Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Does Psalms 22 stand up to the skeptics? | Ps 22:16 | Mandy33319 | 52818 | ||
Hi all, have a current "hot" debate going with some friends, and decided to come back and glean some thinking from the "fine" minds on the forum. :) This concerns Psalms 22, and its use as prophecy. All along, I've always been taught, and believed, that Psalms 22 was the strongest of all prophecies for one main reason: 16 "...they have pierced my hands and feet." Now, I'm not so sure. Here's some of the observations of those I've been discussing this matter with: 1. The New American Bible says: "So wasted are my hands and feet." 2. The New Revise Standard Version says: "My hands and feet have shriveled." 3. The Jewish Masoretic says: "Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet." 4. In most of the other translations, it is unclear who does the piercing--the dogs or evil men who have the speaker encircled. If dogs, then biting would have done it. If men, then with what? Swords, knives, spears? 5. It seems apparent that the speaker is on the ground, either prone or at best, in a crouching defensive position. Nothing suggests that the speaker is up a tree, on a cross, etc. 6. There is no "hammer and nail" connection. 7. The piercing could have been caused by bites of the various metaphors and similes of animals. 8. It's a sentence taken out of context since the speaker is also said to have been despised by his own people, as well as by all mankind. This wouldn't fit Jesus, since he was only hated by the Pharisees. The Romans were basically neutral; Jesus own people adored him; and the rest of the world didn't even know he existed. 9. They have given me other "prophecies" that they say are taken out of context. Example: Matthew 22: 14--15. And Matthew 2:23 10. The speaker appears to have been saved by God, but Jesus was not spared. 11. It would make no sense for Jesus to beg to be spared, to be asking Himself to save Himself; and especially in light of the foreknowledge that he must die, in order for the Salvation plan to work. 12. That what appears to happen is that the Gospel writers wrote their books with an OT blueprint. They knew what Jesus was supposed to fulfill so they made sure he did. 13. Only Luke has Jesus show his hands and feet. John has Jesus show his hands and side, but not his feet. 14. There is some proof that feet were never nailed, but the legs were tied to a buttress apparatus. 15. Normally, it took forever to die from cruxifixion; Jesus died really fast. 16. If the Hebrew Masoretic translation is accurate, why do other translations deviate? 17. Who was at the cross as witnesses? No one seems to know. Only John puts anyone close to the scene. ------------------------------- I'm sure they're going to come up with more ideas, but if anyone can refute some of the above, it would help. Thanks, Mandy |
||||||
2 | Does Psalms 22 stand up to the skeptics? | Ps 22:16 | Reformer Joe | 52819 | ||
I am not the Hebrew scholar, so I will leave items 1-3 to someone else more qualified. 4. It is pretty obvious that David was not writing about literal dogs, but that the term is a description for his pursuers. Go tell your friends what a metaphor is. 5. Irrelevant to it being prophetic. Psalms are POETRY, and poetry employs figures of speech, metaphor, and other literary techniques. Saying that "you lay me in the dust of death" does not necessarily mean that he was laid in literal dust. Did your opponents in this debate ever take high-school English. Knowing our educational system as an insider, I am afraid that they just may have... 6. Not necessary for it to be a prophecy. Many prophetic Psalms, including some Messianic ones, describe a current situtaion (in this case, that of David) as well as have a future implication as well. Again, this is a poetic prophecy, not a play-by-play to the last detail of all that is going to happen on the day it predicts. 7. I hope someone else wrote this sentence, because the sentence itself makes no sense. Bitten by metaphors? Okay... 8. Jesus' own people rejected him (John 1:11; John 18:38-40; Acts 2:36) 9. What do they mean that prophecies are "taken out of context"? How is Matthew 22:14-15 a prophecy at all? 10. Jesus was raised from the dead, glorified. Death did not hold Him. Just as Psalm 2 says, God did not let his Holy One see decay. 11. Your pals need to go back and read the Garden of Gethsemane passages more carefully. And they need a lesson in the distinction between persons of the Trinity. Jesus was not talking to Himself there. 12. Yep, they made sure that he fulfilled all those prophecies, in spite of people still living who could easily refute their claims, and they would be imprisoned, endure torture, even die to defend what they knew to be a lie. Makes perfect sense. 13. Tell your friends, "So what?" It makes no difference. If I gave you twenty dollars and my mother 50 dollars, would you be wrong if you wrote, "Joe gave me twenty dollars"? In other words, what they are trying to do is argue from silence. 14. Such as? 15. The Hebrew Masoretic text is actually from the 9th century. While most extant Hebrew texts do have the different wording, it is hard to conclude what was actually there in the autographs. Some Hebrew texts have "pierced" just like our Bible does, and the Septuagint has the hands and feet "pierced" as well. In any case, we cannot be certain that the Masoretic text is the correct rendering in this case. 17. Well, if John puts himself there, then John seems to know, doesn't he? Your fellow debaters are really amateurs who do not know how to read literature very well at all, much less the Bible. If they are looking for reasons to rebel against God, they will always find them, no matter how feeble they may be. --Joe! |
||||||
3 | Does Psalms 22 stand up to the skeptics? | Ps 22:16 | Mandy33319 | 52873 | ||
Part ONE: She said they said: 4. In most of the other translations, it is unclear who does the piercing--the dogs or evil men who have the speaker encircled. If dogs, then biting would have done it. If men, then with what? Swords, knives, spears? He said: 4. It is pretty obvious that David was not writing about literal dogs, but that the term is a description for his pursuers. Go tell your friends what a metaphor is. She said: You have made an assumption. Of course, my friends know David was using metaphor and simile. But then, I, too, made an assumption. I assumed that it was understood that most people who read the Psalms know them to be metaphorical. It was a given, self-evident, axiomatic—but evidently not. I plan to be more careful in the future, so condescendence (acting with an air of superiority) might be avoided. She said they said: 5. It seems apparent that the speaker is on the ground, either prone or at best, in a crouching defensive position. Nothing suggests that the speaker is up a tree, on a cross, etc He said: 5. Irrelevant to it being prophetic. Psalms are POETRY, and poetry employs figures of speech, metaphor, and other literary techniques. Saying that "you lay me in the dust of death" does not necessarily mean that he was laid in literal dust. Did your opponents in this debate ever take high-school English. Knowing our educational system as an insider, I am afraid that they just may have... She said: What is now irrelevant is that the friends did “not” know about metaphor. Clearly that was my faulty assumption that the reader of these questions would understand. As for my opponents ever taking “high-school” English, they are wondering why you chose to place a hyphen between high and school. Also, they are curious as to why, when you apparently have asked a question, you chose not to use a question mark at the end of the sentence. Finally, they observe that you end your last sentence with three periods, when four are necessary for proper grammar. She said they said: 6. There is no "hammer and nail" connection. He said: 6. Not necessary for it to be a prophecy. Many prophetic Psalms, including some Messianic ones, describe a current situtaion (in this case, that of David) as well as have a future implication as well. Again, this is a poetic prophecy, not a play-by-play to the last detail of all that is going to happen on the day it predicts. She said: Then, it is perfectly correct that a prophecy be supported by a sentence, whether or not it’s in or out of context? And “implication” is acceptable? Of course, implication is a far cry from being definitive. In fact, if a prophecy is to be supported, or proved, by implication only, then no wonder prophecies are controversial. No wonder it takes a biblical scholar, an expert, a spirit-laden reader to really understand the import of a sentence or idea, no matter the context. We lay believers have little chance, since we must depend on the interpretative abilities of others. (By the way, my assumption is that “situataion” is a typo) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- She said they said: 7. The piercing could have been caused by bites of the various metaphors and similes of animals. He said: 7. I hope someone else wrote this sentence, because the sentence itself makes no sense. Bitten by metaphors? Okay... She said: No, that “someone” was I, guilty as charged. Although I do agree it is written awkwardly, it's not a far intellectual reach to understand the premise, i.e., that if the animals are metaphors, then their bites would be metaphorical, also. (Just wonder if your question couldn’t have been asked in ten other, kinder ways, without the condescending, three-period-instead-four “Okay…” Part one |
||||||