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    

Hi Andalus,

You have come up with an interesting and challenging post and I have the following comment:

According to Christian OT: 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.

Let us see what the Jewish Scripture has to say!

The title in the Jewish Scripture is Ingratitude for God's benefits

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

2 The more they called them,the 
   more they went from them; 
   They sacrificed unto the Baalim,
   And offered to graven images.

Stark difference, one can see. I have noticed that the Christian OT has been reworded at places where it matters most in the interest of getting prophecies come true or making a statement look like a prophecy. I agree with your thoughts.

BR & Salaams

BMZ

In terms of prophecies, Fredi

BMZ

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.

bmzsp wrote: Hi Andalus, You have come up with an interesting and challenging post and I have the following comment: According to Christian OT: 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. Let us see what the Jewish Scripture has to say! The title in the Jewish Scripture is Ingratitude for God's benefits 1 "When Israel was a child, then I loved him,        And out of Egypt I called my son. 2 The more they called them,the     more they went from them;     They sacrificed unto the Baalim,    And offered to graven images. Stark difference, one can see. I have noticed that the Christian OT has been reworded at places where it matters most in the interest of getting prophecies come true or making a statement look like a prophecy. I agree with your thoughts. BR & Salaams BMZ

BMZ there is no stark difference.

Christian Scriptures

1 �When Israel was a child, I loved him,
      And out of Egypt I called My son.

Internet Jewish Scriptures

1. For, when Israel was young, I loved him, and from Egypt I called My son.

Another Internet version of Hebrew Scriptures

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

You are going to have to realize that what you call "Christian" OT was translated from the Hebrew to Greek by Jews prior to Christianity.  The only way you are going to be able to determine whether the Hebrew Scriptures are more correct than our OT is to compare the Hebrew with the Greek translation.

There is no reason to believe that the Hebrew Scriptures are more correct that what we have.  Anyway verse 1 is just about identical with the Hebrew Scriptures.

Peace

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?   

George,

Andalus has a great point, when he wrote:

V1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him,
       and out of Egypt I called my son.

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

One cannot just stop at V1. The "But" in  V2, clearly shows that the main gripe of God is in V2, not V1.

V1 shows God loved the Israelites, bestowed favours upon them, giving the strength and hope to bear the life under the cruel Pharoahs and then arranging a deliverer Moses, who came out of Egypt itself, right from the House of the Pharoah.

V2 shows how ungrateful the same people had become after Moses delivered them with God Almighty's power behind him and brought them into Sinai. Instead of remaining steadfast to God Almighty, they started worshipping the Golden Calf, etc.

That is what The Lord God Almighty is unhappy about and displays  extreme displeasure.

"and out of Egypt I called my son." does not refer to either Joseph or Jesus.

Please check with Moses.com and the learned Rabbi will confirm what I said. It is no prophecy at all for the coming of Jesus.

George wrote: Andalus Matthew is merely comparing Jesus to Moses.  Hosea 11:1 originally referred to God's calling the nation of Israel out of Egypt in the time of Moses.  Matthew applies it to Jesus.  He sees the history of Israel (God's children) recapitulated in the life of Jesus (God's unique son).  Just as Israel as an infant nation went down into Egypt, so the child Jesus went there.  And as Israel was led by God out of Egypt, so also was Jesus.

Hi George.

I think you are going off topic. Keep in mind that a comparison is not equivalent to a prophecy. They are not one and the same thing, nor does one prove that the other is a prophecy.

George wrote: Jesus' sojourn in Egypt recalls the experience of Moses, who returned to Egypt after fleeing to Midian (Ex 3-4), and then was delivered out of Egypt in the Exodus along with his people by the power of a providential God. In coming out of Egypt, Jesus can be seen as a second Moses who delivers his people. While the true fulfillment of Israel's Exodus occurs in the death and resurrection of Jesus, Matthew obviously has in mind the story of the baby Moses who was threatened by the king of Egypt, who did not know Joseph (Ex 1:8ff.). As Pharaoh fabled to kill Israel's future deliverer in his devious and wicked slaughter of the innocent Hebrew boys (Ex 1:15-2:10), so also Herod failed to eradicate the threat he saw in the birth of the King of the Jews.

Again George, you are moving around the meat of the topic. No one is saying that Herod did not try and kill Gd, and that Matthew compared Jesus to Moses. What is being argued is that this is not a prophecy. This is a point you have yet to bring up.

George wrote: Verse 2 is not germane to the point that Matthew is trying to make.

The real question is: WHo cares what Matthew thinks is or is not germane to his point?

This is about the verse being a prophecy claim by the church. I find it interesting that you have been willing to nit pick through unrealistic expectation when it comes to Islam, yet here is an exmaple of a prophecy claim in your word of Gd that is obviously not a prophecy, and you are having such a difficult time with this verse that you have yet to actually discuss it. If Matthew is just trying to make a point, then this is clearly not a prophecy, but a really bad attempt at a "midrash". So do you believe it is a prophecy or not?

George wrote: Hosea 11:1 is not listed in the prophecies of the Messiah.  Matthew's comparison could be described as a "type prophecy."

Whether or not it is listed as a messianic verse is completely irrelevant to the thread. What we are discussing is that the Church claims this is a prophecy about Jesus. Also, keep in mind that a messianic verse held as important to Jews has nothing to do with Jesus prophecies of the Church.

George wrote: You might be interested in this translation of Hosea 11:1-2, witch comes from my Tanakh. The Jews that I know said it was a good translation. "I fell in love with Israel When he was still a child, And I have call [him] My son Ever since Egypt. Thus were they called, But they went their own way; They sacrifice to Baalim And offer to carved images. Notice how different that translation are. Do you understand Matthew's point now? Peace

What I fail to understand is how a different translation of the verse, and information about how the author of Matthew felt concerning Jesus and Moses, has anything to do with the thread. The above translation does not help the claim of the church about Hosea any more than the translation I gave. Furethermore, I stated that nothing in the Hebrew Grammer supports the Christian claim, that the two verses can be seperated, that it has a dual meaning, or that it is a prophecy. I have the most popular TANAKH edition, Stone Edition, and it does not help the claim of the Church either.

Since you failed to give a single point that directly resolves trhe points I put forth, I conclude that you have sought out some research on the topic, and like myself when I studied your faith, was unable to find a single, solid argument for resolution.

Peace