Tumah
Veteran Member
Where is it obvious that Jewish "fathers(??)" did read and interpret passages to please themselves?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
haalmah harah: "a young woman is pregnant"
- Thread starter gnostic
- Start date
Where is it obvious that Jewish "fathers(??)" did read and interpret passages to please themselves?
james2ko
Well-Known Member
1. There is no "christian" bible. Both the Old and NT are God's Holy Word. I look forward to the day when you and the rest of my people will see the Messiah for who He really is and was, as prophesied by the prophet:
Zec 12:10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.
2. Opinions are like belly buttons....We all have one...and we all think ours is the best looking....well, maybe not mine
3. Thats right. He prophesied as inspired by God. And God inspired a prophecy of Jesus as the Messiah in Isa 7:14. But He did it in a manner that would trip up some of His people:
Isa 28:9-11 "Whom will he teach knowledge? And whom will he make to understand the message? Those just weaned from milk? Those just drawn from the breasts?10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little." 11 For with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to this people,
Isa 6:9-10 And He said, "Go, and tell this people: 'Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.' 10 "Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed."
Isa 44:18 They do not know nor understand; For He has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, And their hearts, so that they cannot understand.
Isa 6:9-10 And He said, "Go, and tell this people: 'Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.' 10 "Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed."
Isa 44:18 They do not know nor understand; For He has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, And their hearts, so that they cannot understand.
These verses apply to this day, as implied in the NT. Ironically, God used Isaiah to prophesy of Jesus as well as Israel's blindness, which will be made evident in your next reply
4. The Masoretic Text states "she" will name Him. The DSS states "He" will name Him. Guess who was ultimately responsible for the giving of Immanuel's other name. I'll give you a hint--it was neither Joseph nor Mary:
Mat 1:20-21 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins."
Luk 1:30-31 Then the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS.
Luk 1:30-31 Then the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS.
It was God, through His messenger, who told Joseph and Mary to call Immanuel by a different name. Just as God told Nathan to call Solomon by a different name!
5. If God inspired Nathan to refer to Solomon as Jedidiah, He could have also inspired Isaiah to refer to Jesus as Immanuel.
6. You reject information from half of God's Word. How can you even begin to talk about perversion of context?
7. Show me in scripture where Hezekiah is called by the names in Isa 9:6?
Not quite. See point 4 in my reply to Cmike above.
see point 7 above
gnostic
The Lost One
sincerly said:
Sorry, but did I say anything about Jesus was now known by the title given to him. Yes, I know he was called the Son of God, Son of Man, Christ, Messiah, Rabbi or Teacher, The Good Shepherd, etc.
These are all documented in different parts of the NT books. So I am not arguing you with this over these titles.
But not once, any disciple, apostle or scribe (in the NT scriptures) had ever called him by "Immanuel", not even Matthew himself.
Matthew indeed quoted Isaiah's verse in regards to Immanuel, but even then Immanuel is never mentioned again in his gospel. He has been called the son of Mary, the Son of God, Son of Man, etc. The silence is very telling, so it is doubtful anyone even knew that Matthew had equate Isaiah's sign with Jesus' so-called miracle - the virgin birth.
Even the angels (possibly the same angel, except that Matthew never called this angel in Jesus' birth story by any name) that appeared in both gospels, both stated that his name will be "Jesus":
Matthew 1:21 said:
Luke 1:31 said:
As you can see, neither angels in these 2 gospels say that Mary's child will be named "Immanuel". The angel in Luke 1 said something further:
Luke 1:32 said:
Immanuel does mean the Son of the Most High.
Just because Jesus was many different titles, doesn't mean that he was ever called Immanuel. And the reason that was so, is because Isaiah's sign was never about the messiah, never about Jesus. The sign was already fulfilled in Isaiah's time, because the child Immanuel has to be the one who eat honey and curds and the one who know how to choose good :
Isaiah 7:14-17 said:
Who is "he" in 7:15 and who is "the lad" in 7:16, if he isn't Immanuel?
Ignoring the 3 verses that followed Isaiah 7:14, is re-interpreting the verse, manipulating and twisting them to suit your agenda and bias...nothing more, nothing less. It is called cherry-picking, and it is deceitful method.
This whole chapter showed the relation of the child (Immanuel) to the war in Judah. Isaiah 8 confirmed that Immanuel relate to the event that would stop the war, because his name reappeared in relation to Rezin and the son of Remaliah (Pekah), to the two kingdoms - Aram and Israel, and to the King of Assyria (read Isaiah 8:5-8).
But then again, I have wasted my time, in typing all this, because I know you will ignore everything I have wrote, and I know that you will ignore the verses I've quoted. You done so in the past, and you will do so again.
Last edited:
Tumah
Veteran Member
Yes. The DSS were written by a proto-Christian sect. We would expect them to make some changes. But that's OK, I can accept that you consider yourself ideological descendants of the Essenes, Sadduceans or whichever break-away sect wrote the DSS. But if Jesus came from the Pharisees, that's not what his Isaiah scroll said.
It doesn't say who will call Hezekiah this. It says He will call Hezekiah this. As opposed to Immanuel where she will call his name.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
gnostic
The Lost One
james2ko said:
I have a translation of the DSS, and it doesn't say which will name the child. It say neither "he" nor "she":
I don't have the original Hebrew text (referring to the DSS), so I can't say anything about the gender.Isaiah 7:14 said:
However, since the only parent that is mentioned in Isaiah's passage, and she was the one who got pregnant "has conceived", and that she will give birth, then it can be reasoned (hence, implied) that she will name her son - Immanuel.
In Matthew 1, the angel appeared to Joseph, not Mary, and the angel said that he - Joseph - will name her son "Jesus" (not Immanuel), see Matthew 1:21:
Matthew 1:21 said:
The angel was talking to Joseph, so "you" can only referred to as Joseph.
Of course, in Luke 1, the angel appeared to Mary, and said she shall named him "Jesus" (again, no "Immanuel" here).
But, looking at this translation, it is clear that almah was translated to "young woman" (not "virgin"), and harah has been translated to "has conceived" (hence, already pregnant). Which would fit in the profile of what will happen when the child reach a certain age, to the land of the two kings (Isaiah 7:15-17); here is the rest of the sign, as translated from the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Isaiah 7:15-17 said:
Clearly, "He will eat curds and honey" and "by the time he knows to refuse evil and choose good", are markers of time, of when Aram and Israel will lose the war.
And clearly all four verses don't indicate one way or the other, that the child Immanuel will be messiah or prophet.
Tumah
Veteran Member
I looked it up, there's a DSS online. It says either "וקרא" or "יקרא". Which means "and he called" and "he will call" respectively. Chances are its the former because otherwise without the "and" it sounds disjointed.
Ultimately, that's the point. In context it's talking about something relevant to the lives of the people. Otherwise, its not much of a sign for them. But first we have to explain to them how Hebrew grammar works.
CMike
Well-Known Member
This is the passage in hebrew
Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
יד. לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא לָכֶם אוֹת הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ עִמָּנוּ אֵל:
וְקָרָאת=And she will call
The word is feminine. It refers to a woman.
She will have a child and she will call him Immanuel.
Actually you guys have another problem.
Immanuel doesn't mean son of G-D.
It means "G-D is with us".
Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
יד. לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא לָכֶם אוֹת הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ עִמָּנוּ אֵל:
וְקָרָאת=And she will call
The word is feminine. It refers to a woman.
She will have a child and she will call him Immanuel.
Actually you guys have another problem.
Immanuel doesn't mean son of G-D.
It means "G-D is with us".
dantech
Well-Known Member
I find it funny that you protect the word "G-D" by skipping the O, but do not cut the actual name in the original language.
gnostic
The Lost One
tumah said:
Thank you for clearly that up. So it is a "he" in the Hebrew DSS passage.
