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.
This is perhaps Matthew's biggest blunder in claiming prophecy fulfillment. It clearly demonstrates that the writer of Matthew's gospel wasn't an eyewitness to the events described (riding on two animals would be memorable) and doesn't understand the Hebrew idiom. While Mark, Luke, and John all have Jesus sending for one animal and riding it into Jerusalem in the usual fashion, Matthew claims that Jesus sent for and rode two animals to fulfill a prophecy.
Matt 21:1-7 1When they had come near Jerusalem and had reached Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, 2saying to them, ‘Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie themand bring them to me. 3If anyone says anything to you, just say this,“The Lord needs them.” And he will send them immediately.*’ 4This took place to fulfil what had been spoken through the prophet, saying,
5 ‘Tell the daughter of Zion, Look, your king is coming to you, humble, and mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’The disciples went and did as Jesus had directed them; 7they brought the donkey and the colt, and put their cloaks on them, and he sat on them." (NRSV)
A number of modern bibles try to translate this passage differently to avoid the obvious error. Some simply eliminate the word "and" from "mounted on a donkey, and on a colt" but it's there in the earliest editions:
"and brought the ass and the colt, and put their mantles on them, and he sat upon them. "(Codex Sinaticus, 325 AD)
I do not think you are looking for understanding, only an opportunity to critique the Bible.
Of course Jesus did not ride both the she-ass and colt into Jerusalem. Do you imagine him riding them in Roman style? LOL Do you think that is what Matthew has written?
In Zechariah 9:9....The Prophet of the Lord said ``Rejoice greatly. O daughter of Zion, shout, O daughter of Jerusalem, behold your King comes to you, he is just, and having salvation, lowly, and riding on a donkey, and on a colt the foal of a donkey``....were in Matthew 21 the donkey was a female and the colt was her baby , were a foal is less than three months old still on mothers milk and Jesus would not ride a three month old colt donkey, and he would not take a mother donkey who had a baby without the baby....See contradiction in the Word were there are four gospels of the account of Jesus and prophets were the Lord talks of things to come can be lost in time, different customs and interpretations .....
RESPONSE:
Whoa! Were did the less than three month's old come from? Why would Jesus send for a three month old animal in only one gospel account?
Why would Jesus ride on a three month old animal ("on them he "rode").
I checked the Greek on the Matthew text and the translation is essentially correct. Looking at the Greek, it not hard to understand why it says that Jesus rode on them. The plural pronoun is used through the whole text to refer to the mother and colt. It would have been kind of clumsy and inconsistent to change at the very end. The text clearly indicates Jesus rode on the colt, so why get so picky about it. It just goes to show that there are some people are looking for any and every excuse to deny the divine inspiritaton of the Bible.
Which brings up a question. Why are people who are obviously not Christian coming on a Christianity forum, trying to destroy people's faith?. I always hear about how bad Christians are because they do evangelism. If that's true, than isn't it also a bad thing to try to change peoples minds so that they deny Christianity.
RESPONSE:
You seem trapped in "either-or" thinking. This leads to the "one has to accept everything as actually happening" or one has to "reject everything."
Shouldn't we be willing to separate fact from fiction?
St. Paul "Test everything. Hold fast to that which is true." John: "You shall know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
Last edited by ancient warrior; 12-11-2011 at 06:41 AM..
Reason: addition
Four reliable witnesses usually give four accounts that are similar but differ in the details. Ask any cop. Sorry. Consider doing jury duty next time it is offered. You'll see what I mean.
RESPONSE:
Is the testimony given in a criminal divinely inspired as the bible is said to be? If so, did God inspire errors?
I do not think you are looking for understanding, only an opportunity to critique the Bible.
Of course Jesus did not ride both the she-ass and colt into Jerusalem. Do you imagine him riding them in Roman style? LOL Do you think that is what Matthew has written?
Do you really want the verses explained?
RESPONSE:
I want to separate fact (it happened) from fiction (it didn't happen).
St Poaul: "Test everything. Hold fast to that which is true."
The writer of Matthew wrote what the writer of Matthew wrote. The plain meaning of words is clear in his writing.
Are you going to argue that Matthew didn't mean what he clearly wrote?
Last edited by ancient warrior; 12-11-2011 at 06:40 AM..
Reason: addition
I want to separate fact (it happened) from fiction (it didn't happen).
St Poaul: "Test everything. Hold fast to that which is true."
The writer of Matthew wrote what the writer of Matthew wrote. The plain meaning of words is clear in his writing.
Are you going to argue that Matthew didn't mean what he clearly wrote?
You wrote: "St Poaul:" ...... guess that means ancient warrior didn't mean what ancient warrior clearly wrote. So much for ...The plain meaning of words is clear in his writing.
Luckly, it doesn't take much to separate what you write from fact (it happened) from fiction (it didn't happen).
"The Bible is full of errors" has long been a debate and it certainly isn't going to be resolved on City Data Forums. Those who believe the Bible is full of errors believe that because they look for them. They want to find them. Nothing makes them happier than when they find supposed errors. They go on and on at great length about them and, even when shown the error is NOT in scripture but with THEM and THEIR (lack of) understanding, they still go on and on because of their hatred.
That is the truth of the matter. It's the truth because when any person reads the scriptures and sincerely seeks God and the truth, they find Him.
The scriptures themselves are perfect in every way. There may be man-made errors in translations along the way, but, even then, if someone is seeking God and the truth of His Word, the Holy Spirit will not be hindered by man's errors. The truth will still be found by the one seeking it.
This is the Bible's promise. Either you believe it or you don't. The decision, and the consequences of that decision, are owned by you alone.
"The Bible is full of errors" has long been a debate and it certainly isn't going to be resolved on City Data Forums. Those who believe the Bible is full of errors believe that because they look for them. They want to find them. Nothing makes them happier than when they find supposed errors. They go on and on at great length about them and, even when shown the error is NOT in scripture but with THEM and THEIR (lack of) understanding, they still go on and on because of their hatred.
That is the truth of the matter. It's the truth because when any person reads the scriptures and sincerely seeks God and the truth, they find Him.
The scriptures themselves are perfect in every way. There may be man-made errors in translations along the way, but, even then, if someone is seeking God and the truth of His Word, the Holy Spirit will not be hindered by man's errors. The truth will still be found by the one seeking it.
This is the Bible's promise. Either you believe it or you don't. The decision, and the consequences of that decision, are owned by you alone.
I checked the Greek on the Matthew text and the translation is essentially correct. Looking at the Greek, it not hard to understand why it says that Jesus rode on them. The plural pronoun is used through the whole text to refer to the mother and colt. It would have been kind of clumsy and inconsistent to change at the very end. The text clearly indicates Jesus rode on the colt, so why get so picky about it. It just goes to show that there are some people are looking for any and every excuse to deny the divine inspiritaton of the Bible.
Which brings up a question. Why are people who are obviously not Christian coming on a Christianity forum, trying to destroy people's faith?. I always hear about how bad Christians are because they do evangelism. If that's true, than isn't it also a bad thing to try to change peoples minds so that they deny Christianity.
They are agnostics. They desire a sign. I think many of us are guilty of that.
>>"The Bible is full of errors" has long been a debate and it certainly isn't going to be resolved on City Data Forums. Those who believe the Bible is full of errors believe that because they look for them. <<
RESPONSE:
Yes. Some preferto overlook the many errors so that they can continue to claim divine authorship or the bible.
>> They go on and on at great length about them and, even when shown the error is NOT in scripture but with THEM and THEIR (lack of) understanding, they still go on and on because of their hatred.<<
RESPONSE:
Actually, it's not their hatred. It's their lack of gullibility.
>>That is the truth of the matter. It's the truth because when any person reads the scriptures and sincerely seeks God and the truth, they find Him.<<
RESPONSE:
"Any person"? What about historians?
>>The scriptures themselves are perfect in every way. There may be man-made errors in translations along the way, but, even then, if someone is seeking God and the truth of His Word, the Holy Spirit will not be hindered by man's errors. The truth will still be found by the one seeking it.<<
RESPONSE:
"Man-made errors" Like the many in Matthew's gospel?
Matt 2: 23" There he made his home in a town called Nazareth, so that what had been spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, ‘He will be called a Nazorean."
The problem here is that there is not such prophecy in the Old Testament. Moreover, there is not even a mention of Nazareth in the Old Testament.
Don't you think an intellectually honest person should investigate the reliability of what somebody tells him "isperfect in every way" before believing it???
>>This is the Bible's promise. Either you believe it or you don't. The decision, and the consequences of that decision, are owned by you alone.
RESPONSE:
Some prefer to investigate the sources of their beliefs rather than just believe what someone tells them is true.
Last edited by ancient warrior; 12-11-2011 at 10:09 AM..
Reason: typo
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.
