tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post6842051215329877380..comments2023-06-16T07:01:52.541-07:00Comments on The Blog of Dr. T. Michael W. Halcomb: Jesus & Prophecy: Jesus' Birth In Context, Pt. 2TMWHhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06807155020816222182noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-89732408854829162622008-12-08T09:05:00.000-08:002008-12-08T09:05:00.000-08:00Craig,I'm encouraged by your comments; I'm...Craig,<br>I'm encouraged by your comments; I'm glad you're finding the series helpful. I just posted the most recent installment (pt. 4). As for breaking out the cyclical mould, I would say "yes", to some degree. However, it is hard to pinpoint exactly "how much" that happened. Yet, we still see remnants of it in the NT too: see this post: http://michaelhalcomb.blogspot.com/2008/11/time-of-jesus-crucifixion-in-mark-and.htmlT. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-70029932949607433742008-12-08T08:37:00.000-08:002008-12-08T08:37:00.000-08:00Thanks for your perspective. I'm reading along...Thanks for your perspective. I'm reading along, though I've gotten a little behind. I like your perspective and find it helpful. However, doesn't the OT (linear) account of Israelite history indicate to us that the Hebrews actually <i>were</i> able to break out of the cyclical view — at least to some extent?Craig L. Adamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08351091412370400350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-10123098476284918232008-12-04T12:45:00.000-08:002008-12-04T12:45:00.000-08:00Sphodra / George, Thanks for your comments. I def...Sphodra / George, Thanks for your comments. I definitely get what you're saying here. I think that at the root, you and I understand Israel's hopes for a Messiah differently...but maybe not. For me, they weren't "predicting" that it would happen, they knew it would. The question is "when"? (Of course, that's still a debate today.) The NT writers were attempted to say "now". Not because "predictions" came true but rather, because they realized who Jesus was. To make their case, they were constantly recasting Him in terms of OT language and imagery. <br><br>I would encourage you to continue to think on it. I definitely will continue to monitor my own views as well. Keep participating in the discussion.<br><br>-tmwhT. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-6357443991111269452008-12-04T12:04:00.000-08:002008-12-04T12:04:00.000-08:00I'm definitely not totally sold on what you...I'm definitely not totally sold on what you're saying, but I'm willing to listen more and give this line of reasoning a fair shake. Context is definitely important... but I think we must be careful not to swing the pendulum too far thinking our own modes of thinking are completely out of phase with past generations.<br><br>I'm definitely of the mind that we can over-interpret the author's original intent. Maybe there are many instances where "fulfilled" is intended more as reuse than as "fulfilled". But I don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. I believe that first-century Christians DID consider the events of Jesus life and death as completing prophetic scripture (and that much is yet to still be done). And trying to eradicate perceived differences and misunderstandings by dismissing it as over-reading seems to go too far. What I'm saying is - sometimes appropriate, but careful...<br><br>I'm still learning (always!), so take this as, "I'll consider it and be watchful of my own assumptions"; not as "You're wrong and a heretic."<br><br>Grace and peace!<br>Georgesphodrahttp://sphodra.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-8271482980255322142008-12-04T10:22:00.000-08:002008-12-04T10:22:00.000-08:00Scott,I think many share your sentiments. There c...Scott,<br>I think many share your sentiments. There certainly is something to be said for reading Gospel narratives like they were supposed to be read/heard and then reading them like a "moral" or "counseling" manual today. No doubt, you're right on target with that!!!T. Michael W. Halcombhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01119080394574322124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3839131113481621095.post-67632083702917788912008-12-04T10:11:00.000-08:002008-12-04T10:11:00.000-08:00I used to loathe Matthew for his unartful and desp...I used to loathe Matthew for his unartful and desperate-seeming appropriation of OT texts. Now I realize that Matthew's audience would not see his account that way. First century Jews expected their sacred literature to borrow aspects of the scriptures (the OT, of course) and apply them to figures in contemporary works. It is our modern Western mind set that treats the Gospels as literal God-manuals rather than as literature written with a purpose and audience in mind. Viewed from the first century these are not as inflammatory as they appear to us reading them today.Scott Fergusonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03089281236217906531noreply@blogger.com