Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Clarification please

I am reading the scriptures and I like to go back to the source that NT quotes and I found something of question. i do not want to start a heated debate just being honest.

John 23: says that apparently he replied in the words of Isaiah
"I am a voice shouting in the wilderness, Prepare a straight pathway for Lord's coming!"

Going back to Isaiah 40:3 It seems God is directly talking to the people of that time notice the wording.

"Listen! I hear the voice of someone shouting. Make a highway for the Lord through the wilderness." and at the end "The Lord has spoken!"

So is John just assuming he is who god spoke of or just quoting as in example? I ask only because his quote is incorrect

Answer Question
 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 8:15 PM on Jun. 10, 2010 in Religion & Beliefs

Answers (13)
  • Ok, lol I posted a long and involved answer before realizing that I wasn't really answering the question you asked. Der.

    John is telling the people that he IS the one of whom God was speaking. John's coming was foretold as a harbinger of Jesus' arrival. He knew that he was the person who was spoken of in the prophecy, so, he challenged the people he was speaking to by quoting their own scripture to them and claiming the prophecy, as was his right.
    MamaRae85

    Answer by MamaRae85 at 8:41 PM on Jun. 10, 2010

  • ok thank you. That is what I thought but I wasn't sure really because the scriptures had said something about Elijah
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 8:46 PM on Jun. 10, 2010

  • John:23?
    RidingPink

    Answer by RidingPink at 12:52 AM on Jun. 11, 2010

  • Jn 3, 4 And MamaRae that is also what I get.
    oldermomof5

    Answer by oldermomof5 at 9:24 AM on Jun. 11, 2010

  • It is the N.T. writers trying to "connect" their beliefs about Jesus to ancient prophecies. They hoped that doing this would make their claims of Jesus as the Messiah more credible. Often the supposed prophecies are not even ABOUT the future messiah. For instance, the Bethlehem mentioned in the old testament is a PERSON, not the town.
    witchqueen

    Answer by witchqueen at 4:15 PM on Jun. 11, 2010

  • Where are you talking about, witchqueen? Not trying to fight, I'm genuinely curious, and think I may be able to explain that. Maybe not, though! =)
    MamaRae85

    Answer by MamaRae85 at 11:56 AM on Jun. 12, 2010

  • Okay, MamaRae, here's a couple from Dan Barker's book "Losing faith in faith". Barker is a former minister turned atheist, so he has MORE than a little knowlege of the bible. 1. Isaiah 7:14 says "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold a young woman shall conceive, and bare a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" Mary did not name ANY of her sons "Immanuel" or "Emmanuel", nor was Jesus ever referred to by that name by anyone in the bible. 2. Micah 5:2 says "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel..." Town? No. 1 Chron. 4:4 says "These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephratah, THE FATHER OF BETHLEHEM." A person. In addition Jesus NEVER ruled Israel and, to this day has not been made either king or governer.
    witchqueen

    Answer by witchqueen at 3:50 PM on Jun. 15, 2010

  • Now some from the biblical errrancy website: 1. Acts 2:30 states that the prophesied anointed one was to be born "of the fruit of his (David's) loins." Yet both of Jesus' geneologies in Matt. 1:1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 concern Joseph--who was supposedly NOT Jesus' father. His mother Mary was from the Aaronic line in the tribe of Levi. David's line came from Judah, not Levi. In addition, they are different lineages, one saying Joseph was the son Jacob and the other claiming he was the son of Heli. Are we talking about a same-sex couple here? Basically, Jesus could NOT have been born BOTH of the lineage of David and to a virgin (where no seed is, presumably, involved). And he has left no proof that he even existed in the first place.
    witchqueen

    Answer by witchqueen at 4:10 PM on Jun. 15, 2010

  • Thanks for replying, witchqueen! Sorry it took so long. I had forgotten I asked a question, so I didn't think to check back! Whoops!

    I do have replies to what you have brought up. Thank you for challenging my beliefs. I like to examine why I believe things. Now, my answers all come from the Bible, so please bear with me,

    1 Concerning "Emmanuel"- I have long thought that this was in reference not to His name but to what He would literally be known as. Indeed, Jesus is known as "God- WITH us". He was sent as a physical manifestation of God, so he actually became "God among us". The word was just never translated due to misunderstanding. This was one of the more difficult questions to answer, and I'm not completely satisfied with my answer, so I am continuing research on this subject.

    2 The first mention of Ephratah is in Genesis, referencing where Rachel, the mother of Israel (who is Joseph) and Benjamin died. CONTINUED
    MamaRae85

    Answer by MamaRae85 at 11:48 PM on Jun. 18, 2010

  • CONTINUED
    Bethlehem Ephratah simply refers to the city by a proper name, referencing the people who founded the city. When it says that Hur was the "father" of Bethlehem, it is still referring to Bethlehem the city. In the beginning of verse 4, it mentions Hur's sons, and Bethlehem is not mentioned as a son. The Hebrew word for father is also the word for "chief". Hur was the man who "founded" the city of Bethlehem, thus, he was the "father", or "chief" of Bethlehem.

    3 In reference to the genealogies of Jesus. He is referred to as Joseph's earthly son throughout the New Testament, so Joseph's lineage is included in Matthew, hence, why it refers to "Joseph, who is the husband of Mary", since biologically speaking, it was Mary whose lineage produced Jesus' biology. To answer this, Mary's lineage is the one referred to in Luke. Mary's name would not be included in the lineage since she was implied as being Joseph's wife. CONT
    MamaRae85

    Answer by MamaRae85 at 12:10 AM on Jun. 19, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN