Fulfillment of Prophecy in the New Testament

[CG Didymus]

the stories do not contradict each other when held together, just as the stories of witnesses to a crime may appear to contradict but many times are just the same story as seen through different eyes.

Since I don't need for the stories to be "literally" and "historically" true and accurate, I'm okay with Matthew simply adding the trip to Egypt and the massacre of the children in to his version.

But, about witnesses... if the sheriff shows up and ask, "Which way did they go?" And one witness points to the north and says, "They went that 'a way." And another witness says, "Sheriff, I saw the high tail it outta town and go south." Who's he going to believe? They both can't be right. And maybe one is lying and is trying to have the sheriff go the wrong way.

Another thing is... Luke and Matthew were not witnesses. Did they get their information from Mary or from traditions? We have shepherds that were telling the story. A moving star led people to the site. But Herod didn't know about it? Then the family takes Jesus to Jerusalem? People at the Temple recognized who this child was, but Herod didn't know that Jesus was right there in town? And he trusted the Magi to come back and tell him the location of the child? How big was Bethlehem that he couldn't send some of his people to go look or go with the Magi?

Then about getting the story straight... We have another Mary that was in each of the empty tomb stories, but each story is different and has different people there? Did she give a different story to each gospel writer? Or, was there different versions of the story being told? And Matthew, Mark and Luke, again, were not eye witnesses. So was John's version correct? If so, then why didn't the other writers ask him what had happened at the tomb and write that "eye witness" account?

Anyway, doing away with contradictions is only important to those that need the story to be true and accurate. I'm getting more and more okay with religious people connecting dots and taking things out of context to make their religious beliefs true. But, I don't believe it makes them true.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Well, when a sign is given to a king that his enemies will be dead by the time a child reaches a certain age becomes a prophecy about a God/man being born of the Holy Spirit and a virgin, there is more that is necessary than just connecting dots. They have to pull out just one verse, then make a "young woman" a virgin. And Baha'is support that. But they do not support the literal and physical resurrection of Jesus, yet the NT writers found verses that support it.

They even have Jesus predicting it by telling the people that just like Jonah was in the belly of a fish for three days that he'll be in the belly of the Earth three days. Then Luke quotes Peter quoting David... " you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, you will not let your holy one see decay." And later he says... " David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30 But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31 Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. 32 God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it.

But Baha'is erase those dots and say that Jesus' body, being flesh, died, decayed and is gone, but his Spirit lives on and that is what rose from the dead. Plus, Baha'is say that the meaning of the resurrection is symbolic... that the "cause" of Christ was like a lifeless body until his disciples got up and started telling people about the teachings of Jesus, and thus brought life into the religion of Jesus.

What is your choice CG and what is every person's choice, is to consider if God has given us these keys to understand scriptures in Messages given in the 1800's by the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

It is them that say this is what God is now telling us is the intent of scripture.

It really boils down to if we accept what they have offered, or not. If we do accept, we are then Baha'i, but it is not us that have given the explanations, it is us that have accepted them. We do not make them fit, the Messenger is either the purpose of the Prophecy, or they are not.

In the end Christ has given the Tests, so we have no excuses.

There is much guidance

BIBLE VERSES ABOUT TRUE PROPHET

Them and the Word becomes the Standard for the age it is given.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

What is your choice CG and what is every person's choice, is to consider if God has given us these keys to understand scriptures in Messages given in the 1800's by the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

God has given us the keys to understanding the scriptures and the capacity to understand them, which is exactly what we would expect from a God that is just.

“Suffer not yourselves to be wrapt in the dense veils of your selfish desires, inasmuch as I have perfected in every one of you My creation, so that the excellence of My handiwork may be fully revealed unto men. It follows, therefore, that every man hath been, and will continue to be, able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God, the Glorified. Had he not been endowed with such a capacity, how could he be called to account for his failure?” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 143

 

[Trailblazer]

We do not make them fit, the Messenger is either the purpose of the Prophecy, or they are not.

Logic 101.

