaden the scope to the entire book of Daniel.> In other words, you would rather ignore context so you can 'interpret' to get the desired result. I repeat what I said (perhaps not so clearly) earlier. I do not doubt that there are Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament. But I don't see them as future-telling party tricks. I see them as godly men grappling with God's purposes in the world, confident that He will work His purposes in ways they see only dimly. The Bible is NOT 'history in advance', like some prediction of planetary alignments. You have been infected too deeply by the Scientific mindset without even realising it. |
||||||
|
But to get to the relevant part of your post at 04:36… Am I understanding you correctly that it’s not possible to convert dates before the Julian calendar existed onto the Julian calendar? |
||||||
|
This imo is a standard (likely universal) definition… <<Messianic prophecy refers to biblical prophecies, particularly in the Old Testament, that predict the coming and nature of the Messiah, often interpreted by Christians to refer to Jesus Christ.>> Your definition… “…godly men grappling with God's purposes in the world, confident that He will work His purposes in ways they see only dimly.” …seems to nearly entirely ignore the predictive nature of Messianic prophecies and does not at all acknowledge that Messianic prophecies by definition are about a Messiah. |
||||||
|
How so? Predicting the date of when “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem … the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times” or knowing the date as an historical fact doesn’t affect the prophecy in the least – mainly because the end point of the prophecy is not an historical fact when the prophecy was written, regardless of whether it was written in the 6th century B.C. or mid-2nd century B.C. <<But leaving that to one side, I point out that there WAS no Julian Calendar date at the time. If perchance someone with genuine astronomical and calendrical expertise can provide what that date would have been IF the Julian calendar was in operation, I could be convinced. But the mish-mash of different calendars given in the 'explanation' destroys the credibility of your post.>> It really isn’t when you understand that the entire point of using the Jewish calendar in use back then is to determine **how many days are between the starting point of the prophecy and ending point of the prophecy (as far as the Messiah is concerned.)** And that is easily calculated because a prophetic year lasted 360 days, and the number of years according to the prophecy is 483 years. Thus 483 years x 360 days = 173,880. The prophecy is therefore saying 173,880 days are between “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem…the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times” and the crucifixion of the Messiah Now that we know how many days exist, we need only count those days on a Julian calendar **assuming the start date of March 14, 445 B.C. Is correct.** The only adjustments that need to be made when counting 173,880 days on the Julian calendar are to realize years are 365 days long (not 360 days long) and leap years exist. It’s really straightforward. The only questionable point is the starting date on the Julian calendar. I’m not sure how March 14, 445 B.C. was arrived at (I understand what the proposed Jewish date was but am not sure how that was converted to the Julian date,) but can check that out over the weekend. I have seen variations of that starting date on the Jewish and Julian calendars but am not sure if the variations are due to a different commandment being used or a different way of calculating the Julian date from the same commandment. |
||||||
|
“And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king. Now I had not been beforetime sad in his presence. Wherefore the king said unto me, Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? this is nothing else but sorrow of heart. Then I was very sore afraid, And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers' sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire? Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the God of heaven. And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers' sepulchres, that I may build it. And the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time. Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah; And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the king's forest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the palace which appertained to the house, and for the wall of the city, and for the house that I shall enter into. And the king granted me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.” (Nehemiah 2:1-8) Artaxerxes the king of Persia started his reign in 465 B.C., so the twentieth year of his reign would be 445 B.C. From AI: <<In the Bible, Artaxerxes I reigned from 465 to 424 BCE. He is mentioned in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah as the king who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple and the walls of the city.>> Nisan 1 in 445 B.C. was March 14 on the Julian calendar. From AI… <<On the Julian calendar, Nisan 1 in 445 BC corresponds to March 14, 445 BC. The Persian edict to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, which began on Nisan 1, was decreed on this date.>> While we don’t have the Jewish dates of when Artaxerxes was king of Persia, I don’t think we need them. The Persians used the Babylonian calendar in 445 B.C. and the Babylonian calendar is similar to the Julian calendar in that both have 365 days per year and 12 months per year. |
||||||
|
Vic Of course it's possible. It's also possible to get it wrong. But even that is irrelevant to my main points. 1. ANYTHING can be a prediction of the future if you are allowed as many arbitrary inputs as this scheme. One workmate tried to tell me how unlikely it is that a 'prophecy' could be so 'incredibly accurate', when his interpretation of some detail (I forget what it was) 'predicted' that detail. So I invited him to write two numbers on a piece of paper; the first was between 20 and 500, the second between 2 and 40. He did this. I then took out my first Rome book ('Silo and Sulla') and said "I will now turn to the page number the same as your first number, and count down to the printed line of your second number. The paragraph containing that line will also contain a prophecy." "Yeah, sure!" We did that. The paragraph spoke of a Roman commander who had something like ten legions on the spot and another two in reserve. "Where's the prophecy?" he sneered. "Give me five minutes. Your interpretation took more than five minutes to work out." I looked up my concordance for the reference and within a minute I was back with him. "A total of twelve legions were available to this commander. Now look up Matt. 26:53, where Jesus says 'Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?'" Given enough time, ingenuity and freedom to pick what details are important and which can be ignored, virtually anything can be turned into a 'prophecy'. As I said earlier, "I don't see (prophecy) as future-telling party tricks. I see them as godly men grappling with God's purposes in the world, confident that He will work His purposes in ways they see only dimly." Everything you said in your posts 4:45, 5:15, 18:14 and 18:56 completely ignores this key consideration. In the process of making this into a 'prediction', you are ignoring the writer's purpose. |
||||||
|
“And whiles I was speaking, and praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the Lord my God for the holy mountain of my God; Yea, whiles I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation. And he informed me, and talked with me, and said, O Daniel, I am now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. At the beginning of thy supplications the commandment came forth, and I am come to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved: therefore understand the matter, and consider the vision.” (Daniel 9:20-23) It appears you have no interest in discussing this, as you’ve imo said nothing to challenge this Messianic prophecy and apparently don’t understand the prophecy is from Gabriel, whom Daniel saw in a vision and who gave Daniel the prophecy. And there are no “arbitrary inputs” in this Messianic prophecy, but it seems pointless to discuss this with you because you’re mischaracterizing the prophecy and don’t seem to think Messianic prophecies have anything to do with a Messiah – even when the word “Messiah” is in the prophecy! |
||||||
|
Calendars Think about it! That means a seven-year slippage. Each solar year, one calendar would slip 5 days further behind the other. When do we sow crops? When do we harvest? This is an absurdity! For seven complete cycles, midwinter and midsummer would creep past each other. You say yourself that the Babylonians had a 365-day year. And Daniel does NOT say 'prophetic year'; he says 'year'. Where is your principle that the Bible is to be taken literally wherever possible? Instead you play games with counting days instead of taking Daniel at his word! I will agree that there is the concept of a 'prophetic year' in the Revelation to John; but that is apocalyptic, and intended to by symbolic rather than literal. And Daniel only mentions this in its own apocalyptic passages, which (being aplocalypse) should also be taken symbolically. So why not take these Daniel passages as being either symbolic (i.e., not literal) or literal (i.e., a year is a year is a year, from one growing season to the next growing season). But this 'interpretation' does neither. Not that I'm too fussed even if (by co-incidence, or Divine Providence) this interpretation turns out to be accurate to the nanosecond. My problem is that this approach to prophecy positively distracts the reader's attention to what the prophet is trying to teach. It is atrocious exegesis. It is an abuse of the Bible, to make it jump through hoops rather than hearing what it has to say. By-the-way, you who would complain about being 'misrepresented'; don't misrepresent my understanding of prophecy. by quoting one of my descriptions and saying it was my 'definition'. |
||||||
|
