To the list:
I had a brief exchange with a Xtian from alt.bible.prophecy.
I thought it might be of interest to at least some subscribers.
Maybe even Roger if he wants a change of subject.
I had a software crash, so I can't start right at the begining, but that shouldn't be a problem.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: wade@gnn.com (Michael Fisher) To: rabray@scrtc.blue.net Subject: Re: WHERE IS THE BIBLE PROPHECY DISCUSSION?
>>>>>
>Jesus is referred to as the BRANCH in the Old Testament. I don't have a
> concordance handy, so look it up for yourself.
Nay nay. I'm not the one making the claim. So far as I am concerned it is absurd on its very face.
So its up to Jill.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: wade@gnn.com (Michael Fisher)
To: rabray@scrtc.blue.net
>
>The "claim" happens to be Bible TRUTH, which apparently you are very
> lacking in.
> Just this once I have done your work for you. If you have a Bible at all
> look
>at Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5 and Zecheriah 2:8 and 6:12. As for the
> Prophecy
>discussion, try "The Revelation Decoded" in alt.religion.christian. I've
> spoon
>feed that to you too.
>
Actually I have five differnt translations, including a King James from the days of my youth.
I have a couple of other references too.
Now remember, Jill complains that "atheists" always quote scripture out of context. So I have used as much context as I have time to provide, law school
keeps me rather busy.
Jill also claimed that there were over 500 unequivocal references to the second coming.
See the attached text, but right now, using Jills own test, you are batting exactly zero.
Regarding Isaiah: "And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:"
From the Jerusalem Bible, readers edition: "Isaiah the prophet belongs to the last years of the kingdom of Judah. . . .it was his mission to announce the fall of Israel and of Judah as the due punishment for the whole nation's unfaithfulness. At this time, the kingdom of Judah, living under the threat of Assyrian invasion, was looking for military alliances to preserve its independence; Isaiah resisted all such human expedients as showing a lack of faith in God and his purposes. When eventually the armies under Sennecherib reached the walls of Jerusalem and called for the surrender of the city, Isaiah advised the king not to capitulate . . . [t]his is the background to the prophecies in the first part of the book . . . beyond the destined fall of his nation he sees a coming age in which a remnant of the people will survive to rebuild peace and justice under a future descendant of David."
The necessary context (remember, Jill wanted proper context) for 11:1 is the historical background of Assyrian invasion. Most of the necessary Biblical context starts at 10:5. Within the total context, then the prophecy of Isaiah was given to the Jews in Judah about a future quite physical king. It does not read as Isaiah prophesying that god himself would become incarnate and come to 'redeem' mankind at some indefinite far future date. It does not include the death and resurrection, nor a virgin birth.
It certainly doesn't sound like a prophecy of any "second coming" of God incarnate.
If you wish to read the text in a manner other than that suggested BY the context, you must set forth facts and reasoning to support ripping it out of context and giving it a different interprittion.
Jeremiah: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth."
From the Master Study Bible, Holman Bible Publishers, "Jeremiah's long ministry of over forty years stretched from 625 B.C. until a few years after Judah ceased to be a state in 586 B.C. . . . Jeremiah advocated submission to Babylon, but without success. Under the last four kings of Judah, twenty-one years of religious apostasy and political weakness made the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., and exile, inevitable"
Against this background, Jerimiah speaks in metaphor, divorce stands for exile, and Judah is finally divorced (exiled), but exile was not final. A remnant would return to live under Messiah's rule.
In a secular kingdom, in Israel/Judah, under a secular king.
Again, putting the isolated verse back into its context, and understanding the historical context within which it was written again removes any useful Christian interpritation of the text.
Zecharia: "For thus says the Lord of hosts, "After glory He has sent me against the nations which plunder you, for he who touches you, touches the apple of His eye." "Behold, a man whose name is Brnch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord."
Zecharia was a contemorary of Haggi, and like Haggi addressed himself to the rebuilding of the temple after the return from exile in 537 B.C.
Both prophets spoke in Messianic language about the future of Israel after the temple was rebuilt.
The temple was rebuilt during the reign of Zerubbabel. Haggai is certain that Zerubbable IS the messiah;
Haggai 2:20-23 "Then the word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the month saying, 'Speak to Zerubbable governor of Judah saying ,'I am going to shake the heavens and the earth. And I will overthrow the thrones of kingdoms and destroy the power of the kingdoms of the nations; and I will overthrow the chariots and their riders, and the horses and their riders will go down, everyone by the sword of another.
'On that day,' declares the Lord of hosts, 'I will take you, Zeubbable, son of Shealtiel, my servant,' declares the Lord, 'and I will make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you,' declares the Lord of hosts."
This prophecy must have come to the ears of Darius or one of his genereals, because Zerubbable disappears from history.
Seeing as Zerubbabel didn't live up to the prophecy of Haggai, Zechariah either decided to be less specific, or--and this is a real possibility, he has been edited to remove references to Zerubbabel.
A further problem with 2:8 is that in that entire passage, Zechariah is discussing "Zion" as a whole, so the pronoun "you" refers to Zion.
Zech 2:7 AND 8, 10, "Ho, Zion! Escape, you who are living with the daughter of Babylon." For thus says the Lord of hosts, "After glory He has sent me against the nations which plunder you, for he who touches you touches the apple of His eye. . . Sing for joy and be glad, O daughter of Zion."
Again, once everthing really is put into context, your desired interpritation makes no sense.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From: wade@gnn.com (Michael Fisher) To: rabray@scrtc.blue.net
>
>Forget it; I have no desire to talk to padlocked minds.
So another Christian, body slammed by his own Bible and his own ignorance, trys to dodge the reality by blaiming it on someone elses "closed mind".
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
I guess I really shouldn't try and tweak back like that, but jeesh, I'm not applying for sainthood, and some of these people hit you right in the nose with the giant chip on their shoulder.
I cc'd Jill with the whole thing, so far I haven't heard from her.
Cheers!
mike in ca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THE WAY
Polarity is the movement of the Tao. Receptivity is the way it is used. The world and All Things were produced from its existence. Its existence was produced from nonexistence.
--Lao Tzu--