Just two chapters into Matthew we can see twice where, by modern standards, Matthew is outright lying to the reader. But what about ancient standards?
In another thread, in a comment that was not directed at me, this was said:
Very true. But Christians love to have their cake and eat it too. On the one hand they'll play this card to defend Christianity, but they then remain silent and refuse to correct some other ignorant Christian who says that prophecy in the Bible is strong evidence for God's existence because a prophecy is the accurate prediction of future events. Prophecy in the Bible is NOT a prediction of future events. I will allow Matthew to illustrate this.
Matthew 2:14-15 says,
And [Joseph] arose and took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt; and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt did I call my son.
This is a reference to Hosea 11:1, which says,
When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.
This is an illustration of Matthew's idea that the Christ-type existed all throughout the scriptures. But clearly Hosea is not predicting future events. Hosea is describing past events and making no comment about the future. The knowledgeable Christians know this, yet do not dispense the information.
Another obvious example from Matthew is Matthew 1:23, which says,
Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us.
This is a reference to Isaiah 7:14, but a quick read of the context of that verse shows that Isaiah is not referring to an event that is hundreds of years in the future. I don't want to post it here because it will take up the whole page, but do I do encourage everyone to read Isaiah 7 in full context.
So it seems reasonable to say that Matthew cannot be taken at his word when it comes to prophecies.
