judge

Have you got a lot of time to devote to this?
How much time are you prepared to spend?
Do you think Christ did it in 5 minutes by pointing to a verse here and a verse there?

Steven Carr

You can read Jesus's words and decide for yourself how long it took :- Luke 24 - '46 He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Let us start with the first bit. Where is it written that the Christ will rise from the dead?

Magdlyn

Sorry to jump in late. I am not sure what the disagreement is about here. Nowhere is it written in the Tanakh that mosiach will die and rise again after 3 days. Mosiach will rule over the peaceful Kingdom of the Lord, not die.

This quote from Luke seems spurious, written by an overly enthusiastic euangelist.

gregor

Not trying to wade in too much here, but Judge, you said:

"I think it can be explained. . ."

I am interested in the explanation. I'd guess the explanation may be either:

1. There is an explicit reference to death and resurrection somewhere in the existing OT stories.

2. There is an oblique reference to death and resurrection somewhere in the existin OT stories.

3. There was a reference (explicit or oblique) to a story. Unfortunately, the book didn't get canonized.

4. This is an error by the gospel author or editor.

Please first pick a horse (or list one I missed).

Then, please describe the horse.

Layman

Umm, the early Christians were Jews. And the Jews of the second-temple period were not the Jews who wrote the Hebrew Bible.

gregor

Layman

If you think there's an OT reference to dead and rising Messiah, you're free to answer the question as well as to which scripture it referred to (Ref: My prior post).

Or is your statement about Jonah the sum total of OT references to dead and rising Messiahs?

Layman

Answer what question? This thread was about Carr'ss bizzare attempt to equate ALL Jewish scripture with second-temple Jewish literature was ill-informed. As usual, once Steve is shown to be so obviously wrong on something, he has to move on to something else. I see little need to reward this behaviour.

And I do not remember making any statement about Jonah in this thread. Nor am I Deep Thought. There are many websites devoted to the issue of the relationship of Jesus to OT prophecies. Feel free to see which scriptures they claim foretell Jesus or are typologies of Jesus and debunk them. But please do not pretend that Jonah is the only example. Frankly, the issue is more theological than historical and as such has not greatly interested me.

Toto

Hey - I'm the one who mentioned Jonah, not Layman! (I've been mistaken for other people before, but let's nip that one in the bud.)

This is a very strange Christian debating technique. Refuse to answer a question because it wasn't framed deferentially enough? Surely you realize that any lurker will assume that you have refused to answer because you can't.

Steven Carr started this by saying:

NT Wright writes 'No second-Temple Jewish texts speak of the Messiah being raised from the dead.'

If this whole matter can be solved by saying - yes but some other Jewish texts do speak of the Messiah being raised from the dead - you can satisfy everyone's curiosity by identifying them. Otherwise, the difference between second-Temple Jewish texts and all Jewish texts is not the point.

Or you can use the out that I gave you on page one - that Jesus was reading the texts "creatively" - and we can go on from there and consider the implications of that.

Layman

Spare us the baseless overgeneralization. And the taunting.

Carr was trying another of his attacks on N.T. Wright. Trying to set up some sort of contradiction between his two statements. Since the attack was obviously baseless and illinformed, fellow skeptics are rushing provide cover by changing the subject. I responded because I, unlike Carr, have read the book in question and could easily point ouf the flaw in equating "second temple literature" with all Jewish literature.

I assume that any lurker interested in the subject will realize that I have limited time and interest, but that they can do some google searches to find websites devoted to the issue of Jesus' relationship to OT typology and prophecy. Of course, I could start listing some of the prophecies myself. That would easily answer the question and stop the attacks without getting me mired in a subject I have little interest in discussing. Right? Wrong. Then we will have to discuss each one in depth, as well as discuss what the proper interpretive approach to the Old Testament is? Authorial intent? The approach taken by the Jews of Jesus' time? And then discuss whether the Christian approach fit into any particular interpretive approach and if so, which one and, if not, was their's invalid?

I'd rather spend time working, with my new baby, working on the threads I have going on Luke/Acts and Galatians, and various articles I have in the works on other issues I find more interesting.

So put aside your agenda for a minute, try and be a normal human being, and just realize I don't have much interest in spending a lot of time on this issue. Nor does my lack of interest or willingness to get drawn down into such a debate mean . . . . absolutely anything about the merits of the issue.

Toto

Hi Layman - why don't you just say that early Christians read the scriptures in an allegorical manner?

This would explain why there is no literal mention of the Messiah rising from the dead after three days in second-Temple literature or any other Jewish literature, but early Christians might still have based their beliefs on a creative reading of scripture, or claimed to have.

Then you wouldn't have to fling baseless insults at Steven Carr or anyone else.

a google hit for Jesus+prophecy+typology

So you, with your literalist reading of scripture as history, are breaking with over a millenium of Christian tradition. That's okay, of course