 

[CG Didymus]

Well, when a sign is given to a king that his enemies will be dead by the time a child reaches a certain age becomes a prophecy about a God/man being born of the Holy Spirit and a virgin, there is more that is necessary than just connecting dots. They have to pull out just one verse, then make a "young woman" a virgin.

What is your choice CG and what is every person's choice, is to consider if God has given us these keys to understand scriptures

We do not make them fit

Did the "sign" in Isaiah chapter 7 to King Ahaz get fulfilled? Did the gospel writer lift one verse out of the chapter and make it into a Messianic prophecy? How much of the "virgin" birth story is literally true? Was there a star that led the Magi? We have angels appearing to the shepherds, to Mary, to Elizabeth... true or not true? Did Herod kill all the baby boys in Bethlehem? And was that a fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:15? Let's look at it...

Jeremiah 31:15
“A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children, and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.”

Matthew 2:13-18 Joseph... took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt... When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi...
Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:
“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.”​

If you care to read the context in Jeremiah, it is about the Israelites being taken away as captives. So, again, out of context. No dots. Nothing. Just lifting a verse the writer can use. Plus, it is questionable whether the massacre of the children really happened. Unless Baha'u'llah said it happened, then of course it is true. But, I don't think he did.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This all comes back to having to use Metephor and stories to tell of spiritual truths and I have had offered before there will be a level of literal truth in every story and many spiritual possibilities.

How much of the "virgin" birth story is literally true?

I would say most of it, the important Message to get from the story is that Jesus is a Messenger of God, born of the Holy Spirit and not the human spirit.

Was there a star that led the Magi?

Yes and all Messengers have signs in the heavens, prior to becoming manifested on earth.

This is another reason William Miller was excited, there were events Christains saw were possible as to fulfilling this requirement.

We have angels appearing to the shepherds, to Mary, to Elizabeth... true or not true?

God does give visions to people and they are a blessing indeed. Many people had such visions of the Bab and Baha'u'llah, which are now recorded in history.

Did Herod kill all the baby boys in Bethlehem?

More than likely he tried to do this. After all they killed tens of thousands of Baha'i, including many women and children.

If you care to read the context in Jeremiah, it is about the Israelites being taken away as captives. So, again, out of context.

Names are applicable to the time, the story is what is repeated. The Bab and Baha'u'llah and his followers were taken away as captives, so were Muhammad's followers.

RegardsTony

 

[CG Didymus]

I would say most of it, the important Message to get from the story is that Jesus is a Messenger of God, born of the Holy Spirit and not the human spirit.

Did the "sign" in Isaiah chapter 7 to King Ahaz get fulfilled?

Was this "sign" fulfilled in Isaiah's time, or just in the time of Jesus, or both?

 

[CG Didymus]

Hi there,

As a former Christian, having read the Old Testament and New Testament to completion and numerous books multiple times, it has always occurred to me that a few Old Testament scriptures that the New Testament says was fulfilled by Jesus or in some other way, seem to have been taken out of context.

Sometimes the writers would quote a single verse from a passage to prove a point and then when going back I would find that the context seemed very different.

In some cases I have found that this was a misunderstanding of the context on my part.

Would you guys say that the NT writers definitely take certain quotes out of context from the OT?

@Harel13

What I sort of knew, but now believe is that Judaism can stand alone. It doesn't need another religion to "fulfill" it. Christianity doesn't either, but it takes some of Judaism and creates something new. So it essentially replaces Judaism and makes some beliefs and practices of Judaism obsolete. Like most of the Law.

Then comes Islam and does the same thing to Christianity. Islam no longer needs Judaism or Christianity. It stands alone and replaces them.

In between there are other significant religious movements... like the Sikhs. But, one that claims to be the fulfillment of all the others is the Baha'i Faith. They accept Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but come up with new beliefs and practices that replace those others. But they also tie in Hinduism, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism.

I don't know much about Zoroastrianism, but Hinduism stands apart and alone from what some call the "Abrahamic" religions. It doesn't need them. It has its own beliefs and practices. Then Buddhism evolved out of Hinduism. And most all these religions keep evolving and adapting their beliefs to fit in and be relevant in modern times.

The "Abrahamic" religions do need the previous one to legitimize themselves. So Christianity needs to find "prophecies" from Judaism that prove that they are the new truth from God. Then Islam does it to both of them. And the Baha'i Faith does it to them plus all the other major religions. None of the prophecies seem to be dead on and without a doubt saying what the new religion says it does. There is always a different way to interpret them, especially since most all are taken out of context.

So where does that leave us? Judaism doesn't need any of the other religions and still has prophecies unfulfilled. Hinduism and Buddhism doesn't need the Abrahamic religions and has their own prophecies to be fulfilled. Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith all have their own prophecies and wait for them to be fulfilled. Most all prophecies are too vague to know for sure if they've been fulfilled... accept for the believers in that religion who swear they have been fulfilled. The main prophecy that all the religions have, though... is that the world will become a spiritual, peaceful place. It hasn't happened yet. Any comments or things you can add?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

What I sort of knew, but now believe is that Judaism can stand alone. It doesn't need another religion to "fulfill" it. Christianity doesn't either, but it takes some of Judaism and creates something new. So it essentially replaces Judaism and makes some beliefs and practices of Judaism obsolete. Like most of the Law.

Then comes Islam and does the same thing to Christianity. Islam no longer needs Judaism or Christianity. It stands alone and replaces them.

In between there are other significant religious movements... like the Sikhs. But, one that claims to be the fulfillment of all the others is the Baha'i Faith. They accept Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but come up with new beliefs and practices that replace those others. But they also tie in Hinduism, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism.

I don't know much about Zoroastrianism, but Hinduism stands apart and alone from what some call the "Abrahamic" religions. It doesn't need them. It has its own beliefs and practices. Then Buddhism evolved out of Hinduism. And most all these religions keep evolving and adapting their beliefs to fit in and be relevant in modern times.

The "Abrahamic" religions do need the previous one to legitimize themselves. So Christianity needs to find "prophecies" from Judaism that prove that they are the new truth from God. Then Islam does it to both of them. And the Baha'i Faith does it to them plus all the other major religions. None of the prophecies seem to be dead on and without a doubt saying what the new religion says it does. There is always a different way to interpret them, especially since most all are taken out of context.

So where does that leave us? Judaism doesn't need any of the other religions and still has prophecies unfulfilled. Hinduism and Buddhism doesn't need the Abrahamic religions and has their own prophecies to be fulfilled. Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith all have their own prophecies and wait for them to be fulfilled. Most all prophecies are too vague to know for sure if they've been fulfilled... accept for the believers in that religion who swear they have been fulfilled. The main prophecy that all the religions have, though... is that the world will become a spiritual, peaceful place. It hasn't happened yet. Any comments or things you can add?

United we stand divided we fall.

I see No Faith is about standing alone.

Regards Tony

 

[ManSinha]

United we stand divided we fall.

I see No Faith is about standing alone.

The son of the person you think is a manifestation - said that his father was Kalki - this displays utter arrogance and ignorance (Source) - he probably knew the name "Kalki" and hastily added it to the other outlandish claims about being the messiah of all religions without even bothering to read up on him in the Bhaveshya Purana - utter garbage IMO - did he not know that Kalki is not prophesied to appear for about another 400K years and will have a sword with which to smite his enemies - did Baha'u'llah come even remotely close? not so again IMO - all he could do was ineffectually curse those who did not heed him - further proof to me that he did not know what he was talking about and all this is a part of self aggrandizment and self promotion

How can you worship and follow a charlatan and a narcissist is beyond me

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The son of the person you think is a manifestation - said that his father was Kalki - this displays utter arrogance and ignorance (Source) - he probably knew the name "Kalki" and hastily added it to the other outlandish claims about being the messiah of all religions without even bothering to read up on him in the Bhaveshya Purana - utter garbage IMO - did he not know that Kalki is not prophesied to appear for about another 400K years and will have a sword with which to smite his enemies - did Baha'u'llah come even remotely close? not so again IMO - all he could do was ineffectually curse those who did not heed him - further proof to me that he did not know what he was talking about and all this is a part of self aggrandizment and self promotion

How can you worship and follow a charlatan and a narcissist is beyond me

The quandary is just that, I get to choose and you get to choose.

I thank God every breath I take, that I was given the choice.

Every breath I take is pure bounty in knowledge of Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God.

My life is dedicated to all humanity over preferences of self as a result and offer no ill will to any person. I leave others to choose as they so wish

RegardsTony

 

[Harel13]

The son of the person you think is a manifestation - said that his father was Kalki - this displays utter arrogance and ignorance (Source) - he probably knew the name "Kalki" and hastily added it to the other outlandish claims about being the messiah of all religions without even bothering to read up on him in the Bhaveshya Purana - utter garbage IMO - did he not know that Kalki is not prophesied to appear for about another 400K years and will have a sword with which to smite his enemies - did Baha'u'llah come even remotely close? not so again IMO - all he could do was ineffectually curse those who did not heed him - further proof to me that he did not know what he was talking about and all this is a part of self aggrandizment and self promotion

How can you worship and follow a charlatan and a narcissist is beyond me

Considering that Baha'i choose what they like and what "fits" from other religions and announce that the rest is wrong, or relevant only for a certain period of time (thus ignoring the many phrases of eternity), I assume that the average Baha'i would tell you that your prophecy of the 400k years is wrong...

 

[ManSinha]

Considering that Baha'i choose what they like and what "fits" from other religions and announce that the rest is wrong, or relevant only for a certain period of time (thus ignoring the many phrases of eternity), I assume that the average Baha'i would tell you that your prophecy of the 400k years is wrong...

Well sir - it is not my prophecy per se - but I was quoting from a text I happened to have read just to show how illogical IMO some people are - they follow blindly without a rationale analysis and run away from answering questions deemed difficult - but that is religion I guess - I do not claim mine has all the answers - it is perhaps one of many different paths to the Almighty - what gets me some times is statements like "in the future the entire world will know and accept ....." - that appears to be perhaps a futile hope and illogical to boot

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Considering that Baha'i choose what they like and what "fits" from other religions and announce that the rest is wrong, or relevant only for a certain period of time (thus ignoring the many phrases of eternity), I assume that the average Baha'i would tell you that your prophecy of the 400k years is wrong...

A Baha'i sees that scripture given by the Messenger is not wrong. The question to ask ones own self, is what scriptures can be 100% confirmed to be have given by a Messenger 3500 years ago, 2000 years ago or 1500 years ago, when there is no records that they themselves have written? Thus there is a good possibility that a lot of the ancient scriptures are more like Islamic Hadith, which is what is written by people, to say this is what the Messenger said. Some may be right, some may be wrong, some may be a mixture.

Number Prophecy is likewise very difficult to interpret, as numbers can have many meanings.

It is the Bab and Baha'u'llah who announced who they were to the World and either they are that Truth, or they are not.

I can only wish you all the best - Regards Tony

Well sir - it is not my prophecy per se - but I was quoting from a text I happened to have read just to show how illogical IMO some people are - they follow blindly without a rationale analysis and run away from answering questions deemed difficult - but that is religion I guess - I do not claim mine has all the answers - it is perhaps one of many different paths to the Almighty - what gets me some times is statements like "in the future the entire world will know and accept ....." - that appear perhaps a futile hope and illogical to boot

It is simple, Abdul'baha has said something you do not believe. You have a stance that apposes what is said and offered without question a reply that stated Abdul'baha was ignorant.

I need not to reply to such accusations, I am happy for you to have that view. What would you like me to do, offer more material so you can lavish more insults?

So Is it not better for me to be silent when you give such replies, as I am fully aware Abdul'baha was far from being ignorant and just a small look at his life will show you how many came for His Advice for the highest ranks to the most common people and no person went away without having a satisfactory answer to their questions.