More false accusations, Bob? It appears you can’t help yourself. The Babylonian calendar is only relevant in determining when Artaxerxes was king in Persia. And the Jews used a 360-day year at the time of Daniel. <<Anderson, using a 360-day year (which Israel used in Daniel’s day), calculated 173,880 days from the decree to the triumphal entry, fulfilling the prophecy to the day. “It is customary for the Jews to have twelve months of 360 days each and then to insert a thirteenth month occasionally when necessary to correct the calendar.” (Walvoord)>> enduringword.com From AI… <<In ancient Israel, specifically during the Old Babylonian period and earlier, a 360-day year, composed of 12 months of 30 days, was used for administrative purposes, particularly in areas like accounting, taxation, and long-term planning. This system coexisted with a lunar calendar. The 360-day year was also used in the Genesis account of the flood, illustrating the 150-day interval until the water abated.>> What is important is **the number of days** that the prophecy says exists between “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem … the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times” and the Messiah. **That number of days (173,880) is the same regardless of whether the Jewish calendar or Julian calendar is used.** The Jewish calendar of 360-day years is used to determine the number of days, and that number of days is then used on the Julian calendar. |
||||||
|
<<My problem is that this approach to prophecy positively distracts the reader's attention to what the prophet is trying to teach.>> The prophet Daniel is not trying to teach anything in Daniel 9:24-27. He’s relaying a vision that he received from Gabriel about when the Messiah would arrive. |
||||||
|
Vic In your 18:56 post you said "The Persians used the Babylonian calendar in 445 B.C. and the Babylonian calendar is similar to the Julian calendar in that both have 365 days per year and 12 months per year." So where is the 'false accusation'? Don't you know what you have posted yourself? I was also impressed that you quote Walvoord as your authority. (never mind such 'carnal' techniques as reading from recognised scholars!) Because Walvoord is well-recognised as being a leading light of the Dispensationalist, Rapture-proclaiming fringe. Like someone not a million miles from my current location, he was absolutely certain of what he believed and could interpret any scripture to prove it. <What is important is **the number of days** that the prophecy says exists between “the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem … the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times” and the Messiah.> 1. If the number of days is important, then why didn't Daniel say the number of days? Why resort to 'a time, times and half a time' language? That's what apocalypse writers do as a symbolic gesture, not a chronicler doing history-in-advance! Answer:- because inserting the idea of 'prophetic years' and playing switcheroo with calendars is the only way we can get it to fit. (For those who are wondering, this 'time, times and half a time' is intended to convey an extended (but still finite) duration. "It will go on for a while, then for an even longer time after that, and then some more; but it will end eventually." It a call for endurance, to be in there for the long haul. "It's a marathon, not a sprint.") 2. If this is a prediction of the Messiah, then why not his birth? Why not the start of his public ministry? Why not the Resurrection, or the Ascension? Why his death? Answer:- because the interpreters managed to twist the dates (aided by quite a few assumptions on the way) to make this credible. Therefore, as the only event that fits their preconceptions, it MUST be what Daniel prophesied! So many ungrounded assumptions! So many arbitrary selections! So much twisting of the wording! All to distract from what the prophet was telling his contemporaries. Daniel was giving an assurance that God is in control and will win over evil (the common purpose of all apocalyptic); "So hang in there guys!" But these modern-day 'interpreters would rather read it as an intellectual puzzle for them, to play counting games in their armchairs. What could be further from the lived reality of Daniel's original readers! <That number of days (173,880) is the same regardless of whether the Jewish calendar or Julian calendar is used.> Yes; and that 'number of days' is calculated on the basis of false assumptions, therefore the conclusion is invalid. Meanwhile, I'm still wondering why this 'prophecy' isn't claimed in any of the Gospels or other New Testament writings. None of the sub-apostolic writers, nor the Apologists such as Tertullian, nor the Church Fathers mention it, even though it would have been considered conclusive proof. It seems to have popped up to prominence only with the influence of Darby, Scofield and other Dispensationalists. The Scientific Method applied to very unscientific writings. |
||||||
|
Vic 21:13 1. Thank you for proving my case. You show that you don't look for any teaching here. 2. <when the Messiah would arrive.> Read your own posts again! You earlier said this prophecy is about when the Messiah would be crucified; now you're saying it is about when he would arrive. You keep logging these self-contradictions! |
||||||
|
<<Yes; and that 'number of days' is calculated on the basis of false assumptions, therefore the conclusion is invalid.>> What false assumptions? The number of days is calculated on 69 “weeks” of 360-day years. 69 x 7 = 483 years. 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days. Where are the false assumptions? The math is straightforward. And this is a very straightforward prophecy. It gives the starting point (the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem, the time of which is identified in Nehemiah 2) and the ending point (the Messiah.) And yes, I did mistakenly attribute the end point to Jesus Christ’s crucifixion when it was actually (in Anderson’s view) His triumphal entry into Jerusalem only days earlier. Here are the relevant words from the prophecy… <<Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself:” (Daniel 9:25-26a) Obviously “unto the Messiah the Prince” leaves open what time in Jesus’ life this refers to, but I think it’s evident it refers to public knowledge of Him being the Messiah. And His triumphal entry into Jerusalem was certainly a public demonstration of that. It can’t refer to the crucifixion of Jesus (or any point after that) because the crucifixion is in the following verse when Daniel speaks of the Messiah being “cut off.” <<1. Thank you for proving my case. You show that you don't look for any teaching here>> Daniel is relaying a vision from Gabriel. Just read the verses right before the prophecy. |
||||||
|
The first verse of this prophecy… “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.” (Daniel 9:24) …seems a lot more substantive and specific than “So hang in there guys!” |
||||||
|
Vic This gets back to something I mentioned a short time back. You concentrate on the words, like a genuine literalist. That's why you hand-copy the text, and rely on proof-text upon proof text when pushing an opinion. I concentrate on what the text meant to the writer and first readers, and why I rely on historical, cultural and literary context. This became obvious (yet again!) in our posts above:- Bob:- "My problem is that this approach to prophecy positively distracts the reader's attention to what the prophet is trying to teach." Vic:- "The prophet Daniel is not trying to teach anything in Daniel 9:24-27." In summary, I understand what you are saying. You want a specific prophecy there, and you'll dig one out no matter what. But I maintain that a contextual reading is a better approach. Meanwhile, you don't understand what I'm saying, because you refuse to let it through your filters. Instead, you reject anything that doesn't agree with your own position. In al our discussions, I can't recall any time when you seriously critiqued my position. At best you regarded it as a contradiction to your own position, and therefore wrong; usually you simply ignored it and double-down on your own understanding. I have grown accustomed to that. I know I can't convince you of anything, so I don't really try. Instead I use our discussions to show third parties who might be interested the difference between thinking critically vs reciting dogma. Anyway, I think I'm done with this topic now. |
||||||
|
<<Yes; and that 'number of days' is calculated on the basis of false assumptions, therefore the conclusion is invalid.>> As I said, the number of days is calculated on 69 “weeks” of 360-day years. 69 x 7 = 483 years. 483 years x 360 days = 173,880 days. Where are the false assumptions? As for your “quoting” me here… <<Vic:- "The prophet Daniel is not trying to teach anything in Daniel 9:24-27.">> Why did you not quote my response in full? <<The prophet Daniel is not trying to teach anything in Daniel 9:24-27. He’s relaying a vision that he received from Gabriel about when the Messiah would arrive.>> And you just can’t resist another false accusation… <<…the difference between thinking critically vs reciting dogma.>> No dogma from me. Just a straightforward review of a widely-recognized Messianic prophecy… From AI… <<Yes, Daniel 9:24-27 is widely considered a messianic prophecy. It outlines specific events and timelines related to the coming of the Messiah, including his arrival, his death, and the ultimate establishment of God's kingdom. Here's a breakdown of why it's seen as such: The "Seventy Weeks" Prophecy: The passage introduces the concept of "seventy weeks" (490 years), which are decreed for "your people and your holy city". Objectives of the Seventy Weeks: The prophecy details several key objectives to be fulfilled within these seventy weeks: to finish transgression, put an end to sin, atone for iniquity, bring in everlasting righteousness, seal vision and prophet, and anoint a most holy place. The Messiah's Role: The prophecy specifically mentions the "Messiah the Prince" (Daniel 9:25) and the "anointed one" (Daniel 9:26), who will be "cut off" (killed) and will have nothing (Daniel 9:26). Historical Fulfillment: Many interpret these verses as fulfilled in the life and death of Jesus Christ, who is seen as the Messiah. Connection to the New Testament: The New Testament connects events described in Daniel 9:24-27 to the ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus. In essence, Daniel 9:24-27 provides a framework for understanding the timing and nature of the Messiah's arrival, death, and subsequent reign, making it a crucial passage in messianic prophecies.>> You: <<Anyway, I think I'm done with this topic now.>> Understood and thanks. I’ll continue posting Messianic prophecies from the Old Testament as the Spirit moves me. |
||||||
|
<<Daniel 9: The Timing of Messiah When it comes to Messianic prophecy, you might wonder, Since the Messiah is so central to God’s redemptive plan, did the Old Testament provide any clues about when He would come? The answer is yes! The clearest prophecy in Scripture about when the Messiah would come is found in Daniel 9:24-27. You may have heard this passage referred to as the 70-Weeks Prophecy. Don’t worry – you don’t need to do complicated calculations to understand this Messianic prophecy or to share it with your Jewish friends. We can discover the timing of the Messiah from a straightforward interpretation of the text. Background of Daniel 9 At the beginning of Daniel 9, Daniel has been reading the words of Jeremiah, who prophesied that the Babylonian exile would last 70 years (Jeremiah 25:11; 29:10). Daniel realizes that the 70 years are almost over and he responds by turning to God in prayer and repentance. He asks God to forgive the Jewish people and to turn His anger away from Jerusalem, emphasizing that this plea is not “based on any merits of our own, but based on Your great compassion” (verse 18). God responds by sending the angel Gabriel to Daniel with a prophecy. We read Gabriel’s words in Daniel 9:24: “Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the wrongdoing, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for guilt, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy Place.” Notice how these 70 weeks aren’t just about forgiveness for previous sins, but rather a total end to sin and the bringing in of eternal righteousness. God was going to do something unprecedented that would change the way He related with His people. Next, the 70 weeks are broken down into three periods of time. In the first seven and 62 weeks, Jerusalem will be rebuilt. Then, in Daniel 9:26, we get to the part about the Messiah: “Then after the sixty-two weeks, the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined.” God was telling Daniel that yes, Jerusalem and the Temple would be rebuilt, but they would also be destroyed again. Looking at history, we know that both the Second Temple and Jerusalem were destroyed by the Romans in AD 70. Since the prophecy tells us “the Messiah will be cut off” before these events, the Messiah must have come before AD 70. In the phrase “cut off and have nothing” we see also a hint towards the fact that not only will Messiah come at this time, but He will also die. Using Daniel 9 in Evangelism This is a powerful prophecy to point to when sharing the gospel with our Jewish friends! It comes from the Hebrew Scriptures and gives a clear time frame for the Messiah, giving strong evidence for Jesus as the one who fulfilled it. The 70-Weeks Prophecy concludes with a description of the “abomination of desolation (verse 27). While end-times prophecy can often be our focus when reading the book of Daniel, we shouldn’t overlook verses like Daniel 9:26 that provide important clues about the Messiah’s first coming. As you have conversations with Jewish people, look for opportunities to share the prophecy in Daniel 9 with them. The Messiah had to come before AD 70 and fulfill other Messianic credentials. Based on this prophecy, you can raise the question of who the Messiah is and listen to how your Jewish friend responds. This could open the way for you to share other Messianic prophecies and lead to conversations about Jesus and the gospel.>> <<Many Jewish people are still waiting for the Messiah today, and some might be surprised to find their own Scriptures teaching that He has already come. As you seek to reach your Jewish friends and neighbors, pray that God will open their hearts to the Good News of what Jesus has done for us.>> www.lifeinmessiah.org. |
||||||
|
“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14) “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.” (Isaiah 9:6-7) That God has a Son (relationally and not biologically as God the Father is a Spirit) is seen in the Old Testament most explicitly imo in Proverbs… “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?” (Proverbs 30:4) The Son of God is also referenced in the Old Testament in Daniel, which was written about 530 B.C., www.gotquestions.org when three Jewish men are thrown into a furnace for refusing to fall down and worship a statue of a king… “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up. Then was Nebuchadnezzar full of fury, and the form of his visage was changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: therefore he spake, and commanded that they should heat the furnace one seven times more than it was wont to be heated. And he commanded the most mighty men that were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to cast them into the burning fiery furnace. Then these men were bound in their coats, their hosen, and their hats, and their other garments, and were cast into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. Therefore because the king's commandment was urgent, and the furnace exceeding hot, the flames of the fire slew those men that took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. And these three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, and rose up in haste, and spake, and said unto his counsellors, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king. He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.” (Daniel 3;16-25) |
