Fast and loose with the Truth.

[Elijah John]

This verse seems to strike at the heart of the notion of Biblical inerrancy:

Luke 24:45-46 English Standard Version (ESV)

45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,

Thing is, that "prophecy" is nowhere to be found in the OT/Hebrew Bible.

For debate, was Jesus wrong or lying? Or was Luke wrong or lying?

Or have we New Testament skeptics missed something?

[oldbadger]

This verse seems to strike at the heart of the notion of Biblical inerrancy:

Luke 24:45-46 English Standard Version (ESV)

45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,

Thing is, that "prophecy" is nowhere to be found in the OT/Hebrew Bible.

For debate, was Jesus wrong or lying? Or was Luke wrong or lying?

Or have we New Testament skeptics missed something?

You missed nothing.
Indeed, your careful selection of these two verses puts my blundering pick-axe job to shame, for (just to start) I should chop out nearly the whole of Luke's nativity in one huge slashing edit.

Luke must have been an ardent lover of the young faith, his belief a powerful auto-suggestive placebo, causing him to feel that he was honestly and decently doing God's work through fairy tales.

That young Mary, a Galilean Jewish peasant, should have the freedom and provisions to go walkabout out of Galilee, down through the Decapolis along the Jordan east-bank and into Judea to visit cousins.......... is a nursery story so delightful as to warm the heart........... but for solid truth it just melts into perjury.

The whole lot...... rubbish, but for the copying of Mark, Q and that other document, which give G-Luke some value.

[postroad]

Is it any more or any less convoluted than the other "prophecies" used to prove that Jesus was the Messiah? Indeed they are yanked without context and explanation from the Hebrew Scriptures at will. It is described in apologetic literature as "authorized by the Spirit" This particular prophecy is the "sign of Jonah"

Matthew 12:38
[ The Sign of Jonah ] Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.�

Matthew 12:39
He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

Matthew 16:4
A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.� Jesus then left them and went away.

Luke 11:29
[ The Sign of Jonah ] As the crowds increased, Jesus said, “This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.

Luke 11:30
For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so also will the Son of Man be to this generation.

Jonah 1:17
[ Jonah’s Prayer ] Now the Lord provided a huge fish to swallow Jonah, and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.


Matthew 12:40
For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

[JJ50]

This verse seems to strike at the heart of the notion of Biblical inerrancy:

Luke 24:45-46 English Standard Version (ESV)

45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,

Thing is, that "prophecy" is nowhere to be found in the OT/Hebrew Bible.

For debate, was Jesus wrong or lying? Or was Luke wrong or lying?

Or have we New Testament skeptics missed something?

Jesus was a mere human like the rest of us and had no more idea whether a god of some sort really exists or not than we do.

[tfvespasianus]

I think one possible answer is that early Christians used techniques similar to those found in the pesherim and midrashim that are roughly contemporaneous. That is, yes, there is no verbatim ‘prophecy’ to be found in a straightforward reading of scripture. It is found through elaboration and interpretation of the texts. So, what is being discerned is an inference from scriptures. For example, in the Habakkuk pesher we see a reinterpretation of that prophet’s situation into the context of the author of the pesher. In a sense, it is both an appropriation (Habakkuk is not writing about events at the turn of the millennium) and a reinterpretation. We can say that such things aren’t concomitant with the way the world actually works, but I would argue that such a claim isn’t relevant when discussing how certain people long ago thought of how the world functions.

Take care,
TFV

[postroad]

[Replying to post 5 by tfvespasianus] I am going to rant a little bit here. Hope you don't mind? This concept gets me a little crazy. I simply can not stand Christian apologetics. The double speak is more than I can endure. They have no problem pointing back at the original context and language to undermine theological positions they do not hold and uphold midrash interpretation of Hebrew text even though the literal interpretation does not support the theological position they do hold.

[Elijah John]

Is it any more or any less convoluted than the other "prophecies" used to prove that Jesus was the Messiah? Indeed they are yanked without context and explanation from the Hebrew Scriptures at will. It is described in apologetic literature as "authorized by the Spirit" This particular prophecy is the "sign of Jonah"

It is more convoluted in that this one ain't even remotely in the Hebrew Scriptures, unless one uses one's imagination.

"Convoluted" is a good word that fits.

To refer to the "sign of Jonah" is an allusion, not a quote. When one says "it is written" what follows is, or should be a quote.

[tfvespasianus]

[Replying to post 6 by postroad]

Ranting is fine. In fact, some view it is therapeutic.

However, my response isn’t geared towards apologetics and I am not an apologist by trade or inclination. My focus was to posit a theory as to how early Christians interpreted Hebrew writings. We should remember that the earliest Christians did not have writing of their own yet (i.e. they were yet to be written). Moreover, most scholars work under the assumption that Christianity arose in a largely Jewish milieu. So, early Christian hermeneutics were similar to other contemporary approaches (or so the theory goes).

I don’t have any skin in the game as to whether that’s ‘valid’ as far as concocting a personal world-view and I am less concerned with how Christians today justify their beliefs than historical questions about Christian origins.

Take care,
TFV

[postroad]

[Replying to post 7 by tfvespasianus]
I wasn't directing anything towards you. Sorry for the misunderstanding. It's the concept that makes me crazy. I mean, in what universe can someone create a fable and expect that other people must believe it or be damned?

[tam]

This verse seems to strike at the heart of the notion of Biblical inerrancy:

Luke 24:45-46 English Standard Version (ESV)

45 Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,

Thing is, that "prophecy" is nowhere to be found in the OT/Hebrew Bible.

For debate, was Jesus wrong or lying? Or was Luke wrong or lying?

Or have we New Testament skeptics missed something?

Neither of them are wrong OR lying.


Note that Christ opened their minds to understand the scriptures. They could all read (and/or listen to the scriptures being read). That does not mean that they understood all that was written.


Nor does it mean that there was a specific verse that says: The Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead. Only that this is what the scriptures (in whole or in part) SAY. Note also that the scriptures (plural) were opened. Not the 'scripture' (singular).



Such as multiple scriptures that point to the Servant of God/the Chosen one of God (Messiah)/the Anointed One/the Righteous One, etc, suffering, and even being struck down (then raised back up).



Neither Christ nor Luke were wrong or lying.




Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy