Fulfillment of Prophecy in the New Testament

[Brian2]

So sorry, but I guess because modern science says resurrection is impossible, even for God. It could not have happened. Poor God, when he was young he could do anything. Not anymore, it's kind of sad. Which means Christians that believe in the resurrection are to be pitied. They got it wrong. There is no resurrection. As Abdul Baha' says, "the clergy have neither understood the meaning of the Gospels nor comprehended the symbols..." And poor clergy too, they stupidly thought the Bible could be taken literally, and that it was the Truth from God. It's not. Not if if doesn't agree with science.​

There will always be people who require proof and maybe it is becoming more common with materialist thinking in most levels of education, and esp universities.
Nevertheless there are plenty of scientists who are believers in a God and in the Bible.
Personally I think the young earth creationists do some damage to the science/Bible relationship.​

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm not sure what happened, but I know that people don't literally rise from the dead after three days.

As does any rational person know that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Stealing the body is a possibility.

That all the resurrection stories are fictitious stories is the best explanation, Imo.
Why they were ever written and why God allowed millions of people to be duped by them only God knows.
The latter has something to do with free will.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you basically have people not really seeing Jesus, but inserting their desire to see a risen Jesus onto other people. This would account for the growth of the belief that J was risen from the dead.

And that is what we still have today, a desire to believe Jesus rose from the dead.
This would account for the maintenance of the belief that J was risen from the dead.

But that belief is not growing anymore, it is shrinking, as most people in this age realize dead bodies to do not come back to life. Even Christians are coming to realize that.

What many liberal theologians believe about Jesus' death

 

[CG Didymus]

It means that the people of earth are left without a Messenger for hundreds or even thousands of years.

It's worse than that. Their explanation of why there are so many contradictions is that they say the Scriptures have been misinterpreted... maybe even tampered with, like the thing about Isaac or Ishmael being taken to be sacrificed. But do Baha'is really trust the Scriptures of the other religions? Not really, they say that they are not 100% authentic, only things that Baha'u'llah quotes are authentic, and then he'll probably interpret it completely different than what Christians have believed they were saying. Like the "comforter" and the resurrection, and about no Satan, etc.

So a prophet comes, gives a message, but he doesn't write it. His followers, like with Jesus, might even have been eyewitnesses, so who knows how accurate the story is. Then, Baha'is say that some things, like the resurrection, were meant to be symbolic, but the ignorant believers took it literal. So for 600 years there was no "true" message... just a mangled, distorted message. Then came Muhammad and straightened things out by saying that Jesus was not God. And told stories about the young Jesus making clay birds and making them come to life. Now we know the truth about all religions... it is what the Baha'is say they are. Krishna did not teach about reincarnation. That's a misinterpretation. And Buddha taught about there being only one God. Where? Who knows?

In that respect the Baha'is do with the whole Bible what Christianity is accused of doing with the OT. There are big differences however imo when the texts that the Baha'is use are examined.

I took it for granted that the from mountain to mountain and sea to sea was absolutely a fulfilled prophecy when I first heard it decades ago. It was only recently that I started checking on that one. It's one of the most used prophecies along with the 1260 days, changed to years, and starting with the Hegira of Muhammad, then changed to lunar years and there it is, plain as day, it comes out to 1844. My problem with them one... why start it with the Hegira in 621AD? Of course they have a perfectly good reason why... but then they use it 5 or 6 times for the 3 1/2 days and forty months and any other things that can be converted into 1260 years. Each thing describes a different event, and all of them they make start in 621AD and end with 1844.

 

[Brian2]

As does any rational person know that.

It was a good trick wasn't it. It certainly shows that Jesus approved of Jesus and confirmed Him.
But if you don't think that God can raise someone from the dead, that is your choice and your God.

 

[Brian2]

So a prophet comes, gives a message, but he doesn't write it. His followers, like with Jesus, might even have been eyewitnesses, so who knows how accurate the story is. Then, Baha'is say that some things, like the resurrection, were meant to be symbolic, but the ignorant believers took it literal. So for 600 years there was no "true" message... just a mangled, distorted message. Then came Muhammad and straightened things out by saying that Jesus was not God. And told stories about the young Jesus making clay birds and making them come to life. Now we know the truth about all religions... it is what the Baha'is say they are. Krishna did not teach about reincarnation. That's a misinterpretation. And Buddha taught about there being only one God. Where? Who knows?

And Muhammad even denies that Jesus was crucified. That is a denial of the gospel message, but Baha'u'llah goes back to saying Jesus was crucified and denies the resurrection and says the gospel was only applicable in Jesus dispensation. (not that their retelling of the gospel is 100% accurate)
I think it is the Muslims who say that God has no Sons and he said that he was the last of the prophets (according to Muslim interpretation).

I took it for granted that the from mountain to mountain and sea to sea was absolutely a fulfilled prophecy when I first heard it decades ago. It was only recently that I started checking on that one. It's one of the most used prophecies along with the 1260 days, changed to years, and starting with the Hegira of Muhammad, then changed to lunar years and there it is, plain as day, it comes out to 1844. My problem with them one... why start it with the Hegira in 621AD? Of course they have a perfectly good reason why... but then they use it 5 or 6 times for the 3 1/2 days and forty months and any other things that can be converted into 1260 years. Each thing describes a different event, and all of them they make start in 621AD and end with 1844.

And when the truth of their "interpretations" are pointed out, it does not really matter, because they do not really believe what the Bible says, only what Baha'i/Baha'u'llah says about the Bible anyway,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and the same with the scriptures of other religions.

 

[cataway]

That all the resurrection stories are fictitious stories is the best explanation, Imo.
Why they were ever written and why God allowed millions of people to be duped by them only God knows.
The latter has something to do with free will.

it seems your god does not have any power to do anything at all

 

[Brian2]

Then I thought back to an earlier point -- that in Hebrew, the word translated "eternal" sometimes doesn't mean "eternal" -- in fact, in the case of a freed slave it means much less time. Ex 21:6 says that the slave stays with the master "eternal" but Lev. 25:40 says he goes free at the Jubilee. This is explained by the fact that the Hebrew word can mean something different. And yet the Septuagint uses the same rooted word for "eternal" in Ex 21:6 (see here to confirm https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/HatchRedpath1-01alpha-0039.png ) as it uses in Heb 13! So either Christian theology must say that there is a contradiction in the text, or they must accept that the Hebrew word can mean "for a certain amount of time," and that, therefore the Greek word that they used to translate the text, which shares a root with the word in Heb 13:20, also can mean for a specific amount of time, i.e. not necessarily "eternal." This would make your claim about an "eternal covenant" a matter of interpretation, not an explicit claim of the text.

I checked the Tanakh and found that it also translates Ex 21:6 as "forever".
Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 21 (Parshah Mishpatim)
I'm no Hebrew or Greek scholar so maybe the word is forever at that place, which at the longest is to the end of the slave's life or the master's life.
I must say that sharing a root in the Greek does not mean that the word has the same meaning.
The word used in the Septuagint (165 in Strong's Concordance) which is similar to "eternity" "forever" (166 in Strong's concordance) and can even be translated that way at times, is a word that does not have to mean "forever" or "eternal".
1 And these [are] the ordinances which thou shalt set before them. 2 If thou bu... EXODUS / ΕΞΟΔΟΣ21 - Bilingual Septuagint
So the eternal of Heb 13:20,21 is correct and the forever of Ex 21:6 is the right Greek word which has been translated as "forever" in the LXX translation even though it does not have to mean that.
The Hebrew word is also translated "forever" in the Tanakh. Does the Hebrew word mean "forever" in the Tanakh? and if not, I wonder why it is translated that way.

 

[rosends]

I checked the Tanakh and found that it also translates Ex 21:6 as "forever".
Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 21 (Parshah Mishpatim)
I'm no Hebrew or Greek scholar so maybe the word is forever at that place, which at the longest is to the end of the slave's life or the master's life.
I must say that sharing a root in the Greek does not mean that the word has the same meaning.
The word used in the Septuagint (165 in Strong's Concordance) which is similar to "eternity" "forever" (166 in Strong's concordance) and can even be translated that way at times, is a word that does not have to mean "forever" or "eternal".
1 And these [are] the ordinances which thou shalt set before them. 2 If thou bu... EXODUS / ΕΞΟΔΟΣ21 - Bilingual Septuagint
So the eternal of Heb 13:20,21 is correct and the forever of Ex 21:6 is the right Greek word which has been translated as "forever" in the LXX translation even though it does not have to mean that.
The Hebrew word is also translated "forever" in the Tanakh. Does the Hebrew word mean "forever" in the Tanakh? and if not, I wonder why it is translated that way.

The word is translated as "forever" in some English translations on Jewish sites because the site also is aware of the oral law which goes along with the text. Had you but clicked "Show Rashi" on the page you referenced, you would have found, directly under the verse:
"Heb. לְעֹלָם, until the Jubilee year [the fiftieth year of the cycle]. Or perhaps it means literally forever, as its apparent meaning? Therefore, the Torah states [in reference to the Jubilee year]: “and each man to his family you shall return” (Lev. 25:10). [This] informs [us] that fifty years are called עֹלָם. But [this does] not [mean] that he must serve him [his master] the entire fifty years, but he must serve him until the Jubilee year, regardless of whether it is near or far off. — [From Mechilta, Kid. 15a]"

If you look at things in the vacuum of the simple English, you miss out on what the text says.

I still find it funny that you can insist that the word which translates to "forever" in one place may not mean "forever" in another place, but it does where it suits you. Judaism explains the word handily, using both an oral law and the understanding of a larger phrase (including other words like "ad"). You have a single word without any phrase and see that the word might mean something else (unless you see a biblical contradiction) but you still insist that it means "forever." Do you have some sort of reason to say this? The word is open to more than one meaning and it lacks any additional words to complete the phrase.

Have fun with that.

 

[Brian2]

So the Greek word means "forever" and was used in a place which couldn't possibly have meant "forever" because that would have introduced a textual contradiction.

As I just posted, the Tanakh does the same. If he Hebrew does not mean forever then I wonder why it is translated that way. Maybe a meaning of olam can be "forever" but not necessarily. I know that the Greek can mean forever, but not necessarily.
The easiest thing could be to translate the words as "forever" and then let people fight out the right meaning.
Translations are a real pain at times.

One refers to ALL the commandments which I have commanded you. The other refers to "all the words in this Torah." (each uses the word "kol" which means all) How you can get from that "some" is beyond me.

Deut 12:28 Keep and hearken to all these words that I command you, that it may benefit you and your children after you, forever, when you do what is good and proper in the eyes of the Lord, your God.

Deut 29: 24 Then they will say, It is because they abandoned the covenant of the Lord, God of their fathers, [the covenant] which He made with them when He took them out of the land of Egypt,
25 For they went and served other deities, prostrating themselves to them deities which they had not known, and which He had not apportioned to them.
26 And the Lord's fury raged against that land, bringing upon it the entire curse written in this book.
27 And the Lord uprooted them from upon their land, with fury, anger and great wrath, and He cast them to another land, as it is this day.
28The hidden things belong to the Lord, our God, but the revealed things apply to us and to our children forever: that we must fulfill all the words of this Torah.
כח הַנִּ֨סְתָּרֹ֔ת לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֵ֑ינוּ וְהַנִּגְלֹ֞ת ֹלָֹ֤נוֹּ ֹוֹּלְֹבָֹנֵֹ֨יֹנֹוּ֨ עַד־עוֹלָ֔ם לַֽעֲשׂ֕וֹת אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֖י הַתּוֹרָ֥ה הַזֹּֽאת:

The above are from the Tanakh. Deut 12:28 is advice to the Jews to keep all the command, but not keep them forever, it says, that it may benefit you and your children forever, when you do what is good and proper.
Certainly nothing about keeping all the commands in the Law of Moses forever.
In the next quote it is interesting that it can be seen that at least part of it was written when either the Northern or Southern Kingdoms were in Exile.
Verse 28 says that the revealed things apply to the Jews forever: that you are to fulfil all the words of this Torah.
Does "fulfil" mean to obey?
I presume "Torah" is referring to the Law in that book of Deuteronomy, unless it is referring to all the Word of God that has been revealed, which in context of the verse it could mean.

A revealed word in Deuteronomy is Deut 18:15
15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him.
This could refer to any prophet that God raises up but I hear that it is interpreted to mean the Messiah. And certainly Jesus is like Moses in many ways, one being that He brought in the New Covenant.
As a Christian I have to say that you have not listened to Him and so have not fulfilled all the words of Deuteronomy.

So you are bound to keep laws of first fruits (which demonstrate love of God)? Is burying your waste fulfilled by love? What about divorce? Is that fulfilled by love? You see, the fact is, none of these laws were given to people not under the Mosaic covenant. The attempt to be grafted in but then to feel absolved of a chunk of Mosaic law is exactly the pick and choose which makes no sense.

We Christians are grafted into chosen people of God, we are not grafted into the Mosaic Covenant. I still do not think that the Mosaic Covenant is said to last forever, and how could it be if a New Covenant is promised?
Yet all the Law is fulfilled by Love for God and Love for our neighbour. That is, if we love God and our neighbour in our actions and are not under the Law, then we are seen as righteous even if we have not obeyed all the letter of the Law. (and let's face it, not even a Jew can say that he has done that).
But you repent when you feel the need to and that no doubt will cover your sins as a sacrifice in the Temple would have done so in the old days.
Yet to have your sins removed completely comes with the New Covenant, the one that Jesus brought, the one you should listen to, the one who added to the Word of God that you have. Otherwise you are like the Sadducees of Jesus day, who only believed the 5 Books of Moses. You cannot fulfil what you do not know and believe.
Jeremiah 31:31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make pa new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it ton their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

 

[Brian2]

The word is translated as "forever" in some English translations on Jewish sites because the site also is aware of the oral law which goes along with the text. Had you but clicked "Show Rashi" on the page you referenced, you would have found, directly under the verse:
"Heb. לְעֹלָם, until the Jubilee year [the fiftieth year of the cycle]. Or perhaps it means literally forever, as its apparent meaning? Therefore, the Torah states [in reference to the Jubilee year]: “and each man to his family you shall return” (Lev. 25:10). [This] informs [us] that fifty years are called עֹלָם. But [this does] not [mean] that he must serve him [his master] the entire fifty years, but he must serve him until the Jubilee year, regardless of whether it is near or far off. — [From Mechilta, Kid. 15a]"

Even forgetting the Jubilee, the forever of Ex 21:6 can only go as long as their lives. And I guess in the context of the verse, even at Jubilee the slave may have said that he loved his master and wanted to serve him. Actually Ex 21:6 seems like a scenario where Jubilee would not make any difference.
So if the Hebrew means "forever" which it seems to considering the translations, that means until death.

If you look at things in the vacuum of the simple English, you miss out on what the text says.

Yes, it is good to find out more about the old languages, but it is too late for me to learn them.

I still find it funny that you can insist that the word which translates to "forever" in one place may not mean "forever" in another place, but it does where it suits you. Judaism explains the word handily, using both an oral law and the understanding of a larger phrase (including other words like "ad"). You have a single word without any phrase and see that the word might mean something else (unless you see a biblical contradiction) but you still insist that it means "forever." Do you have some sort of reason to say this? The word is open to more than one meaning and it lacks any additional words to complete the phrase.

Have fun with that.

Thanks.
In translations to English people do some strange things at times, and that is even when they know the Hebrew and Greek.
Are you talking about any particular place?

 

[rosends]

Deut 12:28 Keep and hearken to all these words that I command you, that it may benefit you and your children after you, forever, when you do what is good and proper in the eyes of the Lord, your God.

Deut 29: 24 Then they will say, It is because they abandoned the covenant of the Lord, God of their fathers, [the covenant] which He made with them when He took them out of the land of Egypt,
25 For they went and served other deities, prostrating themselves to them deities which they had not known, and which He had not apportioned to them.
26 And the Lord's fury raged against that land, bringing upon it the entire curse written in this book.
27 And the Lord uprooted them from upon their land, with fury, anger and great wrath, and He cast them to another land, as it is this day.
28The hidden things belong to the Lord, our God, but the revealed things apply to us and to our children forever: that we must fulfill all the words of this Torah.
כח הַנִּ֨סְתָּרֹ֔ת לַֽיהֹוָ֖ה אֱלֹהֵ֑ינוּ וְהַנִּגְלֹ֞ת ֹלָֹ֤נוֹּ ֹוֹּלְֹבָֹנֵֹ֨יֹנֹוּ֨ עַד־עוֹלָ֔ם לַֽעֲשׂ֕וֹת אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵ֖י הַתּוֹרָ֥ה הַזֹּֽאת:

The above are from the Tanakh. Deut 12:28 is advice to the Jews to keep all the command, but not keep them forever, it says, that it may benefit you and your children forever, when you do what is good and proper.

Wait, what?
The first text says that keeping all the words that are commanded only applies to the generation to which it was said but if they do it then the "good" applies forever? So no one has to keep any laws and never had to from 1 generation after the laws were given? Is that your position?

Certainly nothing about keeping all the commands in the Law of Moses forever.

So your reading is that they never had to be followed after the original recipients died.