||||||
|
I didn’t realize Islam also believed Jesus to have been born of a virgin… <<The virgin birth of Jesus is the Christian and Islamic teaching that Jesus was conceived by his mother, Mary, through the power of the Holy Spirit and without sexual intercourse.>> en.m.wikipedia.org |
||||||
|
biblehub.com But “virgin” seems to me to be a better translation because… • The word “Behold” in the prophecy indicates something very significant and remarkable is about to follow. And while unmarried Jewish women back then were assumed to be virgins, I can’t see that a young unmarried Jewish woman being pregnant by natural means would warrant the word “Behold” preceding it. • When the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek by Hebrew scholars and Jewish rabbis 200+ years before Jesus’ “birth” to the Virgin Mary, the translators used the Greek word for “virgin” and not “young woman.” www.gotquestions.org • The New Testament authors back up Jesus being born of a virgin in both the narrative of Mary’s pregnancy and the genealogies of Jesus. “And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:26-35) The genealogies are found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. • As far back as Genesis, the Saviour is described as “the seed of a woman” when I think it was much more common to refer to children as the seed of a man. “And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” (Genesis 3:14-15) From AI… <<Genesis 3:14-15 describes God's curse on the serpent (Satan) after the fall of Adam and Eve. It outlines a prophecy of "enmity" between the serpent and the woman, and between their offspring, culminating in a future conflict where the offspring of the woman (Jesus) will ultimately bruise (defeat) the serpent's head, while the serpent will bruise the heel of the offspring. Here's a more detailed breakdown: Genesis 3:14: God curses the serpent, stating he will crawl on his belly and eat dust for the rest of his life, symbolizing his degradation and subjugation. Genesis 3:15: God declares a fundamental conflict: "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring." This signifies a lasting hostility between Satan and humanity, as well as a future battle between their respective followers. The key is that the offspring of the woman will ultimately bruise (defeat) the serpent's head, while the serpent will only inflict a temporary injury (bruising) on the heel of the offspring. Prophetic Interpretation: This verse is widely interpreted as a prophecy pointing to the future arrival of Jesus, the Messiah. Jesus, as the ultimate offspring of the woman, would defeat Satan and his forces through his death and resurrection. Gospel Connection: Genesis 3:15 is often seen as the first hint at the "gospel," the good news of redemption and reconciliation between God and humanity through Jesus.>> Obviously, Genesis was not only written well before the New Testament but also well before Isaiah. • Joseph, Mary’s fiancée at the time he learned she was pregnant, had the right to back out of the marriage and was considering it, but decided against it after a visitation by Gabriel (the same angel who gave Daniel the prophecy of when the Messiah would appear.) • It appears most Bible translations, including Young’s Literal Translation and the Literal Standard Version, the latter of which describes itself as “the most literal translation of the Bible into the modern English language” en.m.wikipedia.org use the word “virgin” and not “young woman” in Isaiah 7:14. • If the sin nature of humans is passed to subsequent generations by the male, Jesus could not have been sinless if He had an earthly father. As an old saying goes, “We’re not sinners because we sin. We sin because we’re sinners.” Many Bible commentators view Isaiah 7:14 as a “double prophecy,” with the other prophecy pertaining to Aram and Israel not being successful in conquering Jerusalem. |
||||||
|
