messianic prophecies

Originally posted by stellspalfie
errr, thats not exactly what i was getting at. its not just about what is true in our mind. it needs apply to our minds and reality.

so if i say - "taking a pain killer is good" this is true to a person with a headache and false to a person with a pain killer allergy".

Okay, that show how we can all be easily misunderstood and is also why the Holy Bible is also easily misunderstood. The written word may be describing something different than what we have pictured in our mind and we conclude, that can not be true.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
This is among the most ill informed assertion yet to surface on this thread and betrays
the kind of ignorance that the theist battles against every day. Anyone could go into a
synagogue and examine the Hebrew text, messianic prophecies are based on what was
written in the Hebrew text, Matthew made none of these up and to state that he did not
...[text shortened]... be mocked! The only problem a
theist has to face is the scurrilous ignorance of non theists.

I see you totally misread my post. At no point did I say that Matthew was unaware of the prophesies surrounding the messiah. On the contrary, I suggested that he was fully aware of them and used them to construct a fictional narrative of Jesus' life such that his character would fit the prophesies in question.

When I said the writers would not have had information available to them I was referring to the details of Jesus' life, not the prophesies.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I see you totally misread my post. At no point did I say that Matthew was unaware of the prophesies surrounding the messiah. On the contrary, I suggested that he was fully aware of them and used them to construct a fictional narrative of Jesus' life such that his character would fit the prophesies in question.

When I said the writers would not have had ...[text shortened]... formation available to them I was referring to the details of Jesus' life, not the prophesies.

you stated Spalding that he had no access to the material and this presented a
problem,

here are your words seeing that you are somewhat forgetful, please note the
ludicrous nature of the language,

It is also obvious that the writers would almost certainly not have had this
information readily available to them . . . Robbie knows this??

Huh, not only have you stated that something you claim is obvious when in fact its
not even true and secondly you have arrogantly attempted to tell the forum on my
behalf what it is I know, please refrain from doing so in the future. Had no
information concerning Jesus life, lets see if you can do better than FMF and tell us
on what basis they had no details of Jesus life and how you came to know this, after
all, it should be obvious

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you stated Spalding that he had no access to the material and this presented a
problem,

here are your words seeing that you are somewhat forgetful, please note the
ludicrous nature of the language,

It is also obvious that the writers would almost certainly not have had this
information readily available to them . . . Robbie knows this?? ...[text shortened]... ey had no details of Jesus life and how you came to know this, after
all, it should be obvious

This twhitehead seems to be an intelligent fellow, but completely lacking in Biblical knowledge. He seems to be getting like FMF at times. Ha 😀

Originally posted by RJHinds
This twhitehead seems to be an intelligent fellow, but completely lacking in Biblical knowledge. He seems to be getting like FMF at times. Ha 😀

Yes he is an intelligent fellow, I tend to forget that while I have studied the Bible daily
for many years that others have not and therefore their knowledge is scant and they
should not be reproached simply because they have not, after all we cannot give our
attention to everything. It simply gets frustrating at times, clearly one needs to be
patient with others as well as oneself. No one comes close to FMF for trickery.

Originally posted by RJHinds
There is no specific reference in the OT that states there is a second coming of the Messiah. It is a matter of interpretation.
Perhaps this reference will help you understand:

http://www.jesusplusnothing.com/studies/online/thetwocomings.htm

After you read it, let me know if you still have questions about it and I will try to see if I can give you answers.

it seems odd that there are no specific references to what is arguably the biggest event in history. i agree its open to interpretation and that just reinforces by opinion that it is crazy to throw the weight of your belief 100% behind one view.

i think the most sensible approach a christian can take to the bible, is to hold dear the core of book and to take the details with a pinch of salt. particularly taking the old adage into consideration 'the devil is in the detail'

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes he is an intelligent fellow, I tend to forget that while I have studied the Bible daily
for many years that others have not and therefore their knowledge is scant and they
should not be reproached simply because they have not, after all we cannot give our
attention to everything. It simply gets frustrating at times, clearly one needs to be
patient with others as well as oneself. No one comes close to FMF for trickery.

sometimes when you look to hard you can loose objectivity. its a bit like the army, they always have outside groups go over battle plans because the people who draw them up get so close to them they cannot see the pitfalls.

a fresh pair of eyes is always a good thing.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you stated Spalding that he had no access to the material and this presented a problem,

What does 'Spalding' mean?

Huh, not only have you stated that something you claim is obvious when in fact its
not even true and secondly you have arrogantly attempted to tell the forum on my
behalf what it is I know, please refrain from doing so in the future. Had no
information concerning Jesus life, lets see if you can do better than FMF and tell us
on what basis they had no details of Jesus life and how you came to know this, after
all, it should be obvious
I did not say that the writers had no information regarding Jesus' life, and you clearly misquoted me when you said I wrote 'Robbie knows this' as if it refers directly to the previous sentence. Go back and read it again a bit more carefully.
Why have you twice managed to totally misread my posts?

Originally posted by twhitehead
What does 'Spalding' mean?

[b]Huh, not only have you stated that something you claim is obvious when in fact its
not even true and secondly you have arrogantly attempted to tell the forum on my
behalf what it is I know, please refrain from doing so in the future. Had no
information concerning Jesus life, lets see if you can do better than FMF an ead it again a bit more carefully.
Why have you twice managed to totally misread my posts?

Spalding is a name i sometimes make up for people, like Baldric, or Gerald or Nerdboy
and yes I see that i have misinterpreted your outlandish claims although you still have
not provided a shred of evidence for them. When are you going to provide some or
are we simply meant to believe you because you say its true?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have studied the Bible daily for many years that others have not and therefore their knowledge is scant and they should not be reproached simply because they have not,

Having "knowledge" of the content of a certain book, and having gone over it over and over again for "many years", does not make any of the content "true" in and of itself. The fact that you are repeatedly asking straw man questions and totally misreading posts - seemingly deliberately - suggests strongly that your "many years" of study have not equipped you with the skills or demeanour to present your theories credibly.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Spalding is a name i sometimes make up for people, like Baldric, or Gerald or Nerdboy
and yes I see that i have misinterpreted your outlandish claims although you still have
not provided a shred of evidence for them. When are you going to provide some or
are we simply meant to believe you because you say its true?

I am not sure what claims you consider outlandish. I am not even sure you know what claims I have made. Lets go through them:
1. The gospel writers included a number of details of Jesus' life specifically because they thought it supported prophesy regarding the messiah.
2. One would not expect these writers to be privy to much of this information especially the details of his early life (and his parents activities prior to his birth). Although it is possible that they were, I find it unlikely.
3. A typical reader without religious motivation to think otherwise, would conclude that the writer (or his source) made up the events (and this fits with the fact that some of the major events contradict other records).
4. Some Christians may reasonably conclude that the writers obtained the information via inspiration from God rather than word of mouth from witnesses. It must be noted that witnesses are notoriously unreliable so one would think that most Christians would either believe in some sort of divine inspiration as being a major input, or that the accounts are far from accurate historical records.
5. Robbie is aware of some or all of the above arguments whether or not he agrees with the conclusions. (and I assumed that this was why you were emphasizing that Matthew did not make anything up, but I think now that I was wrong and you were just not making much sense at the time).

Did I make any other claims? If so, list them and I will say whether that is what I intended or not.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not sure what claims you consider outlandish. I am not even sure you know what claims I have made. Lets go through them:
1. The gospel writers included a number of details of Jesus' life specifically because they thought it supported prophesy regarding the messiah.
2. One would not expect these writers to be privy to much of this information especi ...[text shortened]... make any other claims? If so, list them and I will say whether that is what I intended or not.

you have still produced not a shred of evidence for your claims! obvious though they
seemed to you, why not? are we excepted simply to believe you because you say so?
you have claimed that the Biblical authors had no access to the details of Jesus life,
evidence nil.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
it seems odd that there are no specific references to what is arguably the biggest event in history. i agree its open to interpretation and that just reinforces by opinion that it is crazy to throw the weight of your belief 100% behind one view.

i think the most sensible approach a christian can take to the bible, is to hold dear the core of book an ...[text shortened]... nch of salt. particularly taking the old adage into consideration 'the devil is in the detail'

The biggest event in history has not happened yet. But there are references to it. It just is not termed "the second coming of the Messiah."

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am not sure what claims you consider outlandish. I am not even sure you know what claims I have made. Lets go through them:
1. The gospel writers included a number of details of Jesus' life specifically because they thought it supported prophesy regarding the messiah.
2. One would not expect these writers to be privy to much of this information especi ...[text shortened]... make any other claims? If so, list them and I will say whether that is what I intended or not.

You need to understand that Matthew is Levi a disciple of Jesus.

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matthew-mark/was-taxman-named-matthew-or-levi

Also Jeus is reported to have told the disciples things in the Old Testament scriptures that spoke of Him.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The biggest event in history has not happened yet. But there are references to it. It just is not termed "the second coming of the Messiah."

the only clear references (as you have agreed) are only in the new testament. doesnt it seem odd that with all the prophets kicking around in the old testament that none of them predicted the biggest event of all time????

wouldnt it be sensible of the new testament writers to create a 2nd coming to solve the issue of jesus not completing all the prophecies? id like to stress that this isnt necessarily my opinion. just another example of why it would be foolish to think that everything in your bible is 100% accurate.