"
Honestly we used to have somebody on here that used to say "The Bible is true because the Bible says it's true!" That's what this sounds like here. You're not saying that you know there are no inconsistencies because everything can be reasonably explained, you're saying you know there are no inconsistencies because... it's the Bible." -Roundy
Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. However, we arrive at that "assumption" based on what I believe the Bible to be...the infallible, inspired Word of God. This, being the "foundation" of our belief, is not just assumed but is a conclusion that has been arrived at by millions of people throughout the centuries. The very specific prophecies given in Scripture that come to pass are a good indicator that this is
no ordinary book.
The New Testament gives people a way to disprove its message.
1 Corinthians 15.12-19
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.
The faith of a Christian and the validity of his book rises and falls on this one fact.
Jesus Christ was raised from the dead. If that statement is shown to be false then, as the passage states, "
we are to be pitied more than all men." I believe this statement to be true. More than 500 people attested to seeing the risen Christ. These same 500 people zealously spread this very same belief, and that vast majority of them were killed for it. But that did not stop them. They believed it. I believe it.
"
It is rationalization. I'm not saying you were rationalizing, I'm saying the authors of the New Testament were rationalizing. It's a twisting of the original text to suit the need for Jesus to fulfill the prophecies no matter how you look at it. To say that some of the prophecies are only now coming to pass, or have yet to come to pass, is ridiculous. They were supposed to come about in the messiah's lifetime. There is no mention of a "Second Coming" in the prophecies. He was supposed to be an earthly king. He wasn't." -Roundy
I see what you are saying here now. It is a good point to try and make. If this were true of the Apostles then it would also be true of Christ because the Apostles only taught what was taught them by Christ. I can certainly see how one could get that notion though. It is, afterall, the very same thing that nearly every Rabbi did for the last 500 years. That is where the whole idea of "binding and loosing" comes from. After a Rabbi was bound or loosed by his peers he would begin his ministry at the age of 30 (just like Jesus) and he would address different issues in the Scriptures. They would say something along the lines of, "You have heard _____ , but I tell you it is surely _____." Sound familiar? Those were the same types of statements that Christ made time and time again. A rabbi's teaching in areas such as this were called his "yoke" or his "burden." Hence Christ's words, "For My yoke is easy and my burden is light" (Matthew 11.30). The way we know we can believe Christ's "version" to be the correct is that He claimed to be God and then backed up His claim with signs and wonders.
Whether or not the OT speaks specifically of a second coming is irrelevant. Christ said there would be one. Christ's words were truth. Period. However, the OT does speak of the second coming some 500 times. I'm not even going to begin to list references as I doubt it would matter to you anyway...
The Jews did have the notion that Christ would be an earthly king. That notion is not entirely false, but it is one that they did not understand. God will not contradict His Word, but He has no problem contradicting our understanding of it.
"
Maybe you can tell me the specific passages you're talking about here." -Roundy, referring to OT references of Christ divinity.
Again, whether or not the OT explicitly states this is irrelevant for the same reasons above. However,...
Isaiah 9:1-7
1 Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan-
2 The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of the shadow of death
a light has dawned.
3 You have enlarged the nation
and increased their joy;
they rejoice before you
as people rejoice at the harvest,
as men rejoice
when dividing the plunder.
4 For as in the day of Midian's defeat,
you have shattered
the yoke that burdens them,
the bar across their shoulders,
the rod of their oppressor.
5 Every warrior's boot used in battle
and every garment rolled in blood
will be destined for burning,
will be fuel for the fire.
6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David's throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the LORD Almighty
will accomplish this.
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
Immanuel is Hebrew for "God with us" which is exactly what Christ was.
You could also read practically any of the Messianic Psalms.
"
Daniel wasn't believed by the Jews to be a messianic prophet." -Roundy
Technically Daniel wasn't even considered to be a prophet, in the strictest sense of the word. He did not have the "office" of a prophet, but he did possess the "gift of prophecy." Regardless, Daniel's book is a book of end-time prophecy. The end times are when Christ returns. The
Revelation of Jesus Christ (last book in Bible) parallels Daniel in many ways.
"
This seems to be right. But in Biblical times tribal affiliation went through the father, not the mother. So whether or not it can be argued that Mary was descended from David is irrelevant. It had to come through the father. Since he was not descended by blood through his father from David, he could not have been the Messiah." -Roundy
It did come through the father, Joseph. Again...this is the genealogy used by Matthew. The Gospel of Luke was written to the Greeks. They wouldn't be concerned with (nor would they understand) tribal affiliations. Thus Luke traced Him to David in a different way. Again...either way...He is descended from David.
"
You say you are not as fundamentalist as I may think, then you say you believe that the Bible was the one that got the flood story exactly right? Everything you say suggests someone who takes the word of the Bible literally. Are you simply saying you are not a fundamentalist as you are not literally a member of that sect? Because you sure seem to take everything as fact. What exactly do you question in the Bible, if you're not as much of a fundamentalist as I think? "
I certainly do take the Bible literally. I am a fundamentalist in that I uphold the fundamental truths of Christianity, but beyond that many would say that I was way off track on some things. But then again, others would not.
"
You're absolutely wrong about there being contemporary historical references to Jesus at the time of his life, by the way. Sorry, but that's just not true."
I'm not sure how you can continue this one since I fed you several writers of antiquity who wrote about Christ and His followers.
Anyway, be blessed Roundy.
in love,
>>zack