 |
Web Hosting by Netfirms | Free Domain Names by Netfirms |
|
|
|
Answer for yourself: What is a prophecy?
A prophecy is the future told in advance by G-d through a prophet. Isaiah 48:2-5 [3] I foretold the former things long ago, my mouth announced them and I made them known; then suddenly I acted, and they came to pass. [4] For I knew how stubborn you were; the sinews of your neck were iron, your forehead was bronze. [5] Therefore I told you these things long ago; before they happened I announced them to you so that you could not say, `My idols did them; my wooden image and metal god ordained them.'
Answer for yourself: Does the Old Testament contain any prophecies about the Messiah?" Yes! The Old Testament contains many prophecies about the Messiah.
Answer for yourself: Are not all of these prophecies "fulfilled by Jesus" according to the New Testament?
It is going to come as a shock to you but the answer to the above question in a resounding "no"!
The problem is that we have two Bibles, a Jewish Masoretic Text Old Testament and a "Christianized Old Testament," and they contradict each other in rather critical places and these places are usually in supposed "Messianic prophecies."
If the above statement is "news" to you then I recommend that you stop right here and familiarize yourself with this FACT before you proceed, because unless you do otherwise, then how will you know if what I am saying is truthful or not. As an ordained Pastor for more than 12 years I can assure you what I am saying can easily be proven if one just comes to the knowledge of these "facts." No wonder the Jews, when introduced to the Christian "theology" about Yeshua/Jesus normally will never accept it. If these Jews of whom I speak know their Bible then they recognize a "corrupted purposeful mistranslation" whereas the Christian missionary, not possessing such information, never does. It is time to learn the truth because "truth" never hurt anyone and if G-d is always identified with the truth then it stands to reason we should embrace it no matter what it might be. A lie or a deception, known or otherwise, never brings honor to G-d or to Yeshua.
I guess we should start right at the beginning.
Many Christians are taught that Isaiah the prophet told the Jews to expect G-d to become incarnated in a human body. They point to Isaiah 9:6-7 for their proof.
Isaiah 9:6-7 [6] For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty G-d, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. [7] Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end.
He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. ... 700 B.C.
The fulfillment of this is believed to be found in the New Testament in the very first verse of the Gospel of Mark.
Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of G-d.
Others point to the Gospel of John for further evidence of the fulfillment of Isaiah 9:6-7.
John 1:1-3, 14 [1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with G-d, and the Word was G-d. [2] He was with G-d in the beginning. [3] Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. [14] The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Answer for yourself: Is Mark 1:1 and the selected verses from the Gospel of John the fulfillment of Isaiah 9:6-7?
Let us remember that in order to interpret any passage and arrive at the intended meaning that certain laws of interpretation must be followed. The failure to do this guarantees that the reader "reads into the verse" what he already believes. This phenomenon has a term and it is called "eisegeis," but in Biblical studies we desire "exegesis" whereby the truth is drawn out from the passage and our preformed religious beliefs are not read into the passage.
As we are not Hebrew scholars, it is not expected that you are to acquaint yourself with the laws of grammar of the Hebrew language. To do so would be very prosperous to your understanding of the Bible however. We begin with grammar, because a detailed study of several passages will bring completely different understandings of the texts from what the traditional Christians have been taught. Lacking skills in Hebrew, many have continued to teach what they know not.
First of all, there are no "to be" verbs in Hebrew! Exodus 17:15 records for us that Moses built an altar and called it "Jehovah Nissi" (the Lord our banner). Now, understand that the term "Jehovah Nissi" is the name FOR G-D! Now, these rocks that made up the altar are only called by G-d's name; the rocks did not actually become G-d the Father! Judges 6:24 records for us that Gideon built an altar and called is "Jehovah Shalom." Again, calling these rocks "G-d" does not make them G-d!
With this understanding we must begin to look at Jer. 23:5-6: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD (YHVH), that I will raise to David a Branch (term for Messiah; and we know it is Yeshua) of righteousness; a King shall reign and prosper, and execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell safely; now this is His name by which He will be called: The LORD our Righteousness." This is a very problematic verse, and proper understanding how to translate this verse will open-up the rest of the Bible for you. First of all, let us not forget we are dealing with a Hebrew document and there are no "to be" verbs in the language of Hebrew. Recalling what we just learned about Hebrew not containing "to be verbs" and that things are often called by the name of G-d, yet never being G-d themselves, then calling the human "branch" (descendent of David) by the name of G-d does not make him G-d! Thus it is NOT proper to understand that because something is called "something or given a name representing something or someone else" that it is actually the "substance" by whose name it is called.
Now pay close attention. There are no capital letters in Hebrew or Greek! Here we find David's seed (Yeshua) is referred to as the "branch of David." But notice again, that the words Branch, King, and His are all capitalized.
Answer for yourself: Why capital letters here since the original manuscripts did not contain them?
Again, this is the interpreter's opinion and his personal theological stance that allows him to decide for you and me that these words need to be capitalized and we unconsciously identified this human descendent "as G-d." This is a grave error!
Answer for yourself: Again, let me ask you, in the days of Yeshua was Judah saved? Did Israel dwell safely? Can we divorce a passage from its context and be assured we have the truth? "Certainly not" is the answer to all 3 of the above questions.
If anything, the Jews were continually persecuted and martyred, as many as 500 per day were being crucified. Rome had occupied the nation and had no plans of leaving. Thus, this prophecy could not refer to the life time of Yeshua. But also notice, that since there are no "to be" verbs, that the passage is certainly not calling Yeshua "G-d."
What the passage in Isaiah 9:6 is saying, however, is that this "son" will be like G-d in righteousness. The "son" will be like and do what G-d the Father will do. He will judge righteously like his G-d and Father judges. Yes, Yeshua had many divine attributes, but he is not G-d the Father. Calling the "child" of Isaiah 9:6 "THE" Messiah or even Yeshua by a "name for G-d" no more makes him G-d than calling a pile of stones, making up an altar, G-d! To say that the Messiah IS the "LORD G-d our Righteousness" or that Yeshua IS "the" LORD G-d our Righteousness does a serious damage to the text and is a horrible mistranslation of the text. You may understand that now, since you have read this teaching, but the early Gentiles who interpreted the Bible following the destruction of Israel by the Romans made many such errors in interpretation of the text (they did not know the Hebrew language and could not interpret or translate the Hebrew text properly) and we have their erroneous doctrines today as testimony of their mistakes. Please understand this principle, because it is of considerable importance as we continue on in our study. Jeremiah is not calling the Messiah "G-d" or "Jehovah" or "YHVH."It is only a symbolic representation that makes a general statement that the Messiah will be G-dly, not G-d! Yeshua was G-dly, but not G-d!
Rashi thought that the verse in Isaiah 9:6 spoke about Hezekiah. So did the majority of the other Rabbis. When Hezekiah was 9 years old, his father became king over their land and the land of their enemies. Hezekiah was also know as the "Prince of Peace", a term that Christians have delegated to Jesus, which is an interesting "coincidence". However, Ibn Ezra refutes the idea because of the time delay involved. Notice that Isaiah 9 comes after Isaiah 7 (the sign given to King Ahaz).
This child was Hezekiah, who inherited the throne from his father, King Ahaz. Hence, the verse states that “the government is upon his shoulder,” in the present, not that it “will be” in the future. Likewise, his reign extends “from now and forever,” with the Hebrew word olam (forever) not to be taken literally. “No end to the peace” is also to be understood figuratively, as it is used elsewhere:
Ecclesiastes 4:8 ...and there is no end to all his toil
Isaiah 2:7 Their land is full of silver and gold—there is no end to their treasures; their land is full of horses—there is no end to their chariots.
Hezekiah and his kingdom of Judah were threatened with imminent invasion by the Assyrian army:
Isaiah 8:7--8 Now therefore, behold, the L--rd is bringing up against them the waters of the river, mighty and many—[namely] the king of Assyria and all his glory—and it will rise over all its channels and overflow all its banks. And it will sweep on into Judah....
When the Assyrians were encamped outside the gates of Jerusalem, G--d intervened:
Isaiah 37:36 And the angel of the L--rd went forth and killed 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians, and when the men arose early in the morning, behold, [Assyria was] all dead corpses.
The effect of this miracle is spoken of earlier:
Isaiah 9:1 The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them has the light shined.
In the verse under discussion, the Divine attributes contained within Hezekiah's name allude to G--d and to this awesome miracle:
“Wonderful in Counsel”—G--d's counsel to Hezekiah was reassuring and prophetic:
Isaiah 37:6--7 ...thus says the L--rd: “Be not afraid of the words you have heard, that the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Behold, I will put a spirit in him, and he shall hear a rumor and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.”
“Mighty G--d”—G--d's might prevailed against the massive Assyrian army.
“Everlasting Father”—G--d prolonged Hezekiah's life:
Isaiah 38:4--5 Then the word of the L--rd came to Isaiah, saying: “Go and say to Hezekiah: Thus says the L--rd, the G--d of David, your father: I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; behold, I will add fifteen years to your life.”
Indeed, it is written “and he called his name,” not “and he called his names,” for only “Prince of Peace”applied to Hezekiah, symbolizing the peace enjoyed by the nation after the destruction of the Assyrian army, as Hezekiah anticipated:
Isaiah 39:8 Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah: “The word of the L--rd that you have spoken is good,” for he thought, “There will be peace and truth in my days.”
Isaiah chapter 7 focuses on Hezekiah's father, King Ahaz; Isaiah chapter 8 speaks about the imminent Assyrian invasion; and Isaiah chapter 9 about the miraculous rescue of Hezekiah and his kingdom from the Assyrian army. Missionaries claim that the child in the verse under discussion is Jesus and the Divine attributes are describing him. However, the original Hebrew uses the past perfect tense (“to us a child has been born, to us a son has been given”), the past (“and he called his name”), and, as pointed out, the present, whereas if Jesus, who lived seven hundred years later, was this child, then the future tense would have been used.
It is also interesting to note that Jesus never proclaimed himself Divine, nor did he instruct his followers to worship him. It is obvious that he knew himself to be nothing more than a mere mortal being:
Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
Mark 10:17--18 And as [Jesus] was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him: “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? No one is good but G--d alone.”
Mark 10:40 ...but to sit at my [Jesus'] right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared. Mark 14:36 And [Jesus] said: “Abba, Father, all things are possible to You; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what You will.”
Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice: “E--li, E--li, lama sabachthani?” which means “My G--d, my G--d, why have You forsaken me?”
Answer for yourself: That being so is it possible that the troublesome passages in Isaiah 9 concerning a child that is born be the same child of Isaiah 7, and since Hezekiah was called "Prince of Peace," and since there is no "to be verbs" in Hebrew, then could this be strong evidence that the identity of the child in Isaiah 7 and 9 was none other than Hezekiah? You will have to be the judge.
One has to discount Hebrew grammar as well as the context and the testimony of the Rabbis to hold to the position that Isaiah 9:6 was speaking of a child some 700-800 years in the future, which by the way, could not be the sign for King Ahaz as he would have been dead by that time some plus 2000 years.
Remembering what you have just learned from the previous article concerning the absence of "to be verbs" in Hebrew, then let us now proceed with Isaiah 9:6 and understand correctly what is being said.
The text says: "For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder, and his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty G-d, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
I suppose this is the best proof-text that Christianity can use to prove to themselves that Yeshua is G-d. When those in Christianity finally begin to understand Hebrew they will have to repent and ask forgiveness for practicing error and idolatry. I had too. Let us recall that there are no "to be" verbs in Hebrew. Remember that Isaiah was written in Hebrew.
Answer for yourself: Why is the word "child" in Capitals in your Bible when the original manuscripts did not contain them?
Again the word "child" has been capitalized in your Bibles to make sure you agree with the Gentile translator who represents the orthodox position of the pagan Gentile church for centuries. The word "child" was not capitalized in the Hebrew manuscripts!
There are three ways to properly understand this verse.
First of all, terms of G-d were often associated in the Oriental culture with great men and kings. When a human king was called "mighty god" is was understood the power of this king was like a god; invincible. When he was called "god" it was understood that the king was the all-powerful one. When is was said that he is an "everlasting Father" the meaning was quite similar to today's "G-d save the king." It was a term of address implying a desire for long life be given to the king. 1 Kings 1:31 states: "Let the lord King David live forever." The same is seen in Neh. 2:3. These terms, used in this way, was not to understood that a human ruler or king was truly G-d!
A second interpretation is the lack of the "to be" verbs (mentioned above), which when translated into English, tend to make the uninitiated and uninformed reader believe the child IS one and the same "being" by whose names he is called. These names are only intended to described him and manifestations about him and his character. To say it another way, adjectives in a sentence describe the subject of the sentence, they are never the same as the subject of the sentence. Just because the "child" (human child) is called "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty G-d, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" does not mean that he must be one and the same with the titles given him. It is mistakenly understood that since those "titles" are titles for G-d the Father, then the child IS all those titles and is himself G-d! This is incorrect according to the rules of grammar of Hebrew. The child's is ONLY to be called by these titles (again we see the 'to be' verb). The child of Isa. 9:6 is to do and be like the one whom he is called. He is not to be confused with the identity of the one he imitates! Selah! (means pause and think about it).
It is easy to understand Yeshua as a Wonderful Counselor (he has G-dly wisdom), as like a Might G-d (he truly was very powerful and his ministry was full of anointed miracles), as like an Everlasting Father (referring to the pre-existence of the "anointing of G-d" before Genesis 1:1), and as like a Prince of Peace (his ministry brought repentance and reconciliation with the Father, thereby ending the enmity between man and G-d; thus bringing peace).
These terms for "G-d" are not meant to mean that the child is "G-d," only that he will exhibit many G-dly traits and characteristics in his life and ministry.
Answer for yourself: Now, if the correct interpretation of the text in the original language does not teach that the child is G-d, then how do we have the right to teach that Yeshua is G-d if the Bible never said he was? Please tell your Pastor what you just learned and help him to teach his congregation correctly.
Thirdly, and even more interesting, is that in Hebrew it is quite common to use phrases or terms for G-d to complete sentences (The LORD our righteousness, the LORD our banner, the LORD our peace, etc.). This was spoken of above. A good example for us that has misled the church so much is the much debated "virgin" passage of Isa. 7:14.
Isa. 7:14: "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel."
There are so many errors in this verse as transcribed into the English I don't know where to begin. The sentence in question states that G-d will give a "sign" and that sign is related to the conception of a child. Remember, that the verse in Hebrew does not say the child is "Immanuel" for there are no "to be" verbs in Hebrew. Thus, the "child" is not to be Immanuel! [ONLY TO BE LIKE G-D IN SEVERAL WAYS].
Next the sentence ends with praise to G-d ("Immanuel") because in the Hebrew language it is not uncommon to give praise to G-d in a sentence describing G-d's accomplishments or some great work He has done and to conclude the descriptive sentence with such praises to G-d. It is quite proper in Hebrew to make a statement about G-d (that "G-d is with us") in finishing a sentence. It is similar to our custom of praising G-d in conversation by saying "bless G-d" or "Praise the LORD." We do it all the time, and so did the Hebrews!
Next, we find that in the context of the verse, the Hebrew word translated "virgin" in English is incorrect. This is not the meaning of the term at all! In Hebrew, "almah" means a young woman, of which she may or may not have had prior sexual experience. It does not mandate she be a virgin. Anytime the Bible wants to make a distinction between a "virgin" and "non-virgin" for legal reasons (in a court of law and in matters of divorce), G-d uses the term "betulah" and never "almah."
Christianity claims that Yeshua was born of a virgin, and bases such belief off a verse in the New Testament as well as Isa. 7:14. However, there is no linguistic reason to translate "almah" as virgin.
Proverbs 30:19 tells of four paths or four ways: a way of an eagle in air, a serpent on a rock, a ship in the sea, and a man with an "almah." All four of these examples have in common that there is absolutely no way to demonstrate where an eagle has flown, where a ship has sailed, where a serpent has crawled on a hard rock, or a sexual experience after a woman has had other prior sexual experiences. Since a virgin has demonstrable differences in her physical body (vaginally) both before and following her first sexual encounter as seen in the tearing of the vaginal membrane, the term used to make such distinctions would not be "almah" but "betulah."
Likewise, Isaiah tells us that a young woman (with prior sexual experience since he used "almah") shall conceive and bear a child, and before that child (verse 16) shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread (Assyrian invaders) will be forsaken by both her kings (a child learns right from wrong usually by the age of 2-3 years). If you keep reading the passage you will find that within about 2-3 years (before the child learns good from bad) G-d will bring His Presence (Immanuel) upon Israel and destroy the attacking Assyrian army. Isaiah speaks to King Ahaz of Israel who was being attacked by two Assyrian kings. Isaiah brings assurance to him to not worry, that G-d was bringing a "sign" to Israel that before a small child (who would be born not of a virgin) learns to choose right from wrong, the battle will be won for Israel. The young woman's pregnancy was a "good sign" that something good was going to happen to Israel...real soon! The child was a sign of the soon coming delivering Presence of G-d as He liberates His people from Assyrian aggression. G-d's Presence (Immanuel-G-d with Israel) would come and destroy Israel's enemy (not Yeshua). The child was not to destroy them either. G-d was to destroy them. Thus we see that to adhere to a virgin birth in front of such solid evidence is foolishness and to believe that this child is Yeshua is utterly ridiculous, because Yeshua would not be born for seven hundred more years!
Back to Isaiah 9:6 for a moment. These names in verse six (Wonderful Counselor, Mighty G-d, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace) have already been seen as symbolic names that are often used to complete Hebrew sentences. In and of themselves, they make complete sentences about G-d, and not about the child (again similar to our responses to the goodness of G-d when we say "Bless G-d" or "Praise G-d"). The most proper understanding of the passage would be that the Eternal Father G-d, the Mighty G-d, is planning a wondrous deed (the birth of the Messiah will come in the future some 700 years later). However, the wondrous deed that coincided with the coming of "Immanuel" at the time of the writing of the text by Isaiah was the destruction of Sennacherib's army (Assyria) and the salvation and deliverance of the people of Israel. Immanuel! G-d's Presence came to deliver them. Isn't G-d wonderful. Oh what a Mighty G-d we have that chose to deliver Israel against so many overwhelming odds. Oh what a Prince of Peace as He brings peace to His people by His mighty deliverance and Presence. Oh what an Everlasting Father that Israel has who never slumbers or sleeps, and is ever-watching to protect and deliver His people.
As you can easily see that in Hebrew these words and phrases about G-d completed sentences in order to render "praise" to G-d for His greatness and love for His people. These phrases never meant that the child to be born later would be G-d. But let me say again, let us never forget that these "praises" were in no way intended to mean that the child was G-d, only to give glory and praise to G-d for what He had done or will do (G-d is faithful to bring His people their Messiah! Yeshua came seven hundred years following this prophecy.
Answer for yourself: Don't you think the Christian church should be told the truth?
Bennoah1@verizon.net