Comments You Will Not Year at the 3-12-06 WT Study(Witness/Nations)

by blondie 54 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • scout575
    scout575

    Carla: I left JWs last September feeling very grateful for the many years that I had spent in their company. I had come to the realization that the Bible isn't from god, and so I had no choice but to leave Christianity. I would have left whatever Christian group I had been a part of.

    One of the first things that eroded my faith is the gospel writers taking liberties with the Hebrew Scriptures. At Matthew 2:6, for instance, a quotation is made from Micah 5:2, and presented as a Messianic prophecy that was fulfilled by Jesus. However, the context of Micah 5:2 shows clearly that the 'ruler' foretold in that verse could not have been Jesus. In verse 6 it foretells that the 'ruler' of verse 2, would: "Deliver us ( the Israelites ) from the Assyrian." History shows that the Assyrians disappeared centuries before Jesus was born, and so the 'ruler' of Micah 5:2 simply could not have been Jesus, as Matthew claims.

    This, and many other examples like it, show how Bible writers are quite prepared to use 'spin' in order to support their pre-suppositions. The above 'Messianic' prophecy is cited by Christians as one of the 'jewels in the crown' of Messianic prophecies, and yet it is simply a blatant misrepresentaion of Micah's words.

    Jesus' early followers believed that he had fulfilled Micah 5:2, and many other supposed Messianic prophecies. If they hadn't have believed that he had fulfilled those 'prophecies' Christianity would have never got started. What a shame that Christianity has, at its root, such obvious distortion of the Hebrew Scriptures.

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider
    One of the first things that eroded my faith is the gospel writers taking liberties with the Hebrew Scriptures. At Matthew 2:6, for instance, a quotation is made from Micah 5:2, and presented as a Messianic prophecy that was fulfilled by Jesus. However, the context of Micah 5:2 shows clearly that the 'ruler' foretold in that verse could not have been Jesus. In verse 6 it foretells that the 'ruler' of verse 2, would: "Deliver us ( the Israelites ) from the Assyrian." History shows that the Assyrians disappeared centuries before Jesus was born, and so the 'ruler' of Micah 5:2 simply could not have been Jesus, as Matthew claims.

    Is this why you lost faith in the Bible? Why is that? (And I`m not even a christian). Many of the "messianic" prophecies of the OT, which the NT-writers are building on, would not be what the OT-writers had in mind at all, that much is true, but I don`t see that as a problem at all. Yes, the OT-writer in Micah was probably referring to the Assyrians, and at the time of Christ, the romans were the ones in power. But the point is: Ever since Babylon, Judah had been under the control of foreign powers. Babylonians, Assyrians, Romans, what`s the difference? The point is that they were foreigners, and in the mind of the NT-writers, Jesus came to deliver them from all that (foreign) crap. It was all "Babylon the great" to the NT-writers (although not specified with that term), and as no "Messiah" had come, to "deliver the Israelites", before Jesus, this "out of context"-quote from Micah isn`t problematic at all. Jesus comes and "delivers them", not physically (which is what the jews were originally expecting, the writer of Micah too), but spiritually. The NT-writer probably saw this as just an "increased understanding" on basis of the OT-texts. There`s nothing wrong with that, if one just accepts the authority of the Bible (on itself). However, the WTS has absolutely no right to claim equal authority for themselves. Who do they think they are? Prophets? Oh, that`s right, they do...

  • blondie
    blondie

    Hey guys, I appreciate discussion. But I think this has really hijacked this thread. A suggestion, start another thread and take the wonderful but not directly related to the review discussion to that thread.

    Love, Blondie

  • scout575
    scout575

    Hellrider: Don't want to upset Blondie, so I'll debate with you by personal messages.

  • Bonnie_Clyde
    Bonnie_Clyde

    Blondie - sorry to bother you. Can you tell me there have no new posts since March 11?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit