Christian apologists twist Old Testament scriptures to point them to Jesus (Catholic, Jesus Christ)
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.
Jesus, as the high priest of the celestial temple would have had many names, so it is a possibility that the early Christians thought Immanuel was one of them.
Just do not tell the Trinitarians Michael could also have been one of them, that is what the JW's teach.
"He shall be called mighty. He shall carry a person of many colors and with speed shall defeat his foes. He will arise out of the great nation of Kentucky and will be crowned in an arena known for round black hat. His name shall be...the winner."
This is just one of the many ways that scriptures are a vague template that can be used by later generations to fit whatever purpose presents itself. It is there in the service of confirmation bias by people who have already bought into the general idea.
This is just one of the many ways that scriptures are a vague template that can be used by later generations to fit whatever purpose presents itself. It is there in the service of confirmation bias by people who have already bought into the general idea.
And that's exactly what the gospel writers did. Matthew was the real culprit here desperate to convince his readers that this Jesus fellow was the real Messiah with fantastic tales of fulfilled prophecy through vague extremely opaque words that are nothing more than flowery poetry.
The one thing above all I despise about Christianity is its flagrant dishonesty in saying that Jesus fulfilled 400+ scriptures, and the way apologists dishonestly push it as propaganda to convince gullible dopes to join. It galls me that because they haven't anything genuine to prove Jesus was real they have to resort to trickery and deceit. The Internet is exposing their dirty under-dealings, and websites devoted to showing nothing in the Old Testament pertains to Jesus is gaining lots of traction.
An OT verse often claimed to be a prophecy about Jasus:
"I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever” (2 Samuel 7:12–13).
It's not about Jesus. It's about Solomon. Solomon was David's legitimate offspring, not Jesus. He was David's flesh and blood, not Jesus. He's the one who built the First Temple, but his throne was not established forever. That's another failed prophecy.
This prophecy is indeed literally about Solomon.
However, we can also see how Solomon is a type of Christ, and so the prophecy also applies to Christ - being both a physical descendant of David and the possessor of an everlasting Kingdom (the Church).
It seems that you may be unfamiliar with the exegetical method of Typology.
I hope you can see, Mike that under this theory of "typeology" words in the OT could be applied to anyone the writer wanted it to apply to.
Look at the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke. All messed up. Apologists couldn't figure out how to explain why a supposed perfect God would make such a glaring error as dictating two different heritages for Jesus until some brainiac in the Church hit upon the idea of saying Matthew's was Joseph's lineage and Luke's was Mary's. Deviously clever, huh?
Last edited by thrillobyte; 04-17-2023 at 10:12 AM..
I hope you can see, Mike that under this theory of "typeology" words in the OT could be applied to anyone the writer wanted it to apply to.
Not "anyone". The prophecy would still have to fit.
Who else can you apply the aforementioned prophecy to other than Solomon and Jesus?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
Look at the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke. All messed up. Apologists couldn't figure out how to explain why a supposed perfect God would make such a glaring error as dictating two different heritages for Jesus until some brainiac in the Church hit upon the idea of saying Matthew's was Joseph's lineage and Luke's was Mary's. Deviously clever, huh?
It's not "all messed up". This alleged "problem" has been recognized since the earliest days of the Church.
The claim that Matthew expressed Joseph's lineage and Luke Mary's is not an *official solution*. It's one proposed solution.
Another proposed solution is that both Joseph and his father were the products of Levirate marriages; so one account gives Joseph's biological lineage, while the other gives his legal lineage.
The most likely solution is that expressed by St. Augustine; that Joseph was adopted. So Matthew lists Joseph's biological lineage (note the language of "begot"), while Luke lists Joseph's legal lineage (note the more legal language: "who was of / son of").
Augustine's solution is also fitting; because it would mean that Joseph, like Jesus, had in effect "two fathers". Joseph was asked to raise and care for a child who was not his own biologically, just as his own adoptive father was.
However, we can also see how Solomon is a type of Christ, and so the prophecy also applies to Christ - being both a physical descendant of David and the possessor of an everlasting Kingdom (the Church).
It seems that you may be unfamiliar with the exegetical method of Typology.
David's descendants did not occupy the throne forever.
They most certainly do! Jesus Christ is a descendent of David, and His throne is everlasting.
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.