It is jaw-dropping how the Church to back up Jesus' claim that the Old Testament was about him will show you texts that supposedly predict him which clearly are ripped out of their real context. The Church also uses a Greek translation instead of the original Hebrew.  The real wording does not help them at all.  So they find some texts that seem to help in their non-scripture.  And as there is a shortage, even then they have to lie and invent prophecies.

Matthew claimed that a text that was not about Jesus at all actually predicted he would be born of a virgin.  It does not say virgin even!

To deal with that, Christians try to have their cake and eat it.  So they say it does not predict Jesus on the face of it but there is another layer.  Scratching beneath the surface that is really just imagining things into the text.

Farrell Till - writes on this.  He calls it the Double-Application Dodge.
"To deal with contextual problems like the one in Isaiah's virgin-birth prophecy, bibliolaters have invented the double-application doctrine. "Yes, the prophecy in Isaiah did refer primarily to an immediate situation," they admit, "but it contained also, as did many other prophecies, a double-entendre that, in this case, makes it applicable to the birth of Jesus too." Contextual evidence, of course, necessitates their admission that prophecies such as this one were indeed intended for the times in which they were made, but if inerrantists are going to claim a "double-application" of Isaiah 7:14, they have a responsibility to do more than just claim. They must also prove. If Isaiah really had a double-meaning in mind, then who was the virgin of that generation who gave birth to a son? That is a legitimate question, because if Isaiah meant virgin in the strictest sense with reference to a woman who would give birth 700 years later, then he had to mean virgin in the strictest sense for the woman of his time who would bear a son. If not, why not?

The truth is that evidence to prove a double-application theory isn't so easy to come by. In this case, we have nothing--absolutely nothing--but Matthew's unsubstantiated word that the birth of Jesus fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy. Isaiah said nothing in the context of the original passage to imply a double intention, and none of the other gospel writers in recording the circumstances of Jesus's birth in any way related the event to Isaiah's prophecy. This latter fact seems particularly significant in the case of Luke whose gospel account included many more details about both the annunciation of the birth and the actual event itself than did any of the others. Mark and John, in fact, were completely silent about the birth. Doesn't it seem strange, then, that this remarkable "prophecy fulfillment" would have been treated with silence by three of the four "inspired" writers who recorded the life of Jesus? Only Matthew mentioned it, and that is the sum total of the proof we have that Jesus's birth fulfilled Isaiah's "prophecy.""
I would add that Matthew would need to be a psychic to know if Isaiah or God had a double meaning. Why would God predict something that made sense in Isaiah's day as if that was more important than the conception of Jesus the Messiah? Why are all the major things in Jesus' life accompanied by double application style alleged prophecies? Do not forget that even today most believers think the prophecies are great for they look good out of context and few bother or care to look. Matthew was definitely overstretching his case for Jesus and lying.
Till refers to a verse from the Old Testament that shows all this prophecy stuff is just populist rubbish. God says to Jeremiah, "At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to break down and to destroy it, if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do to them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if they do that which is evil in my sight, that they obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, with which I said I would benefit them (18: 7-10). So if the Bible predicts a Messiah who never comes it just means that God cancelled the plan to send one. Any book can be passed off as the word of God with that disclaimer! Go and write your own Bible then and predict until your heart is content.

Jesus’ central credential, the prophecies that spoke of him, proves that he was not the Son of God or the Messiah. And that is because the credential is based on bizarre and strained understandings of the prophecies.  And in fact many of the prophecies are not prophecies at all.  And the prophecies are from an inaccurate Greek translation.  For somebody that was so into the written word of God and promoting it and who would have left footprints in sand why couldn't he invent printing?
Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania, undated
Are There Hidden Codes in the Bible? Ralph O Muncaster, Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon, 2000
Attack on the Bible, John R Rice, Sword of the Lord, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1965
Bible Dictionary and Concordance, New American Bible, Catholic Edition, CD Stampley Enterprises, Charlotte Enterprises, Inc, North Carolina, 1971
Encyclopaedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason W Archer, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982
Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Vol 1, Alpha, Scripture Press Foundation, Bucks, 1995
God’s Word, Final, Infallible and Forever, Floydd C McElveen, Gospel Truth Ministries, Grand Rapids, 1985
In Search of Certainty, John Guest, Regal Books, Ventura, California, 1983
Jesus Hypotheses, V Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
Science and the Bible, Henry Morris, Moody Press, Bucks, 1988
Science Speaks, Peter W Stoner, Robert C Newman, Moody Press, Chicago, 1976
The Bible Code, Michael Drosnin, Orion, London, 2000
The Case for Jesus the Messiah, John Ankerberg Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1989
The Hard Sayings of Jesus, FF Bruce, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1983
The Late Great Planet Earth, Hal Lindsay, Lakeland, London, 1974
The Signature of God, Grant R Jeffrey, Marshall Pickering, London, 1998
The Truth Behind the Bible Code, Dr Jeffrey Satinover, Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1997
The Truth of Christianity, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
The Unauthorised Version, Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992
The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1973
Theodore Parker’s Discourses, Theodore Parker, Longmans, Green, Rader and Dyer, London, 1876
Whatever Happened to Heaven, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1988


No Copyright