Response to Apollos

I decided to open a new thread concerning the discussion about the apparent connection (as per the Christians) between Matthew 2 and Hosea 11, so as to not mix up with other issues. 

This is a response to Apollos:

"I realize that the followers of Jesus were Jews � that is why I said the Bible is a Jewish book."

The point I was making was that since the followers of Jesus were Jews, their use of the Old Testament would be based upon their understanding of it, the Jewish understanding, not a non-Jewish one.  The appeal to Hosea therefore is questionable since there is no Jewish claim that it was a reference to the Messiah as well as Israel.  The following is taken directly from a Jewish website:

"Matthew 2:13-15 makes the claim that Mary, Joseph, and Jesus fled to Egypt until recalled by an angel. This is supposedly in fulfillment of a prophecy: "Out of Egypt did I call My son." The source of the so-called prophecy is Hosea 11:1. However, in the context of the verse as found in Hosea there is no prophecy, but simply a restating of Israelite history.

What is more, the following verse in Hosea is a continuation of the prophet's statement. It says of those called out of Egypt that they sinned against God: "The more they [the prophets] called them, the more they went from them; they sacrificed to Baalim, and offered to graven images" (Hosea 11:2). The application of Hosea 11:1 to Jesus would, on the basis of verse 2, describe him, as well as Mary and Joseph, as sinners. If one reads Matthew's so-called fulfillment of prophecy within the context of that "prophecy" then one must consider that Jesus was a sinner."1

So, according to this Jewish perspective, there is 1) no prophecy being made and 2) no dual meanings.  If there was a dual meaning, as you claim, and Hosea 11 is referring both to Israel and the Messiah, then the obvious conclusion would be that the Messiah, like Israel, would be sinful, even to the point of worshipping pagan gods! 

"As for examples, I can give you many examples that are consistent with this perspective but the Bible doesn�t say: �pattern is prophecy�. Just as Hebrew poetry uses repetition instead of word rhymes. The Bible doesn�t say �use repetition instead of homonyms in your poetry�. These are cultural factors that existed not commandments from God. If one doesn�t keep these things in mind, they may end up reading in their own cultural perspective into the passages and it is just as reasonable to ask: Why do you think prophecy should be merely prediction and fulfillment?"

It sounds to me like you, a non-Jew, is trying to interpret the Bible, a Jewish book, through your own understanding, something you have warned me against doing. 

"When you claim that the mentioned verse in Hosea does not have a dual meaning, you are just stating your opinion. If one has to choose between you o Matthew, I will take Matthew�s. He at least was Jew. "

I just showed you the opinion of a Jew who disagrees with you.  Regarding Matthew (or whoever actually wrote the Gospel), he clearly did not look at the Bible from a traditional, Jewish perspective.  I may dare say that he was even unfamiliar with the scripture, since he was appealing to verses which were not even predictions and turning them into the fulfillment of his Christian understanding.

"Paul explains his Jewish perspective to Gentile believers � feast, foods and Sabbath days are types or shadows of the Messiah:

 

Col 2:16  Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

Col 2:17  Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."

Paul basically annulled the law, something Jesus did not do.  Jesus kept all the commandments.  He prayed, he fasted, he kept the Sabbath.  There were things that  Paul, upon his conversion, annulled.  I fail to see the dual meaning here.  Please clarify.

"God through Isaiah speaks against the King of Babylon and the Lucifer (Satan) simultaneously (dual meanings):

I saw no dual meaning.  Isaiah first speaks about the king of Babylon and then Satan in a different verse.  This is not like Hosea, who only mentioned Israel and not the Messiah.

"God through Ezekiel speaks against the King of Tyre and Satan simultaneously (dual meanings):"

Again, I see no dual meaning.  Where is the reference to Satan.  What I took away from the verses was that the king of Tyre was being warned about his sinful ways.  I tried to look for a Jewish commentary on Ezekiel 28, but all I found were Christian ones, which I would expect would not be reliable, since we have to look at the Old Testament from the Jewish perspective, not non-Jewish ones.  Can you provide a Jewish commentary on this chapter?

"After Abraham performed the drama of offering his son as a sacrifice, he declares that this was a pattern or foreshadow of what God would do in the future:

Gen 22:14  And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh (Jehovah Will See): as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen. "

Regarding the name of the place, what version of the Bible are you using?  According to the NIV, the place was called "The Lord will provide."2  This changes a lot of what you are claiming.  And even if there were a dual meaning here, it certainly is up to interpretation as to what the second meaning is.  You don't sound too sure.

"(If this drama foreshadows Jesus, the parallels are astounding.  It is the first time in the Bible that the word �love� is used. For three days the Father (Abraham) travels with his son already dead in his mind. Yet he knew that God had promised to produce a great nation through his son who had no children yet - so he must have expected his son to be raised from the dead after the sacrifice. The wood of the offering was laid on the son who bore it to the place of the sacrifice. Because he loved the Father, the Son submitted himself to the Father�s will. The Father was willing to allow his son to die for the sins of others. Mount Moriah �where this all took place - is later called Golgotha where Jesus was crucified.)"

All of this is based on your understanding, you a non-Jew.  What is the Jewish perspective? 

The moral of the story was that God was testing Abraham, to see if he would do whatever was asked of him.  The angel even says "Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.'"3 

You cannot possibly know what was going through Abraham's mind when he was given the task of sacrificing his son.  The Bible certainly does not tell us much.  

Regarding Mount Moriah, it was my understanding that it was the site of the Temple in Jerusalem.  Golgotha is not.  On what do you base the claim that Golgotha is the same place as Mount Moriah? 

"There are many other similar examples. In each case it is the prophet of God who writes the message or a later prophet who informs us what their message means. It is not for you to decide."

I think you should practice what you preach.  By the way, Matthew was not a prophet.