Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Christians before Jesus came | Bible general Archive 2 | chesed | 128854 | ||
I think the problem is here: "It is the claim that Matthew is using pesher contemporization of the OT, particularly in ‘fulfillment’ citations, that provides the most serious challenge to those holding to verbal, plenary inspiration." You don't like it because it goes against your a priori approach of Verbal, plenary inspiration. Therfore, you must explain this away so that your view of inspiration does not get damaged. The fact remains that Mathew was relying on the LXX for his prophesy, and recorded the event accordingly, which is contradictory to Mark's record. I realize this falls in the realm of acceptable Jewish literature, and I believe that Matthew was inspired of God to write his gospel. It is just different, that's all. If it sounds better, I will say midrashic. Whatever it is that Matthew does, it is a 1st century Jewish method which lifts an OT passage out of context and applies it to a contemprary situation. chesed |
||||||
2 | Christians before Jesus came | Bible general Archive 2 | Morant61 | 128892 | ||
Greetings again Chesed! I forgot a point! ;-) Whether or not Matthew based his quotation of Zech. 9 upon the LXX is really irrelevant. The words of Jesus in Mt. 21:2 were certainly not based upon the LXX. Unless, of course, you are prepared to say that either Matthew 'invented' these words of Jesus or that God incarnate simply misunderstood His own prophecy! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||