You say that Hosea 11:1 is not about Jesus. Here is my explanation. You do not have to accept my understanding, but it is how I understand it.
Hosea 11:1 is a multiple prophecy. In other words, it is a prophecy which is fulfilled multiple ways.
1. Out of Egypt I called my son: Moses was called out of Egypt. And thus Israel was saved.
2. Out of Egypt I called my son: Israel was called out of Egypt. And thus Israel was saved.
3. Out of Egypt I called my son: Joseph’s body (savior of Israel, literally) was taken out of Egypt by his descendants.
4. Out of Egypt I called my son: Jesus was also called out of Egypt back to Israel, where, as a result spiritual Israel (the Church) was saved.
5. Out of Egypt I called my son: Figuratively, all of us who become Christians are called “out of Egypt” when we are saved. The writer of Hebrews uses this analogy/metaphor in Hebrews 3:12-4:7, showing that we, too, figuratively were called out of Egypt. All of us, as Christians are “called out of Egypt.”
You do not have to agree with this, but this is how I understand Hosea 11:1
Next: About this statement:
The New Testament is apocryphal, falsehood, spurious, fabricated. The Heavenly Father ONLY spoke to the Israelite’s, not to the Greeks. The New Testament was originally written in GREEK, never a translation from Hebrew to Greek.
What would it even mean to say that the New Testament is apocryphal? This statement, in my opinion, is not a meaningful one. What do you mean by this? You say that the heavenly father only spoke to the Israelites. This is a mere statement. Making statements does not make them true. Either the New Testament is true and reliable or it is not, but simply saying these things is of no value. What do you mean that the New Testament was fabricated? What claim was fabricated? Do you claim that Jesus never lived? Do you claim that he was not born in Bethlehem, as prophesied in Micah 5:2? Do you claim that he was not crucified, as prophesied in Psalm 22:16? Do you claim that he did not work miracles? Why do you believe that those who wrote the gospels lied about this?
Apparently, God spoke to Greeks, since Luke was written in Greek. What is your reasoning? What is your proof that God never spoke to Greeks? Simply making statements does not make them true. Yes, the New Testament was written in Greek. What does this prove? I am confused here.
There is no such thing as an Old Testament. READ: Malachi 3:16 for the TRUE name.
Are you claiming that the true name of the Old Testament is “A scroll of remembrance?” People can call the Hebrew Bible whatever they want. It is called “The Hebrew Bible.” It is called “Tanakh” It is called “The Bible” It is called “The Old Testament.” It is called “The Word of God” and “your Word” (in Psalm 119) Put it this way. Is there a New Testament? Well….. obviously. You can buy one wherever you like. Well, then, by definition there is an Old Testament. Arguing about the name of something is a waste of time and energy. Bottom line, there is a list of books (22, 39, depending on how they are listed) that some people call the Old Testament. Therefore, by definition, there is an Old Testament.
Every Covenant YHWH gave to his people Israel, was EVERLASTING, so there would be no reason to make a NEW Covenant when it is EVERLASTING. Jeremiah 31:31-34, the Greeks removed the (RE) from REnew and replaced it with NEW.
I totally understand that you have a right to claim this and to believe it. I cannot prove this wrong, as it is simply a matter of opinion. However, I have a different opinion because I believe that Jesus gave a New Covenant. However, you do not have to agree with this. That is up to you. A really good argument that a New Covenant was needed is found in Hebrews 7:11-28. I find this argument to be convincing. I ask you humbly to read Hebrews 7:11-28. If you believe that this is a bad argument, then, fine, and I respect your right to disagree with this argument, but I, for one, do agree with this argument. The fact that sacrifices had to be offered again and again and that the priests died and that they sinned showed reason that a more perfect covenant, based on a person who did not sin and whose sacrifice was once for all and who is living forever with God in heaven is a pretty good argument that the New was better than the Old. Like the Hebrew writer says in Hebrews 8:13, when Jesus died and the curtain was torn in two, the former covenant was “old and fading and will soon disappear.” Again, you may not agree, and I totally accept your right to disagree.
Hebrews 8:7-8 does not imply at all that YHWH had any flaws. Jesus said that the covenant of Moses was perfect and not a jot or tittle will be removed from the first covenant. What Jesus said is that he did not replace the Law of Moses, but he fulfilled it Matthew 5:17. The way Paul explained it, through the Law of Moses we understood our need for a saviour. Jesus completes the Law of Moses. It is the thing that the Old Testament points toward. Jesus told the Jewish teachers that the Old Testament testify about him (John 5:40). The evidence supports this, because Jesus fulfilled all of the OT prophecies. Again, if you do not agree–if you believe that Jesus is a liar and a deceiver, that is your right, and I respect your right to believe Jesus was a deceiver and a liar, but, given his miracles and that he was raised from the dead, personally, I disagree.
Thanks for listening and thanks for simplifying your arguments.