Special thanks to Joel here who gave me a shout out and interestingly enough provided direction to a blogger Mrs. Fether who espouses, among other ultra conservative viewpoints, the following:
I believe that Jesus is the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament, as proven by hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, his miracles, and his bodily resurrection from the dead. (Emphasis mine).
While I have no intention of creating a dispute. I would like to engage in a scholarly dialogue about whether in fact there are hundreds or any direct messianic prophecies in the “Old Testament” (ironically, such a term is pejorative on its face!). Thus, I would like anyone who holds similar beliefs to articulate exactly what was predicted and where in the Hebrew Bible and then argue for how exactly “hundreds” of these were fulfilled. I am eliciting a hermeneutical query. I have no intention on entertaining whether or not Jesus was/is the Messiah. I personally believe he was. However, that is not to say that he is found under every nook and cranny of Hebrew Bible texts.
I anxiously anticipate your responses 🙂
Joel or Polycarp is fine, Rob
Joel,
Thanks. I fixed the post to reflect that.
If I had some more time on my hands, I might take you up on the challenge. I have a feeling we are of a similar mind on the issue in any case!
Hi Rob, here is a typical page of some of the prophecies, and others can be found on that same site. Another can be found at this link. I’m sure some can be disputed, but I personally am convinced that there are far too many clear ones to allow skeptics to dismiss them all or claim the odds of one person fulfilling them are within normal parameters. And of course the “big one” is His resurrection from the dead.
Paula,
Thank you for responding. However, rather than pointing me to other sites, I would prefer an actual dialogue about specific texts, similar to what Yeshua below has offered. Your rhetoric further reinforces my initial concern in attempting this dialogue.
First, could you please offer two or three “clear” ones to discuss.
Second, I question your presupposition that prophetic fulfillment is meant to “convince skeptics.”
Third, you have identified an ancillary presupposition by indicating that in collecting these supposed “clear fulfillments” into a number that somehow by virtue of ratios that you can accumulate some kind of “odds” as it were to “convince skeptics.”
You will note, two and three above, read like a page off of one of Josh McDowell’s books, an evidentialist. Epistemologically, perhaps no one has suggested this to you before, evidence, in fact, does not “demand” a verdict…no matter how much you accumulate.
Furthermore, your comment suggests to me that you are willing to excise these “clear ones” from their historical-contextual, that is, historical grammatical (since you are so keen on the terminology) meaning of the passage in question in order to force it into a grid of direct prophetic fulfillment to which you appear to be suggesting is the primary goal of convincing people about Jesus person and character.
My concern, as a biblical scholar, is to engage individuals at times, articulating a theological or apologetic framework predicated on a misuse of the texts in question in order to further another agenda.
Rob, I’ll try to contribute something on the ‘prophecies’ or prophecies of
1.) Matthew 2.15/Hosea 11.1
2.) And how the above relates the the Servant’s song in Isaiah 53
3.) Matthew 20.20-23/Wisdom 3.506
And the possibility of ….. (I’ll save that for the post)
I’ll try to get to it tomorrow
Polycarp,
Thanks for submitting some texts. Hosea 11.1 is an excellent example.
Let’s consider Hosea 11:1-2: “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.” Interestingly, the historical-contextual definition of “my son” is virtually impossible to miss, unless you wrench this passage out of context. “My son” is Hosea 11:1 is defined in 11:2 and 11:1a, namely, Israel, corporately as a nation.
Now Matthew: “Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, “Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is going to search for the Child to destroy Him.” So Joseph got up and took the Child and His mother while it was still night, and left for Egypt. He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON.” (Mat 2:13-15 NASB)
Now the exegetical quandry begins because of the 1. the way Matthew is interpreting Scripture and 2. the way Matthew is appropriating it to his narrative of Jesus. (I say “Matthew” as shorthand for the final composition of the document, whoever the author/authors/editors/community). These two questions are central. Hosea defines his terms contextually. Matthew is reading Hosea differently and applying some type of “fulfillment.” Well what exactly does that mean? Is this a one to one correspondence fulfillment? A typological fulfillment? Sensus Plenior (fuller sense)? Can a text have two referents and a stable meaning? How is meaning shaped? Does Matthew misuse (by our critical sensibilities) the text (which would only mean that he doesn’t use the historical-grammatical reading like we think he should!)?
What are your thoughts, Polycarp?
Hi Rob
Here are two direct OT prophecies…Israel/Jacob said that the people would gather onto Shiloh-Genesis 48:10…This happened when Jesus road into Jerusalem on a colt/ass-Matthew 21:1-11…
Daniel (9:27 KJV) said that ‘He’ the Messiah would confirm the Covenant for one week-a literal seven days… After riding into Jerusalem,Jesus spent the first half of the week teaching and healing and being ‘observed’ by the temple priests and pharisees…Our passover lamb (Jesus) was crucified/cut off mid-week of the Passover festival of unleaven bread…
He spent the remainder of the week-three consecutive days and nights in the heart of the earth-sundown to sundown and rose on the first day of the week-which was Firstfruits…
Since the right to rule (scepter) had passed from Judah.It was unlawful for them to put Jesus to death by stoning… Fulfilling Psalm 34:20 and Psalm 22…
Rob,i know this was not scholarly or even a hermeneutical query? Anyway would you consider these-not for discussion with me (i am way out of my league here)…
Yeshua,
Thank you for responding. Your post is well received and appreciated. I would like to engage, irenically, with your texts in question. For now, time permits only the first, but I hope to come back later and discuss your others.
At the outset, let us frame Genesis 48:10. Actually, the text in question that I think you are describing, at least with the “Shiloh” reference is 49:8-12, Jacob’s blessing on Judah, no? Also, I’m going to have to ask you to clarify regarding Matthew 21:1-11, the colt/ass issue is relative not to Gen, but to Zech 9:9 and Isa 62:11 unless I am missing you entirely. So if you want to dialogue about Zech or Isa, that is fine, but I’m only going to speak to the Shiloh reference at this time, until you clarify.
That said, back to the pericope in Gen 49 regarding Judah. First, I would like to point out several features of the text that often go unnoticed. There are two, extended, positive blessings in the section, namely, to Judah and to Ephraim (= Israel, later in the divided monarchy) which may well suggest, upon closer inspection that there is a potential for a dual kingdom, at least possibly. That, however, is not integral to my point, simply something to consider.
Now, some English translations render the Hebrew “Shiloh” because frankly they don’t know what to do with it. In the Hebrew text, this is an instance of Kethiv-Qere, that is, a textual corruption in the MT. The original Hebrew may be either שׁלו or שׁלה. These subtle differences make all the difference in the world. If the former, is it two prepositions and a third person personal pronoun? Or the latter, the name “Shiloh” but then in what sense does “it come to Shiloh.” I encourage you to read about 10 different English translations and see that most are conflicted on how to render this passage. It could be “until Shiloh comes” or “until he/it [scepter?] comes to his [own]” or “until he comes to Shiloh” or “until tribute is brought to him” or any number of other renderings. Furthermore, there is no consensus on what “Shiloh” is or means. I believe it is only vocalized as “Shiloh” in one other place in the HB, Josh 16:6 (I could be mistaken here). Either way, it is entirely unclear what Shiloh is, much less that it should even be rendered Shiloh.
Moreover, in the same passage the term for “Scepter” could on rather solid lexical grounds be rendered “mace” rather than scepter, which would then give you a military image rather than a regal image. This passage is riddled with ambiguity. People often focus on “the scepter shall not depart from Judah” as some type of messianic predictor. However, at best historically-contextually it is the promise of a “dynasty” not a single king to emerge from Judah’s lineage. Also, in my view, this has to be balanced by a very similar blessing offered to Ephraim.
Hopefully, that frames the issue, at least somewhat in Gen 49. Please let me know if this doesn’t make sense or if I didn’t speak to the issue you raised. I look forward to dialoging further.
Rob,
The first thing you said was “While I have no intention of creating a dispute.”. But judging by your disproportionate response to my comment, I’d say this is like someone who says “I don’t mean to brag” and then proceeds to do exactly that.
Then you said you wanted to discuss whether there are in fact hundreds of messianic prophecies, to which I responded by giving links instead of “reinventing the wheel” by listing them all in your blog. This was a proper response to your actual request, not to the one you just replaced it with: “actual dialogue about specific texts”. The lists at the links do “articulate what was predicted and where”, along with their fullfillments. Now you have added specifics, but I see that others have already offered some.
You also seem to have made a mountain out of the molehill about skeptics. I was referring to people who see absolutely no prophecies about any Messiah, much less that Jesus fulfilled any, as I thought I made clear. And I did say that not all the items on any list were necessarily clear.
Your disparaging remark about Josh McDowell is of course an ad hominem and thus has no bearing on the discussion. Yet you speak of MY rhetoric? Interesting. And I maintain that evidence does demand a verdict, or are you saying that courts of law should be discontinued since evidence is worthless?
Lastly, how can you glean a suggestion from my brief comment that I am willing to take things out of context? What does my alleged “keenness” on terminology mean when you yourself seem equally “keen”? You sure get a lot of mileage out of a few vapors!
That such tactics come from “a biblical scholar” isn’t impressing me to continue dialog with you. If you can only win debates by throwing your credentials at your opponent, I won’t waste any more of either your or my time.
FWIW: Look at the context in which I made the statement you find so offensive and outrageous. It is a statement of faith, not a doctoral thesis. Relax, man!
Paula,
Perhaps my “dialogue” is your “dispute.” Critical inquiry of whatever stripe does not necessitate some type of superficial Christian flattery, thus, I am straightforward and critical. Hopefully, you can take my word for it when I say that I have no intent on being “hostile” but again your definition of “dialogue” may well not include some of the features of my means of articulating myself. Furthermore, while I appreciate your passive jab at my own personal arrogance, I will simply shrug that off.
My comments on McDowell are my judgment. You cannot neatly dismiss judgment as “ad hominem” and therefore baseless. That seems rather naive. Even vitriolic rhetorical attack may well embody genuine criticism worthy of consideration.
I will again state that from an epistemologically sensitive perspective “evidence does not demand a verdict.” You are predicating a necessary relationship between factors and your conclusions. The same “facts” do not demand every jury to reach the same conclusions! Furthermore, while analogical court language butters up scholarly dialogue, making it aesthetically pleasing, we are not in a courtroom.
Also, I find it strange that I attempted to engage you in dialogue and you accuse me of “throwing out credentials.” Frankly, I haven’t thrown out anything. I don’t think where I went to school determines how competent I am or how competent you are. Competence remains to be seen by that which is put forth. So, I find that a cheap way out.
Finally, I completely understand that I took your comments out of your statement of faith. If you are appealing to genre for consideration, I full well understand. Nevertheless, is the discussion still not worth having? One is left with the impression after reading your site that you are an apologetically minded Christian conservative. I simply offered to engage one of your beliefs in light of critical inquiry. Is that not worth consideration?
Morning Robgreid
Yes,i meant Genesis 49:10 in particular-as referring to Matthew 21:8-12. Verses 1-7 of Matthew were mainly for context…Yes of course you are correct that the colt/ass refers to Zech 9:9…Salvation/redemption ‘coming’ refers to Isaiah 62:11.Moreover,Jesus arrival in Jerusalem was the fulfillment of these prophecies…
Israel’s prophecy of the people gathering unto ‘him’ the Messiah-was at the beginning of the Holy week (literal seven days) of the Passover and the feast of unleaven bread.I see these prophecies in connection with Daniel 9:27-the only place in scripture (as far as i know) that predicted the exact time when the Messiah/Christ would die.Thereby all sacrifices for sin-ceased being acceptable to God…
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Daniel 9:27
The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Gen 49:10
And a very great multitude spread their garments in the way; others cut down branches from the trees, and strowed them in the way.
And the multitudes that went before, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the son of David: Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest. Matthew 21:8,9
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. Zech 9:9
Behold, the LORD hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh; behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him. Isaiah 62:11…
Thank you for the information on ‘Shiloh’ and the Scepter…
[…] Reid and Paula Fether have burst unto the scene, or seen?, with a conversation concerning prophecies. He would: “like to engage in a scholarly dialogue about whether in fact there are hundreds […]
Rob, as I stated in my post (pinged above), I believe that it is not necessarily prophecies, but completion of the Hebrew Prophets that we find in Christ – or would your rather say fulfillment. While we have a ‘here and now’ referent we find Matthew understanding the story of Christ coming from Egypt in light of Hosea – and essentially (inspirationally) combined the two, starting from the stable and seeing the fulfillment in Christ.
‘Here, see, the Messiah came from Egypt just like Israel did, so this text pointed to the Messiah.’ – Matthew paraphrasing his work, c. 53 ad.
Yeshua,
I am still confused what you see going on in Matt 21:8-12 relative to Genesis? Could you explain exactly what you are getting at? I apologize for not understanding fully.
Also, is it possible that Jesus intentionally reinacted the Zech passage? In what sense would that be a fulfillment? Was the Zech passage a future prediction of Jesus? Or did Zechariah anticipate a Davidite king sooner?
Rob,
Good luck with Paula, she seems to just want to show how biased we “men” are. While that may be easy with the likes of me, as older.. Irish, and a one time Royal Marine. We all have our lives and places we come from. I try my best at objectivity, but my presuppositions are always, I hope in the Judeo-Christian text. But with a mind and hand back toward the historical. also. But again, best of luck with her.
Also, I will try to read your blog more often. Thanks..
Fr. Robert
PS..if ya don’t moderate my blog? I will understand. – Fr. R.
Oh dear, Rob. You’ve gotten yourself entrenched in dialogue, haven’t you. I wonder if perhaps it is overly simplistic to view texts in the Hebrew Bible as “messianic” simply because the NT employs them as such. I wonder if a better method would invoke 1st century Jewish hermeneutics. What did Matthew think he was doing? (for example)
[…] Prophecy Rob Reid and Paula Fether have burst unto the scene, or seen?, with a conversation concerning prophecies. He would: “like to engage in a scholarly dialogue about whether in fact there are hundreds […]
[…] Reid and Paula Fether have burst unto the scene, or seen?, with a conversation concerning prophecies. He would: “like to engage in a scholarly dialogue about whether in fact there are hundreds […]