Explaining the Fulfillment; CCF Basic Doctrines

1. Prophesy: Isaiah 7:14 -Born of a Virgin, Fulfillment Luke 1:34-35

Luke 1:34-35
34 35

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. Proof text: Fulfillment?

Hebrew Scripture: Isaiah 7:14

14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman ( and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. KJV Version ) shall conceive,

Isaiah 7:14
14

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. This is a case of mistranslation from Hebrew to English in KJV and furthermore, Jesus was never called Immanuel.

2. Prophesy: Micah 5:2 Born in Bethlehem, Fulfillment Matthew 2:1

In the opening verse of the second chapter in the Gospel of Matthew, the author declares that Bethlehem was the birthplace of Jesus: Matthew 2:1(KJV) Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem, The author then claims this event to be a "fulfillment" of a prophecy found in the Hebrew Bible, which he states as follows: Matthew 2:5-6(KJV) (5) And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, (6) And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

According to Christian apologists and missionaries, Matthew 2:6 points to Micah 5:2 in their Old Testament; in the Hebrew Bible this is Micah 5:1. Micah 5:1[2]1[2] has thus become a popular Christian "proof-text" in the apologist and missionary's portfolio.

A careful analysis of the Hebrew text in Micah 5:1 demonstrates that the false application by the Greek rendition of this verse in the New Testament, and its subsequent mistranslation in the King James Version (KJV) Old Testament (and in other Christian Bibles), are inconsistent with the teachings of the Hebrew Bible. Moreover, the KJV Old Testament's rendition of a key phrase in the verse is also inconsistent with other instances of the same phrase elsewhere in the King James Version Bible. II. COMPARISON OF JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN TRANSLATIONS, AND THE NEW TESTAMENT APPLICATION

Table II-1 provides a side-by-side comparison between the verse from the KJV New Testament, the KJV Old Testament rendition of the verse, and a Jewish translation of the original verse. For reference, the corresponding verse from the Hebrew Bible is also displayed in the table. As was already pointed out above, note that the KJV Old Testament verse number is different from the verse number as it appears in the Hebrew Bible. The highlighted phrase in both the Jewish and KJV translations corresponds to the highlighted phrase shown in the Hebrew text.

table II-1 Comparing Matthew 2:6 with Micah 5:1[2]

Hebrew Text

King James Version New Testament Matthew 2:6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among

King James Version "Old Testament"

Jewish Translation from the Hebrew

Micah 5 v.2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, v.1 though thou be little among And you, Bethlehem Ephratah you should have been the

1[2]

The notation Micah 5:1[2] shows the verse number from the Hebrew Bible first, followed by the corresponding verse number from the Christian Old Testament shown in brackets.

the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

lowest amongst the clans of Judah from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from old, from ancient days.

Aside from the fact that Matthew 2:6 leaves out the last phrase of the source verse and is, at best, a paraphrase of the quoted portion, there are a number of problems with the Micah 5:2 rendition in the KJV. These problems, as well as the truncated rendition of the verse in the New Testament, will be explained in the analysis.

I.

III.

ANALYSIS OF THE PASSAGE

To help facilitate the analysis, the correct translation of Micah 5:1 is separated into two segments:

Segment A

Micah 5:1A And you, Bethlehem Ephratah - you should have been the lowest amongst the clans of Judah from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel;

Segment B

Micah 5:1B and his origin is from old, from ancient days.

Segment A and Segment B will now be separately analyzed.

A. Analysis of Segment A

Micah 5:1A And you, Bethlehem Ephratah - you should have been the lowest amongst the clans of Judah from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel;

The name Bethlehem, in the original Hebrew is House of Lehem [

(beit-lehem), which literally means (lehem). In the case

(lehem) means bread, or (generic) food]. Therefore, the title

(beit-lehem) may refer either to the town or to a clan with the name of Micah 5:1, the reference is to a clan. How can one determine this?

The first clue is found in the opening phrase of the verse, where the Hebrew is (veatah beit-lehem ephratah). The term components (ve), the preposition and, and (veatah) has the (atah), the pronoun you for the 2nd-person,

singular, masculine gender. Thus, (veatah) translates as and you, using the 2nd-person, singular, masculine gender pronoun (the KJV has but you in Micah 5:2; note, however, how the KJV translators correctly render this phrase as And thou in Mt 2:6!). The rest of the phrase in Segment A is also cast in a 2nd-person, singular, masculine gender conjugation. Following this term (veatah) is the phrase (beit-lehem ephratah), where (ephratah) or, alternatively, (ephrat), is an alternate name for the town of Bethlehem in Judah in the Hebrew Bible, as seen from the following example:

Genesis 35:19(KJV) - And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrat which is Bethlehem (beit-lehem).

(ephrat),

In the Hebrew Bible, singular pronouns, such as

(atah), you, are often used

interchangeably in both the singular and plural context. In the case of Micah 5:1, (atah) is a singular compound entity, a specific clan, so that the context is the [plural, masculine] you. Though the singular usage is the most common one, the plural application occurs as well (e.g., Exod 33:3, Deut 9:6). Therefore, the one being addressed here in Micah 5:1 is (beitlehem), which is the name of a family, or clan, residing in the town of (ephratah), Ephratah, i.e., in the town of Bethlehem. According to this analysis, perhaps a more accurate version of Segment A (and, thus, Micah 5:1) would be:

Micah 5:1A And you, House of Lehem [from] Ephratah - you should have been the lowest amongst the clans of Judah from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel;

In the expression

(bealphei yehudah), amongst the clans of Judah, contains a (eleph), (alphei), which is used in the

plural possessive construct of the Hebrew term

context of clans of . The most common application of (eleph) in the Hebrew Bible is a thousand, which is its general meaning. However, there are instances in the Hebrew Bible where (eleph) is used in reference to a portion of a tribe, i.e., a clan or family. Micah 5:1 is one of these cases, and others are found at Numbers 31:5, Deuteronomy 33:17, Joshua 22:14, Judges 6:15, and 1 Samuel 10:19, 23:23. It is interesting to note that most translators (both Jewish and Christian) are consistent in their (mis)translation of this word in all but one of these instances, the one at Judges 6:15, where the term (alpi) [1st-person, singular conjugation of the noun (eleph)] is correctly translated as my family. Although, in general, it is not a serious contextual discrepancy when using a thousand in place of a clan in the above mentioned places, the correct context in Micah 5:1 is that the reference is to a [particular] clan from the town of Bethlehem. This case is further supported by the fact that members of a clan are frequently referred to by the name of the clan, often derived from the name of its progenitor, as is seen from the following example:

Numbers 3:27 - And of Kohath, the Amramite family, and the Izharite family, and the Hebronite family, and the Uzzielite family; these are the Kohathite families.

Regarding someone from the Bethlehemite clan [ has passages such as the following:

(beit-ha'lahmi)], the Hebrew Bible

1 Samuel 16:1 - And the L-rd said to Samuel, "Until when will you mourn for Saul, that I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? Fill your horn with oil, and go, I will send you to Jesse the Bethlehemite [ king for Me. (beit-ha'lahmi)], for I have found among his sons a

Another reference in the Hebrew Bible is even more explicit:

1 Samuel 17:12 - And David was the son of this man from Ephrat [

(ephrati)] of the

House of Lehem [ (mi'beit-lehem)] in Judah, whose name was Jesse, and he had eight sons; and the man, who was elderly in Saul's time, was among the [respected] men.

In the Hebrew language, which has no neuter gender, i.e., a separate Hebrew word for it does not exist, cities and towns are assigned the feminine gender. So, if it were the town of Bethlehem being addressed in Micah 5:1, the opening term would have been in Jeremiah 50:24 and elsewhere, the components of which are (veat), such as (ve), the preposition and, and

(at), the Biblical form of the pronoun you for the 2nd-person, singular, feminine gender. Consequently, (veat) translates as and you, with the 2nd-person, singular, feminine gender pronoun. Understanding this difference is essential for the correct reading of this verse!

The KJV translators, lacking the required level of proficiency of the Hebrew language, did not recognize that a certain clan, the House of Lehem, is being addressed in Micah 5:1[2]. Rather, from the sources they used, one of which was most likely the Christian LXX (that which Christians mistakenly call the Septuagint), it appeared to them that the town of Bethlehem is being addressed here. Consequently, they characterize Bethlehem as a small and insignificant town from the territory of Judah, in an introductory phrase to the prophecy. Namely, that in spite of its insignificance, the town will be the birthplace of the promised Messiah.

However, since it is the clan, the House of Lehem, and not the town, that is being addressed here by Micah, it does not matter in which town the Messiah will be born; rather, it is the clan, the family, that is significant! The phrase in Segment B, "and his origin is from old", simply means the Messiah will come from a family with a long lineage.

How can one learn more about the particular clan to which this verse refers? The ancestry of the known members of the clan is a good place from which to start the investigation, and it leads to a woman named Ruth, a Moabitess, who is among the ancestors of King David. Ruth was married to one of the two sons Elimelech and Naomi, a family that hailed from Bethlehem.

A famine in Judah forced Elimelech to take his family to a place that had food, and they wound up in the Land of Moab. Originally, Elimelech and Naomis plan was to go to Moab just to wait out the famine, but they then decided to remain there, a decision that eventually led to tragic consequences. Elimelech and Naomi's two sons, Killion and Mahlon (Ephrathites from House of Lehem [Ruth 1:2]), married Gentile women, Orpah and Ruth, respectively. Elimelech and his

two sons died while the family was in Moab, leaving the three women, Naomi, Orpah, and Ruth, as widows. Naomi made plans to return alone to her home in the Kingdom of Judah, and she instructed her two daughters-in-law to go back to their people, the Moabites. Orpah approached her mother-in-law, kissed her goodbye and left. Ruth came over to Naomi, held on to her and did not let go. Ruth informed Naomi that she was coming with her; and even though Naomi attempted to dissuade her from returning to the famine in Judah, Ruth insisted and said to her:

Ruth 1:16-17 (16) Do not entreat me to leave you, or to desist from following you; for wherever you go, I will go; and where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your G-d is my G-d; (17) Wherever you die, will I die, and there will I be buried; the L-rd may do so to me, and so may He continue, for [only] death will separate me from you.

From Ruth's declaration of her intentions to Naomi when she says, For where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge; your people are my people, and your G-d is my G-d;, it is understood that she converted to Judaism. But Ruth, a person of outstanding character, had a problematic ancestry she was a Moabite woman. This is what the Torah instructs the Israelites about a Moabite:

Deuteronomy 23:4 - An Ammonite [ (ammoni)] and a Moabite [ (mo'avi)] shall not enter into the congregation of the L-rd; even the tenth generation shall never enter into the congregation of the L-rd.

In other words, Ammonites and Moabites were prohibited from ever converting to Judaism. Note, however, that in the Hebrew text, the terms (ammoni) and (mo'avi) are used, terms that translate as an Ammonite (male) and a Moabite (male), respectively. The corresponding terms for a female, as used in the Hebrew Bible are, (mo'avit) [or (mo'avi'yah)]. (ammonit) and

The reason for the prohibition is stated immediately following it:

Deuteronomy 23:5-6 (5) Because they did not greet you with bread and water on the way, when you left Egypt, and because he [Moab] hired Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor in Aram Naharaim against you, to curse you. (6) But the L-rd, your G-d, did not want to listen to Balaam. So the L-rd, your G-d, transformed the curse into a blessing for you, because the L-rd, your G-d, loves you.

And this is repeated at a much later time by Nehemiah:

Nehemiah 13:1-2 (1) On that day the Book of Moses was read to be heard by the people; and it was found written therein that an Ammonite [ (ammoni)] and a Moabite [ (mo'avi)] may not enter into the congregation of G-d forever; (2) Because they did not come to meet the people of Israel with bread and with water, and [instead] hired Balaam against them, to curse them; and our G-d turned the curse into a blessing.

Considering this prohibition, how was Ruth the Moabitess able to " enter into the congregation of the L-rd"? How could she become the ancestor of the greatest king of the Jewish people, King David? The Sages explain in the Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Yevamot, 76b; Tractate Ketubot, 7b) that this prohibition applies only to Ammonite and Moabite men, and not to women. This is because only a man was expected to leave his house and bring food and drink to the traveler; a woman was not expected to do that for obvious reasons. Thus, the interpretation of the law (Deut 23:4), which had to be rendered by ten elders, that the prohibition on becoming one of the assembly of the L-rd, i.e., to be admitted into the community of Israel, applied only to Ammonite and Moabite men and not to Ammonite and Moabite women. This clarified the law, and enabled Boaz to marry Ruth the Moabitess. So, the (beit-lehem) clan, with a history marred by Ruth's ancestry of a nation that was excluded from Judaism, is characterized by the phrase, "you SHOULD HAVE BEEN the LOWEST amongst the CLANS of Judah", in Segment A. This phrase reflects the uneasiness people may have had even with King David, whose great-grandmother was a Moabitess. Yet, the fact is that out of this clan rose the greatest king of Israel, and the promise is made that the Messiah will also come from it.

This passage is all about King David's ancestry, with the Messiah being but a "by-product" of it. This fact is even confirmed by the rendition in The New Jerusalem Bible (a Christian translation), whose translators state the following in a footnote to this verse (Micah 5:2; only the relevant portion of the footnote is being quoted here):

Micah is thinking of the ancient origin of the dynasty of David, Rt 4:11,17,18-22; 1 S 17:12. The evangelists later interpreted this passage as a prophecy of Christs birthplace.

In other words, while this passage does not rule out the town of Bethlehem as being the Messiah's birthplace, as could be any other place, the notion that it is his birthplace was introduced later, in the New Testament, as an interpretation by the Gospel writers.

B. B. Segment B

Micah 5:1B and his origin is from old, from ancient days.

The fact that Segment A of Micah 5:1 voids the positive identification of Bethlehem as the Messiah's birthplace, creates a serious problem for the Church. This problem is compounded by the closing phrase in the Hebrew text in Segment B, days. (mi'y'mei olam), from ancient

Micah, who was a contemporary of the prophets Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah, and of King Hezekiah (around 730 B.C.E.), states something special here, namely, that the origin of the Messiah would be from Bethlehem, from the long ago past, from ancient days. However, this statement conflicts with Christian theology, since Jesus is considered as having been around since the beginning of time, since before the Creation, and the expression from ancient days does not satisfy this condition. To "rectify" this problem, many Christian translators simply replace ancient days with days of eternity, or everlasting, or days of time indefinite (see, e.g., KJV, NAS, NWT). How can one determine who is telling the truth?

The Hebrew expression preposition (mi-), from, as

(yemei olam), ancient days, is used in Micah 5:1 with the (mi'y'mei olam), from ancient days. Table III.B-1 shows

all six instances in the Hebrew Bible of the expression (yemei olam), ancient days, including its combinations with various prepositions. Also shown in the table are the respective renditions of these expressions in the KJV.

Table III.B-1 KJV renditions of the expression

(y mei olam) in the Hebrew Bible

Hebrew

Pronunciation ye-ME-i o-LAM

# Reference 2 Isaiah 63:9,11 Amos 9:11;

Correct Translation the days of old

KJV Rendition the days of old

kiy-ME-i o-LAM

3 Micah 7:14; Malachi 3:4

as in days of old

as in the days of old

miy-ME-i o-LAM

1 Micah 5:1[2]

from ancient days

from everlasting

Note that the expression is correctly translated in the KJV in five out of the six cases as days of old, which is synonymous with ancient days, yet at Micah 5:2 it is rendered as from everlasting. What could have motivated the KJV translators to render the same expression correctly in all but one place, the one exception being at Micah 5:2, which speaks of the Messiah? Could it be that replacing from ancient days with from everlasting in this passage would "harmonize" this Old Testament prophecy with Christian theology? Did the KJV translators engage here in an act of "pious fraud"?

For the sake of completeness and fairness, it should be noted that, in contrast to the KJV (and several other Christian Bibles), some Christian translators have correctly rendered this phrase, e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV, RSV, The New Jerusalem Bible, among others.

C. Matthew 2:6

As was demonstrated above, the phrase from ancient days brings the reader back to King David and his ancestors, which created a serious theological problem for Christianity. It was also shown how the KJV translators attempted to "solve" this problem in their rendition of Micah 5:2. The author of the Gospel of Matthew apparently recognized this problem as he was attempting to construct a cohesive scenario, and his creative way of dealing with the true context of Micah 5:1[2] was to simply restates this verse:

Matthew 2:6(KJV) And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

Upon comparing Matthew 2:6 with even the KJV rendition of Micah 5:1[2], the following changes are evident in the part that corresponds to the passage in the KJV equivalent of Segment A:

U The name of the place, Ephratah, is absent from the verse. U A subtle change in context takes place, from "though thou be little among the thousands of Judah", in the KJV Old Testament, to "thou art not the least among the princes of Juda", in the KJV New Testament. U The generic title of ruler in the KJV Old Testament is replaced with the specific position of Governor In the KJV New Testament.

As was already noted earlier, the author of the Gospel of Matthew uses a truncated version of Micah 5:1[2] in Matthew 2:6. Thus, the obvious change is:

U Segment B of the original verse was deleted

Clearly, Segment A, being a rather straight forward passage that could refer to the Messiah hailing from Bethlehem, required just a minor amount of editing to get it to "line up" with the rest of his story.

Regarding Segment B, which is disastrous to Christian theology, the author of the Gospel of Matthew does something interesting, as he also does in other places as well (e.g., Mt 2:13). He deletes the problematic part (Segment B) of Micah 5:1[2] so that it is absent from Matthew 2:6; he only applied an edited version of Segment A to what he wrote in Matthew 2:6. The problematic part would have drawn the reader to the origin of the Messiah, some 200-300 years behind Micah on the historical time scale, to King David himself.

The author of the Gospel of Matthew refused to accept the words of the Prophet Micah, because they describe Bethlehem as the least significant of the clans and communities of Judah. How can that be, if the Messiah is to be born there? The Messiah cannot be born in the insignificant place that is the lowest on the totem pole. This action demonstrates that the author of the Gospel of Matthew knew and understood very little of the Hebrew Bible, and that he did not understand that the reference here was to Ruth. So, in order to tailor this passage to fit his paradigm, he not only applied a portion of the verse out-of-context by dropping the problematic part of it, but he also changed the context of that which is written in the Hebrew Bible by reversing the you are to read you are not.

In contrast to the author of the Gospel of Matthew, the author of the Gospel of Luke was somewhat more careful. While he insists that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, he makes the correct connection, that it was the city of David (Lk 2:4,11). There are other instances where the author of the Gospel of Matthew, allegedly a Jew, made a mistake, while the author of the Gospel of Luke, allegedly a Gentile, used much more care in dealing with the same subject. One notable example is the application of Zechariah 9:9-10 in the Gospels. As dealt with in Matthew 21:1-7, the passage has Jesus coming into Jerusalem on two animals, while in Luke 19:29-35, Jesus is said to be coming on one animal.

II.

IV.

SUMMARY

Is Micah 5:1[2] a prophecy that the (Jewish) Messiah will be born in Bethlehem? The Christian claim is that Jesus fulfilled this prophecy by being born in Bethlehem. As was demonstrated in the analysis, the town of Bethlehem was the place from which King David's family originated, and this prophecy speaks of Bethlehem as the Messiah's place of origin, though not necessarily his place of birth. The Hebrew text clearly states that the Messiah's ancestors came from Bethlehem. Since the KJV translation of the Hebrew Bible came many centuries after the Gospel of Matthew was written, the only option available to Christian translators for "harmonizing" Micah 5:2 with Christian theology and Matthew 2:6 was to suitably alter the context of the source verse. Since Christians generally study the New Testament first, their theological ideas are well established by the time they proceed to the Old Testament to look for the "pointers". So that the discrepancies between Matthew 2:6 and Micah 5:2 are not likely to even be noticed. Using the logic of the Christian claim, and considering the many thousands of people having come from Bethlehem during its history, how is it possible to identify which one of them was the Messiah? It is also worth noting that, relative to the important messianic attributes

spelled out by the Jewish prophets in the Hebrew Bible, which Jesus did not fulfill, being born in Bethlehem is inconsequential, even if it were true.

3. Prophesy: Jeremiah 31:15 Babies massacred, Fulfillment Matthew 2:16-18

Matthew 2:16-18 16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:18 A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning,Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.[d]

Note: There is no historical proof that this event, the killing of babies in Bethlehem ever occurred. Jewish historian wrote 40 chapters about King Herod but this event of massacre was not even noted by him. Below is the verse Matthew quoted from the book of Jeremiah to prove the above mentioned killing of the babies was actually predicted by Jeremiah; Jeremiah 31:15-17
15

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.
16

This is what the LORD says:

Restrain your voice from weeping and your eyes from tears, for your work will be rewarded, declares the LORD. They will return from the land of the enemy. 17 So there is hope for your descendants, declares the LORD. Your children will return to their own land.

Rachel was not weeping for the children who were supposedly killed but rather she was weeping for the children who were taken into captivity/exile and God said to her to stop crying, for the children shall comeback to their land.

4. Prophesy: Hosea 11:1 Flee to Egypt, Fulfillment: Matthew 2:13

Matthew 2:13

New King James Version (NKJV)

The Flight into Egypt
13

Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.
Gods Continuing Love for Israel

11 When Israel was a child, I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son.

1. Matthew 2:13-15
13

When they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream. Get up, he said, take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt. Stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.
14

So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: Out of Egypt I called my son.

Hosea 11:1 is where Matthew was quoting to prove the said prophesy. However, when we read the verse in Hosea we find that the prophet was talking about Israel.
New International Version (NIV)

Gods Love for Israel Hosea 11:1 When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
Exodus 4:21 - 23

21

The LORD said to Moses, When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. 22 Then say to Pharaoh, This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son, 23 and I told you, Let my son go, so he may worship me. But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.

5. Prophesy: Judges 15:5- will be called a Nazarene, fulfillment: Matthew 2:23

5. Matthew 2:21-23
21 22

So he got up, took the child and his mother and went to the land of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23 and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene. Where in Hebrew bible says this prophesy or where in the bible says that the Messiah would be a Nazarene? Judges 13:5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come upon his head; for the child shall be a Nazirite unto God from the womb; and he shall begin to save Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.' This is not a passage about a messiah but rather it is telling us that Samson will be raised as a Nazirite.
DEFINITION OF NAZIRITE

In the Hebrew Bible, a Nazirite or Nazarite, (in Hebrew: , nazir), refers to one who voluntarily took a vow described in Numbers 6:121. The proper noun "Nazarite" comes from the Hebrew word nazir meaning "consecrated" or "separated".[1] This vow required the man or woman to:

Abstain from wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins, intoxicating liquors[2] and vinegar distilled from such substances.[3]*Refrain from eating or drinking any substance that contains any trace of grapes.[4] Refrain from cutting the hair on one's head; but to allow the locks of the head's hair to grow.[5] Not to become impure by corpses or graves, even those of family members[6]

After following these requirements for a designated period of time (which would be specified in the individual's vow), the person would immerse in a mikveh and make three offerings: a lamb as a burnt offering (olah), a ewe as a sin-offering (hatat), and a ram as a peace offering (shelamim), in addition to a basket of unleavened bread, grain offerings and drink offerings, which accompanied the peace offering. They would also shave their head in the

outer courtyard of the Temple (the Jerusalem Temple for Judaism) and then place the hair on the same fire as the peace offering. (Numbers 6:18) : a Jew of biblical times consecrated to God by a vow to avoid drinking wine, cutting the hair, and being defiled by the presence of a corpse

Nazarene: Noah Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language 1. (n.) A native or inhabitant of Nazareth; -- a term of contempt applied to Christ and the early Christians. Nazarene is a title applied to Jesus (c. 4 BC- c. AD 30), who grew up in Nazareth,[1] a town in Galilee, now in northern Israel. The word is used to translate two related terms that appear in the Greek New Testament: Nazarne (Nazarene) and Nazraios (Nazorean). The phrases traditionally rendered as "Jesus of Nazareth" can also be translated as "Jesus the Nazarene" or "Jesus the Nazorean."[2] So the title "Nazarene" may have a religious significance, in addition to denoting a place of origin. Both Nazarene and Nazorean are irregular in Greek and the additional vowel in Nazorean complicates any derivation from Nazareth.[3] The Gospel of Matthew explains that the title Nazarene is derived from the prophecy, He will be called a Nazorean. Unlike other prophecies that Matthew quotes, this one has no obvious Old Testament source. Some scholars argue that it refers to a passage in the Book of Isaiah,[5] with "Nazarene" a Greek reading of the Hebrew netser (branch), understood as a messianic title.[6] Others point to a passage in the Book of Judges which refers to Samson as a Nazirite, a word that is just one letter off from Nazarene in Greek.

6. Prophesy: Psalm 41:9 Betrayed by a friend, fulfillment, Luke 22:48, Mark 14:17-18
A. Psalms 41
The reference list indicates that Psalms 41 contains one "messianic prophecy" that is "fulfilled" according to the New Testament, as shown in Table below.

Citations Statement "Prophecy" The Messiah's betrayer would be a friend whom he broke bread with Psalms 41:10[9] "Fulfillment" Mark 14:1718

1. 1.

Overview

Following is a summary description of this psalm to help put its context into perspective.

A SUFFERER'S PRAYER: Another Psalm relating to a time when physical suffering was aggravated by mental uneasiness over the machinations of enemies. In particular one man whom he considered a close friend had proved traitorous. His main objective is not to complain about his physical suffering, but to ensure that his enemies receive their due for their treachery. It is not clear whether the Psalm was composed during an illness and the opening verses were said in the hope of a happier future, or if it was written later as a narrative of what had occurred in the past. This Psalm constitutes the climax to the first book of PSALMS and it is for this reason that the final verse takes the form of an appreciation to G-d for accepting the prayer of the Psalmist.2[11]

The superscription identifies King David as the author of this psalm. His overall message here is that, even in circumstances that appear to be hopeless, a person can become aware of God's love and mercy by contemplating the suffering of the sick, the poor, and the persecuted.

The Messiah's betrayer would be a friend whom he broke bread with

The relevant texts from the King James Version (KJV) "Old Testament" and New Testament, and the corresponding Jewish translation for reference purposes, are shown in Table III.B.2.a-1. Psalms 41:10[9] and Mark 14:17-18

2[11]

Soncino Books of the Bible The Psalms, Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, Editor, p. 127, The Soncino Press (1992)

"Messianic Prophecy" King James Version Translation Psalms 41:9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.

"Fulfillment" King James Version Translation from the Greek Mark 14:17-18 17. And in the evening he cometh with the twelve. Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 41:10

Even my ally, in whom I trusted, who eats my bread, has lifted up his 18. And as they sat and did eat, Jesus heel against me. said, Verily I say unto you, One of you which eateth with me shall betray me.

King David spoke of someone, who remains unnamed, with whom he had a close relationship, a trusted friend, who wound up trying to trip him up. He could have had in mind Joab (Yo'av), his military commander-in-chief, who betrayed him by supporting David's oldest surviving son, Adonijah (Adoniyah), when he declared himself the next king of Israel (1 Kgs 1:5-8). He could also have thought of Ahitophel (Ahitophel), a chief advisor, who betrayed him when he conspired with Absalom (Avshalom), another one of David's sons, in his rebellion (2 Sam 15:31, 16:21-17:3). He may even have been thinking of either of these two sons. King David expressed his gratitude to God for foiling all those plots. The "fulfillment" text has the author of the Gospel of Mark putting King David's words into the mouth of Jesus while at the Last Supper with his disciples, where he allegedly foretold that Judas Iscariot would betray him. Once again, this scenario creates problems for Christian theology. The stories about the betrayal of King David by a close associate and the betrayal of Jesus by Judas differ significantly. According to King David's account, the plot against him was unsuccessful, whereas, according to the accounts in the New Testament, the betrayal by Judas succeeded, and it lead to the crucifixion of Jesus. There is also the question of how an act can be seen as a betrayal if it was preordained, and, knowing that Judas was just an agent in the "master plan" of Christianity, why would Jesus so angrily condemn him? Moreover, as was also the case with several of the psalms previously investigated, whoever created this "messianic prophecy"-"fulfillment" pair apparently ignored the

rest of the psalm. This is what King David said just before he began to describe the malice of his enemies:

Psalms 41:5[4] - I said, "O L-rd, be gracious to me; heal my soul because I have sinned against You."

King David confessed that he sinned against God and asked that his soul be healed by the forgiveness of his sins. The consequence of attributing v. 10[9] to Jesus is that v. 5[4] must also be applicable to him, showing that he admitted to being a sinner. Conclusion: Psalms 41:10[9] is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

7. Prophesy: Zechariah 11:12-13, sold for 30 pieces of silver -fulfillment, Matthew 26:15
THE MOTIVE OF THE BETRAYAL According to all four gospels Jesus was betrayed by Judas Iscariot one of his twelve disciples. The account of the betrayal in Mark is given below: Mark 14:10-11 (Matthew 26:14-16; Luke 22:1-6) And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them. And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently betray him. Mark 14:43-46 (Matthew 26:47-50; Luke 22:47-48,54) [After Jesus prayers at Gethsemane] And immediately, while he yet spake, cometh Judas, one of the twelve, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and the scribes and the elders. And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead him away safely. And as soon as he was come, he goeth straightway to him, and saith, Master, master; and kissed him. And they laid their hands on him, and took him. Anyone reading the story with an open mind will note that the whole story of Judas betrayal does not sound natural or believable. For instance, what good does the Judas kiss do? Jesus must have been a very well recognized face in Jerusalem for he had debated with the chief priests, teachers and the elders just the day before and he had preached in front of large crowds in the Jerusalem Temple courts. So

obviously the kiss was not used for the arresting party to recognize Jesus. But then, what other use could the kiss have?

The confusion underlying the betrayal of Judas is further compounded by the fact that we are not told why he wanted to betray his master. Some apologist had made the obvious suggestion that it was greed. But this is most unlikely for it would have been more profitable for Judas to actually abscond the common fund (remember that Judas was the treasurer of the group) than to sell his master for the little amount the gospels made it out to be. Other suggestions include that ambition and jealousy. But nothing in the gospels can tell us what his ambitions were or who he was jealous of. Some apologists have even suggested that Judas fearing the imminent arrest of Jesus, due to his quarrels with the chief priests and teachers of the law, actually betrayed his master to rid himself of this very fear! All these suggestions remain unconvincing. As Guignebert commented:
We are confronted by nothing but...arbitrary suppositions unsupported by any trustworthy passage. The very number of them [i.e. the explanations of the apologists-PT] is sufficient to discredit them, and they merely vie with another in flights of imagination. Even if we combine all motives, ambition, jealousy, fear and failing confidence, and dress them out in highsounding epithets, we cannot deduce from them any well-founded and therefore acceptable conclusions. The interminable discussions which we have touched on appear lamentable futile. The betrayal remains purposeless, useless and unintelligible...

Prophecy Zechariah 11:13b "So I took the thirty shekels of silver and threw them to the potter in the house of the Lord"

Fulfillment Matthew 27:7 "And they counseled together and with the money bought the Potter's Field as a burial place for strangers."

While this seemingly detailed correspondence may look impressive at first sight, a few preliminary considerations show that there is no prophecy and no fulfillment. We have looked at the episode of Judas betrayal elsewhere. Here we need to note the highlights of what we have found:

Firstly, we will note that the whole story of the betrayal by Judas is very probably unhistorical for a few reasons: o The betrayal makes no sense. o There is evidence of a divergent early tradition that does not include a traitor among the twelve apostles.

Secondly, there are divergent and contradictory accounts of what was done with the thirty pieces of silver supposedly prophesized. Matthew 27:3-5 said that Judas threw the money into the temple and then went away to hang himself and it was the chief priests who used the money to buy the potter's field. Acts 1:18-19 openly contradicts this by saying that it was Judas himself who bought the field where he fell and died. Thirdly, we note that Matthew made the mistake in attributing the prophecy to Jeremiah (Matthew 27:9) what can only be found in Zechariah (11:12-13)! And this mistake gives a very strong clue as to how Matthew constructed the whole story.

THE CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN ACTS AND MATTHEW ON JUDAS' DEATH We are not even certain how Judas met with his death for there are two different and incompatible accounts of his death and its relation to a place known as the Field of Blood. According to Matthew, Judas hanged himself: Matthew 27:3-5 When Judas, his betrayer, saw that he was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, saying, "I have sinned in betraying innocent blood." They said, "What is that to us? See to it yourself." And throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself. The book of the Acts of the Apostles however said nothing about a hanging but suggested that Judas died by throwing himself off a precipice which disemboweled him: Acts 1:18-19 Now this man [Judas] bought a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Akel'dama, that is, Field of Blood.

Not only is there discrepancy as to how he died, there is also the divergence in what Judas did with the money. Matthew said he threw the money into the temple and left while Acts said that he used the money to buy a field. In Matthew it was the chief priests and elders who used the money to buy the field which ended up with the same name, The Field of Blood:
Matthew 27:6-10 But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, "It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money." So they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, "And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the

sons of Israel, and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me." MISTAKE IN OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCE BY MATTHEW Matthew 27:6-10 But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, "It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money." So they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, "And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me."

There is still another mistake in the passage above. Matthew had attributed to Jeremiah a passage that was actually in Zechariah 11:12-13! This obvious mistake in reference gave a lot of problems to the apologists for an inerrant Bible. It is amusing to look at the convoluted attempts Christians throughout history had tried to reconcile this mistake.

Apart from the obvious unhistorical nature of the details of the Judas betrayal there is one more additional point to mention. Tim Callahan pointed out in his book Bible Prophecy "lifted up his heels" from Psalm 41:9 implies an action meant to insult and not assault. In other words it is not a prophecy about betrayal at all but a lament about being insulted by a trusted friend.

To summarize- there can be no claim of prophecy fulfillment on contradictory reports that are of an obviously fictional nature.

8. Psalm 27:12 Falsely accused, fulfillment- Matthew 26:59

The Messiah would be accused by false witnesses

Psalms 27:12 and Matthew 26:59-61

"Messianic Prophecy" King James Version Translation Psalms 27:12 Deliver me not over

"Fulfillment" King James Version Translation from the Greek Matthew 26:59-61 59. Now the chief priests, and elders, Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 27:12 Do not deliver me to the

unto the will of mine enemies: for false witnesses are risen up against me, and such as breathe out cruelty.

and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;

desires of my adversaries, for false witnesses and speakers of evil have risen against 60. But found none: yea, though many me. false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, 61. And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.

David was the target and victim of slander campaigns, particularly in trying to incite King Saul against him. Two examples of such cases are Doeg the Edomite (1 Samuel 22) and the people of Ziph (1 Samuel 23). He was always able to escape unharmed from these situations.

The "fulfillment" text attempts to combine these historical accounts of King David with the stated requirement on the testimony of two witnesses, to turn them into a "prophecy" that is "fulfilled" while Jesus was standing in front of Caiphas, the High Priest, soon after which he was crucified.

Conclusion: Psalms 27:12 is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

8. Isaiah 53:4- 5 suffer for others, Fulfillment - Matthew 27

Isaiah 53:4
Isaiah 53:4 says that the suffering servant was considered "stricken" by his enemies. Does this describe Jesus in any way?

, ; , .

4 Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Answer: In verse 4 the Gentile nations exclaim, concerning the servant, "we considered him stricken [by God]." The verb appears again in verse 8. This does not describe Jesus in any way whatsoever.

The verb, nagua, "stricken," is commonly used in the Jewish Scriptures for being stricken with leprosy (for example, 2 Kings 5:27, 15:5; Job 19:21; Leviticus 13:3, 9, 20; Numbers 12:10). Jesus was not stricken physically with leprosy!

Yet, even metaphorically, nagua cannot be applied to Jesus who was not generally shunned as a loathsome pariah. The respectively supportive, indifferent, or hostile audiences he confronts in the Gospels show a variety of responses to his message. Those who apparently despise Jesus are numerically represented in insignificant numbers. They exist, but no more so than one may expect in reaction to any extremely controversial figure. Consideration must also be given to the fact that the great majority of contemporary Jews never heard of Jesus. The application to Jesus of nagua, that is, stricken metaphorically in the manner of one who has leprosy and treated as such by fellow human beings, is unwarranted

9. Isaiah 50:6- Smitten and spat on, Fulfillment, Matthew 26:67 This is not a valid prophesy 10. Isaiah 53:7 silent when accused, Fulfillment, Matthew 26:63

Isaiah 53:7
Does "humbled himself and opened not his mouth" describe Jesus? Isaiah 53:7 says that the suffering servant "humbled himself and opened not his mouth" as a lamb about to be slaughtered or a sheep dumb before its shearers. Does this describe Jesus' behavior at his trials? Answer: Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was the accusation placed against him before the Sanhedrin and Pilate. To the charge of his messianic claim, Jesus answered both the Jewish authorities and Pilate in a forceful manner (John 18:19-23 ) The Chief Priest Questions Jesus
19

The chief priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teachings.

20

Jesus answered him, I have spoken publicly for everyone to hear. I have always taught in synagogues or in the temple courtyard, where all the Jews gather. I havent said anything in secret. 21 Why do you question me? Question those who heard what I said to them. They know what Ive said.
22

When Jesus said this, one of the guards standing near Jesus slapped his face and said, Is that how you answer the chief priest?
23

Jesus replied to him, If Ive said anything wrong, tell me what it was. But if Ive told the truth, why do you hit me? John 18:33-37
33

Pilate went back into the palace, called for Jesus, and asked him, Are you the king of the Jews?
34

Jesus replied, Did you think of that yourself, or did others tell you about me?

35

Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Your own people and the chief priests handed you over to me. What have you done?
36

Jesus answered, My kingdom doesnt belong to this world. If my kingdom belonged to this world, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jews. My kingdom doesnt have its origin on earth.
37

Pilate asked him, So you are a king?

Jesus replied, Youre correct in saying that Im a king. I have been born and have come into the world for this reason: to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to me.

The statement: "Therefore Pilate entered the judgment hall again and called Jesus, and said to him: 'Are you the King of the Jews?'" makes it clear that claiming to be the King Messiah was the Jewish accusation against Jesus. Matthew and Mark comment that Jesus did not Answer the Jewish accusations when Questioned by Pilate: "But he did not Answer him, not even to a single charge" (Matthew 27:14); "But Jesus made no further Answer" (Mark 15:15).

However, the list of charges made by the Jews, which is found in Luke's Gospel: "misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ, a King" (Luke 23:2), is Answered by Jesus.

Answered: in his defense before Pilate, as found in John's Gospel. There he claimed to head a peaceloving, nonmilitary, otherworldly group, which would not countenance revolt against the Roman Empire. John argues, with the help of alleged quotations from the trial, that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews but not one who sought power in this world, i.e., at the expense of the Roman Empire (John 18:36).

Far from showing the humility and silence with which Isaiah 53 describes the servant in verse 7, the encounter between the high priest, the elders, and Jesus is highlighted by a vigorous verbal exchange. In addition, Jesus did not show humility and silence during his confrontation with Pilate. At their meeting, Jesus is depicted as skillfully defending himself. Jesus at no time humbled himself, but, on the contrary, presented a clever verbal defense before Pilate (the one man who could condemn him to death), pleading shrewdly that his messianic teaching was a nonviolent, "not of this world" movement, one which the Romans need not fear. Pilate, Jesus assumed, would not be interested in a non-political, non-military movement that was not of "this world." However, Jesus' movement must have appeared to Pilate like any of the other seditious movements that confronted him. He reacted accordingly. Jesus was obviously defending himself by presenting a shrewd verbal response when he tried to convince Pilate that he was not the head of a seditious movement but that his intentions were peaceful. Contrary to what Christian theologians claim, the Gospels' Jesus presented a strong defense before the Jewish officials and Pilate. Jesus was not "dumb" but very outspoken before his accusers, Jewish or Gentile. Therefore, it is simply not true to say of Jesus that "he humbled himself and did not open his mouth."

11.Isaiah 53: Rejected by the Jews, Fulfillment- Matthew 27:22

Isaiah 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, [there is] no beauty that we should desire him.

This translation does not make sense. Isaiah 52:15 makes it perfectly clear that this chapter is being spoken from a past-tense perspective from the End of Days. Thus, the translation of this narrative should reflect that.

The King James Bible and other Christian translations do not render it in the past tense, however, because the intent of their translations is specifically to lead the reader to believe in Jesus. Translations like this one from Artscrolls Tanach is correct, and thus makes much more sense based on

context (not to mention the Hebrew text itself) because it is in the past tense: Formerly he grew like a sapling or like a root from arid ground; he had neither form nor grandeur; we saw him, but without such visage that we could desire.
Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were [our] faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Again, here we have the same problem of changed tenses that we saw with our previous verse. It is puzzling how this change would help an evangelical in slanting the passage towards Jesus. "He IS despised?" According to the New Testament, Jesus was quite popular, as a number of verses quoted below will show. Also, notice how the tense changed in KJVs rendering from "he IS despised" to "we HID," in the past tense. The errors in this translation plainly give themselves away.

Was Jesus really despised?

Luke 4:14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. [15] And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all.

Luke 8:19 Then came to him [his] mother and his brethren, and could not come at him for the press. Luke 8:45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press [thee], and sayest thou, Who touched me? (KJV)
This is but a small sampling of a long list. The servant is characterized as one who is despised. Jesus is not one who fits that bill. However, when you take a look at the history of Jews, youll find that the Jewish people fit into that description seamlessly.

12. Psalm 69:4 Hated without a cause, Fulfillment- Matthew 27:23

1. .
Overview

Following is a summary description of this psalm to help put its context into perspective.

PRAYER OF THE PERSECUTED: A deeply pathetic human document is presented by this Psalm. A devout servant of G-d is undergoing cruel treatment and fells that his sufferings are due to his religious loyalty. He pleads with G-d for relief and, in burning indignation, begs that retribution come upon his persecutors. His faith remains firm through the ordeal and he looks to the future with confidence. There are several passages in the Psalm which point to the fact that it was written as a prophetic vision that that foretold of the era when Israel would be in captivity. Indeed, the Midrash understands the Psalm as relating to the Babylonian exile. In collective singular, the downtrodden outcasts describe their woeful sufferings, while, at the same time, begging for the mercy of G-d. In the closing verses they affirm their faith in Him by triumphantly proclaiming His praises in a sincere song of devotion. The parallels between this Psalm and the book of Jeremiah are frequent and striking.3[11]

The superscription identifies King David as the author of this psalm. The psalm, written entirely in the first person, can be interpreted as being either about himself or, prophetically, about Israel in exile, portraying their plight during those long and bitter times, and pleads for their speedy deliverance.

a. The Messiah would be hated by many without cause

The relevant texts from the KJV "Old Testament" and New Testament, and the corresponding Jewish translation for reference purposes, are shown in Table III.A.2.a-1.

Table III.A.2.a-1 Psalms 69:5[4] and Luke 23:13-22

"Messianic Prophecy"

"Fulfillment"

3[11]

Soncino Books of the Bible The Psalms, Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, Editor, p. 216, The Soncino Press (1992)

King James Version Translation Psalms 69:4 They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty: then I restored that which I took not away.

King James Version Translation from the Greek Luke 23:13-22

Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 69:5

13. And Pilate, when he had called together Those who hate me for the chief priests and the rulers and the nothing are more numerous than the people, hairs of my head; 14. Said unto them, Ye have brought this mighty are those who man unto me, as one that perverteth the would cut me off, who people: and, behold, I, having examined are my enemies him before you, have found no fault in this because of lies; what I man touching those things whereof ye did not steal, should I accuse him: return?. 15. No, nor yet Herod: for I sent you to him; and, lo, nothing worthy of death is done unto him. 16. I will therefore chastise him, and release him. 17. (For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) 18. And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas: 19. (Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for murder, was cast into prison.) 20. Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them. 21. But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. 22. And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.

This verse can be seen either as pertaining to King David's own life, or as being prophetic about events that would occur to the Jewish people during their various exiles. As it relates to King David, and as was learned from similar scenarios in several of the psalms previously investigated, he had many enemies and was the target and victim of many slander campaigns. In this case, as in Psalms 35, King David wondered if he should restore that which his false accusers charged he had taken. In the case of Israel's exile, the historical record is witness to the many times that trumped up charges were leveled against the Jews (e.g., blood libels, poisoning of wells, etc.) just as a ploy to dispossess them of their wealth.

The "fulfillment" text is taken from a passage that describes Pontius Pilate discussing the release of Jesus with the spiritual and political leaders of the Jews. They allegedly demanded that he be crucified, and Pilate said that he found no reason to put him to death, and that he wanted to punish him and then release him before the Passover.

The match-up of this "messianic prophecy"-"fulfillment" pair is not obvious. King David is complaining about the exactions made upon him or, prophetically, upon Israel in exile, by oppressors on the false pretext that they were executing justice. The author of the Gospel of Luke provides an account of the Roman leader wanting to release Jesus while the leaders of the Jews accuse Jesus of various offenses and demand that he be executed. The problem is that the outcomes of the two situations were quite different, as was noted in several previous instances. King David survived all these plots, while Jesus wound up being crucified.

Another problem is created by ascribing King David's problems to Jesus. Namely, it forces the next verse in the psalm to apply to Jesus as well:

Psalms 89:6[5] - O G-d, You know my folly, and my guilty deeds are not concealed from You.

King David admitted that he sinned; in fact, he committed sins with intent [the noun (asham), intentional sin, is used here]. His trials were, at least in part, punishment for the sins he committed. Thus, by implication, this makes Jesus a sinner, one who sinned with intent, which contradicts Christian doctrine.

A related problem is created by the following account when King David's words are put into the mouth of Jesus:

Psalms 69:12[11] - And I made sackcloth my raiment, and I became a byword to them.

King David lamented about how his enemies made him the subject of derision when he donned sackcloth, the common garb during times of repentance (and mourning). The Hebrew Bible describes an occasion when King David was in sackcloth following his sinful act of conducting a census of Israel4[12] (1 Chron 21:16). Prophetically, this could be his vision of the treatment of exiled Israel by the nations. Once again, this alludes to King David's actions to obtain the atonement for his sins, or, prophetically, for collective Israel doing this in exile. The New Testament contains no accounts of Jesus in sackcloth. These last two issues apply to the remaining "messianic prophecies" in this psalm.

Conclusion: Psalms 69:5[4] is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

13. Psalm 22:15, Hands and Feet pierced, Fulfillment John 19:19

B. Psalms 22:17[16]

King James Version Translation

Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 22

Hebrew Text

16

For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my

17 For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers encompassed me; like a lion [they are at] my

hands and my feet.

hands and my feet.

This is, perhaps, one of the verses from the Christian "Old Testament" most frequently referenced by Christian apologists and missionaries when claiming that the crucifixion of Jesus was foretold. Yet, as was noted above, none of the authors of the New Testament ever point to this verse, which is such an important component in the evangelical portfolio. A comparison of the above two translations reveals a major discrepancy in the respective renditions of the term (ka'ari), like a lion. The typical Jewish rendition of this term is like a lion, while the KJV (typical of most Christian translations) has they pierced. Which is the correct translation?

A simple word study on the Hebrew term (ka'ari) helps answer this question. For simplicity, the word study concerns only on cases where the same form of the term appears, i.e., excluding conjugations of the root noun (ari) in the singular and plural, and combinations with various prepositions other than that which occurs here [the {or } (ka-) here is the Hebrew preposition equivalent to like/as]. In addition to the application at Psalms 22:17[16], three other instances of (ka'ari) are present in the Hebrew Bible, and all are shown in Table IV.D-1 below, along with their respective KJV translations. There is also a single instance of the term (vecha'ari), which is the equivalent of (ka'ari) with the preposition (ve-), and, in front of it to make it, and like a lion. This term is included in Table IV.D-1 for completeness since it contains the original term (ka'ari), though it is not critical for illustrating the point to be made here. Table IV.D-1 Comparisons of KJV renditions of (ka'ari) in the Hebrew Bible

Reference Psalms 22:17[16] Numbers 24:9 Isaiah 38:13 Ezekiel 22:25 Numbers 23:24

KJV Rendition (ka'ari), they pierced (ka'ari), like a lion (ka'ari), like a lion (ka'ari), like a lion (vecha'ari), and as a young lion

Comment Incorrect Correct Correct Correct Correct

It appears that the KJV translators had a special reason for rendering the term Psalms 22:17[16] differently. Why did the KJV translate the Hebrew term pierced only at Psalms 22:17[16]?

(ka'ari) at (ka'ari) as they

Is there a connection between the Hebrew term

(ka'ari) and a Hebrew verb that describes

the act of piercing? The word (ari), lion, is related to another word for lion, (aryeh); both are used in the Hebrew Bible. Several verbs are used in the Hebrew Bible to describe an act of piercing: Hab 3:14), (ka'ari), (daqar; e.g., Zech 12:10), (palah; e.g., Job 16:13), and (ari), or (aryeh). (hadar; e.g., Ezek 21:19), (naqav; e.g., (ratza; e.g., Exod 21:6). A knowledge of

Hebrew is not required to recognize that none of these root verbs resembles the terms

Could there be another linguistic explanation? Two fragments containing Psalms 22:17[16] were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). In the first fragment, which was found at Qumran (4QPs-f; known as the Qumran MS, the word in question is not preserved. In the second fragment, found at Nahal Hever (HHev/Se 4 (Ps); known as the Bar Kochba MS, the word is preserved. The fragment HHev/Se 4 (Ps) shows the Hebrew letters (kaf), (aleph), (resh), and what appears to be a somewhat elongated letter (yod), which some perceive to be the letter (vav).5[3] Thus, the reading of this word would be either (ka'ari) or (ka'aru), respectively. Although the latter of these two renditions of the term has been the focus of much controversy and discussion, it is a fact that no root verb exists which contains the letter (aleph) in it, conjugated in this fashion (3rd-person, plural masculine gender, past tense), with the meaning of they pierced, as rendered in most Christian translations. Without the letter (aleph), and using, for the moment, the argument that the last letter [the elongated (yod)] is a (vav), the word would be (karu), for which the Hebrew root verb is (karah), [to] dig [in dirt], such as digging a ditch (e.g., Ps 57:7). In other words, (karu) has the meaning [they] dug [in dirt]. This verb is never used in the context of piercing, either literally or metaphorically, in any of its 15 applications in the Hebrew Bible.

5[3]

An image of this fragment, in which the line with the word in question has been "enhanced", is shown in an article by a Christian apologist, Tim Hegg, Psalm 22:16 "like a lion" or "they pierced"? http://www.torahresource.com/Newsletter/Ps22.16.pdf. The reader should be cautioned that the Hebrew linguistic analysis in the article is seriously flawed. The article contains other questionable items. For example, the fragment also shows the next word as being misspelled, having an extra letter " heh" attached at the end, which makes no grammatical sense. The author shows this incorrect spelling in the text, but in a later segment in which he compares the Masoretic Text with the text from HHev/Se 4 (Ps), he drops the extra letter "heh".

What could cause such a variation between the two terms (ka'ari) and (ka'aru), i.e., with an elongated letter (yod) that resembles the letter (vav)? Since the word (ka'aru) does not exist in the Hebrew language, the most plausible explanation is that such discrepancy is simply a case of scribal variation (or error).

Another possibility, one that has been alleged by Christian apologists and missionaries, is textual revisionism by the Masorites, who added vowels and melodic trope marks to the Hebrew Bible around the 10th century C.E., i.e., the claim is that the Masorites changed the original (ka'aru) to the current (ka'ari) in order to remove any resemblance to a crucifixion scenario. Given the strict prohibitions in the Hebrew Bible concerning any tampering with its text (e.g., Deut 4:2, Pr 30:6), and the fact that the term (ka'aru) does not exist in the Hebrew language, this is a rather preposterous claim regarding an unlikely action by the trained scribes.

Given the late dating of the Nahal Hever fragment6[4], the discrepancy could be the result of exactly the reverse of the previous claim. Namely, this could be the result of an attempt by second century C.E. (early) Christians to edit the original (ka'ari) to be (ka'aru), thereby making it appear like the term (karu), they dug. This would have accomplished the effect of aligning the word with the events of the early first century C.E. It is also interesting to note that in the LXX (the Christian translation into Greek of the Hebrew Bible), where this verse is numbered as Psalms 21:17, the reading is (oruksan), which stems from the root (orusso), to dig, as in [to] dig a trench. Liddell & Scott (Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon) do not list a meaning of pierce for this word, and the identical usages occur only in early Christian renditions (Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon of the Greek Testament). This LXX reading could possibly stem from a presumed, though non-existent, Hebrew reading (which makes no sense in context) of (karu) [i.e., without the (aleph) not the reading (ka'aru)]. As noted above, the Hebrew word (karu) means [they] dug [in dirt], and it is never used in the Hebrew Bible with the context of piercing.

A final clue is found within the New Testament itself. The New Testament authors are silent on Psalms 22:17[16], a verse so central to Christianity in the description of the crucifixion itself. Given its significance to the Church, the question is: "Why is the New Testament silent on this verse?".

6[4]

The Nahal Hever papyri are dated as late as the second century C.E. according to DSS scholars and researchers; e.g. G. Vermes, An Introduction to the Complete Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 29.

One possible answer is that none of the authors of the four Gospels, all of which provide a narrative of the crucifixion, was aware of this verse. That answer is not likely, however, since all of them referenced other parts of this psalm. Another possibility is that none of the authors saw this verse as being significant, or even relevant, to their respective crucifixion narratives. But this answer would be inconsistent with the important role this verse plays in the Christian perspective.

Perhaps the most likely answer is that the common Christian rendition, they pierced in the "Old Testament", came after the New Testament was written, i.e., the authors of the New Testament were unaware of a future revision of Psalms 22:17[16], in which the Church attempted to create a better fit with the crucifixion narrative. There was no need to mistranslate the term (ka'ari) in Numbers 23:24, 24:9, Isaiah 38:13, and Ezekiel 22:25, since these passages, unlike Psalms 22:17[16], had no Christological value to the Church, and could not help improve the fit into the Hebrew Bible of any component of Christian theology. This is a serious charge to make. However, given the hard evidence of tampering by the Church with other passages from the Hebrew Bible, it certainly is a plausible scenario for the disparity between the two renditions of this particular verse.

14. Psalm 22:18, gambled clothing, fulfillment-Matthew 27:35

King James Version Translation

Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 22

Hebrew Text

18 They part my garments 19 They divide my garments among them, and cast among themselves, and lots upon my vesture. cast lots for my raiment.

The author of the Gospel of John points to this verse as being a prophecy that became fulfilled when Jesus was on the cross:

John 19:23-24 (23) Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also [his] coat: now the coat was without

seam, woven from the top throughout. (24) They said therefore among themselves, Let us not rend it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall be: that the scripture might be fulfilled, which saith, They parted my raiment among them, and for my vesture they did cast lots. These things therefore the soldiers did.

The previous verse, Psalms 22:18[17], is critical to a correct understanding of the true context of this verse. Psalms 22:18[17] describes the person whose clothes are being divided as counting his bones while those who are taking his garments look on gloating. This starving man is so skinny that his bones are visible and can be counted. The "voice" here is still King David, as it is throughout the psalm, and he uses the act of taking and dividing his garments as a metaphorical reference to the desires of his enemies to take away his mantle of royalty and make it their own.

15.Isaaih 53:12 Die with the wicked, fulfillment Matthew 27:38

Matthew 27: 38
38

Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

Isaiah 53:12 53:12 "Therefore, I will divide a portion to him with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty." If Jesus is God, does the idea of reward have any meaning? Is it not rather the Jewish people who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps. 44) - who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54? Isaiah 53:12 has nothing to do with Matthew 27, crucified with thieves.

16.Psalm 22:6-8 Mocked and insulted, fulfillment Matthew 27:39-44 KJV

But I [am] a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, 7

Hebrew
But I am a worm, and not a man; a reproach of man and despised by the people.

8 All those who see me will mock me; they will open their lip, they will shake their head,

[saying], He trusted on the LORD [that] he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.

[saying], He should cast his trust upon the Lo rd so that 9 He will rescue him; He will save him because he delights in Him.

Psalms 22:7[6] - But I am a worm, and not a man; a reproach of man and despised by the people.

In the Christian scenario, it would be Jesus calling himself a worm. This reference to a worm as a metaphor for people is not unique within the Hebrew Bible. Isaiah likens the Jewish people to a worm:

Isaiah 41:14 - Fear not, O worm of Jacob, the number of Israel; "I have helped you," says the Lord, and your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel.

Bildad the Shuhite, one of Job's friends, does the same:

Job 25:6 - How much less, man, who is a worm, and the son of man, who is a maggot!"

In Psalms 22:7[6], King David uses this metaphor as he writes about the plight of his own people. Does the worm metaphor fit Jesus? Would anyone, other than pagans who worship worms, use this metaphor to characterize a divine being?

17. Psalm 22:6-8, Mocked and insulted. Fulfillment- Matthew 27:39-44

Matthew 27: 39-44 39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross. 41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God. 44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

Psalms 22:6-8 6 Unto Thee they cried, and escaped; in Thee did they trust, and were not ashamed. 7 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people. 8 All they that see me laugh me to scorn; they shoot out the lip, they shake the head: 9 'Let him commit himself unto the LORD! let Him rescue him; let Him deliver him, seeing He delighteth in him.' David describes his own pain, anguish, and longing during those times when he was a fugitive from his enemies. Consequently, this is an historical rather than a messianic psalm. When he refers to himself as a worm (Ps 22:7[6]), a helpless creature, whose only salvation can come from God, it becomes abundantly clear that the author does not consider himself to be someone who can provide salvation, and certainly not one who is divine.

18. Isaiah 53:9 Buried with the rich, Fulfillment- Matthew 27:51-61

Isaiah 53
Since any portion of Scripture is only understood properly when viewed in the context of God's revelation as a whole, some additional study will be helpful before you "tackle" Isaiah 53. Look at the setting in which Isaiah 53 occurs. Earlier on in Isaiah, God had predicted exile and calamity for the Jewish people. Chapter 53, however, occurs in the midst of Isaiah's "Messages of Consolation", which tell of the restoration of Israel to a position of prominence and a vindication of their status as God's chosen people. In chapter 52, for example, Israel is described as "oppressed without cause" (v.4) and "taken away" (v.5), yet God promises a brighter future ahead, one in which Israel will again prosper and be redeemed in the sight of all the nations (v.13, 8-12). Chapter 54 further elaborates upon the redemption which awaits the nation of Israel. Following immediately after chapter 53's promise of a reward for God's servant in return for all of its suffering (53:10-12), chapter 54 describes an unequivocally joyous fate for the Jewish people. Speaking clearly of the Jewish people and their exalted status (even according to all Christian commentaries), chapter 54 ends as follows: "`This is the heritage of the servants of the L-rd and their vindication is from Me,' declares the L-rd." In the original Hebrew texts, there are no chapter divisions, and Jew and Christian alike agree that chapter 53 is actually a continuation of the prophecy which begins at 52:13. Accordingly, our analysis must begin at that verse. 52:13 "Behold, My servant will prosper." Israel in the singular is called God's servant throughout Isaiah, both explicitly (Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3) and implicitly (Isa. 42:19-20; 43:10) - the Messiah is not. Other references to Israel as God's servant include Jer. 30:10 (note that in Jer. 30:17, the servant Israel is regarded by the nations as an outcast, forsaken

