Messianic Prophecies and Matthew's Dishonesty Part 1

[AlanRussellFuller]

Jesus and the apostles interpreted the scriptures "spiritually" or allegorically. I don't see where you addressed that. You only analyze in a literal way.

[FireproofAshes]

@AlanRussellFuller Thanks for the reply. This video was a result of my frustration with many popular apologists claiming that these are, in fact, literal prophecies (in a predictive sense). I don't address midrashic interpretation because my point is simply to show that a belief that these are "true" prophecies is self-defeating.

[AlanRussellFuller]

@FireproofAshes Midrash and allegory are two different things. Midrash is interpreting the biblical text by a word or verse in such a way as to give an answer or explanation to the text. Allegory uses forms and figures to present a symbolical narrative to treat one subject in the guise of another. Allegory isnt limited to the Bible. The Egyptians and Greeks used allegory to interpret their myths. The word comes from Greek. Allegory properly describes NT interpretation.

[FireproofAshes]

@AlanRussellFuller Either way, I'm not disagreeing with you. It does not seem likely that the new testament authors were citing prophecies in the literal sense (aka, as "predictions"). I think approaching it in terms of allegory makes a lot more sense. But it is commonly believed that these WERE literal predictions; it just takes a search for "messianic prophecies" to see that. If you don't believe they are literal in the first place, my videos on the subject are irrelevant.

[AlanRussellFuller]

@FireproofAshes The early Christians believed that there was a literal as well as a spiritual level to scripture. Many believed that the Gospels were written in a "prophetic style." Origen De Principiis Book IV, 10.

[korzon]

You clearly don't understand scripture and the niv is trash so youre comparing modern day trash to jewish torah it's impossible so you began in the wrong book to begin with and if you were a Christian you would use the King James you would not use the niv.The niv contradics the Gospel not to mention you need the Holy Spirit to understand scripture and without it they are dead letters.Did you know one day in heaven is a thousand here?No of course not.

[FireproofAshes]

@korzon Hi Korzon, can you give specific examples as to why my criticism does not apply to the King James Version? I've checked both and in my opinion my criticisms apply equally to both.

[korzon]

@FireproofAshes Again man has corrupted the Words written on paper but the parables they did not understand to even change them so there is plenty of truth in the bible and with the Holy Spirit while reading gives us understanding and ables us to sift thru the added metaerial as it's not even there.We are reading dead letter wtithout the Guidance of our Father to understand the Word and the meaning behind them.It men who alter GOD and contradict His Word a perfect example is catholisism.

[FireproofAshes]

@korzon The fact that so many people interpret the Bible in radically different ways shows that the Bible itself is unclear. If I write a book and everybody interprets it in different and contradictory ways, I accept that it is my fault as the writer. Part of communicating is anticipating and clarifying wrong interpretations.

[korzon]

@FireproofAshes You need the Holy Spirit to interpit the Bible and thats a gift of Grace our Father in Heaven decides who will get it not men.Men apoint themselves but GOD is the one who truly gives us our positions Hebrews 8 explains the new covanant not men.And if you read it you will see why the Church is Us and not a building as men say it is.Men make up whatever fits their comfort zone they have even been lying scribes as well so indeed we need the Holy Spirit to sift thru the lies men add.

[HybridD91]

An almah can be a virgin but Jews could have made that distinction if they were implying a virgin birth and Mark's account of Jesus'(accepted by scholars to be the first account written) life casts doubt onto the virgin birth. In Mark's account, Jesus' family thought he was crazy. Odd, if they knew he was born of a virgin (Mark doesn't mention a virgin birth) and was the son of God, why would they think he was crazy? The other Gospels do not mention this senario.

[COMALiteJ]

You completely skipped over a biggie: `So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: "He will be called a Nazarene."' (2:23) This one simply doesn't EXIST! At all! ANYwhere in the Old Testament!

Without it, there was no prophetic reason for the Holy Family to move to Nazareth! That means the angel told them it was SAFE to RETURN FROM EGYPT (uprooting their lives and Joseph's carpentry career yet again in the process) because Herod died, but then Archelaus succeeds him, so, oops!

[COMALiteJ]

One wonders what the angel actually said to Joseph?

"Uh, sorry, our bad. It apparently never even OCCURRED to mine All-Knowing Boss that a king's SON just MIGHT SUCCEED him on the throne! I mean, that NEVER happens, right? Well, y'know, except for nearly EVERY OTHER TIME in HUMAN HISTORY TO DATE in which a king died while any of his sons still lived and were available, but other than those, NEVER! Hey, I hear Galilee has a cooler climate, and Nazareth would be a nice place to raise a kid!"

[EruditeScythian]

@COMALiteJ That's not the only gaffe. Joseph apparently changed his mind about going back to Judea from Egypt and moved to Galiliee because Archelaus the son of Herod the Great was reigning in Judea. The funny thing is that Galilee was being ruled by Herod Antipas, another son of Herod the Great! Why would Joseph be afraid of one son and not the other?

[COMALiteJ]

@EruditeScythian, not to mention, if Joseph had indeed been warned to not so much as set foot in Judaea because it was Archelaus's jurisdiction, why does Luke record that the Holy Family traveled to Jerusalem (Archelaus's friggin' CAPITAL CITY!) EVERY YEAR for the annual Passover festival!? (2:41-42) One of the most beloved tales of the childhood of Jesus (confounding the Temple scholars at age 12, "Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's business?") DEPENDS on this fact!

[EruditeScythian]

@COMALiteJ Hmmm, sounds like Luke didn't "wist" his history very well although he was writing only a bare 80 years after the event. The more I read this stuff the more reasons I find not to believe in it.

[LonaanGreen]

Great breakdown, shows that cherrypicking has been the sop for these people from the beginning.

[FireproofAshes]

If you think these two are bad wait until you see the next two prophecies.

[Ravindra9689]

.....phuck..youuuuu..-_- lol! Jk, great job. Better than me, told yah. Except I only did one. ^_^. But yeah, great. 5 stars.

[hal2017]

Excellent - looking forward to more.

[Cyrathil]

I love how Jesus is not named Immanuel...

[HybridD91]

@Cyrathil The dumbest rebuttal I heard is that Jesus goes by many names despite Matthew saying God spoke through a prophet (false prophet XD) to call him Immanuel and NOT Jesus as stated in the verse before AND after LMAO.

[TheSonofCain]

You raise some interesting points, most of which I think believers will have no answer for

[FireproofAshes]

I wouldn't go that far.