Christian proof texts from the Jewish bible are false prophecies (translation, Isaiah)

[ivria66]

Psalm 22:16, Incorrect Christian translation;

For dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me; they pierced my hands and my feet.

Correct translation;

For dogs have encompassed me; a compnay of evildoers have inclosed me; like a lion they are at my hands and my feet.


The word in question is ka'ari, which means lion, like a lion, as a lion etc. the church translated it in this verse, and only in this verse as pierced. In Psalm 22:12-13 and Psalm 22:20-21 the church translated it correctly and also in verse 38:13 ka'ari is translated correctly by the church. Daqar or ratza are the Hebrew words used for pierce or pierced. Hmm....

Isaiah 7:14, Incorrect Christian translation;

Therefore the Lord himself wil give you a sign. The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son , and will call him Immanuel.

The correct translation;

Therefore the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

The word in question here is b'alma. It does not mean virgin, it means a young woman of child bearing age. Betulah is the Hebrew word for virgin. Psalm 30:18-20 uses the same word, b'almah, it is used to describe an adulterous woman, I don't know how an adulterous woman could be a virgin, and apparently the church realized that as well so they translated b'almah correctly in this verse as a young woman. Not to mention that this verse is speaking of a woman at the time that is currently pregnant, not a woman that is going to be pregnant in the future as the Christian translation will have you believe. This chapter is speaking of things that are going on at the time, not the future. Again, hmm.....


Micah 5:2 Incorrect Christian translation;

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be a ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity.

Correct translation;

Bethlehem Ephrahtah you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah, but from you someone will emerge for Me to be a ruler over Israel; and his origins will be from early times, from days of old.

The word or phrase in question is mai bolam. It means days of old, not eternity, and the church translated the exact same phrase correctly in Isaiah 63:9, 63:11, Amos 9:11, Micah 7:14 and Malachi 3:4. Shall I say hmm...?

There is plenty more, but for now, I will let you all stew on this for a while. Anyone with half a brain will research this on their own, instead of just following orders. Think about it. Most people agree Jews are pretty smart. Most Nobel prize winners are and have been Jewish, etc. Jews have always read the Hebrew bible in Hebrew, not relying on translators with an ulterior motive, so it baffles me that Christians that don't know how to read Hebrew and know nothing about Jews, seem to think they understand the Jewish bible better than those who actually wrote it and have always studied and argued over it in the orginal Hebrew. Need I do this again? Hmm....

[DaniMae1]

Really? Interesting. I'm going to look into this! Gonna try anyhow...not exactly my area.

[Antlered Chamataka]

Originally Posted by ivria66

There is plenty more, but for now, I will let you all stew on this for a while. Anyone with half a brain will research this on their own, instead of just following orders. Think about it. Most people agree Jews are pretty smart. Most Nobel prize winners are and have been Jewish, etc. Jews have always read the Hebrew bible in Hebrew, not relying on translators with an ulterior motive, so it baffles me that Christians that don't know how to read Hebrew and know nothing about Jews, seem to think they understand the Jewish bible better than those who actually wrote it and have always studied and argued over it in the orginal Hebrew. Need I do this again? Hmm....

I don't like this at all.

I've heard that one race was smart and are winners since I was three.

I was given this diatribe since my school that I wasn't as better owing to mixed blood that runs inside me, the by-product of inter-caste marriage. Back home, they also use this logic on mixed breed horses and cattle.

So, stuff it. Smartness and being a winner is God-given.

And the Early fathers all spoke Greek/Hebrew and were thoroughly Greek/Hebrew-educated and Greek was the medium of instruction. If you have the misconception that the Romans spoke Latin, you are the one who's lost in translation

[AONE]

Well when you correct for translation, then consider that nothing was written down so so many centuries it reinforces that perhaps one should question all they hear and read. If it doesn't make sense one must consider it may be wrong.
Did we mention the zealots that rewrote it to a modern comfort language?

[InsaneInDaMembrane]

Originally Posted by ivria66

Psalm 22:16, Incorrect Christian translation;

For dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me; they pierced my hands and my feet.

Correct translation;

For dogs have encompassed me; a compnay of evildoers have inclosed me; like a lion they are at my hands and my feet.


The word in question is ka'ari, which means lion, like a lion, as a lion etc. the church translated it in this verse, and only in this verse as pierced. In Psalm 22:12-13 and Psalm 22:20-21 the church translated it correctly and also in verse 38:13 ka'ari is translated correctly by the church. Daqar or ratza are the Hebrew words used for pierce or pierced. Hmm....

Isaiah 7:14, Incorrect Christian translation;

Therefore the Lord himself wil give you a sign. The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son , and will call him Immanuel.

The correct translation;

Therefore the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

The word in question here is b'alma. It does not mean virgin, it means a young woman of child bearing age. Betulah is the Hebrew word for virgin. Psalm 30:18-20 uses the same word, b'almah, it is used to describe an adulterous woman, I don't know how an adulterous woman could be a virgin, and apparently the church realized that as well so they translated b'almah correctly in this verse as a young woman. Not to mention that this verse is speaking of a woman at the time that is currently pregnant, not a woman that is going to be pregnant in the future as the Christian translation will have you believe. This chapter is speaking of things that are going on at the time, not the future. Again, hmm.....


Micah 5:2 Incorrect Christian translation;

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be a ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity.

Correct translation;

Bethlehem Ephrahtah you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah, but from you someone will emerge for Me to be a ruler over Israel; and his origins will be from early times, from days of old.

The word or phrase in question is mai bolam. It means days of old, not eternity, and the church translated the exact same phrase correctly in Isaiah 63:9, 63:11, Amos 9:11, Micah 7:14 and Malachi 3:4. Shall I say hmm...?

There is plenty more, but for now, I will let you all stew on this for a while. Anyone with half a brain will research this on their own, instead of just following orders. Think about it. Most people agree Jews are pretty smart. Most Nobel prize winners are and have been Jewish, etc. Jews have always read the Hebrew bible in Hebrew, not relying on translators with an ulterior motive, so it baffles me that Christians that don't know how to read Hebrew and know nothing about Jews, seem to think they understand the Jewish bible better than those who actually wrote it and have always studied and argued over it in the orginal Hebrew. Need I do this again? Hmm....

And may I add something about the last one mentioned.

The writer of Matthew jumps all over Micah 5 to PROVE that Jesus was predicted by the prophets and as a result, so has generations of Christians. First of all, the only thing in the first few verses Christians can hang on to is the very area you debunked. The other problem with this whole alleged prophecy is that in verse 5, the context PROVES the writer of Micah does not have any human 700 years in the future in mind. He states that the same person mentioned in the earlier verses will be the one to deliver them from the Assyrians. The Assyrians were long gone BEFORE Jesus' time.

[kdbrich]

Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane

And may I add something about the last one mentioned.

The writer of Matthew jumps all over Micah 5 to PROVE that Jesus was predicted by the prophets and as a result, so has generations of Christians. First of all, the only thing in the first few verses Christians can hang on to is the very area you debunked. The other problem with this whole alleged prophecy is that in verse 5, the context PROVES the writer of Micah does not have any human 700 years in the future in mind. He states that the same person mentioned in the earlier verses will be the one to deliver them from the Assyrians. The Assyrians were long gone BEFORE Jesus' time.

Never heard of dual context?

[InsaneInDaMembrane]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

Never heard of dual context?

Yes, and the "gap theory" and all the other "sciences" in Christian apologetics. Unfortunately, this passage has nothing to do with 'dual context' in its original intentions. That is a later Christian invention to make their theology work.

The funny thing is, Christians love to talk about "context," but only care about it when it supports their stance. In this case, Christians seem to conveniently overlook the historical context.

As it stands, the prophet Micah lived in the days of king Hezekiah of Judah during the Assyrian invasion and siege on Jerusalem. Micah comes in with morale support by giving this grand prediction that a hero and his companions would rise up and turn back the Assyrian threat by beating them all the way back to their capital city. Problem is, no such thing happened as Micah predicted and worse, Micah was not even addressing any event 700 years in the future. This is nothing more than a clear example of the writer of the book of Matthew stretching to MAKE Jesus fit into his biased theology which was then followed by Christians since that time.

[AREQUIPA]

Originally Posted by ivria66

Psalm 22:16, Incorrect Christian translation;

For dogs have compassed me, the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me; they pierced my hands and my feet.

Correct translation;

For dogs have encompassed me; a compnay of evildoers have inclosed me; like a lion they are at my hands and my feet.


The word in question is ka'ari, which means lion, like a lion, as a lion etc. the church translated it in this verse, and only in this verse as pierced. In Psalm 22:12-13 and Psalm 22:20-21 the church translated it correctly and also in verse 38:13 ka'ari is translated correctly by the church. Daqar or ratza are the Hebrew words used for pierce or pierced. Hmm....

Isaiah 7:14, Incorrect Christian translation;

Therefore the Lord himself wil give you a sign. The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son , and will call him Immanuel.

The correct translation;

Therefore the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.

The word in question here is b'alma. It does not mean virgin, it means a young woman of child bearing age. Betulah is the Hebrew word for virgin. Psalm 30:18-20 uses the same word, b'almah, it is used to describe an adulterous woman, I don't know how an adulterous woman could be a virgin, and apparently the church realized that as well so they translated b'almah correctly in this verse as a young woman. Not to mention that this verse is speaking of a woman at the time that is currently pregnant, not a woman that is going to be pregnant in the future as the Christian translation will have you believe. This chapter is speaking of things that are going on at the time, not the future. Again, hmm.....


Micah 5:2 Incorrect Christian translation;

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be a ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity.

Correct translation;

Bethlehem Ephrahtah you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah, but from you someone will emerge for Me to be a ruler over Israel; and his origins will be from early times, from days of old.

The word or phrase in question is mai bolam. It means days of old, not eternity, and the church translated the exact same phrase correctly in Isaiah 63:9, 63:11, Amos 9:11, Micah 7:14 and Malachi 3:4. Shall I say hmm...?

There is plenty more, but for now, I will let you all stew on this for a while. Anyone with half a brain will research this on their own, instead of just following orders. Think about it. Most people agree Jews are pretty smart. Most Nobel prize winners are and have been Jewish, etc. Jews have always read the Hebrew bible in Hebrew, not relying on translators with an ulterior motive, so it baffles me that Christians that don't know how to read Hebrew and know nothing about Jews, seem to think they understand the Jewish bible better than those who actually wrote it and have always studied and argued over it in the orginal Hebrew. Need I do this again? Hmm....

Thank you. When I was doing a post on the misuse of OT passages to cut and paste into the Jesus biography, I remembered the 'pierced' passage was supposed to be arguable. I looked for it but couldn't find it.

I was also told that the reason a lot of gospel quotes are misused, mistranslated or out of context is because of the ambiguities of translating the Pentateuch into greek in the Alexandran septuagint. If so, why on earth would Jesus' supposed followers be using a translation into greek?

The obvious answer is that they were greek and couldn't read Aramaic or Hebrew. The conclusion is that they were not Jesus' original disciples. Just one more reason to think so.

[ivria66]

Colosus, I don't understand the meaning of your post. I never said any one race was smarter than any other race. All I am trying to point out is that Christians think Jews are stupid for not seeing the "hundreds of prophecies in the Hebrew bible" that foretell Jesus' coming. They are the ones that know nothing about Jews and Hebrew, they have to rely on translators with an ulterior motive and we are the ones that have alwasy studied the Hebrew bible in the original Hebrew, not to mention we wrote the dang thing. Jews were forced to become educated because of Christian anti-semitism. Education is what has saved us from extinction. Therefore, as a result, many Nobel winners in all categories have been Jewish.

[InsaneInDaMembrane]

Originally Posted by ivria66

Colosus, I don't understand the meaning of your post. I never said any one race was smarter than any other race. All I am trying to point out is that Christians think Jews are stupid for not seeing the "hundreds of prophecies in the Hebrew bible" that foretell Jesus' coming. They are the ones that know nothing about Jews and Hebrew, they have to rely on translators with an ulterior motive and we are the ones that have alwasy studied the Hebrew bible in the original Hebrew, not to mention we wrote the dang thing. Jews were forced to become educated because of Christian anti-semitism. Education is what has saved us from extinction. Therefore, as a result, many Nobel winners in all categories have been Jewish.

Yup...[SOME] Christians feel THEY can tell the Jews or thing or two about the Jewish Bible, how it should be interpreted and who some of the prophecies are talking about. When the Jews don't agree or buy into the bull, those Christians claim the Jews are "blind" to "the truth" for rejecting Jesus.

You have quite a few Jews today, including LEARNED rabbis who do not even believe their own hype (as written in the Bible) and even doubt the existence of the fantastic stories surrounding their ancient heroes (some even doubt some of the heros actually existed), but those Christians are willing to tell the people (Jews) who gave us the stories what is true and what is not. Talk about audacity. It's akin to Muhammed stepping on to the stage of history and telling both the Jews and Christian they don't know what the hell they're talking about and HE was the one who had the real truth.