All the best to you, regards Tony

Regards Tony

 

[Harel13]

A Baha'i sees that scripture given by the Messenger is not wrong. The question to ask ones own self, is what scriptures can be 100% confirmed to be have given by a Messenger 3500 years ago, 2000 years ago or 1500 years ago, when there is no records that they themselves have written? Thus there is a good possibility that a lot of the ancient scriptures are more like Islamic Hadith, which is what is written by people, to say this is what the Messenger said. Some may be right, some may be wrong, some may be a mixture.

Forgive me, but

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Forgive me, but

No worries, done.

Regards Tony

 

[Samael_Khan]

What I sort of knew, but now believe is that Judaism can stand alone. It doesn't need another religion to "fulfill" it. Christianity doesn't either, but it takes some of Judaism and creates something new. So it essentially replaces Judaism and makes some beliefs and practices of Judaism obsolete. Like most of the Law.

Then comes Islam and does the same thing to Christianity. Islam no longer needs Judaism or Christianity. It stands alone and replaces them.

In between there are other significant religious movements... like the Sikhs. But, one that claims to be the fulfillment of all the others is the Baha'i Faith. They accept Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but come up with new beliefs and practices that replace those others. But they also tie in Hinduism, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism.

I don't know much about Zoroastrianism, but Hinduism stands apart and alone from what some call the "Abrahamic" religions. It doesn't need them. It has its own beliefs and practices. Then Buddhism evolved out of Hinduism. And most all these religions keep evolving and adapting their beliefs to fit in and be relevant in modern times.

The "Abrahamic" religions do need the previous one to legitimize themselves. So Christianity needs to find "prophecies" from Judaism that prove that they are the new truth from God. Then Islam does it to both of them. And the Baha'i Faith does it to them plus all the other major religions. None of the prophecies seem to be dead on and without a doubt saying what the new religion says it does. There is always a different way to interpret them, especially since most all are taken out of context.

So where does that leave us? Judaism doesn't need any of the other religions and still has prophecies unfulfilled. Hinduism and Buddhism doesn't need the Abrahamic religions and has their own prophecies to be fulfilled. Christianity, Islam and the Baha'i Faith all have their own prophecies and wait for them to be fulfilled. Most all prophecies are too vague to know for sure if they've been fulfilled... accept for the believers in that religion who swear they have been fulfilled. The main prophecy that all the religions have, though... is that the world will become a spiritual, peaceful place. It hasn't happened yet. Any comments or things you can add?

You pretty much hit the nail on the head here so there isn't much else that I can add.

This is very much how I see the attempts of other religions to claim that they are prophecied based off vague selective proof texting of the previous scriptures. And then maybe they will say that the rest are invalid because of their whims or that prophecy is hidden. All one has to do is be believer and then you will see what you want to see. What I like about Judaism is that they take context very seriously. Without context one can claim anything about any writing which makes the prophecy worthless in proving your validity as a religion.

With regards to Zoroastrianism, there are symbolic links between that and the Abrahamic faiths to the point that scholars suspect that it influenced Judaism and Christianity. It is a very fascinating religion in itself. (the Lord of Light religion of Game of Thrones are based off Zoroastrianism. They believed that fire was a purifier )

 

[Brian2]

Since I don't need for the stories to be "literally" and "historically" true and accurate, I'm okay with Matthew simply adding the trip to Egypt and the massacre of the children in to his version.

But, about witnesses... if the sheriff shows up and ask, "Which way did they go?" And one witness points to the north and says, "They went that 'a way." And another witness says, "Sheriff, I saw the high tail it outta town and go south." Who's he going to believe? They both can't be right. And maybe one is lying and is trying to have the sheriff go the wrong way.

Maybe, but also it could be that the 2 are telling the truth and one saw them go at one time and the other saw them go when the returned later and left in the other direction. True witnesses fit together like this.