by God, as in Isa. 53:4); Jer. 46:27-28; Ps. 136:22; Lk. 1:54. ALSO: Given the Christian view that Jesus is God, is God His own servant? 52:15 - 53:1 "So shall he (the servant) startle many nations, the kings will stand speechless; For that which had not been told them they shall see and that which they had not heard shall they ponder. Who would believe what we have heard?" Quite clearly, the nations and their kings will be amazed at what happens to the "servant of the L-rd," and they will say "who would believe what we have heard?". 52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah 53. See, also, Micah 7:12-17, which speaks of the nations' astonishment when the Jewish people again blossom in the Messianic age. 53:1 "And to whom has the arm of the L-rd been revealed?" In Isaiah, and throughout our Scriptures, God's "arm" refers to the physical redemption of the Jewish people from the oppression of other nations (see, e.g., Isa. 52:8-12; Isa. 63:12; Deut. 4:34; Deut. 7:19; Ps. 44:3). 53:3 "Despised and rejected of men." While this is clearly applicable to Israel (see Isa. 60:15; Ps. 44:13-14), it cannot be reconciled with the New Testament account of Jesus, a man who was supposedly "praised by all" (Lk. 4:14-15) and followed by multitudes (Matt. 4:25), who would later acclaim him as a prophet upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:9-11). Even as he was taken to be crucified, a multitude bemoaned his fate (Lk. 23:27). Jesus had to be taken by stealth, as the rulers feared "a riot of the people" (Mk. 14:1-2). 53:3 "A man of pains and acquainted with disease." Israel's adversities are frequently likened to sickness - see, e.g., Isa. 1:5-6; Jer. 10:19; Jer 30:12. 53:4 "Surely our diseases he carried and our pains he bore." In Matt. 8:17, this is correctly translated, and said to be literally (not spiritually) fulfilled in Jesus' healing of the sick, a reading inconsistent with the Christian mistranslation of 53:4 itself. 53:4 "Yet we ourselves esteemed him stricken, smitten of G- D and afflicted." See Jer. 30:17 of God's servant Israel (30:10), it is said by the nations, "It is Zion; no one cares for her." 53:5 "But he was wounded from (NOTE: not for) our transgressions, he was crushed from (AGAIN: not for) our iniquities." Whereas the nations had thought the Servant (Israel) was undergoing Divine retribution for its sins (53:4), they now realize that the Servant's sufferings stemmed from their actions and sinfulness. This theme is further developed throughout our Jewish Scriptures - see, e.g., Jer. 50:7; Jer. 10:25. ALSO: Note that the Messiah "shall not fail nor be crushed till he has set the right in the earth" (Isa. 42:4). 53:7 "He was oppressed and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth. Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so he did not open his mouth." Note that in the prior chapter (Isa. 52), Israel is said to have been oppressed and taken away without cause (52:4-5). A similar theme is developed in Psalm 44, wherein King David speaks of Israel's faithfulness even in the face of gentile oppression (44:17- 18) and describes Israel as "sheep to be slaughtered" in the midst of the unfaithful gentile nations (44:22,11).

Regarding the claim that Jesus "did not open his mouth" when faced with oppression and affliction, see Matt. 27:46, Jn. 18:23, 36-37. 53:8 "From dominion and judgment he was taken away." Note the correct translation of the Hebrew. The Christians are forced to mistranslate, since - by Jesus' own testimony - he never had any rights to ruler ship or judgment, at least not on the "first coming." See, e.g., Jn. 3:17; Jn. 8:15; Jn. 12:47; Jn. 18:36. 53:8 "He was cut off out of the land of the living." 53:9 "His grave was assigned with wicked men." See Ez. 37:11-14, wherein Israelis described as "cut off" and God promises to open its "graves" and bring Israel back into its own land. Other examples of figurative deaths include Ex. 10:17; 2 Sam. 9:8; 2 Sam. 16:9. 53:8 "From my peoples' sins, there was injury to them." Here the Prophet makes absolutely clear, to anyone familiar with Biblical Hebrew, that the oppressed Servant is a collective Servant, not a single individual. The Hebrew word "lamoh", when used in our Scriptures, always means "to them" never "to him" and may be found, for example, in Psalm 99:7 - "They kept his testimonies, and the statute that He gave to them." 53:9 "And with the rich in his deaths." Perhaps King James should have changed the original Hebrew, which again makes clear that we are dealing with a collective Servant, i.e., Israel, which will "come to life" when the exile ends (Ez. 37:14). 53:9 "He had done no violence." See Matt. 21:12; Mk. 11:15-16; Lk. 19:45; Lk. 19:27; Matt. 10:34 and Lk. 12:51; then judge for yourself whether this passage is truly consistent with the New Testament account of Jesus. 53:10 "He shall see his seed." The Hebrew word for "seed", used in this verse, always refers to physical descendants in our Jewish Scriptures. See, e.g., Gen. 12:7; Gen. 15:13; Gen. 46:6; Ex. 28:43. A different word, generally translated as "sons", is used to refer to spiritual descendants (see Deut. 14:1, e.g.). 53:10 "He will prolong his days." Not only did Jesus die young, but how could the days be prolonged of someone who is alleged to be God? 53:11 "With his knowledge the righteous one, my Servant, will cause many to be just." Note again the correct translation: the Servant will cause many to be just, he will not "justify the many." The Jewish mission is to serve as a "light to the nations" which will ultimately lead the world to a knowledge of the one true God, this both by example (Deut. 4:5-8; Zech. 8:23) and by instructing the nations in God's Law (Isa. 2:3-4; Micah 4:2-3). 53:12 "Therefore, I will divide a portion to him with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty." If Jesus is God, does the idea of reward have any meaning? Is it not rather the Jewish people - who righteously bore the sins of the world and yet remained faithful to God (Ps.

44) - who will be rewarded, and this in the manner described more fully in Isaiah chapters 52 and 54?

Psalms 68:18, Go back to heaven, Fulfillment- Matthew

The reference list indicates that Psalms 68 contains two "messianic prophecies" that are "fulfilled" according to the New Testament, as shown in Table III.B-1.

Table III.B-1 Claimed "Messianic Prophecies" and their "Fulfillments"

Citations Statement "Prophecy" The Messiah would ascend into heaven The Messiah would give gifts to men Psalms 68:19a[18a] Psalms 68:19b[18b] "Fulfillment" Luke 24:51 Matthew 10:1

2. 1.

Overview

Following is a summary description of this psalm to help put its context into perspective.

G-D'S VICTORIES: While this Psalm is one of the most magnificent of all (Ibn Ezra) in its forceful sweep of thought and language, the commentators are in disagreement on the events which occasioned it. The Targum and others connect it with the revelation at Sinai or the exodus from Egypt. If we look for an occasion in the lifetime of David, it might allude to the occasion when he triumphed in victories over Aram-Zobah and Aram Damascus, Moab, Edom and Philistia (2 Samuel 8) (Malbim). It has also been suggested (Kimchi) that it refers to the future downfall of Sennacherib's army in the days of Hezekiah. Meiri contends that, most probably, it is a prophecy relating to the battle of Gog and Magog which will lead to the coming of the Messiah. Whatever the

reason for its composition, it takes the form of a triumphant march proclaiming the kingship of G-d over the earth.7[11]

The superscription identifies King David as the author of this psalm. He recounts the many victories Israel achieved with G-d's help over mighty empires, and foretells that this phenomenon of Israel's triumph will continue. King David then invites all nations to join in praising G-d.

3. 2.

Investigating claimed "Messianic Prophecies" [and "Fulfillments"]

a. a.

The Messiah would ascend into heaven

The relevant texts from the KJV "Old Testament" and New Testament, and the corresponding Jewish translation for reference purposes, are shown in Table III.B.2.a-1.

Table III.B.2.a-1 Psalms 68:19a[18a] and Luke 24:51

"Messianic Prophecy"

"Fulfillment" King James Version Translation from the Greek Luke 24:51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 68:19a You ascended on high, you took captives; you took gifts to be among men, and also rebellious ones for Y-h G-d to dwell.

King James Version Translation

Psalms 68:18a Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.

7[11]

Soncino Books of the Bible The Psalms, Rev. Dr. A. Cohen, Editor, p. 209, The Soncino Press (1992)

This is not a prophetic passage it is historical. Several scenarios to explain it have been proposed by the Jewish Sages, and two of these are presented here. Targum Yonathan and RASHI say the subject is Moses, who ascended Mount Sinai on behalf of Israel to receive ("capture") the Torah from the hands of the angels (Pr 30:4).

According to RADAQ (Rabbi David Qimhi), the subject is G-d who removed His "divine presence", the Shechinah, from His "dwelling" in Jerusalem and remained aloof in His heavenly abode. In doing so, He allowed foreign nations to invade Israel.

The "fulfillment" text depicts "The Ascension", the scene where Jesus departed from those with whom he walked and spoke during one of his appearances following his alleged "resurrection". What was accomplished by this action? He just disappeared, apparently without a purpose, and he has not returned.

Conclusion: Psalms 68:19a[18a] is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

Psalm 16:10, He will rise again- Fulfillment, Matthew 28:6

6

He is not here; for he has been raised, as he said. Come, see the place where hea lay. Psalms 16:8-10a and Matthew 28:6

"Messianic Prophecy" King James Version Translation Psalms 16:8-10a 8. I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. 9. Therefore my heart is

"Fulfillment" King James Version Translation from the Greek Matthew 28:6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 16:8-10a 8. I have placed the L-rd before me constantly; because [He is] at my right hand, I will not falter. 9. Therefore, my heart

glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. 10a. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

rejoiced, and my soul was glad; even my flesh shall dwell in safety. 10a. For You shall not forsake my soul to the grave; You shall not allow Your pious one to see the pit.

Before addressing the problem with the "messianic prophecy", a significant mistranslation in the KJV "Old Testament" rendition must be exposed. In v. 10a, the KJV translates as hell the Hebrew term (sheol), which means the grave, and it is generally applied in this context in the Hebrew Bible.

The term (sheol), which appears in the Hebrew Bible 65 times, was a familiar concept among the ancient Israelites, and to the Jewish people throughout history. In general, this poetic term describes the world of the dead the place where the body goes after a person dies. There are some exceptions where (sheol) is applied to an experience of great anxiety and despair, such as at Isaiah 5:15[16], where it is depicted as a devouring monster, and at Jonah 2:3, where the prophet applied the term metaphorically as his grave deep in the belly of the whale.

