Ancient Seed of Life

IceAgeCivilizations said:
The prophets, such as Isaiah and Zechariah, as well as King David, would give the predicted details about the incarnation of Jesus, and Moses knew the story of Abraham and Isaac, how God told Abraham to kill his innocent son as an act of obedience, which presaged what the Father would do to His Son, willingly accepted by the Son, just like Issac seems to have accepted his apparent fate at the hand of his father, so the concept of the sacrificed son, in relationship to the lamb sacrifice (which God provided in lieu of Issac), was probably quite real to the ancient Hebrews.
Click to expand...


Could not then have Moses been talking about Abraham in that verse then?

The point is, if Isaiah, Zechariah, and King David could find it in themselves to be clear with their prophesies about Jesus, then why couldn't Moses.

One other thing. Is the "heel crush/seed enmity" verse posted above the only writing of Moses which could possibly prophesize the coming of Jesus? Surely Moses would have written more about it if he believed in a Messiah.
 
Abraham lived 600 years before Moses, and the prophecies became very specific over time, down through the prophets after David, as the time for the Incarnation neared. And Daniel 9 reveals that the Messiah would be "cut off" 483 years after the command by the Persians to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem.
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
That the Messiah would not have a human father is revealed in saying "seed of the woman," and the head wound signifies death (eternal torment) for the evil one, while the heal wound (Jesus' crucificiction) did not count Him out, just a speed bump 'til He resurrected three days later.
Click to expand...
How does a heel wound translate into crucifition? :confused:
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
The prophets, such as Isaiah and Zechariah, as well as King David, would give the predicted details about the incarnation of Jesus, and Moses knew the story of Abraham and Isaac, how God told Abraham to kill his innocent son as an act of obedience, which presaged what the Father would do to His Son, willingly accepted by the Son, just like Issac seems to have accepted his apparent fate at the hand of his father, so the concept of the sacrificed son, in relationship to the lamb sacrifice (which God provided in lieu of Issac), was probably quite real to the ancient Hebrews.
Click to expand...
The Bible is full of stories and characters that were known and retold throughout the early civilisations - all showing similar plots, lineage, ideas, fables etc, with names and places altered.
It is not therefore surprising that the same basic story (father obediently kills son at command of higher power) is retold over again as this reinforces the idea within the reader.

If a God continually tells someone to obey them unfalteringly (e.g. kill their own son), and then kills his own son by way of example, but that through obeisance they will achieve greatness - this reinforces in the populace that obeying the almighty power - whether that be God or a ruler that claims himself a god - is a good thing to do.

There is still nothing in here that suggests the OT Bible is anything more a collection of well-known stories and fables. There is some accuracy of place names - but then there is in vast amounts of fictional accounts of history.
 
Historical fiction, IceAgeCivilizations?

Let's take a look at the novel Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott.

Premise 1: The setting of Ivanhoe is England, while the Crusades continue in the Holy Land.

Premise 2: The Crusades occurred

Conclusion: Ivanhoe exists.

Do you see the flaw in this logic?
 
IceAgeCivilizations said:
"Vast amounts of fictional accounts of history," care to name several of the "vast amounts?"
Click to expand...
Where to start:

David Gemmell:
"Stones of Power" series (Ghost King, Lost Sword of Power) that deal with ancient Britain. (These even have MAGIC in them... or should I call them MIRACLES.)
"Troy" series - that unsurprisingly deals with Troy.
"Lion of Macedon" and "Dark Prince" that deal with Alexander the Great.

Stephen Lawhead
Pendragon cycle - that again deals with ancient Britain - and more accurately with the legend of Arthur.

Thomas Mallory
Le Mort D'Arthur - the quintessential stories of Arthurian legend (and a pain in the arse to read!)

Bernard Cornwell
Sharpe's anything really - there are so many of them.

C.S.Forrester
Hornblower series.

These are just some of the ones I have read, but I can start providing you with a list of others, if you really want.
I suggest you look up "Historical Fiction" in something like Wikipedia, or "Alternate History" - some such.

All these books I've mentioned - and this barely scratches the surface of what is out there - can give accurate dates for some event or other, can give accurate place names. But they mix it up with fiction.

The only difference between these other books and the Bible might well be that noone has yet found the front page of the Bible that says "All events portrayed in this novel are fictional and any resemblence to persons living or dead is purely coincidental."
 
You mean other than the world being created in 7 days?
Or there being a world-wide flood?

Or do you want me to be more specific?

someone said:
The history and geography of the book of Judith appear to be inaccurate.

"The historical setting of the book of Judith does not square with recorded history; this is an indication of the literary form. The author is not writing history as we understand it. The book has been called a 'historical romance.' The situation is the following: Nebuchadnezzar, king of Assyria, decides to invade Israel. He sends his general Holofernes with an army of 120,000 soldiers and 12,000 cavalry to the West. They camp near Bethulia in Israel (there is no record of a city by that name)."

International Catholic University http://www.catholicity.com/school/icu/c03005.htm

"The historical authenticity of the book is open to question, for it contains serious errors relating to historical and geographical details, but the story is often considered a symbolic representation and celebration of chastity."

B. M. Metzger and M. D. Coogan (eds.), The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Oxford, 1993), pp. 399-402.
Click to expand...
for starters...?

I am not saying that the Bible IS historically inaccurate in terms of all places or the major events - but then neither are many historical fiction - with only the central characters and maybe the odd event here and there being fictitious.
But if you wish to hold to the Bible being word-for-word accurate about all things then feel free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top