Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What's your opinion, Hayle? Does Micah 5:2 refer to Jesus or someone else?
I've asked others about the conundrum between the Old and New Testament and have never received the same answer twice, except to say that yes, it all points to Jesus.
On another note, I recently risked being burned at the stake for publicly asking what Jesus meant when he asked if the cup could pass Him Matt 26:39. I would like to say I envy your atheism, but you are hooked line and sinker to fundamentalism.
I'll assume your statement about Jesus being alive and the Assyrians being wiped out centuries earlier is correct. My knowledge of ancient history is limited.
Just reading the scripture, verse 2 does talk about someone who will be the ruler over Israel at a future date who is of elderly age. So again, unless I am missing something, I would not say it is Jesus that the verse is referring to. I don't know what "Bethlehem Ephrathah" means.
Verses 5-6 - I'm not sure who the verse is referring to when it says "he" so I have no idea. Jesus would be a good assumption. I read the verses on biblegateway and it does not include Jesus's name.
The chapter says "A Promised Ruler From Bethlehem". Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
Not sure. I'm sure there are some who will talk about that verse.
Those 3 verses do not state "Jesus". It states a male person and "Bethlehem Ephrathah" so we could guess it is referring to Jesus.
I agree. Those 3 verses do not state Jesus's name so we would have to guess or assume that those verses could be referring to Jesus.
You're making an honest effort, I think, to examine the verses in question, comp. I appreciate that. You'll notice that not a single Christian is willing to address this issue. I think I explained why they won't touch this issue.
Now unless I'm missing YOUR point, I think you're missing MY point.
Quote:
Verses 5-6 - I'm not sure who the verse is referring to when it says "he" so I have no idea. Jesus would be a good assumption. I read the verses on biblegateway and it does not include Jesus's name.
Of course Bible Gatewate doesn't include Jesus' name--for a very good reason: to tie Jesus to verses 5-6 would prove beyond a shadow of doubt that verse 2 is NOT about Jesus; it's talking about someone else being born in Bethlehem. Who it's taking about we don't know but it's certain it's not Jesus. Why? Because for an apologist to tie a Jesus in verses 5-6 to the Assyrians who were extinct when Jesus was alive would be a colossal historical blunder that would be evident to anyone with a modicum of knowledge about ancient history.
Let's be clear about one thing: the person being born in Bethlehem who will rule in verse 2 is the SAME PERSON in verses 5-6 who will defeat the Assyrians. The entire passage is talking about one person--the person born in Bethlehem who will rule over Israel. "He" will do this" "He will do that". If apologists are going to say it's Jesus being predicted in verse 2 then they have to accept it's Jesus in verses 5and 6 as well, and historically this simply cannot be.
Do you see why I say apologists are quick to affirm what Matthew says about verse 2 being about Jesus but they won't get near verses 5-6 because it would clearly demonstrate verse 2 is NOT about Jesus?
No wonder Bible Gateway and any other Christian sources don't get near verses 5-6.
I'll just respond to this statement. If Christians want to say that Jesus is what the OT is referring to whenever "he" is mentioned, then fine. Not sure what the problem is.
Jesus is mostly in the New Testament.
Here's one OT verse I found:
Isaiah 7:14
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”
Immanuel is another name Jesus was called. The only virgin I know in the bible is Mary.
Jesus is mentioned all over the New Testament. Are you using the Old Testament as your basis for why Jesus is not real?
The problem is that Christians are trying to pass off vague and opaque passages in the Old Testament that mean essentially nothing as proof that Jesus fulfilled roughly 400+ prophecies in the Old Testament. It's more than dishonest. It's devious because apologists trick dumb gullible simpletons into believing Jesus is the son of God by slyly assigning these vague meaningless passages as being predictions that Jesus fulfilled. Nobody with half a brain would fall for this nonsense.
This is not rocket science. It's a very simple formula:
Rule No 1: Look for any passages in the Old Testament that doesn't mention a name like Samson or Hezekiah or Moses or Goliath, but uses lots and lots of "He" in the passage.
Rule No 2: Does it say anything bad about the "He"? Then it's not about Jesus.
Rule No 3: Does it say vague, nice, beautiful, flowery things about the "He"? Then it's about Jesus.
Put it to the test:
"He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground."
It's vague. It doesn't mention any names. It's flowery and beautiful-sounding. Voila! It's about Jesus.
"But he lied unto him."
It's not vague. It's precise. The "he" does something bad. Voila! It's NOT about Jesus.
It's a simple test. Take any verse you want where "He" appears. If it's vague and opaque and doesn't talk about anyone in particular but it's saying a good thing, then it's about Jesus. If it's a bad thing, it isn't about Jesus.
I'll just respond to this statement. If Christians want to say that Jesus is what the OT is referring to whenever "he" is mentioned, then fine. Not sure what the problem is.
Jesus is mostly in the New Testament.
Here's one OT verse I found:
Isaiah 7:14
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.”
Immanuel is another name Jesus was called. The only virgin I know in the bible is Mary.
Jesus is mentioned all over the New Testament. Are you using the Old Testament as your basis for why Jesus is not real?
You do realize that the people in the new testament read the old testament canon at the time. So where in Isaiah it says he will be born of a Virgin... Mary becomes a virgin.
It says he will be called Immanuel... so they called Jesus Immanuel.
Another good one is the one where Jesus came riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. Why? Because the old testament had some vague reference about the Messiah riding into Jerusalem on a donkey (Zec 9:9). So they fetched Jesus a donkey to fulfill the prophecy.
That's because your question about my fight with this mythical god of yours has nothing to do with this thread. If you don't want to answer my question it's perfectly understandable.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 04-09-2023 at 09:06 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