The KJV inconsistently renders this term in the "Old Testament", and this has created awkward theological issues for Christians, as the following example demonstrates:

Psalms 139:8(KJV) - If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell [ ], behold, thou art there.

According to the KJV, the Christian deity shares "hell" with the Archenemy, Satan! It is worth noting that Biblical Hebrew has no term for the common Christian idea of eternal damnation called hell.

Regarding the subject of v. 10a, this does not speak of the resurrection of the dead. King David is confident that when the time comes for him to die, his soul would not go to the grave with his body; that it would ascend to be with G-d. King Solomon spoke about this process as well:

Ecclesiastes 12:7 - And the dust returns to the earth as it was; and the spirit returns to G-d who gave it.

Clearly, the same idea as is described by his father, King David. There is nothing in the context here that speaks of a resurrection, and certainly not about a Messiah who dies and is resurrected.

Conclusion: Psalms 16:8-10a is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

Psalm 68:18 Go back to heaven, Luke 24:50-53

Psalms 68:19a[18a] and Luke 24:51

"Messianic Prophecy"

"Fulfillment" King James Version Translation from the Greek Luke 24:51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. Jewish Translation from the Hebrew Psalms 68:19a You ascended on high, you took captives; you took gifts to be among men, and also rebellious ones for Y-h G-d to dwell.

King James Version Translation

Psalms 68:18a Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.

This is not a prophetic passage it is historical. Several scenarios to explain it have been proposed by the Jewish Sages, and two of these are presented here. Targum Yonathan and RASHI say the subject is Moses, who ascended Mount Sinai on behalf of Israel to receive ("capture") the Torah from the hands of the angels (Pr 30:4).

According to RADAQ (Rabbi David Qimhi), the subject is G-d who removed His "divine presence", the Shechinah, from His "dwelling" in Jerusalem and remained aloof in His heavenly abode. In doing so, He allowed foreign nations to invade Israel.

The "fulfillment" text depicts "The Ascension", the scene where Jesus departed from those with whom he walked and spoke during one of his appearances following his alleged "resurrection". What was accomplished by this action? He just disappeared, apparently without a purpose, and he has not returned.

Conclusion: Psalms 68:19a[18a] is not a valid "messianic prophecy".

WHY JESUS ISNT COMING AGAIN

by Mike McClellan The Bible tells us that Jesus Christ spoke to His disciples 2000 years ago, telling them that he would return, that he was coming again. His promise remains one of the most central themes in the myriad of Christian belief systems. Except for a very small minority, Christians still believe he is coming again, the Parousia, the rapture. Is His promise still valid? Has He yet to return? Or did He make the promise only to break it in the lifetime of those to whom He spoke? The Promise The following is taken from the Bible. All verses are from the King James version unless otherwise noted. The Bible references are hyperlinks and will take the reader to the New International Version quotation if so desired. For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death*, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Matthew 16: 27-28 The language is clear. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not taste of death would not die before he returned, until he came into his kingdom. If youve been mistakenly taught that the verses above refer to Christs Transfiguration, read Revelation 20:12 which coincides with Matthew 16:27 in describing a Judgment Day scenario: And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Revelation 20:12 Christ was, again, clearly referring to his second coming before that present generation passed. Again, Jesus tells his disciples: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled. Matthew 24:30-34 Again, Christ describes certain events and warns those who are listening to him that This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled. He is speaking about their present generation. Although the above scriptures clearly convey that Christ was talking about his present generation, there are many other references in the New Testament indicating that the writers of the Gospels and Epistles as well as the followers of Christ firmly believed that Jesus was speaking of their present generation and not some future time hundreds or thousands of years down the road.

Jesus spoke to his followers again about his coming according to the book of Matthew: And ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. Matthew 10:22-23 The cities of Israel were not so numerous that it would have taken a fleeing man 2000 years to go over or through them. No man could live that long. Christ said before a fleeing man could go through all the cities, he would come. Again, Christ was speaking of his return in that generation. He left no doubt as to his meaning in this passage. What I mean, brothers, is that the time is short*. From now on those who have wives should live as if they had none; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away. (1 Corinthians 7:29-31 NIV) Paul tells the Corinthians that time is short and that the world in its present form is passing away. His words have a strong sense of urgency, rather than being a mere suggestion. Paul believes the world is presently passing away. He is not speaking of some event which could take place 2000 years in the future. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep*, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality 1 Corinthians 15:50-53 In this passage, Paul tells the Corinthians We shall not all sleep. Again, Paul is convinced and is convincing the Corinthians that the second coming of Christ is imminent in that generation and not all who hear his words will sleep or die prior to Christs coming. We Which Are Alive And Shall Remain In the following portion of the letter which Paul writes to the Thessalonians he discusses those who remain alive in the present tense.

For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain* unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain* shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 More Scripture Indicating Immediate Urgency The New Testament is abundantly filled with references to the immediacy of Christs return. But the end of all things is at hand:* be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer. 1 Peter 4:7 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days* spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things Hebrews 1:1-2 In 1 John, the false prophets foretold by Jesus who existed in that time period to give notice of the end times are discussed. Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God 1 John 4:1-3 *(italics mine) According to the Bible, Jesus Christ said he would return in the generation in which he lived. He said the sign of the Son of Man would appear in heaven. He said all the tribes of Israel would mourn. He said the tribes would see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. He said he would send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet. The angels were to gather the elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. All of these things were to have happened in his generation. They didnt happen. Jesus did not return as he said he would. He did not return as his disciples believed and preached that he would. Jesus didnt come in the disciples

generation. He didnt come in any generation. The disciples all died. Jesus promise was broken. The disciples believed and lived a false hope. Jesus didnt come then and he isnt coming in the future. Those who cling to the broken promise and false hope of his return will be just as disappointed as the disciples who died looking in vain for the second coming of their Christ. He isnt coming again.

Nonexistent prophecies
4) Fourth, some of the prophecies claimed to be fulfilled in the New Testament don't even exist in the Old Testament! For example, in Luke 24:46, Jesus said:
"Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."

However, nowhere in the Old Testament does it predict or say that! Also, in John 7:38 Jesus said,
"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water."

If Jesus was right in saying that scripture prophesied this, where is it then? No such statement in the Old Testament scriptures has ever been located, yet "the scripture" Jesus referred to would certainly have been in the Old Testament. How could there be a fulfillment of a prophecy that was never even made? In another example, Jesus claimed another fulfillment of nonprophecy in Luke 24:46.
"Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."

Paul also claimed that Christ's resurrection on the third day was also predicted by scriptures. He said in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4
"For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures."

However, Christian apologists cannot produce a single Old Testament passage that made this alleged third day prediction! It simply doesn't exist! Likewise in John 20:9

"For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead."

How could they not know the scripture, since the scripture prophesying that doesn't even exist? No such scripture has ever been found. Jesus also said in Mark 1:2
"It is written in Isaiah the prophet: 'I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way'"

Yet no statement like that appears in the book of Isaiah! That is a clear error there, without a doubt. In Acts 20:35 it says
"In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: `It is more blessed to give than to receive.'"

Yet no such words of Jesus are found in the Bible! Later on, James said in James 4:5
"Or do you think Scripture says without reason that the spirit he caused to live in us envies intensely?"

Again, no such words are found in scripture! In another indisputable example, Matthew said that Judas' purchase of the potter's field with the thirty pieces of silver cast back to the chief priests and elders fulfilled a prophecy made by Jeremiah:
"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter's field as the Lord appointed me." (Matthew 27:9-10)

The only problem here is that Jeremiah NEVER wrote anything remotely similar to this! So how could this be a fulfillment of "that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet"? There is a passage in Zechariah that this might refer to though, however, if the Bible is the inerrant word of God, then how could it make mistakes like this?! When Joseph took his family to Nazareth after they went to Egypt, Matthew said he did this so
"...that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that he should be called a Nazarene." (Matthew 2:23)

Again, Bible scholars have never been unable to find any statement from any prophet that this could be referring to! As a matter of fact, neither the word Nazareth or Nazarene was ever mentioned in the Old Testament. If this is so, how could the period of Jesus' residency in Nazareth have been prophesied by the prophets? How can an inerrant Bible contain huge mistakes like this? Is it any wonder why Christians never refer to these verses as fulfillment of prophecy? These critical errors clearly render the fulfillment of prophecy argument inept.

Failed, expired, and unfulfilled prophecies 5) Fifth, and perhaps most damaging, there are many prophecies in the Bible which never came true or went unfulfilled, expiring beyond their predicted time. For instance, here are 16 obvious failed prophecies in regard to the Second Coming of Christ and the end of the world, which was supposed to take place in the First Century Apostles lifetime! Below Jesus clearly predicts that his Second Coming will be during the lifetimes of the First Century Christians who lived in their time.
"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." (Matthew 16:28) "But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:27)

Jesus clearly predicted in those two verses above that the apostles standing with him would see his second coming in their lifetimes. It's clear and simple, nothing allegorical or symbolical. These following verses also indicate that Paul expected that he and the Christians of his time would see the Second Coming of Christ.
"But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;" (1 Corinthians 7:29) "For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven... Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds..." (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) "God...Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son..." (Hebrews 1:1-2)

2000 years ago it was the "last days"!? More similar verses below.
"For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry." (Hebrews 10:37) "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer." (1 Peter 4:7) "Christ...was manifest in these last times for you,..." (1 Peter 1:19-20) "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord...establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh...behold, the judge standeth before the door." (James 5:7-9) "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass;..." (Revelation 1:1)

"Behold, I come quickly." (Revelation 3:11) "And he said unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand... He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus." (Revelation 22:10, 20) "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come." (Matthew 10:22-23)

Jesus said there that his second coming would occur WHILE his apostles were preaching in the cities of Israel! In the following three verses, Jesus says that the generation living at the time would experience his second coming.
"So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done." (Mark 13:29-30) "So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled." (Luke 21:31-32) "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." (Matthew 24:33-34)

Obviously, that generation that Jesus was speaking to has long since passed! What an impressive assortment of failed prophecies! Is this convincing to you of the divine infallible inspiration of the Bible?