When Q said it was going to be Biblical, I don’t think of that primarily in terms of scale. I think of it in terms of prophecy being fulfilled. It leads me to believe we are living in time when that is happening, and that prophecies are right now being fulfilled in ways that are quite different from what people have been taught to believe about them. For example, no one could have reconciled the many prophecies about the Messiah until they looked back at them in hindsight, even though they thought they had it pretty well worked out at the time. The prophets said the Messiah would come from Egypt, from Nazareth, and from Bethlehem, and only after His advent did people understand how those three things fit together without creating a paradox. The powers that did be at the time completely rejected Him because He didn’t fit into the box they made from their interpretations of prophecy (the conquering hero), even though He was fulfilling prophecy by doing unprecedented miracles right in front of their eyes. The same sort of interpretive box-making is still going on today, in precious doctrines of men people think are the doctrines of God, and neither will they see it when prophecy begins to unfold all around them.
In light of all that, I think it would be good to consider how the following prophecies might relate to current events:
(Psalm 2: 1-6, NKJV) Why do the nations rage, And the people plot a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, And the rulers take counsel together, Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, “Let us break their bonds in pieces And cast away their cords from us.” He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision. Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, And distress them in His deep displeasure: “Yet I have set My King On My holy hill of Zion.”
(Isaiah 24:21-22, NKJV) It shall come to pass in that day That the Lord will punish on high the host of exalted ones, And on the earth the kings of the earth. They will be gathered together, As prisoners are gathered in the pit, And will be shut up in the prison; After many days they will be punished.
(Revelation 18:1-3) After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory. And he cried mightily with a loud voice, saying, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird! For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich through the abundance of her luxury.”
(Revelation 18:7-8, NKJV) In the measure that she glorified herself and lived luxuriously, in the same measure give her torment and sorrow; for she says in her heart, ‘I sit as queen, and am no widow, and will not see sorrow.’ Therefore her plagues will come in one day—death and mourning and famine. And she will be utterly burned with fire, for strong is the Lord God who judges her.
I realize am presenting these scriptures out of context, to which some might rightly object; but even though I am a great fan of context, there is much that can be inferred in these sections of texts. I only present them here for consideration in light of world events and in light of what we know has been happening behind what we can see. We know what Babylon is. We know that God is taking it down. We know that the great ones of the earth have conspired to drive God out of the consciousness of mankind. We know they are facing punishment for their crimes. And, we know that God has already won the war before they ever picked up a sword.
Free note: In Psalm 2, “Yet I have set My King on my holy hill of Zion.” “My King,” is Jesus. Zion is the hill of King David’s city where the king’s palace was and where the Temple of God would be erected by his son. This is a metaphor declaring that God has complete and utter control in spite of whatever his enemies might plot against Him.
The Jews of antiquity didn't look at prophecy quite the way we do. They saw the meaning in it differently. Egypt - Hosea 11:1, referenced in Matthew 2:15 as speaking of Jesus. Nazareth - referenced in Matthew 2:23, is not from any particular prophecy but may be by inference from various prophecies saying the Messiah would be despised. Bethlehem - Micah 5:2, referenced in Matthew 2:6, a solid prediction about where Messiah would be born.
That's a whimsical argument. If they would have viewed it like you claim, they would have all mass converted to Christianity, but they didn't. The other gospels don't make these claims either.
Actual text: Hosea 11:1-3: "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and from Egypt I called to my son. They were called, yet they went from their face; they sacrificed unto the Baalim, and offered to graven images. And I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by their arms; but they didn't know that I healed them..."
Pray tell how do you understand this to be talking about a Messiah? This is chastising the people of Israel for worshiping other things, after God took them out of Egypt and raised them up.
Citation needed.
Solid isn't the word I'd use.
"And you Bethlehem of Ephratha, small among the thousands of Judah, from you there will be my ruler of Israel, his lineage from earlier days."
You can understand this as either the Messiah is from Bethlehem, or that the Messiah is from David who was from Bethlehem. It's certainly not "solid" that the Messiah must be from Bethlehem, as being descendant from David would fit the requirement.
That was quick. Were you just waiting around for my answer? First quote: you make an assumption to prove your point, which is intellectually lazy and too ridiculous to answer. Second quote: I know this text and what it speaks of. Matthew, who knew Jesus, referred to this text as being (also) a reference to the Messiah, and I think you should trust him, even if it seems like he is plucking out a portion to prove his point. It also supports my point about how spiritual Jews in his time handled prophecy differently from our modern linear intellectual approach. Third quote: I have given you enough citations. Your unkind prideful insulting tone tells me you are not looking to engage in a civil discussion of ideas but looking for things to shoot me down, and I will not give you any more ammunition. If it bothers you that much, go study the Bible for yourself. Fourth quote: I would counsel you not to try to handle spiritual things like prophecy with only your intellect. It is an insufficient tool. Jesus rebuked his disciples when they got offended with his words doing just that. But I will say this: when the magi came before Herod to find the birthplace of the Messiah, the Jewish scribes searching the matter told him unequivocally that it was Bethlehem, and Micah 5:2 was the scripture that would have led them to say that.
This is as far as I wish to pursue this discussion because it is obvious where you would lead it, but apart from that, I would counsel you to learn to be kind. Learn how to defend your own dignity by defending the dignity of your opponent. It is a lie that you have to prove yourself superior to be loved. Having your self-esteem depend upon the humiliation of others is bad enough, but trying to make their humiliation happen through our own actions and words will not bring the result you are hoping for. It will win you no one's esteem in the end.
No, I actually just happened to long in a minute or two after you responded, and saw I had a new reply waiting.
You really studied Micah?
Also, Christian scholars today agree that the book of Matthew was not necessarily written by anyone named Matthew, and was probably written a good 50 years after the events depicted: https://evidenceforchristianity.org/did-the-apostle-matthew-write-the-gospel-of-matthew-and-when-can-we-assert-he-wrote-it/
Seeing that most of the so-called fulfillment prophecies quote phantom verses, or seem to butcher earlier texts, why should I trust this book? If you studied the earlier prophets, this would become quite apparent. The other Gospels do not make all these claims. Being that Matthew is the oddity here, why should I take this as reference for anything that was understood at the time?
You last sentence is actually the point I'm making. I have studied the Bible for myself. I cannot find any "prophecies saying the Messiah would be despised" in the Old Testament. I can only imagine people who never studied the Old Testament would believe this. My fervent wish is that more people would study the whole Bible.
According to this logic, the Prophets should have kept their mouths shut because no one could understand them. On the contrary, my belief is that the Prophets spoke to the common man in their day, and the common man understood what they had to say. Otherwise, why would Jeremiah orate everyday in the marketplace?
You're trying to defend the book of Matthew by quoting other evidence invented by the book of Matthew. The other Gospels do not have the magi asking Herod to find the birthplace of the Messiah. The story is also somewhat nonsensical, because if the magi are following the star (whatever that means), why bother asking Herod anything? Just keep following the star. As I said earlier though, Micah 5 could indicate that the Messiah should also be born in Bethlehem, but it does not necessarily mean that, as it could mean his royal lineage began in Bethlehem.
Isaiah 53:3
He is despised and rejected by men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
Apparently, you didn’t study all of the Bible.
Christian scholars today agree. Really? You say something like that here? And, don’t talk to me about logic when you keep using straw man arguments to prove your points.
It seems your only purpose to try to tear down my faith and discredit every single thing I say. Just stop. I'm not impressed, and I will no longer respond to you. Go troll somebody else with your learned unbelief.