Vorkosigan

Willow,

in order to claim that Jesus fulfilled prophecy, you first have to prove the event is history.

Ronald Reagan used to tell audiences about a B-17 pilot who would not bail out of his crippled plane on his way back from a European mission because his wounded gunner couldn't make the jump. The pilot comforted the lad: "Never mind, son. We'll ride it down together." Reagan asserted that the pilot was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously.

However, military author-historian Lawrence H. Suid relates in his book "Guts & Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in Film," that he couldn't verify such a story, either through the White House or the Air Force History Office.

Suid eventually located the source. A World War II veteran recognized that the story was too perfectly similar to a scene in a popular 1944 air drama about the Battle of Midway, "A Wing and a Prayer," starring Don Ameche and Dana Andrews. In a climactic scene, the radio operator tells his pilot that the plane is afire but he can't move. The pilot returns, "I haven't got the altitude, Mike. We'll take this ride together."

Note that no one believes the story Reagan related actually happened. Everyone believes that for whatever reason he copied the story from the movie.

Now we have the same situation in Matthew. First, there is no outside vector on this story; no non-NT source gives it. Second, we know that Matthew copied the story from the OT; he even used the exact language. Now you face the same problem that Reagan does -- how would you go about demonstrating that Matthew did not copy the LXX, but instead was relating history?

We all know that you think this is history. Now -- prove it!

Vorkosigan

Sven

Well, if you think that Matthew wasn't wrong here (misunderstood something), please try to ride two donkeys at once. A picture would be most welcomed here.

You also ignore that the other gospel writers only have one donkey. So one of them simply has to be wrong. Since it's kind of difficult to ride two donkeys (and we know that the original passage Matthew quoted didn't mean two donkeys), it's quite reasonable to assume that Matthew got it wrong.

When will you ever address these arguments?

P.S.: I know that you are quite busy, but what about Tyre?

Jack the Bodiless

I would also appreciate an explanation of why Matthew's attempt to pretend that Isaiah 7:14 prophesied Jesus should NOT be called "a fraud".

Without that, you're left with no "virgin birth" prophecy.

Javaman

I've been on vacation so I'm catching up on this thread. I will say that my objections to listening to Dr. Scott's online sermons boiled down to my hatred of Real Player. FWIW, I finally downloaded the free version of jetAudio which will play Real formats. Save the file and then open with jetAudio... it will ask for a plugin. I haven't figured out how to get it to play streaming real files yet but that may also be possible. The basic version of this program is freeware and lacks (to my knowledge) spyware.

Baidarka

D'Posse Trick Riders Australia
http://www.dposse.com.au/

I have added an image to my Biblical images folder - Jesus enters Jerusalem http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumList?u=4187799 click on Biblical images and check out the last image.

NOGO

He forged a prophecy by copying the old testament and made history out of it. How can you say, so what?

The point is that there is no prophecy on this subject in the old testament.
When a prophecy is made in the OT it is stated as such. Matthew felt that he could pick any sentence and call it a prophecy. The sentence in question Zech 9:9 is in the present not in the future and was written hundreds of years before Jesus.

Anyone can mount a colt and ride into Jerusalem. I could do that today.
This is a non-prophecy.

Matthew wanted a prophecy to write about and he fabricated one.
He misread or he read something which had been mistranslated and made "history" out of it.

The evidence for this is as follow:
a) It is physically impossible to sit on two donkeys.
b) John, Mark and Luke have him seated on one animal.

c) Note that John also quotes Zech 9:9 but there is only one animal involved both in the story and in the quote.

The conclusion from the evidence above is that Matthew changed the story about Jesus in order to match what he has read and therefore create the semblance of a prophecy.

This is what happens when you have a zeal to convince.

NOGO

WILLOW,

Of Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15 which is from the Septuagint. John has Jesus sitting on only one donkey.

There goes your theory that the only Bible in those days was the Septuagint.