I don't have the Hebrew texts, and even if I did have them, I couldn't read them.
Hence, I can only go by whatever English translations that are available to me. I only have one translation, right now - The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, by Abegg, Flint & Ulrich. I wished have more translations, so I can compare them against each other.
While you are here, and since you can read Hebrew, and that you have read the Masoretic Text in Hebrew, perhaps you can clear so thin up for me, with regarding to Isaiah 7:15?
In NRSV translation, it say "he", meaning "Immanuel" will eat curds and honey:
Isaiah 7:15 said:
But in NJPS translation, it say "people" be eating curds and honey:
Isaiah 7:15 said:
Which one does MT really say or mean? "He"? Or "people"? Which translation is correct?
And which "people" is the verse referring to? The people of Judah or Assyria?
In Isaiah 7:22, it does mention honey and curds again:
Again, which "people"?Isaiah 7:22 said:
Edit: could you also please supply the transliteration to 7:15 of the MT? Thanks
Last edited:
CMike
Well-Known Member
What's old?
Actually no one wants the messiah to come more than the jews. When the messiah comes the messianic prophesies will be fulfilled.
They are
world peace
All nations will worship one G-D
All the jews will come to Israel
All the jews will stay in Israel
The temple in jerusalem will be rebuilt and stand forevever
Zec 12:10 "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.
Context;
7. And the Lord shall first save the tents of Judah, so that the boasting of the house of David and the boasting of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall not increase over Judah.
8. On that day the Lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakest of them shall be, on that day, like David. And the house of David shall be like angels, like the angel of the Lord before them.
9. And it shall come to pass on that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come upon Jerusalem.
10. And I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplications. And they shall look to me because of those who have been thrust through [with swords], and they shall mourn over it as one mourns over an only son and shall be in
11. On that day there shall be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the Valley of Megiddon.
12. And the land shall mourn, every family apart: The family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart.
Context;
7. And the Lord shall first save the tents of Judah, so that the boasting of the house of David and the boasting of the inhabitants of Jerusalem shall not increase over Judah.
8. On that day the Lord shall protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the weakest of them shall be, on that day, like David. And the house of David shall be like angels, like the angel of the Lord before them.
9. And it shall come to pass on that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come upon Jerusalem.
10. And I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplications. And they shall look to me because of those who have been thrust through [with swords], and they shall mourn over it as one mourns over an only son and shall be in
11. On that day there shall be great mourning in Jerusalem, like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the Valley of Megiddon.
12. And the land shall mourn, every family apart: The family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart.
Context.
Yeshayahu - Chapter 28 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
7. These, too, erred because of wine and strayed because of strong wine; priest and prophet erred because of strong wine, they became corrupt because of wine; they went astray because of strong wine, they erred against the seer, they caused justice to stumble.
8. For all tables were filled with vomit and ordure, without place.
9. Whom shall he teach knowledge and to whom shall he explain the message? To those weaned from milk, removed from breasts?
11. For with distorted speech and in another language, does he speak to this people.
The passages are referring to the people who strayed because of wrong wine. The prophet will have a hard time getting them to understand the prophesies.
Incorrect translation.
Yeshayahu - Chapter 6 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible
10. This people's heart is becoming fat, and his ears are becoming heavy, and his eyes are becoming sealed, lest he see with his eyes, and hear with his ears, and his heart understand, and he repent and be healed."
These verses apply to this day, as implied in the NT. Ironically, God used Isaiah to prophesy of Jesus as well as Israel's blindness, which will be made evident in your next reply
There is no prophesy of jesus in the Tanach. Those are all christian concepts.
Your passages don't back up what you say. You either take them out of context, they are mistranslated or both.
The Torah says that the mother will her name him Immanuel. Jesus was never named IMmanuel.
The ultimate responsibility for naming him? His real father whomever he may be?
That is the christian bible. However, jesus is no where in the Tanach and he shouldn't be. He has nothing to do with judaism. He may be the christian god but he is not the jewish one.
Which is no where in Isaiah.
Isaiah is very clear. It said his parents will call him Solomon. They did. It says that Nathan will call him Yedidiah. He did. It's not murky. You don't have to do dancing and twisting.
He can do anything, but it doesn't say that in Isaiah does it? You have to make it up to try and get your square peg to fit into the round hole.
Because the christian bible has nothing to do with G-D's work.
G-D was very clear to the jews. The only commandments jews are to follow are those in the Torah. No commandments can be added nor subtracted.
Deuterenomy
Chapter 13
1. Everything I command you that you shall be careful to do it. You shall neither add to it, nor subtract from it.
Assuming you belive the Torah is G-D's word how can you do what G-D said explicitly not to do which is to add and subtract from the Torah?
CMike
Well-Known Member
Cutting it out would be worse.
Tumah
Veteran Member
Even with that its not easy, the letters are not modern Hebrew letters. I had to follow along on an MT to figure out where I was up to.
Literally the verse says, "Curd and honey, he shall eat; to his knowing disgust in the evil and choosing in the good."
I'm not sure who "they" are there.
Literally, this verse says "From abundance of making milk, he shall eat curd. Because curd and honey he shall eat - every[one who] remains in [the] midst of the land."
This verse is separate from the previous one and likely was only brought together because of the similar foods theme. Verses 17 and 18 have an opened paragraph break between them, usually noting a new idea. Then another between 20 and 21.
But more importantly, both verses 18 and 21 start with the words, "and it will be on that day." That usually denotes an eschatological prophecy. So in that context, what this verse is saying is that those that are living in Israel in the end-times will have their calf and two sheep (probably meaning a very small amount of animals) and those few animals will produce an abundance of milk for him.
In verse 21 the subject is whoever is living in Israel in those times, who will be eating curds and honey. In contrast, in verse 15, the subject is Immanuel who will be eating the curds and honey.
I get the feeling that the NJPS is going for the idea of the verse rather than an as-close-to-literal translation as possible.
dantech
Well-Known Member
Switching the "Nun" to a "Mem" comes to mind. halakhically speaking, I believe you are more required to do so for the Hebrew word, rather than the English one. I recall already discussing this with you, I think...
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi Mike, it's real name is the King James translation/version. They are fairly universally obtained.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by sincerly
It is obvious that the Jewish fathers did read and interprete passages to please themselves rather than obey the Creator GOD. Those Prophets were continually being sent to them to nudge them to repentance and conformity to the WILL of the Father.
The "It is finished" signified that all things which had been prophesied concerning HIM had been "Fulfilled." Also, the things which the "others" were to inflict upon HIM as well---were "fulfilled".
Moses still is being a witness to the Truths of GOD---and the reality of Jesus Christ.
Start with "Kings and Chronicles" them look at each of the Prophet's writings even to Malachi. Were they pleasing the Creator GOD?? NO, as a whole, but there were some--called "the Remnant"---which Obeyed.(That has been the case in all generations of the Human race.)
It is obvious that the Jewish fathers did read and interprete passages to please themselves rather than obey the Creator GOD. Those Prophets were continually being sent to them to nudge them to repentance and conformity to the WILL of the Father.
The "It is finished" signified that all things which had been prophesied concerning HIM had been "Fulfilled." Also, the things which the "others" were to inflict upon HIM as well---were "fulfilled".
Moses still is being a witness to the Truths of GOD---and the reality of Jesus Christ.
Start with "Kings and Chronicles" them look at each of the Prophet's writings even to Malachi. Were they pleasing the Creator GOD?? NO, as a whole, but there were some--called "the Remnant"---which Obeyed.(That has been the case in all generations of the Human race.)
CMike
Well-Known Member
It's not obvious to me. Perhaps you can give some examples?Originally Posted by sincerly
It is obvious that the Jewish fathers did read and interprete passages to please themselves rather than obey the Creator GOD. Those Prophets were continually being sent to them to nudge them to repentance and conformity to the WILL of the Father.
The "It is finished" signified that all things which had been prophesied concerning HIM had been "Fulfilled." Also, the things which the "others" were to inflict upon HIM as well---were "fulfilled".
Moses still is being a witness to the Truths of GOD---and the reality of Jesus Christ.
Start with "Kings and Chronicles" them look at each of the Prophet's writings even to Malachi. Were they pleasing the Creator GOD?? NO, as a whole, but there were some--called "the Remnant"---which Obeyed.(That has been the case in all generations of the Human race.)
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by sincerly
Thanks, Gnostic, Yes, Jesus was best known by "Jesus". However, HIS disciples/Apostles, also, acknowledged HIM as the Messiah and the SON of GOD---as was posted recently.(#896)
Originally Posted by sincerly
Thanks, Gnostic, Yes, Jesus was best known by "Jesus". However, HIS disciples/Apostles, also, acknowledged HIM as the Messiah and the SON of GOD---as was posted recently.(#896)
In public and while HE was alive?---NO! That was explained by Jesus to the Disciples that they should not do so. However, as previously stated(posted)---They knew and acknowledged the truth of that fact (as recorded)while HE was alive.
Matthew referred to Jesus throughout his "Gospel" account of the life and teachings of Jesus---Including, Matt.28:19-20, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
That is a teaching which all have acknowledged since HIS Crucifixion as "those things which are most surely believed among us". "It was Written for our learning and admonition."
Luke1:26, states the Angel's name to be Gabriel. Right! The Angel stated the child's name would be---"Jesus" to tell/describe the mission Jesus would be accomplishing---"For HE shall save his people from their sins." Matt.1:21.
Yes, Jesus is/was the "SON of the Highest"(GOD) and "Immanuel" still is interpreted as "GOD with us."Luke.1:32; Matt.1:23
You has repeated your false agenda over and over and it still is false. Why are you ignoring the prophetess's son as the "he"? Isaiah 8:18, acknowledges the "child of the "sign" in regards to those three kings. Isaiah and his sons----
and "Ma-her-shal-al-hash-baz" isn't "Im-man-u-el".
Thanks, Gnostic, Yes, Jesus was best known by "Jesus". However, HIS disciples/Apostles, also, acknowledged HIM as the Messiah and the SON of GOD---as was posted recently.(#896)
Originally Posted by sincerly
Thanks, Gnostic, Yes, Jesus was best known by "Jesus". However, HIS disciples/Apostles, also, acknowledged HIM as the Messiah and the SON of GOD---as was posted recently.(#896)
In public and while HE was alive?---NO! That was explained by Jesus to the Disciples that they should not do so. However, as previously stated(posted)---They knew and acknowledged the truth of that fact (as recorded)while HE was alive.
Matthew referred to Jesus throughout his "Gospel" account of the life and teachings of Jesus---Including, Matt.28:19-20, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."
That is a teaching which all have acknowledged since HIS Crucifixion as "those things which are most surely believed among us". "It was Written for our learning and admonition."
Luke1:26, states the Angel's name to be Gabriel. Right! The Angel stated the child's name would be---"Jesus" to tell/describe the mission Jesus would be accomplishing---"For HE shall save his people from their sins." Matt.1:21.
Yes, Jesus is/was the "SON of the Highest"(GOD) and "Immanuel" still is interpreted as "GOD with us."Luke.1:32; Matt.1:23
You has repeated your false agenda over and over and it still is false. Why are you ignoring the prophetess's son as the "he"? Isaiah 8:18, acknowledges the "child of the "sign" in regards to those three kings. Isaiah and his sons----
and "Ma-her-shal-al-hash-baz" isn't "Im-man-u-el".
sincerly
Well-Known Member
There is one on these threads who deems the Creator GOD as a myth, but seeks help.
CMike
Well-Known Member
Since I don't have hebrew characters on my keyboard I can't do this.