Another thing is... Luke and Matthew were not witnesses. Did they get their information from Mary or from traditions? We have shepherds that were telling the story. A moving star led people to the site. But Herod didn't know about it? Then the family takes Jesus to Jerusalem? People at the Temple recognized who this child was, but Herod didn't know that Jesus was right there in town? And he trusted the Magi to come back and tell him the location of the child? How big was Bethlehem that he couldn't send some of his people to go look or go with the Magi?

Herod was not looking for Jesus until maybe a couple of years later when the Magi came and asked directions to the new King. Why go and start knocking on doors and killing until you know there is something to kill. When the Magi failed to return he must have suspected being duped and so it was time to act. Bethlehem was not that big but Herod was shrewd even if vicious.
Luke at the start of his gospel says he got his information from witnesses and those who had been there from the beginning. But also he was a good historian according to what we know and so probably would also be a good one in the things we do not know for sure.
Matthew as an apostle who was there with Jesus and probably knew Mary could probably fill in details that Luke did not have.

Then about getting the story straight... We have another Mary that was in each of the empty tomb stories, but each story is different and has different people there? Did she give a different story to each gospel writer? Or, was there different versions of the story being told? And Matthew, Mark and Luke, again, were not eye witnesses. So was John's version correct? If so, then why didn't the other writers ask him what had happened at the tomb and write that "eye witness" account?

It probably depended on the source of the information. Most of it can be fitted together nicely but details are different.

Anyway, doing away with contradictions is only important to those that need the story to be true and accurate. I'm getting more and more okay with religious people connecting dots and taking things out of context to make their religious beliefs true. But, I don't believe it makes them true.

No it certainly does not make them true but it is amazing how many people get hoodwinked by dots that are no more than fly ****.

 

[Brian2]

To prophesy is means to foretell the future in the English language. If the original word doesn't only mean that then another word or many other words should be used to define the difference.

Prophets had different roles in the OT around conveying God's word and sometimes it involved predicting the future. Prophesying the future means the same in English as in Hebrew. Prophecy is for different purposes and some prophecy is so that we first see an event and then realise that God had prophesied it and knew it all along even though the exact nature of the event may not have been know before the event. (I'll give Ps 22 as an example)

Short is a relative term. Typology is easy, I do it as a pass time. A Christian friend and I constantly go back and forth with regards to Messianic and non messianic symbolism. It is a fun creative experiment. One doesn't need the Holy Spirit to do that, just knowledge of the Biblical stories.

The synoptic gospels were written 20 to 40 years after Jesus in traditional dating. Luke wrote his gospel in the 50s probably and he says that others before him had also attempted to write about Jesus.
Some typology is not true however and comes from a good imagination. And of course Judaism seems to think that all Christian typology is of that type.
With Christian typology I think it does help to know the story of Jesus however and whom He is said to be etc.

One wouldn't be studying things if they weren't open to it, unless they are studying specifically to disprove something.

Which can happen, or some study out of interest etc.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Judaism stands alone but waiting for their Messiah to save and restore them. The Messiah came and they rejected Him, as prophesied and they kicked His followers out of Judaism and that is why Christianity is another religion.
Christianity (and any other Abrahamic religion) is not a stand alone religion as it needs the Hebrew scriptures to show that what it claims is true and that their Prophet, Manifestation, Christ is true and prophesied about.
Jesus brought the New Covenant to the Jews, the one prophesied about. (Jer 31, Ezek 36 etc) Most Jews rejected Jesus and the Covenant and it was taken to the Gentiles as prophesied. The Covenant of Law in the OT is replaced with the Covenant of the Spirit.

To which I see we can add Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah to the OT line of Messengers.

I personally see that a Jew is one that Embraces the Covenant and the Laws of each Messenger and in that way we become a Jew of the first Covenant, of all the Covenants and on to the Last Covenant.

Baha'u'llah has offered we can Include all God's Messengers and to reject One is to reject them All.

Thus what does the OT say of a Jew that rejects a Covenant! From that advice we all have a lesson to learn.

@CG Didymus

Disclaimer
The view expressed in my post are as a Baha'i, any accusation that I want to convert any person is pure fabrication, I just Love all humanity to bits and it is God who changes hearts

Regards Tony