The book of Isaiah was written about 700 B.C. www.gotquestions.org Here is Isaiah 50:6-9 with a commentary from enduringword.com after those verses… “I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting. For the Lord God will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed. He is near that justifieth me; who will contend with me? let us stand together: who is mine adversary? let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord God will help me; who is he that shall condemn me? lo, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up.” (Isaiah 50:6-9) <<a. I gave My back to those who struck Me, and My cheeks to those who plucked out the beard; I did not hide My face from shame and spitting: This prophecy speaks in chilling detail of the sufferings of the Messiah. We know that Jesus was beaten on the back (Mark 15:15). We know Jesus was beaten on the face (Luke 22:63-65). We know that Jesus was mocked and spat upon (Mark 15:19-20). i. There is no specific mention in the gospels of those who plucked out the beard of Jesus as part of His pre-crucifixion suffering, but from this passage in Isaiah we know it happened. What terrible agony Jesus endured! It is even more than what the gospel writers explain to us! “We have before us the language of prophecy, but it is as accurate as though it had been written at the moment of the event. Isaiah might have been one of the Evangelists, so exactly does he describe what our Saviour endured.” (Spurgeon) ii. “He suffered the deepest humiliation, for to pluck out the hair (of the beard) and to cover someone’s face with spit was, according to Near-Eastern concepts, the most humiliating suffering that could be inflicted upon a man.” (Bultema) iii. “Many of us could give to Christ all our health and strength, and all the money we have, very heartily and cheerfully; but when it comes to a point of reputation we feel the pinch. To be slandered, to have some filthy thing said of you; this is too much for flesh and blood. You seem to say, ‘I cannot be made a fool of, I cannot bear to be regarded as a mere impostor;’ but a true servant of Christ must make himself of no reputation when he takes upon himself the work of his Lord. Our blessed Master was willing to be scoffed at by the lewdest and the lowest of men.” (Spurgeon) iv. Notice it carefully: I gave My back means that Jesus did it voluntarily. Can we still think that God does not care for us? b. For the Lord GOD will help Me: In the midst of all this suffering, humiliation, and pain, the Messiah has an unshakable confidence in the help of the Lord GOD. i. Can we have the same confidence in God? “It is pitiful for the Christian to refuse to suffer, and to become a fighting man, crying, ‘We must stand up for our rights.’ Did you ever see Jesus in that posture?” (Redpath) Instead, trust in the LORD and proclaim, for the Lord GOD will help me. c. Therefore, I have set My face like a flint: Despite knowing the agony awaiting Him, the Messiah will have a steadfast determination to obey the Lord GOD and follow His way. His face will be set as hard as a flint, and nothing will turn Him aside. i. This was exactly fulfilled in the life of Jesus, who was determined to go to Jerusalem, even knowing what waited for Him there. Now it came to pass, when the time had come for Him to be received up, that He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem. (Luke 9:51) ii. There are two kinds of courage – the courage of the moment, which requires no previous thought, and a “planned” courage, which sees the difficulty ahead and steadfastly marches towards it. Jesus had this kind of courage; He could see the cross on the horizon, but still set His face like a flint. iii. Spurgeon has a wonderful sermon on this text titled, The Redeemer’s Face Set like a Flint. These are his headings and points: 1. How the steadfast resolve of Jesus was tested. ·By offers from the world. ·By the persuasions of His friends. ·By the unworthiness of His clients. ·By the bitterness of the first few drops of suffering in Gethsemane. ·By the ease at which He could have backed out if He had wished to. ·By the taunts of those who mocked Him. ·By the full stress and agony of the cross. 2. How the steadfast resolve of Jesus was sustained. ·By His divine schooling. ·By His conscious innocence. ·By His unshakable confidence in the help of God. ·By the joy that was set before Him. 3. How to imitate the steadfast resolve of Jesus. ·When there is something right, stand for it. ·When you have a right purpose that glorifies God, carry it out. d. And I know that I will not be ashamed: The courage of the Messiah isn’t a passive resignation to fate. It is a confident assurance in the Lord GOD. He can set His face like a flint because He can say, “I know that I will not be ashamed.” e. He is near who justifies Me; who will contend with Me? This is the Messiah’s way of anticipating the truth of Romans 8:31: If God is for us, who can be against us? If it isn’t clear enough, He says it again: Surely the Lord GOD will help Me; who is he who will condemn Me? i. In fact, the reason why Romans 8:31 applies to us is that it first applies to Jesus, and we are in Christ. If Jesus stands in this place of victory, then all those who are in Christ stand there also.>> enduringword.com |
||||||
|
Vic 15:36 This is the traditional view, and so long as it is used as a basis for personal piety it serves well. That is one of the strengths of Scripture; so long as it is read with humility and a will to follow it, you won't go far wrong in your daily life. But was guidance for people centuries into the future the primary purpose of the writer? This is where good scholarship goes deeper. It looks for what the original writer meant to the original readers. If you can understand this, then the present-day applications is NOT overthrown, but enriched. For example:- a) "Isaiah has more Messianic prophecies than any other book in the Old Testament." I expressed tis slightly differently some days back. I said that Isaiah has more 'Creation Imagery' than any other book. It talks about how God is going to do a 'New Thing'; he will create a New Israel. This will be everything that the Old Israel failed to be. If you think through what this would actually mean in the dust and sweat of history, it necessarily becomes a promise of a New People with a New Moses. Thus, it is a 'Messianic Prophecy' as a consequence of being a 'New Creation' prophecy. The New Testament writers explicitly take up this 'New Israel' vs 'Old Israel' contrast. Jesus talks of the 'sons of Abraham' vs the 'sons of the Satan', and Paul makes this obvious in Galatians ("Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.") The 'New Creation' motif is the basis on which the Messianic Hope and therefore Messianic Prophecy rests. So the approach that sees 'Messianic Prophecy' is not wrong; it is a conclusion reached on the basis of a prior meaning. I am arguing that we would do well to study that 'prior meaning' on the way through. |
||||||
|
Here’s the passage from which you quoted the words “new creation.” “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.” (Galatians 5:1-6) Jesus Christ was referenced four times in six verses. The verse you quoted (verse 6) specifically says “in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision;…” And in 2 Corinthians 5:17, the Apostle Paul says believers are new creations *in Christ.* <<English Standard Version Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. Berean Standard Bible Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away. Behold, the new has come! Berean Literal Bible Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old things have passed away; behold, the new has come into being.>> biblehub.com Being “in Christ” is essential to the new creation. Do you agree? <<The 'New Creation' motif is the basis on which the Messianic Hope and therefore Messianic Prophecy rests.>> I think you have the order reversed here. Jesus Christ is the basis on which Messianic prophecies and the new creation rest. <<Paul makes this obvious in Galatians ("Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.")>> It appears you’re using “new creation” as a watered-down synonym for Jesus Christ. What counts is Jesus Christ. Without Jesus Christ, you don’t have a new creation. |
||||||
|
Vic 21:50 No, Vic. Do I 'avoid Jesus Christ' by showing the chronology of the prophecies that he satisfied par excellence? Or by showing that he is not ONLY 'Messiah', but that this means that he is the entirety of the New Israel? Vic; you seem to be deliberately misunderstanding this point. I'm NOT discussing the catechism here as an exercise in Systematic theology; I'm unwrapping what those prophecies meant WHEN THEY WERE FIRST SPOKEN, TO THOSE WHO FIRST HEARD THEM. Please; read the Bible for what it said to the people it was addressed to. Do that properly, and all the rest will be added unto you. You DON'T need to read it as a mine of proof-texts for your preferred doctrines. I've taught Systematic Theology and Doctrine to adult students doing the Lay Preacher diploma course. I never had a student who spat out the fresh food and insisted that he would only eat the fully-processed stuff that came in the freeze-dried packets. |
||||||
|
Please; read the Bible for what it said to the people it was addressed to.>> They were waiting for the Messiah. The Messiah, the hope of a Messiah, was relevant to Jews living in Old Testament times, and the Messiah was written about extensively by prophets, rabbis and sages well before Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry, crucifixion and Resurrection. Messianic prophecies are prophecies (what you prefer to call “future telling”) of a Messiah. |
||||||
|
Vic 22:30 Was that the ONLY thing they were doing? Weren't they asking themselves and each other questions like:- 1. How could God let this happen? 2. How can we worship God without the temple? 3. Are we cut off forever, like the Northern Tribes were 150 years ago? 4. Will God not intervene for us, as he offered to intervene for Sodom, if but ten of us remain righteous? 5. Will our children ever return to Jerusalem? And quite a few others in between? But no, you focus on one question, and probably not even the most common one, despite there being lots of parts of Isaiah and Jeremiah that had nothing to do with Messianic prophecy. I wonder why they bothered writing those bits, if nobody was asking about those subjects!) What you say is quite right, Vic. But it is not the whole of the story. |
||||||
|
What you say is quite right, Vic. But it is not the whole of the story.>> I never said the Biblical books of prophets in the Old Testament were only about Messianic prophecies, but that’s what I chose to focus on in this thread. |
||||||
|
“Sharing Jesus Prophecy with Jews in Israel” youtube.com Video is 1:41 |
||||||
| |||||||
