It will shock most Christians to learn that there is no prophecy that the messiah will be born in בֵּֽית־לֶ֣חֶם / Beit Lĕḥĕm (aka Bethlehem. Yet again the Christian bible authors took a biblical passage from the T'nach and twisted it -- even reversing it. Michah / Micah 5:1 (2 in Christian translations) says “But as for you, Beit Lĕḥĕm–Ĕfratah... (you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah (so small you aren't even counted)- (but) from you [the messiah] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from early times (days of old).”
Why is the "too small" important? Because Matthew reverses it. Micah: “But as for you, Beit Lĕḥĕm–Ĕfratah... you are too small to be among the thousands of Judah (so small you aren't even counted)- Matthew: "'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.'" you are too small ≠ by no means least Opposite. When Micah says "from you [the messiah] shall emerge for Me" doesn't that mean he must be born in Bethlehem? Nope. The T'nach tells us time and time and time again that the messiah must be a descendant of King David and his son, Solomon. Read Shmuel Alef / 1 Samuel 17:12, Divrei Hayamim Alef / 1 Chronicles 22:9-10, And while you're at it read M'lachim Alef / 1 Kings 8:15-20; Divrei Hayamim Alef / 1 Chronicles 17:11-15, 22:9-10, and 28:3-7. The T'nach (bible) states that the messiah must be a physical offspring of both David and Solomon. Jesus fails this test (virgin birth). Having established that the messiah must be a descendant of King David -- have you ever asked yourself where David came from? That is right: בֵּֽית־לֶ֣חֶם / Beit Lĕḥĕm (aka Bethlehem), or to be more specific, בֵּ֥ית לֶ֙חֶם֙ יְהוּדָ֔ה / Beit Lĕḥĕm–Ĕfratah. "וְדָוִד֩ בֶּן־אִ֨ישׁ אֶפְרָתִ֜י הַזֶּ֗ה מִבֵּ֥ית לֶ֙חֶם֙ יְהוּדָ֔ה" / "And David was the son of this Ephrathite man from Bethlehem of Y'hudah (Judah)." Shmuel Alef / 1 Samuel 17:12. The prophet Micah is echoing what we have already been told in the bible: the messiah will be a descendant of David -- who was from the House of לֶ֙חֶם֙ / Lĕḥĕm of יְהוּדָ֔ה / Ĕfratah (not the one in the Galilee). One way to know that Micah is speaking of the messiah being descended from David, and not that the messiah will be born in the town of Bethelehm, is to read a portion of Micah that Matthew conveniently ignores: "וּמֹוצָאֹתָ֥יו מִקֶּ֖דֶם מִימֵ֥י עֹולָֽם" / "and his origin is from of old, from days of old." The messiah's origins go back to ancient times: to the tribe of Y'hudah (Judah) as prophesied by Jacob (Israel) in the book of B'reshit / Genesis! See B'reshit / Genesis 49:10. Christian translations try to twist Michah / Micah 5:1 (2 in Christian translations) to somehow fit Jesus. "from days of old." magically becomes "eternally." Yet, as with so many "proof texts" (a biblical passage which missionaries point to as being about Jesus) -- the mangled translation disappears in passages not viewed as being Jesus prophecies. So while the Holman Christian Standard Bible, New American Standard Bible, International Standard Version and others have "eternity" -- and the King James has "from everlasting" they translate the exact same phrase more accurately as "from old days" in other biblical passages: יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / "days of the past." Isaiah 63:9, Holman Christian Standard Bible, יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / / "days of old" Isaiah 63:9, New American Standard Bible. יְמֵ֥י עֹולָֽם / / "days of old" Isaiah 63:9, International Standard Version Why do those three translations (and many others) incorrectly translate the passage as "eternity" ONLY when they think it points to Jesus, but get it correct in other instances? Isaiah 63:9 is joined by other passages including In Isaiah 63:11 the Holman has "days of the past" while the New American Standard (NASB) has "days of old.." Micah is not saying the messiah is somehow divine: from eternity. No, Micah is stating that the messiah comes from a very old, very long family tree -- pointing back to the tribe of Y'hudah (Judah) and its kings David and Solomon.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Photos used under Creative Commons from dionhinchcliffe, paulasenciogonzalez, paulasenciogonzalez, amy32080, petersbar, Aaron Stokes, amboo who?, Damian Gadal, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Midwest Region, SharonaGott, Udo Schröter, paulasenciogonzalez, Joybot, zeevveez, ianmunroe, freeqstyler, quinn.anya, Ivy Nichols, Groman123, UnknownNet Photography, torbakhopper, “Caveman Chuck” Coker, CarbonNYC [in SF!], dgoomany, Lion Multimedia Production U.S.A., oldandsolo, dbeck03