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.
As Christmas nears, there will invariably be reference to Micah 5 as an OT prediction of Jesus. Christian or not, I do not believe it is just by reading further into the chapter, but because it is mentioned in the book of Matthew surrounding Jesus' birth, it is often pushed forward as a prediction of Jesus' birth and birthplace.
What I have noticed, however, is that the writer of Matthew never says he believes this. He only says the scribes told Herod that the scriptures (Micah) claims that the new king would be born in Bethlehem. Did the writer also believe this or was he just documenting the popular belief of the day?
As Christmas nears, there will invariably be reference to Micah 5 as an OT prediction of Jesus. Christian or not, I do not believe it is just by reading further into the chapter, but because it is mentioned in the book of Matthew surrounding Jesus' birth, it is often pushed forward as a prediction of Jesus' birth and birthplace.
What I have noticed, however, is that the writer of Matthew never says he believes this. He only says the scribes told Herod that the scriptures (Micah) claims that the new king would be born in Bethlehem. Did the writer also believe this or was he just documenting the popular belief of the day?
If you were the writer and you did not believe it, would you refer to that?
I would believe that the writer in referring to that had to believe it, otherwise, he would share about something else that he believes in, for the readers to know as well, in regards to their faith in Jesus Christ.
If you were the writer and you did not believe it, would you refer to that?
I would believe that the writer in referring to that had to believe it, otherwise, he would share about something else that he believes in, for the readers to know as well, in regards to their faith in Jesus Christ.
Not sure. I think it was the book of John that refers to the Pharisees claiming that god does NOT hear the prayer of sinners and they were not talking about prayers of forgiveness, but just prayers in general. True? False?
As Christmas nears, there will invariably be reference to Micah 5 as an OT prediction of Jesus. Christian or not, I do not believe it is just by reading further into the chapter, but because it is mentioned in the book of Matthew surrounding Jesus' birth, it is often pushed forward as a prediction of Jesus' birth and birthplace.
What I have noticed, however, is that the writer of Matthew never says he believes this. He only says the scribes told Herod that the scriptures (Micah) claims that the new king would be born in Bethlehem. Did the writer also believe this or was he just documenting the popular belief of the day?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enow If you were the writer and you did not believe it, would you refer to that?
I would believe that the writer in referring to that had to believe it, otherwise, he would share about something else that he believes in, for the readers to know as well, in regards to their faith in Jesus Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane
Not sure. I think it was the book of John that refers to the Pharisees claiming that god does NOT hear the prayer of sinners and they were not talking about prayers of forgiveness, but just prayers in general. True? False?
Are you trying to ascertain the identity of the wise men or why Matthew was referencing them?
Being how Herod consulted with the chief priests and the scribes of the people together to find out what the scriptures says, these wise men must also be Jews as well. Why else would he fathom to inquire among his native Jewish authority if the wise men were not Jewish for him to confirm their search by the scriptures?
In Acts 2, we find that Jews were coming from all nations for the Passover at Jerusalem: This would be how the disciples fulfilled the commandment to make disciples of all nations because those converted on the Day of Pentecost, the disciples would train and teach them.
What I am trying to say is that the wise men must have been Jews from the far east: and God's promise ( which Jesus made know afterwards ) that all those that seek, shall find, and so even though everyone was a sinner in God's eyes respectively, those that seek God were favoured by God to give them the answers they seek or the prayers to be heard.
So Matthew, being a tax collecting Jew,and writing the account after Jesus had risen and ascended to Heaven, was led by the Holy Spirit to refer to that which was significant for him to mention as he believed it. If you note his reference to Joseph's lineage as Luke's reference was to Mary's, Matthew had apparantly access to the time of weeping caused by Herod's slaughter of those children as obviously, he had grown up, hearing about it.
Speculation... mind you. I can only surmise what he would have gleaned from Joseph or a brother of Jesus for the lineage of Joseph's.
I think it is interesting that Mary did not speak of it to Luke because it would be too painful to speak about how other mothers lost their sons because of Herod seeking the blood of hers.
Sorry. I digress.
I hoped I had answered your question, and not deviated too much from your query. I believe Matthew reported it because he believed it was significant for his readers to know.
Being how Herod consulted with the chief priests and the scribes of the people together to find out what the scriptures says, these wise men must also be Jews as well. Why else would he fathom to inquire among his native Jewish authority if the wise men were not Jewish for him to confirm their search by the scriptures?
In Acts 2, we find that Jews were coming from all nations for the Passover at Jerusalem: This would be how the disciples fulfilled the commandment to make disciples of all nations because those converted on the Day of Pentecost, the disciples would train and teach them.
What I am trying to say is that the wise men must have been Jews from the far east: and God's promise ( which Jesus made know afterwards ) that all those that seek, shall find, and so even though everyone was a sinner in God's eyes respectively, those that seek God were favoured by God to give them the answers they seek or the prayers to be heard.
So Matthew, being a tax collecting Jew,and writing the account after Jesus had risen and ascended to Heaven, was led by the Holy Spirit to refer to that which was significant for him to mention as he believed it. If you note his reference to Joseph's lineage as Luke's reference was to Mary's, Matthew had apparantly access to the time of weeping caused by Herod's slaughter of those children as obviously, he had grown up, hearing about it.
Speculation... mind you. I can only surmise what he would have gleaned from Joseph or a brother of Jesus for the lineage of Joseph's.
I think it is interesting that Mary did not speak of it to Luke because it would be too painful to speak about how other mothers lost their sons because of Herod seeking the blood of hers.
Sorry. I digress.
I hoped I had answered your question, and not deviated too much from your query. I believe Matthew reported it because he believed it was significant for his readers to know.
I gather you are saying that the writer of Matthew believed what the scribes told Herod? Well both he and the scribes would be wrong that Micah 5 speaks of Jesus if my education is of any worth.
Last edited by InsaneInDaMembrane; 12-15-2009 at 07:02 PM..
I gather you are saying that the writer of Matthew believed what the scribes told Herod? Well both he and the scribes would be wrong that Micah 5 speaks of Jesus if my education is of any worth.
I'm sure you would know that intelligence and wisdom do not necessarily go hand in hand. It has been said that the natural man cannot understand the heavenly things of God... so to understand what God is saying is to ask the Lord for wisdom.
Jesus spoke in parables. Those that were not seeking to understand are not going to care to fathom it further by leaning on God, but those desiring to know, God will impart wisdom as well as word of knowledge.
So if you are applying an analysis on what you are reading into Micah 5 as not applying to Jesus, feel free to share.
But just so you should know... there are alot of Old Testament scriptures coming out as prophesies regarding Jesus that reading it at the time would not look like prophesy, but looking back... one can see by His grace, that it was.
Micah 5: 1Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek. 2But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. 3Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel.
Reading this from your point of view, I understand how for the most part, it was seen as not referring to Jesus but verses 2 & 3 is the prophesy regarding Jesus by referencing the place of where Jesus would come out of.
Even the rejection by Israel can be seen in verse 3 as giving them up which would be why the Gospel went to the Gentiles for a time BUT after the pre tribulational rapture event, when the fulfillment of that prophesy for that remnant in verse 3 comes to pass is by the choosing of the 144,000 witnesses that would continue the Gospel for the duration of the great tribulation.
Anyway... by the grace of God, I can see the reference to Jesus coming out of Bethlehem in verse 2.
I do not hold anything against you for not seeing it.
I'm sure you would know that intelligence and wisdom do not necessarily go hand in hand. It has been said that the natural man cannot understand the heavenly things of God... so to understand what God is saying is to ask the Lord for wisdom.
Jesus spoke in parables. Those that were not seeking to understand are not going to care to fathom it further by leaning on God, but those desiring to know, God will impart wisdom as well as word of knowledge.
So if you are applying an analysis on what you are reading into Micah 5 as not applying to Jesus, feel free to share.
But just so you should know... there are alot of Old Testament scriptures coming out as prophesies regarding Jesus that reading it at the time would not look like prophesy, but looking back... one can see by His grace, that it was.
Micah 5: 1Now gather thyself in troops, O daughter of troops: he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek. 2But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. 3Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel.
Reading this from your point of view, I understand how for the most part, it was seen as not referring to Jesus but verses 2 & 3 is the prophesy regarding Jesus by referencing the place of where Jesus would come out of.
Even the rejection by Israel can be seen in verse 3 as giving them up which would be why the Gospel went to the Gentiles for a time BUT after the pre tribulational rapture event, when the fulfillment of that prophesy for that remnant in verse 3 comes to pass is by the choosing of the 144,000 witnesses that would continue the Gospel for the duration of the great tribulation.
Anyway... by the grace of God, I can see the reference to Jesus coming out of Bethlehem in verse 2.
I do not hold anything against you for not seeing it.
Hi Enow,
Well thank you for you elaboration/explanation, but no I cannot accept the idea Micah 5 speaks of Jesus. If you can permit me to put some perspective here:
Micah was a prophet who lived during the time of the prophet Hezekiah. The threat at the time was the Assyrians led by king Sennacharib. The Assyrians laid siege to Jerusalem and were trying to starve the population into submission. It was into this mess that Micah makes his "prophecy." He believed a hero would come forward from the Judean family - Bethlehem-Ephratath. This hero/savior had nothing to do with Jesus or even 700 years into the future. We know this because I think it is verse 5 of the chapter tells us that this hero Micah has in mind will drive the Assyrians back to their land with the help of some assistants. Jesus never did such a thing and the Assyrians were long removed from the pages of history long before the time of Jesus. Clearly, with context in mind, Micah is not speaking of Jesus, but rather, a contemporary of his own time.
As Christmas nears, there will invariably be reference to Micah 5 as an OT prediction of Jesus. Christian or not, I do not believe it is just by reading further into the chapter, but because it is mentioned in the book of Matthew surrounding Jesus' birth, it is often pushed forward as a prediction of Jesus' birth and birthplace.
What I have noticed, however, is that the writer of Matthew never says he believes this. He only says the scribes told Herod that the scriptures (Micah) claims that the new king would be born in Bethlehem. Did the writer also believe this or was he just documenting the popular belief of the day?
The Coming of Jesus- Micah 5:2
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans [ Or rulers ] of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins [ Hebrew goings out ] are from of old, from ancient times. [ Or from days of eternity ] " Micah 5:1
[ A Promised Ruler From Bethlehem] Marshal your troops, O city of troops, [ Or Strengthen your walls, O walled city ] for a siege is laid against us. They will strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a rod. Matthew 2:6
" 'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.' [ Micah 5:2] " John 7:42
Still others asked, "How can the Christ come from Galilee? Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from David's family [ Greek seed] and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?" 1 Samuel 16:1 [ Samuel Anoints David ] The LORD said to Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him as king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and be on your way; I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem. I have chosen one of his sons to be king."
1 Samuel 16:18 One of the servants answered, "I have seen a son of Jesse of Bethlehem who knows how to play the harp. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the LORD is with him." 1 Samuel 17:12
Now David was the son of an Ephrathite named Jesse, who was from Bethlehem in Judah. Jesse had eight sons, and in Saul's time he was old and well advanced in years. David was the son of Jesse and from Bethlehem. Jesus was born where David was born, Bethlehem. Prophecy fufilled.
The Coming of Jesus- Micah 5:2
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans [ Or rulers ] of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins [ Hebrew goings out ] are from of old, from ancient times. [ Or from days of eternity ] " Micah 5:1
[ A Promised Ruler From Bethlehem] Marshal your troops, O city of troops, [ Or Strengthen your walls, O walled city ] for a siege is laid against us. They will strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a rod. Matthew 2:6
" 'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will be the shepherd of my people Israel.' [ Micah 5:2] " John 7:42
Still others asked, "How can the Christ come from Galilee? Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from David's family [ Greek seed] and from Bethlehem, the town where David lived?" 1 Samuel 16:1 [ Samuel Anoints David ] The LORD said to Samuel, "How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him as king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and be on your way; I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem. I have chosen one of his sons to be king."
1 Samuel 16:18 One of the servants answered, "I have seen a son of Jesse of Bethlehem who knows how to play the harp. He is a brave man and a warrior. He speaks well and is a fine-looking man. And the LORD is with him." 1 Samuel 17:12
Now David was the son of an Ephrathite named Jesse, who was from Bethlehem in Judah. Jesse had eight sons, and in Saul's time he was old and well advanced in years. David was the son of Jesse and from Bethlehem. Jesus was born where David was born, Bethlehem. Prophecy fufilled.
Did you read what I typed just above your post, Mercy? How was he prophecy fulfilled when it is clear it was NOT speaking of Jesus as I showed above? Secondly, are you also aware that Bethlehem and Ephrathah were actual people who had actual clans?
Again, Micah's words shows he believed a leader was to come from the clan of Bethlehem. That's fine, but he clearly does NOT have Jesus in mind and the REST of the chapter bears this fact out.
Did you read what I typed just above your post, Mercy? How was he prophecy fulfilled when it is clear it was NOT speaking of Jesus as I showed above? Secondly, are you also aware that Bethlehem and Ephrathah were actual people who had actual clans?
Again, Micah's words shows he believed a leader was to come from the clan of Bethlehem. That's fine, but he clearly does NOT have Jesus in mind and the REST of the chapter bears this fact out.
I read it, believe what you like.
God's word is plain to me.
God never contradicts his own word. OT backs up NT. NT backs up OT.
God prophesised about his Son from Samuel, the Psalms and all the Prophets.
Seek and Knock and the door shall be opened!
Have a wonderful day!
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.
