Feedback and Notes

 No Gods

Latest Activity

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

Forging Prophecies:Why Jesus Christ in not predicted in the Old Testament.

    If Jesus Christ is not in the Old Testament,then why do many People assert that he was predicted by the prophets of Judaism. In fact, if you open up the New Testament,you smacked in th face with one "Jesus prophecy" one after another. The Truth is that the so-called "Jesus prophecies" that are mentioned in the New Testament are a manner of deception because they are verses from the Old Testament taken out of context and "applied" to Jesus; Let's get biblical and see for ourselves

So-Called Prophecy #1: Is Bethlehem a Dude?

    In Mathew 2,Herod asks the hebrew priests where the Messiah is to be born:they say ,"In Bethlehem", but how could this the hebrew bible never says the messiah will be born in Bethlehem Ephrathah(more on that later). The answer:they wouldn't have. Micah 5:2 is quoted in Mathew 2:5-6 as a prophecy with a little,but CRUCIAL (presumably intentional) mistranslation. Mathew 2:6 "mistranslates" Micah 5:2  as to say that this ruler will be born in BETHLEHEM, as opposed to "BETHLEHEM EPHRATHAH". Also,Mathew 2:6 makes another bold mistranslation of Micah 5:2: Bethlehem is now a LAND instead of a ruler.

    Did Mathew mistakingly forget to include Ephrathah,or is there a more sinister motive behind this pivotal omission? My assertion: Mathew knew very well what he was doing,he sought deception. He left out "Ephrathah" and changed the word "ruler" to "land" to warp Micah's verse to deceive Christians that Bethlehem is a place,where in reality BETHLEHEM IS A PERSON WHO IS THE FATHER OF EPHRATHAH (1 Chronicles 4:4).

    Some translations of the Bible assert the the word "Father" used in the above verse refers to a "military leader"(which would still not be talking a "land" that Mathew implies),but the word assuredly means father,as they same word is used in Deuteronomy 22:15. Anyways,WHO IS THIS CHILD,THIS LEADS US TO THE NEXT PART:

So-Called Prophecy #1.2: A Child as a Sign for Ahaz?

    Before we answer as to who this child is,let's look at an other passage: Mathew 2:23 points to Isaiah  7:14, which announces the child who is to be born of a "virgin"(more on that later). So who is this child and what is his purpose? If you read Isaiah 7 in it's full context,you will soon find out something striking: Jesus is not the child of Isaiah 7:14,as the child is given to King Ahaz as a sign after kings are plotting against him(Isaiah 7:5-6),this child will eat honey and curds(Isaiah 7:15) and will learn to reject evil and choose good after the opposing kings are laid to waste(Isaiah 7:16) and he will bring about the new King of Assyria (Isaiah 7:17). Does this have anything to do with Jesus... Nope,absolutely not. Still not convinced? If  look back on that "virgin" word that is used in Mathew's (intentional???) mistranslation,you will see the word means "young woman"(https://biblehub.com/hebrew/haalmah_5959.htm)

    So is this child the same as  Micah 5:2,probably,As the prophet Micah who gave this prophecy lived during the time of Ahaz(Micah 1:1) and this child was to deliver the Israelites when the Assyrians invaded them(Micah 5:6).

So-Called Prophecy #2: Rachael weeping for her children?

    According to the gospel of Mathew 2:17,it was predicted by Jeremiah that Herod would kill all of the Jewish children,even though this event is so important that it was not mentioned in the gospel of Luke,John or Mark. This event is so major it is not mentioned in Josephus's(who was a Jew) biography on Herod the Great[1],also this event is so major that there is no historic evidence of this whatsoever and even the Christian apologetics ministry called Associates of Biblical Research says that the event is "The slaughter of the innocents is unattested in secular records" and relies on Herod's "character" to justify this non-existent act[2],but let's look at the so-called "prophecy" of Mathew to see he has to say.

    Mathew points to Jememiah 31:15 as a proof-of-prophecy concerning the slaughter of the infants. The verse says:

This is what the Lord says:

“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.”

Jeremiah 31:15

    Mathew suggests that this verse is a prophetic word that was fulfilled by Herod killing all of the babies,as Rachel's(Jacob's favorite wife i.e the Mother of the Jews) Children are no more. The problem is that verse is taken out of context because the next verse(Jeremiah 31:16) says that Rachael  is to stop weeping as there is hope for her descendants and that they will be returned to their own land,so basically the passage is saying that the Mother of the Jews is weeping for her children who are the people of Israel and Judah(Jeremiah 30:3),who are promised to be returned to their own land from Babylon(Jeremiah 29:4,10),not Bethlehem hence this passage has nothing to do with Jesus outside of what some apologists may say is an allusion to Christ,however as you will see, this prophecy like many others,are taken out of context,which brings us to

 So-called Prophecy #3: No Allegories Here: A Path in the Wilderness

   Christianity states that John the Baptist is prophesied in the book of Isaiah in John 1:23 Mark 1:2 Luke 3:4-6 and Mathew 3:3,but.. As with all of the other "prophecies", this is a verse taken out of context and applied to Jesus. So what's the verse in question: Isaiah 40:3,which says "A voice of one calling in the wilderness,‘Prepare the way for the Lord,make straight paths for him.". Here is the catch,this verse like many others is abducted out of context and is applied to something Jesus-y,which in this case it is applied to John the baptist. In reality,Isaiah 40 is talking about how there  is going to make a highway that will allow the Jews to return to Zion which is a elaboration of the same prophecy in Isaiah 35:8-10 which is clearly talking about a physical one that will have mountains be turned low and uneven ground will become even.(Isaiah 40:4) 

So-called mini Prophecy #4: On a Donkey,Colt, or Both?

   The new testament quotes a present-tense verse from Zechariah 9:9 about Israel's king and applies it to Jesus,so ignoring this fact,could this passage still be a Jesus "prophecy"? The answer is no as the new testament is not consistent on weather Jesus rode on the colt or both the donkey and the colt at the same time. John 12:15 and Luke 19:32 has Jesus Riding on a single colt ,whereas Mathew 21:5-6 says Jesus is riding on a donkey and on a colt. This logic is also applied to our next "prophecy" we will analyse, which is

So-called Prophecy #5: Judas's Coins?

   Mathew 27:9-10 states that Judas fulfilled a prophecy of Jeremiah by throwing away the 30 coins he was paid to betray Jesus. Technically the phrase used in Mathew 27:9-10 never appears in the book of Jeremiah(however a similar statement of 17 coins in present in Jeremiah 32:9). The verses being referred to is Zechariah 11:11-12 which is God telling Zechariah to give money to a potter in Jerusalem,but this,like many other Jesus "prophecies",is a verse taken out of context and applied to something relevant to Jesus. However, assuming that this "method" of fulfilling prophecies is valid,there is stil a problem here: What did Judas do with the coins? Mathew 27:5 says Judas threw the away coins to the chief priests which fulfilled  a "prophecy" supposedly.  However,like before, the new testament is not consistent with what actually happened because the Acts1:18 states the Judas bought a field with the money,whereas in the gospel of Mathew Judas presented no intention of buying anything with the money. Also the New Testament isn't actually consistent with what actually happened with Judas himself,did he hang  himself(Mathew 27:5) or did he fall headlong and have his guts spill out. One may try to rationalize both events happening by saying that He hanged himself and then his guts spilled out,but this ignores the fact that it says he fell headlong.

The Most Notorious So-Called Prophecy of All: Isaiah 53:

    The suffering servant prophecy of Isaiah 53 is referenced 7 times in the New Testament in Matthew 8:14-17,John 12:37-41, Luke 22:35-38, 1 Peter 2:19-25, Acts 8:26-35 and Romans 10:11-21 with  good reason too; It sounds like Jesus. It has this servant bearing pain for our sins Isaiah 53:3-5,10 and has him being assigned a grave with the wicked in Isaiah 53:9(which sounds like Jesus being crucified alongside the theifs). But lets assume the Christian apologists are right and that the subject of Isaiah 53 is Jesus,let's ignore the fact that all of the other "Jesus prophecies" are not taken out of context,let's insert Jesus into the shoes of Isaiah 53. The first reason why Jesus is not the servant of Isaiah 53 is that is because the suffering servant prophecy actually starts at Isaiah 52:13,and Isaiah 52:14 says this servant will be disfigured beyond human likeness,which cannot be Christ because he is recognized at first sight in Mathew 28:16-17 and Mark 16:9,however this isn't the case in John 20:14(he is still recognized as a though at first sight). The prophecy has two other key assertions: that this servant must say nothing when oppressed(Isaiah 53:7) and must have done no violence(Isaiah 53:9),both of which have nothing to do with Jesus,as Jesus spoke back those who oppressed him at his trial(John 18:20-23) and Jesus also went into a temple and started flipping tables and whipping people(John 2:15,Mathew 21:12 and Mark 11:15)

1 http://www.josephus.org/ntparallels.htm#innocents

2 http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/12/08/The-Slaughter-of-th...

Views: 75

Nice Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Universe to add comments!

Join Atheist Universe

Comment by Lutz on January 22, 2019 at 4:08am

I spent years in libraries trying to find this jesus christ figure. in history books that is. finally in the '80s I came across a history book of the middle east and it had a little paragraph about his person who - I wish I had noted the source - quoted a local contemporary about this little ugly man who was an exorcist - and that was about it. there was more but that was what it boiled down to. so if he did exist which I doubt- after all one report is not exactly proof - no one really paid any attention. the creation of this myth is of course remembered by a renaissance pope who said that -the myth of this person had served the church extremely well. I've got that quote in my christmas blog. your research is excellent

Comment by Stephen on January 18, 2019 at 2:33pm

Very interesting post, Clayton. As Atheists its right that we should read the bible in order to show the errors and contradictions' which are many.

© 2019   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service