chuna1985:



Lmao, who needs to pick up the scriptures n tear it apart, lol. Is there any need to tear apart a book where donkeys talk to people n sharks swallow people n vomit dem 3 days later, that's same with Jack the giants killer movie. Lol.


Try telling ur parents that God spoke to u through ur neighbours dog, n find ur self in yaba left.

Lol! is it not the same as you saying that primitive men had the technology to see the milky way. With sand and sticks and metal.

Jeromejnr:


Are you back from your long research.

I thought you were smart and knew everything. You are supposed to be teaching me here.

Anyways since science can't give a definite answer, they aproximated it would have been btw these timeline. 2100-1800 B.C.

Who approximated it


Pls don't display foolishnessness again, so u fink I live on nairaland U fink I will be here every second of the day replying ur messages...Lol.

chuna1985:




Who approximated it


Pls don't display foolishnessness again, so u fink I live on nairaland U fink I will be here every second of the day replying ur messages...Lol.

Since you know why don't you tell us. I have my articles here and ready.

Jeromejnr:


Lol! is it not the same as you saying that primitive men had the technology to see the milky way. With sand and sticks and metal.

Do ubknow what astrology is

Jeromejnr:


Since you know why don't you tell us. I have my articles here and ready.

Normal Christian self deception.

chuna1985:



Do ubknow what astrology is

Dude my lifetime dream when I was younger was to be an astronomer also followed by being an archeologist. I love solving mysteries.

So before you try to feel smart with yourself, make sure you make concrete claims cause I am not ignorant.

chuna1985:


Normal Christian self deception.

You are the one that is deceiving yourself because you are not been reasonable.

Jeromejnr:


Dude my lifetime dream when I was younger was to be an astronomer also followed by being an archeologist. I love solving mysteries.

So before you try to feel smart with yourself, make sure you make concrete claims cause I am not ignorant.

Self acclaimed smart non-ignorant nigga, astronomy n astrology ain't same

chuna1985:



Self acclaimed smart non-ignorant nigga, astronomy n astrology ain't same

Now I know, I have been talking to an unlearned person.

"Astronomy is a natural science which is the study of celestial objects (such as stars, galaxies, planets, moons, asteroids, comets and nebulae), the physics, chemistry, and evolution of such objects, and phenomena that originate outside the atmosphere of Earth, including supernovae..."

Thanks anyway for acknowledgding that I am smart.

adullam210:

read the book of Daniel you will see it there that 'Knowledge shall increase'

Lol. Good prediction. Knowledge has increased to the extent that we have realized religion is bullshit.

Still nothing on electricity though.

Jeromejnr:


Now I know, I have been talking to an unlearned person.

"Astronomy is a natural science which is the study of celestial objects (such as stars, galaxies, planets, moons, asteroids, comets and nebulae), the physics, chemistry, and evolution of such objects, and phenomena that originate outside the atmosphere of Earth, including supernovae..."

Thanks anyway for acknowledgding that I am smart.

Astronomy n Astrology ain't same

chuna1985:



Astronomy n Astrology ain't same

Hmph! In order for me not to beat round the bush.

So you are trying to say that Pseudoscience was used to discover the gravitational pull of the stars?

If yes prove it.

Jeromejnr:


You just wasted your time writing nothing. Leaving out the scripture I gave you and talking smack about God.

That is how they always behave when they have no explanation for anything. SMH.

Btw @ the bolded was a very useless assumption just to try to get your silly point across.

Let me lay it out for you;

Your bible, the Qur'an, the Jewish Torah and all other holy books are the same; Words of men, explaining their (limited) understanding of the world at the time they were written.

All the 4000 religions in the world, including yours are all the same; human inventions, born of fear and ignorance, attributing things that mankind could not explain to the supernatural.

In the 500+ years since humanity took the bold step to start looking for rational explanations to 'natural phenomena', we've made more advancements than any other period in human history.

If your God is the God of heaven and earth, then he is a very very small god. Our solar system is smaller than a tiny dot when placed in a map of the observable universe.

Learn a little. Free your mind from the shackles of indoctrination and religious propaganda.

Anas09:
Thank you @JeromeJnr.

Biblical prophecies and these guys kicking against the pricks (to their own hurt) are the reason I believe that am in the right direction. Christianity is True.
I was hoping that the light weight Meneseh and Chuna will pick up the scriptures and tear them up, bring out the lies and inaccuracies in them, and make me change my mind about what I believe, but instead, they once again displayed their foolishness, and make me hold firmly to my beliefs.
And the other guy Chizzled06 if you don't ve what to say just shut it. You must not appear whenever a thread is opened.

And what is it that you believe?

I think I know where we can begin. You think the bible is all the unedited words of a supreme being, don't you?

Let's start with the creation story. You think that's how humans came into existence?

Chizzled06:


Let me lay it out for you;

Your bible, the Qur'an, the Jewish Torah and all other holy books are the same; Words of men, explaining their (limited) understanding of the world at the time they were written.

All the 4000 religions in the world, including yours are all the same; human inventions, born of fear and ignorance, attributing things that mankind could not explain to the supernatural.

In the 500+ years since humanity took the bold step to start looking for rational explanations to 'natural phenomena', we've made more advancements than any other period in human history.

If your God is the God of heaven and earth, then he is a very very small god. Our solar system is smaller than a tiny dot when placed in a map of the observable universe.

Learn a little. Free your mind from the shackles of indoctrination and religious propaganda.

Let me also lay it out for you, I talk science and facts and not assumptions like you just did.

Why don't you bring up facts to refute the argument instead of giving us your own opinions.

BTW, why don't you help your friend explain how primitive men knew about the gravitational pull of the Orion and its friend.

Chizzled06:


And what is it that you believe?

I think I know where we can begin. You think the bible is all the unedited words of a supreme being, don't you?

Let's start with the creation story. You think that's how humans came into existence?

I am guessing from your own theory humans came from monkeys.

Jeromejnr:


I am guessing from your own theory humans came from monkeys.

Not exactly. Humans and monkeys evolved from the same common ancestor. Understand the theory first.

And yours? You believe mankind is 6000 years old? Really?

Chizzled06:


Not exactly. Humans and monkeys evolved from the same common ancestor. Understand the theory first.

And yours? You believe mankind is 6000 years old? Really?

Na don't push the question to me.

What was the common ancestor?

Why is it that Centuries have passed and we have not seen any evolution even by a small margin?

How is it that after men and monkeys all evolved from a common ancestor, humans happened to have different language consciousness from the monkeys and also how various primitive humans had different language factors?

Jeromejnr:


Let me also lay it out for you, I talk science and facts and not assumptions like you just did.

Why don't you bring up facts to refute the argument instead of giving us your own opinions.

BTW, why don't you help your friend explain how primitive men knew about the gravitational pull of the Orion and its friend.

Science? Facts? That's laughable because 'sensible' religious people run from those two things.

Science and religion have been at war since the days of Galileo; the first man to claim the earth revolves around the sun, imprisoned by the church for his heretic views.

No 1 scientific fact: The bible is nothing but a fictional book. Have you noticed it's NEVER quoted in any scientific discipline?

In fact, the foundations of biology (evolution) and physics(big bang) completely contradict biblical claims.

And then paleontology, anthropology, astronomy.

They knew nothing about gravitation, my friend. That's why the bible claims there's a 'firmament' preventing heavenly bodies from falling onto the earth.

"One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad."

Chizzled06:


Science? Facts? That's laughable because 'sensible' religious people run from those two things.

Science and religion have been at war since the days of Galileo; the first man to claim the earth revolves around the sun, imprisoned by the church for his heretic views.

No 1 scientific fact: The bible is nothing but a fictional book. Have you noticed it's NEVER quoted in any scientific discipline?

In fact, the foundations of biology (evolution) and physics(big bang) completely contradict biblical claims.

And then paleontology, anthropology, astronomy.

They knew nothing about gravitation, my friend. That's why the bible claims there's a 'firmament' preventing heavenly bodies from falling onto the earth.

"One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad."

Oh enlightened one.

So you're more smarter than the scientists that said the Genesis account and the Big Bang are in harmony?

They knew nothing about gravitation but talked about the gravitational pull of the Orion and Plaeidas which some scientists have even written a book on.

The knew nothing about biology and others but declared in Genesis that all creation is based on space, matter and time.

They new nothing but yet claimed the earth was in a circle.

If you don't know how to refute the argument then just like that lady said to you, Keep quiet.

Jeromejnr:


Na don't push the question to me.

What was the common ancestor?

Why is it that Centuries have passed and we have not seen any evolution even by a small margin?

How is it that after men and monkeys all evolved from a common ancestor, humans happened to have different language consciousness from the monkeys and also how various primitive humans had different language factors?

"Language factors"?? You're beginning to sound like an illiterate.

Humans and monkeys parted ways millions of years ago, enough time for us to develop more complex brains and differing physical structures. Evidence of this progression can be found in fossils.

Actually, evolution is STILL happening. Natural selection is still being observed till today. Good, you've learnt something new today.

If you truly want to learn about evolution, read about it yourself. Google is your friend.

And onto you. What's your more believable, "fact based" story of the origin of man?

Jeromejnr:


Oh enlightened one.

So you're more smarter than the scientists that said the Genesis account and the Big Bang are in harmony?

They knew nothing about gravitation but talked about the gravitational pull of the Orion and Plaeidas which some scientists have even written a book on.

The knew nothing about biology and others but declared in Genesis that all creation is based on space, matter and time.

They new nothing but yet claimed the earth was in a circle.

If you don't know how to refute the argument then just like that lady said to you, Keep quiet.

People write books, to sell books. To gullible people. Like you.

If you start talking about "smart people," this won't end well for you.

If they knew anything about gravitation, they would've explained it before Newton did.

I'm not here to argue. I'm here to open up you mind to the realisation that you're looking for extra meaning to books that are plainly Jewish folklore.

If we want to go down that "refuting" road, you'll have to start with refuting the 3999 other Gods that you don't believe in.

I only believe in one less God than you do.

Jeromejnr:


How can you understand. There are many prophecies that refers to King David which also had what is called a double interpretation for Jesus.

Most of the prophecies in scriptures had double interpretations. E.g. In Revelations Jesus messages to the seven churches.

There was also one for a King of Tyre which also had a double meaning for the Devil.

Can you point out ONE verse in the Bible where "double interpretation " is stated, implied or even the merest hint is visible as a doctrine? who espoused this doctrine of double interpretation. And do you admit you were wrong on your so-called Micah prophecy or do you still persist ?

Chizzled06:


"Language factors"?? You're beginning to sound like an illiterate.

Humans and monkeys parted ways millions of years ago, enough time for us to develop more complex brains and differing physical structures. Evidence of this progression can be found in fossils.

Actually, evolution is STILL happening. Natural selection is still being observed till today. Good, you've learnt something new today.

If you truly want to learn about evolution, read about it yourself. Google is your friend.

And onto you. What's your more believable, "fact based" story of the origin of man?

Mr. Man.

Go and do your research again.

All these things your guys are calling facts are actually theories that are still subject to debate.

So what was the gene that separated Men from monkeys from the so called common ancestor whom you cannot identify?

And why did they them have more complex brains than the monkeys? Don't give me vague ideas give me details.

And also tell me why man has a conscience and sense of guilt but monkeys do not?

Don't judge the questions but answer them in detail.

Sarassin:


Can you point out ONE verse in the Bible where "double interpretation " is stated, implied or even the merest hint is visible as a doctrine? who espoused this doctrine of double interpretation. And do you admit you were wrong on your so-called Micah prophecy or do you still persist ?

E.g:

The first example to which I wish to call attention is Psalm 16. I ask the reader to stop at this moment, return to this psalm, and read it very carefully. Everyone who does this will be well repaid—many-fold.

In the first seven verses David, the human author of this poem, used the personal pronouns I, me, my, and mine. Everything that appears in these verses was literally true of David and of the experiences through which he passed. Thus if we follow the ordinary rules of interpretation, we are to apply everything in these verses to the historic King David, the author of the poem.

But when we look at verses 8-11, we see that he still uses the personal pronouns (I, me, my, and mine) of the first person. At the same time we know that David did not enjoy the experiences that are mentioned here. To show that David was not speaking of his own experiences, I will quote these last four verses.

8 I have set Jehovah always before me: Because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: My flesh also shall dwell in safety.
10 For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.
11 Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fullness of Joy; In thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore (Ps. 16:8-11).

Of whom then, was he speaking? Being a prophet and knowing God had sworn with an oath that of the fruit of his loins he would raise one to sit upon his throne, David spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, his Greater Son. David was a type of the Messiah, being an anointed one who sat upon the throne of Judah. It was natural for him, upon the principles set forth in the first part of this article, to speak of his own experiences and then to be carried by the Spirit of God into the future and to move in a circle of experiences that far transcended any through which he passed. We therefore know that he was speaking of the Messiah in the latter part of the psalm. This psalm, therefore, is an illustration of the principle of double reference, or the manifold fulfillment of prophecy. See Acts, chapter two.

THE LAW OF DOUBLE REFERENCE

THE NEXT PRINCIPLE for investigation in our study of Hermeneutics is what is termed the law of double reference. We are now in a position to study this most important rule, which is found through the prophetic portion of the Word. We have seen that the basic rule of all interpretation is what is properly called the golden rule of interpretation, which insists upon our taking every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages, demand a departure from the literal, ordinary meaning and require that we understand a passage as figurative or metaphorical. When we have mastered this rule until we can apply it unconsciously to our Bible study, and when we have made a note of the fact that we must recognize the law of first mention, we are then in a position to study the law of double reference.



I. Statement Of The Law
The law of double reference is based upon one of the fundamental laws of psychology: the principle of the association of similar or related ideas. Similarities always suggest comparisons. Thus the prophets constantly depicted that which was as a rule in the immediate future or present. Since history repeats itself, as all admit, the prophets looked out into the future and saw similar situations arising like those which were confronting them or immediately in the future. Thus the transition from describing that which was immediately before them to that which was in the remote future was very easy, normal, and natural....

Check for more info:

http://www.biblicalresearch.info/page57.html

Chizzled06:



People write books, to sell books. To gullible people. Like you.

If you start talking about "smart people," this won't end well for you.

If they knew anything about gravitation, they would've explained it before Newton did.

I'm not here to argue. I'm here to open up you mind to the realisation that you're looking for extra meaning to books that are plainly Jewish folklore.

If we want to go down that "refuting" road, you'll have to start with refuting the 3999 other Gods that you don't believe in.

I only believe in one less God than you do.

You still are beating round the bush.

And BTW, No one in the bible knew of gravitational pull of stars. It was God that spoke to Job concerning the concept.

And should I also show you another amazing thing from that scriptures on stars which scientists know today? It's coming up.

Jeromejnr:


Mr. Man.

Go and do your research again.

All these things your guys are calling facts are actually theories that are still subject to debate.

So what was the gene that separated Men from monkeys from the so called common ancestor whom cannot identify?

And what they them have more complex brains than the monkeys? Don't give me vague ideas give me details.

And also tell me why man has a conscience and sense of guilt but monkeys do not?

Don't judge the questions but answer them in detail.

Lol. You want me to give you a Biology lesson on an internet forum?

The funny part is that your questions are are very common among people that haven't learnt about evolution.

Please, just try to learn about the theory, it won't kill you. Or better still, type your questions into Google if you're genuinely curious and impatient.

It's obvious you have no background in science, because if you do, you'll realise a Scientific Theory is not the same as your everyday use of the word.

These "theories" have been tested and verified countless times, and the minute any of them is proven wrong ONCE, it is thrown out.

This is one of the most widely accepted scientific theories OF ALL TIME. If you can prove it wrong, I'll make you world famous.

Jeromejnr:


E.g:

The first example to which I wish to call attention is Psalm 16. I ask the reader to stop at this moment, return to this psalm, and read it very carefully. Everyone who does this will be well repaid—many-fold.

In the first seven verses David, the human author of this poem, used the personal pronouns I, me, my, and mine. Everything that appears in these verses was literally true of David and of the experiences through which he passed. Thus if we follow the ordinary rules of interpretation, we are to apply everything in these verses to the historic King David, the author of the poem.

But when we look at verses 8-11, we see that he still uses the personal pronouns (I, me, my, and mine) of the first person. At the same time we know that David did not enjoy the experiences that are mentioned here. To show that David was not speaking of his own experiences, I will quote these last four verses.

8 I have set Jehovah always before me: Because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.
9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: My flesh also shall dwell in safety.
10 For thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; Neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption.
11 Thou wilt show me the path of life: In thy presence is fullness of Joy; In thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore (Ps. 16:8-11).

Of whom then, was he speaking? Being a prophet and knowing God had sworn with an oath that of the fruit of his loins he would raise one to sit upon his throne, David spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, his Greater Son. David was a type of the Messiah, being an anointed one who sat upon the throne of Judah. It was natural for him, upon the principles set forth in the first part of this article, to speak of his own experiences and then to be carried by the Spirit of God into the future and to move in a circle of experiences that far transcended any through which he passed. We therefore know that he was speaking of the Messiah in the latter part of the psalm. This psalm, therefore, is an illustration of the principle of double reference, or the manifold fulfillment of prophecy. See Acts, chapter two.

THE LAW OF DOUBLE REFERENCE

THE NEXT PRINCIPLE for investigation in our study of Hermeneutics is what is termed the law of double reference. We are now in a position to study this most important rule, which is found through the prophetic portion of the Word. We have seen that the basic rule of all interpretation is what is properly called the golden rule of interpretation, which insists upon our taking every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages, demand a departure from the literal, ordinary meaning and require that we understand a passage as figurative or metaphorical. When we have mastered this rule until we can apply it unconsciously to our Bible study, and when we have made a note of the fact that we must recognize the law of first mention, we are then in a position to study the law of double reference.



I. Statement Of The Law
The law of double reference is based upon one of the fundamental laws of psychology: the principle of the association of similar or related ideas. Similarities always suggest comparisons. Thus the prophets constantly depicted that which was as a rule in the immediate future or present. Since history repeats itself, as all admit, the prophets looked out into the future and saw similar situations arising like those which were confronting them or immediately in the future. Thus the transition from describing that which was immediately before them to that which was in the remote future was very easy, normal, and natural....

Check for more info:

http://www.biblicalresearch.info/page57.html

Well, that explains it then ! the laws of double interpretation which you have employed to dredge up unlikely events in the bible and “reverse engineer” them to foreshadow prophecies of Jesus is based on “the principle of the association of similar or related ideas” and not from your bible.

You still haven't answered my query on your Micah prophecy....

Chizzled06:



Lol. You want me to give you a Biology lesson on an internet forum?

The funny part is that your questions are are very common among people that haven't learnt about evolution.

Please, just try to learn about the theory, it won't kill you. Or better still, type your questions into Google if you're genuinely curious and impatient.

It's obvious you have no background in science, because if you do, you'll realise a Scientific Theory is not the same as your everyday use of the word.

These "theories" have been tested and verified countless times, and the minute any of them is proven wrong ONCE, it is thrown out.

This is one of the most widely accepted scientific theories OF ALL TIME. If you can prove it wrong, I'll make you world famous.

You divert the discussion ignoring the concepts you can't explain.

First of all know that I am from a science field.

Secondly the word theory I used is such:

Theory: idea formed by speculation: an idea of or belief about something arrived at through speculation or conjecture
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Thirdly, There are various arguments from different scientists that oppose your own version of evolution. So I don't know what you're saying.

So are you sure if I prove you wrong I will be world famous??

Read this: From the Guardian Newspaper US.

First read the conclusion of the article. And note, it wasn't written by a christian so no bias.

"The irony in all this is that Darwin himself never claimed that it was. He went to his deathbed protesting that he'd been misinterpreted: there was no reason, he said, to assume that natural selection was the only imaginable mechanism of evolution. Darwin, writing before the discovery of DNA, knew very well that his work heralded the beginning of a journey to understand the origins and development of life. All we may be discovering now is that we remain closer to the beginning of that journey than we've come to think."


Now read from the beginning.....

The story, still sometimes repeated in creationist circles, goes like this: it is the 1960s, at Nasa's Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, and a team of astronomers is using cutting-edge computers to recreate the orbits of the planets, thousands of years in the past. Suddenly, an error message flashes up. There's a problem: way back in history, one whole day appears to be missing.

The scientists are baffled, until a Christian member of the team dimly recalls something and rushes to fetch a Bible. He thumbs through it until he reaches the Book of Joshua, chapter 10, in which Joshua asks God to stop the world for . . . "about a full day!" Uproar in the computer lab. The astronomers have happened upon proof that God controls the universe on a day-to-day basis, that the Bible is literally true, and that by extension the "myth" of creation is, in fact, a reality. Darwin was wrong – according to another creationist rumour, he'd recanted on his deathbed, anyway – and here, at last, is scientific evidence!

Inevitably, those of us who aren't professional scientists have to take a lot of science on trust. And one of the things that makes it so easy to trust the standard view of evolution, in particular, is amply illustrated by the legend of the Nasa astronomers: the doubters are so deluded or dishonest that one needn't waste time with them. Unfortunately, that also makes it embarrassingly awkward to ask a question that seems, in the light of recent studies and several popular books, to be growing ever more pertinent. What if Darwin's theory of evolution – or, at least, Darwin's theory of evolution as most of us learned it at school and believe we understand it – is, in crucial respects, not entirely accurate?

Such talk, naturally, is liable to drive evolutionary biologists into a rage, or, in the case of Richard Dawkins, into even more of a rage than usual. They have a point: nobody wants to provide ammunition to the proponents of creationism or "intelligent design", and it's true that few of the studies now coming to public prominence are all that revolutionary to the experts. But in the culture at large, we may be on the brink of a major shift in perspective, with enormous implications for how most of us think about how life came to be the way it is. As the science writer David Shenk puts it in his new book, The Genius in All of Us, "This is big, big stuff – perhaps the most important [discoveries] in the science of heredity since the gene......

For more: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/mar/19/evolution-darwin-natural-selection-genes-wrong

Now that's another bible amazement.

How the leap year came about.

So this shows your views are not accepted by all.

Sarassin:



Well, that explains it then ! the laws of double interpretation which you have employed to dredge up unlikely events in the bible and “reverse engineer” them to foreshadow prophecies of Jesus is based on “the principle of the association of similar or related ideas” and not from your bible.

You still haven't answered my query on your Micah prophecy....

What's with the Micah Issue?

Jeromejnr:


What's with the Micah Issue?

Here it is again,

This is an unlikely prophecy since,

"Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers to a clan, not a town, the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chr 2:50-52). Your much celebrated prophecy does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from verses 5-6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.

You should note that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make the verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

I asked if you would kindly clarify whether you still consider Micah 5v2 a messiah prophecy.

Sarassin:


Here it is again,

This is an unlikely prophecy since,

"Bethlehem Ephratah" in Micah 5:2 refers to a clan, not a town, the clan of Bethlehem, who was the son of Caleb's second wife, Ephrathah (1 Chr 2:50-52). Your much celebrated prophecy does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from verses 5-6. This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did.

You should note that Matthew altered the text of Micah 5:2 by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah 5:2. He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make the verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.

I asked if you would kindly clarify whether you still consider Micah 5v2 a messiah prophecy.

Okay read this carefully.

I hope first of all you understand the law of double reference.

Secondly,

read this:

Micah 5:2 predicts, “But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.” The verse clearly speaks of a coming king in Israel, but does it predict the coming of the Messiah?

Micah 5:2 makes a couple of predictions. First, the birthplace of this future “ruler of Israel” would be Bethlehem Ephrathah. Since there were two locations known as Bethlehem at the time of Micah’s writing, the addition of Ephrathah is significant. It specifies the Bethlehem in Judah, the portion of Israel in which the capital, Jerusalem, was located. Bethlehem was considered “little,” or insignificant, among the cities of Judah, yet would serve as the birthplace of this future ruler.

Second, the coming ruler of Jewish background was one “whose coming forth is from old, from ancient days.” What else could this refer to other than the Messiah? Only the Messiah fits the description of a ruler in Israel whose origin was from times past. In fact, “from ancient days” is sometimes synonymous with “eternal” (as in Habakkuk 1:12). Only the Jewish Messiah could be a ruler in Israel from eternity past.

This interpretation is strengthened by the fact that the Jewish religious leaders in the first century identified Micah 5:2 as a Messianic prophecy. In Matthew 2, wise men from the East visited King Herod in Jerusalem and asked where the king of the Jews had been born. Herod assembled all the chief priests and scribes, and “he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. They told him, ‘In Bethlehem of Judea,’” basing their answer on Micah 5:2.

Only Jesus Christ fits the Messianic claims of Micah 5:2. He was born in Bethlehem Ephrathah (Matthew 2; Luke 2:1-20). Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the ruler of Israel (John 4:25-26). He also fits the description as being “from ancient times” or eternal (John 1:1; Colossians 1:16-17). No other ruler in Israel fits these requirements. Dozens of other direct prophecies in the Old Testament (some scholars cite hundreds) fit Jesus’ birth, ministry, and death.

Jesus told the Jews that the Law and the Prophets provided a clear witness that He was who He claimed to be. “These are the Scriptures that testify about me,” He said (John 5:39). Still today, those who investigate the prophecy of Micah 5:2 and other Messianic passages find compelling evidence that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.

Read this also: http://www.prophecyproof.org/2012/11/micah-5-the-end-times-siege-of-jerusalem/ The prophecy was fulfilled in Christ birth but is still being fulfilled as Christ is still to come back as a King and reign.