IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Here is the second of the three topics I've picked.
I almost never read links. It's because I come on for conversation. If I want to surf the web, I can do that on my own. However, it was clear that you felt overwhelmed by the length of the post and used a link to try to fit in an answer when you probably felt it would take you a good half hour to type one out. So I made an exception.
The GIST of the link can be found in these words:
"Likewise, I don’t believe Matthew thought Jesus’ flight to Egypt was predicted in Hosea 11:1. But I do believe that Matthew thought Jesus’ flight to and return from Egypt was filling up Hosea 11:1."
My response is "baloney" -- Matthew was claiming that Hosea 11:1 was a prophecy and that it came true. This idea of "filling up" and shadows and stuff is just poetic stuff made up by those who have faced the truth about the obvious mismanagement of text in the Christian Scriptures, and who are desperate to come up with some way, any way, to work around it, no matter how obvious the denial is.
Basically what I'm saying is, you can point to the truck and say, "well, it's really a shade of turqoise," and the world is still going to roll their eyes and say, "It's a stupid green truck."
I will give you an example of a Christian claim:
So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son." Matthew 2:14-15
Let's go to the actual verse where the prophet says this:
"When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." Hosea 11:1
Clearly the prophet is talking about Israel, not the messiah -- the verse is making a reference to the Exodus.
What I was driving at was not proving a negative it was selecting only a few specific claims so that we can fully investigate them.
See, this prophecy claim is a challenging point and it would take a lot of time to hash it out so that we can have a resolution but with all these points I just can't spend enough time on any one issue to cover it fully. There is a very elegant answer to the problem you brought up but the best I can do in the time I have is give you a link to an explanation.
Out of Egypt I Called My Son
Perhaps if you do select just a few items to discuss you can pick this one to really dig into. I promise there are explanations for every problem you can present if I just had enough time to fully discuss it with you.
I almost never read links. It's because I come on for conversation. If I want to surf the web, I can do that on my own. However, it was clear that you felt overwhelmed by the length of the post and used a link to try to fit in an answer when you probably felt it would take you a good half hour to type one out. So I made an exception.
The GIST of the link can be found in these words:
"Likewise, I don’t believe Matthew thought Jesus’ flight to Egypt was predicted in Hosea 11:1. But I do believe that Matthew thought Jesus’ flight to and return from Egypt was filling up Hosea 11:1."
My response is "baloney" -- Matthew was claiming that Hosea 11:1 was a prophecy and that it came true. This idea of "filling up" and shadows and stuff is just poetic stuff made up by those who have faced the truth about the obvious mismanagement of text in the Christian Scriptures, and who are desperate to come up with some way, any way, to work around it, no matter how obvious the denial is.
Basically what I'm saying is, you can point to the truck and say, "well, it's really a shade of turqoise," and the world is still going to roll their eyes and say, "It's a stupid green truck."
Last edited: