The NT and Prophecies

Insha'Allah I will try and contribute points which I consider to be worthy for the rejection of the Christian faith. My rejection of the faith is not because I think it is evil, or bad. The Christian faith does have great morals at its foundation, but for me, it falls apart when it comes to the nature of Gd and its presentation of cannonized narratives.

Matthew 2

13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him."

14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt,

15 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."

This is in reference to Herod trying to kill Gd on earth (everyone knows Jesus is Gd according to Christians, including Herod, or I suppose he did not get the memo). His mother takes him to Egypt, and the gospel writer informs us that this was to fulfill a prophecy as told to the Prophet, which is in reference to the Prophet Hosea. If one looks, one will find this reference in chapter 11 verse 1. 

Hosea 11

1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,
       and out of Egypt I called my son.

 2 But the more I called Israel, 
   the further they went from me. 
   They sacrificed to the Baals 
   and they burned incense to images.

1) In the actual Hebrew, there is nothing seperating verse 2 from the last part of one. In other words, there is nothing inherent in the grammer or in the meaning of the verse that allows one to seperate the two verses.

2) These two verses have a historical context which is about Israel and its love affair with the cult of Ba'al. If verse one is the opening of a prophecy about Jesus, then one must continue where it states that Jesus and his parents became involved with the cult of Ba'al (astaghfuralla).

3) If this is a dual prophecy, then how does one determine this? Understand, the idea of a dual prophecy is a Christian technique of trying to find Christilogical relevance in the OT, thereby making the OT a relevant book. If this is a dual prophecy, then what allows one to stop at verse one for the second prophecy meaning about Jesus where the second verse was included with the first verse for the first prophecy (the first prophecy, or actual historical context includes both verses but not for a second, dual meaning)?

These are points that may seem subtle at the surface, but they are far from insignificant. If the foundation for a prophecy claim is based upon erroneous, and questionable methods, and if these prophecy claims are the foundation for the evidences that the church uses to define their faith, then one must put into question the entire church thesis. These basic points remain unexplained by the church with any reasonable explanation or argument that even remotely makes sense. Insha'Allah if time avails, I hope to contribute my list of points which lead me to reject the Christian faith, none of which cut down its core teachings and morals, or many of its outstanding adherents.

Peace    

Andalus wrote: Insha'Allah I will try and contribute points which I consider to be worthy for the rejection of the Christian faith. My rejection of the faith is not because I think it is evil, or bad. The Christian faith does have great morals at its foundation, but for me, it falls apart when it comes to the nature of Gd and its presentation of cannonized narratives.   Matthew 2 13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him." 14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 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." This is in reference to Herod trying to kill Gd on earth (everyone knows Jesus is Gd according to Christians, including Herod, or I suppose he did not get the memo). His mother takes him to Egypt, and the gospel writer informs us that this was to fulfill a prophecy as told to the Prophet, which is in reference to the Prophet Hosea. If one looks, one will find this reference in chapter 11 verse 1.  Hosea 11 1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,        and out of Egypt I called my son.  2 But the more I called Israel,     the further they went from me.     They sacrificed to the Baals     and they burned incense to images. 1) In the actual Hebrew, there is nothing seperating verse 2 from the last part of one. In other words, there is nothing inherent in the grammer or in the meaning of the verse that allows one to seperate the two verses. 2) These two verses have a historical context which is about Israel and its love affair with the cult of Ba'al. If verse one is the opening of a prophecy about Jesus, then one must continue where it states that Jesus and his parents became involved with the cult of Ba'al (astaghfuralla). 3) If this is a dual prophecy, then how does one determine this? Understand, the idea of a dual prophecy is a Christian technique of trying to find Christilogical relevance in the OT, thereby making the OT a relevant book. If this is a dual prophecy, then what allows one to stop at verse one for the second prophecy meaning about Jesus where the second verse was included with the first verse for the first prophecy (the first prophecy, or actual historical context includes both verses but not for a second, dual meaning)? These are points that may seem subtle at the surface, but they are far from insignificant. If the foundation for a prophecy claim is based upon erroneous, and questionable methods, and if these prophecy claims are the foundation for the evidences that the church uses to define their faith, then one must put into question the entire church thesis. These basic points remain unexplained by the church with any reasonable explanation or argument that even remotely makes sense. Insha'Allah if time avails, I hope to contribute my list of points which lead me to reject the Christian faith, none of which cut down its core teachings and morals, or many of its outstanding adherents. Peace

Andalus,

There is no need to connect verse 1 and 2.  Verse 2 is saying that Israel had a love affair with Baals.  For Matthew, part of Jesus' role and vocation is precisely to make Israel's story complete: as 'son of God' he is, as it were, Israel in-person, succeeding at last where Israel had failed.

Please do note that God calls Israel is son.

And Peace to you.

George wrote: Andalus wrote: Insha'Allah I will try and contribute points which I consider to be worthy for the rejection of the Christian faith. My rejection of the faith is not because I think it is evil, or bad. The Christian faith does have great morals at its foundation, but for me, it falls apart when it comes to the nature of Gd and its presentation of cannonized narratives.   Matthew 2 13 When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. "Get up," he said, "take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him." 14 So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 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." This is in reference to Herod trying to kill Gd on earth (everyone knows Jesus is Gd according to Christians, including Herod, or I suppose he did not get the memo). His mother takes him to Egypt, and the gospel writer informs us that this was to fulfill a prophecy as told to the Prophet, which is in reference to the Prophet Hosea. If one looks, one will find this reference in chapter 11 verse 1.  Hosea 11 1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,        and out of Egypt I called my son.  2 But the more I called Israel,     the further they went from me.     They sacrificed to the Baals     and they burned incense to images. 1) In the actual Hebrew, there is nothing seperating verse 2 from the last part of one. In other words, there is nothing inherent in the grammer or in the meaning of the verse that allows one to seperate the two verses. 2) These two verses have a historical context which is about Israel and its love affair with the cult of Ba'al. If verse one is the opening of a prophecy about Jesus, then one must continue where it states that Jesus and his parents became involved with the cult of Ba'al (astaghfuralla). 3) If this is a dual prophecy, then how does one determine this? Understand, the idea of a dual prophecy is a Christian technique of trying to find Christilogical relevance in the OT, thereby making the OT a relevant book. If this is a dual prophecy, then what allows one to stop at verse one for the second prophecy meaning about Jesus where the second verse was included with the first verse for the first prophecy (the first prophecy, or actual historical context includes both verses but not for a second, dual meaning)? These are points that may seem subtle at the surface, but they are far from insignificant. If the foundation for a prophecy claim is based upon erroneous, and questionable methods, and if these prophecy claims are the foundation for the evidences that the church uses to define their faith, then one must put into question the entire church thesis. These basic points remain unexplained by the church with any reasonable explanation or argument that even remotely makes sense. Insha'Allah if time avails, I hope to contribute my list of points which lead me to reject the Christian faith, none of which cut down its core teachings and morals, or many of its outstanding adherents. Peace     Andalus, There is no need to connect verse 1 and 2.  Verse 2 is saying that Israel had a love affair with Baals.  For Matthew, part of Jesus' role and vocation is precisely to make Israel's story complete: as 'son of God' he is, as it were, Israel in-person, succeeding at last where Israel had failed. Please do note that God calls Israel is son. And Peace to you.

Greetings.

Lets look at the verses again.

1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,
       and out of Egypt I called my son.

 2 But the more I called Israel, 
   the further they went from me. 
   They sacrificed to the Baals 
   and they burned incense to images.

The two verses are directly connected. In the actual historical context, Gd talks about how He called His son, Israel, referring to the nation, out of Egypt. That is an interpretation that is agreed upon by all scholarship. Verse two continues about "Israel", with a continuation (the Hebrew Grammer contains nothing that would allow one to seperate the two verses), that after they were called out they continued their affair with the cult of Ba'al. 

Israel -> him->son-> they are all used interchangably.

What the church wants us to believe is that verse one has a dual meaning. In the second meaning, it is supposed to be a prophecy, but for the prophecy, some how, some way, in some mysterious fashion, verse two is seperated from verse one. The Church has never beem able to reconcile this problem. They simply appeal to circular reasoning with such explanations, "well, Jesus was to supposed to fulfill certain things and that is included in verse one that is seperate from verse two". But this is supposed to be a prophecy. The church cannot explain what is inherent in the verse that allows one to seperate the two verses. There is nothing inherent in the verse that tells us it is a prophecy, and it should be obvious that this is an "after the fact" invention of the author of Matthew who simply asserted the historical verse as a prophecy and maintained a seperation between verse one and two by "leading the reader" and "suggestion".

George, the two are very connected, and if in the historical context the two are inseperable, then what in the verse tells us that one is the phrophecy and and seperate from two?