View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2009, 11:00 AM
Just_A_Guy's Avatar
Just_A_Guy Just_A_Guy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United States -
Posts: 2,126
Thanks: 581
Thanked 1,134 Times in 728 Posts
Laughs: 166
Laughs at 289 Times in 158 Posts
Default

Enlil-An, I agree with you that Matthew sometimes takes unwarranted liberties with his interpretations of Jewish prophecy.

That said, you seem to be (to use the classic legal terminology) "drawing inference upon inference".

Your apparent assumption that Jesus was not born at Bethlehem seems to be drawn from, among other things, the unwarranted assumptions that a) Matthew tells us why Joseph feared to subject himself to Archelaus' rule (in fact, he does not), and b) Matthew's "a city called Nazareth" verbiage means that Matthew is hinting that neither Joseph nor Mary had had any prior connection with that city (as opposed to, say, simply introducing a new and relatively obscure location into the narrative).

If you're using that assumption to assert that Jesus wasn't really born in Bethlehem, that Nephi's account is wrong, and/or that the GAs are suspect because they don't buy into the prior two assertions--that just isn't a bandwagon I'm willing to jump onto.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Just_A_Guy For This Useful Post:
JohnnyRudick (05-10-2009), Maxel (05-08-2009), Maya (05-09-2009), pam (05-08-2009), prospectmom (05-08-2009)