In the next quote it is interesting that it can be seen that at least part of it was written when either the Northern or Southern Kingdoms were in Exile.

"It can be seen"? By whom? Are you saying that the Torah text was, piecemeal, assembled at different times and Moses didn't write down what the text claims he wrote down? If so, there is nothing to discuss. You can dismiss whatever you want.

Verse 28 says that the revealed things apply to the Jews forever: that you are to fulfil all the words of this Torah.
Does "fulfil" mean to obey?

The Hebrew word used is "la'asot" which is a simple infinitve Hebrew verb meaning "to do" or "to make"
מילון מורפיקס | לעשות באנגלית | פירוש לעשות בעברית
So, yes, to follow the rules and perform them. If you would prefer this translation (I don't much like it, but here "it is for us and our children ever to apply all the provisions ")

I presume "Torah" is referring to the Law in that book of Deuteronomy, unless it is referring to all the Word of God that has been revealed, which in context of the verse it could mean.

It refers to the entirety of the Torah.

This could refer to any prophet that God raises up but I hear that it is interpreted to mean the Messiah.

You hear? Why? Does it say "Messiah"? Weren't there other prophets who rose up after Moses' death?

And certainly Jesus is like Moses in many ways, one being that He brought in the New Covenant.

Since, textually, there is no "new" covenant, a new delivery of the same covenant, and that delivery hasn't happened (because people still have to teach each other to do what is right) you have just nullified your own position.

As a Christian I have to say that you have not listened to Him and so have not fulfilled all the words of Deuteronomy.

As a Jew I have to say that you haven't the slightest understanding of the text and your entire theology is a huge lie.

We Christians are grafted into chosen people of God, we are not grafted into the Mosaic Covenant.

So your text tells you as justification.

I still do not think that the Mosaic Covenant is said to last forever, and how could it be if a New Covenant is promised?

Because you still don't understand what was being promised in the renewed covenant.

then we are seen as righteous even if we have not obeyed all the letter of the Law. (and let's face it, not even a Jew can say that he has done that).

A Jew can't say that he has done what? You don't know Jewish law but you are going to tell me that I don't follow it?

Yet to have your sins removed completely comes with the New Covenant, the one that Jesus brought, the one you should listen to, the one who added to the Word of God that you have.

No sin is removed by a false prophet. One day, when you actually learn the text and understand it, you might be able to come to different conclusions, but as of now, you are concluded in unbelief.

 

[rosends]

So if the Hebrew means "forever" which it seems to considering the translations, that means until death.

So now you have decided that the word means "death" which means that no one is commanded to follow laws after he dies. Thanks for the clarification. You are stuck with a textual contradiction and you solve it with an irrelevant piece of unique interpretation. This means that the claims in Heb 13:20 are also until death. So Jesus could not have been resurrected because the "blood of the eternal covenant" was ineffectual once Jesus died and the covenant's "eternal" status disappeared.

Yes, it is good to find out more about the old languages, but it is too late for me to learn them.

If you don't know them, then trying to argue about them is not really helpful.

 

[Trailblazer]

it seems your god does not have any power to do anything at all

God has All Power to do anything, but God does not waste His power doing idiotic things.

 

[Trailblazer]

It was a good trick wasn't it. It certainly shows that Jesus approved of Jesus and confirmed Him.

It doesn't show anything at all, since it never happened.
But millions of people believed it anyway.

But if you don't think that God can raise someone from the dead, that is your choice and your God.

I don't know if God could do it, but God certainly did not do it.
God has better things to do, things that matter, like keeping a universe going.
God does not waste His time doing ridiculous things.

 

[cataway]

God has All Power to do anything, but God does not waste His power doing idiotic things.

your god may have limited power that could be wasted .my God has unlimited power .

 

[Trailblazer]

your god may have limited power that could be wasted .my God has unlimited power .

There is no such thing as your god and my god.... there is just one true God.
The one true God has unlimited power and is not subject to time restrictions.

However, God doesn't waste His power or time doing foolish and unnecessary things like raising dead bodies from the grave.
Imo.

 

[cataway]

There is no such thing as your god and my god.... there is just one true God.
The one true God has unlimited power and is not subject to time restrictions.

However, God doesn't waste His power or time doing foolish and unnecessary things like raising dead bodies from the grave.
Imo.

and where did you learn there is but one true God?

 

[Trailblazer]

and where did you learn there is but one true God?

From the Bible, the Qur'an, and the Writings of Baha'u'llah.