Tumah
Veteran Member
I am not the one adding the word "physical", buddy. And I'd like to direct your attention to Genesis 1:4 where G-d "physically" sees that the light was good. "Goodness" is as physical a concept as "salvation" which is to say, not physical at all. There is also Deut. 28:10, "and all the nations of the world will 'physically' see that the name of G-d is called upon you." Again, unless you believe that they physically etch the name of G-d onto their bodies, your interpretation makes no sense.Why what would you like to add to the dictionaries, and 1308 concordance references?
And that's because you're not making any sense.
No, it's not. Salvation means "preservation or deliverance from harm, ruin, or loss". The nation/s can see G-d saving Israel from harm as it happens. There is no need to re-interpret this word to mean a human being with the name "salvation". That's just weird and there's nothing supporting this interpretation.It isn't my reinterpretation, as not changing the word salvation into something else; when we take all of the text into account this is what is suggested...
You have no brought any verses supporting this.The chief corner stone is literally the Lord coming, as stated in Isaiah 28:21.
I don't know what the "it" is, but I'm sure as above, that you've not brought any verses supporting this.It was a physical occurrence in the battles against Ammon, and the red sea.
I feel a bit like a broken record, but again, the text does not support the interpretation you are attempting to derive from it.Then the texts suggests in Isaiah 52:10 (salvation of our God)...Isaiah 52:14 that the Servant will appear as the son of man.
Unfortunately, I suspect that this is caused by your inability to understand Biblical Hebrew. No such references exist.This is only a start to it, there are so many references where derivatives of the word yasha are used to suggest our Lord is our Salvation.
This is not supported.If you understood all the contextual applications of what was just said in context of the topic, you'd know that was integrating much of the Tanakh prophecies to come, cross referenced by what Yeshua stated.
Malachi only has 3 chapters.To explain that context for you: Our people were cut off by Yeshua (Malachi 4:5-6), where the Curse that Moses stated in Deuteronomy 28, Leviticus 26, was put on us from that point...
And this is not supported.
This is not supported.Yeshua warns not to follow the blind Pharisees (Matthew 15:14), else we will fall into the pit; which is prophetically about judgement on the whole world to come in Isaiah 24:17-18, where those who do not accept this Snare (Isaiah 8 + Isaiah 28) of recognizing the prophetic fulfillment of the Lord becoming Yeshua will be removed.
But it also uses the word seeing (H6493) in that verse and 2 Kings 6:17 also uses this word to describe seeing the horses there. Horses (H5483) is also used in 2 Kings 7:10 along with donkeys, thus indicating that there's going to be this guy on RF who doesn't follow the Rabbinic leaders yet thinks his eyes are opened, but he's really just being an ...donkey.The word blindness (H5788) is specifically used by Moses in Deuteronomy 28:28-29, and about Judah in Zechariah 12:4; thus indicating that after Zechariah 11 the 3 foolish shepherds (Pharisees, Sadducees, Levites), then create a worthless shepherd (Rabbinic Leaders), who won't understand this topic we're now discussing...
This is not complex keyword referencing. This is just you making up stories by re-interpreting passages that contain similar words. If you don't think this is eisegesis, I recommend grabbing a dictionary.So no it wasn't a switcheroo; just complex keyword referencing.