The Lord is our Strength and Song, he has Become Yeshua.

[wizanda]

Exodus 15:2 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation. This is my God, and I will praise him; my father’s God, and I will exalt him.

Psalms 118:14 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation.

Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation. I will trust, and will not be afraid; for Yah, Yahweh, is my strength and song; and he has become my salvation.”

So for Moses, David, and Isaiah, the Lord YHVH became Yeshua...

Really not sure how anyone could get this confused, and miss that the text told them in advance Yeshua was to be the physical representative from their Lord??

 

[Tumah]

That's because you suffer from short and long term memory loss. You've been told multiple times that the word for "salvation" - a noun - in Hebrew is "Y'SHU'aH". It is distinguished from the proper nouns Y'HOSHu'a and YeSHUa' (capitalized letters indicate Hebrew letters, lower case are vowel points).

Additionally, Psalm 2:4 in reference to G-d says that "He will laugh (yishak)", Psalms 27:9 and 47:18 call G-d "my help (ezra)" and Isaiah 1:24 says that G-d "will be comforted (nahem)". By your logic, Isaac, Ezra and Nahum should be incarnations of G-d as well.

 

[wizanda]

By your logic, Isaac, Ezra and Nahum should be incarnations of G-d as well.

Please don't speak about my logic, until you at least comprehend some of it....

As finding the Rabbinic thinking consistently illogical; so since currently we're speaking from two different angles, it would be useful if you got the basics, before acting as if you're superior.

Even your statement just now shows complete illogical comprehension of language; the verb 'to become', is a totally different word compared to, 'to laugh', 'to help', and 'to comfort'.

So will take that as a partial answer, some of the Jews have a disability to comprehend basic language, as they're overly pedantic, thus have missed the obvious.

It is distinguished from the proper nouns Y'HOSHu'a and YeSHUa' (capitalized letters indicate Hebrew letters, lower case are vowel points).

Comprehending metaphoric texts, means allowing multiple methodologies of comprehension at the same time.

The term Yeshua isn't a name, it is a concept of Salvation from God....

The idea that it needs to be a noun to comprehend the metaphoric concepts, leads to lots of problems, as that would then be implying that Yeshua was God in human form.

You've been told multiple times that the word for "salvation" - a noun - in Hebrew is "Y'SHU'aH".

Whereas I've questioned this, and it makes no difference in terms of prophetic writings; any word can be any form of grammar, a verb could appear as a noun, a noun as a concept to be done.

 

[Tumah]

Please don't speak about my logic, until you at least comprehend some of it....

I don't think I will ever be able to.

As finding the Rabbinic thinking consistently illogical; so since currently we're speaking from two different angles, it would be useful if you got the basics, before acting as if you're superior.

This may be an issue with you as opposed to with them. There are multiple rabbis who can understand the logic of their group. There is only one of you and you're constantly complaining that no one gets you.

Even your statement just now shows complete illogical comprehension of language; the verb 'to become', is a totally different word, compare to, 'to laugh', 'to help', and 'to comfort'.

Ohhh, you mean like in Gen. 21:20 when G-d becomes Ishmael.
ויהי - and be (masculine, singular, imperfect with vav-reverser indicating perfect) - same word as in the two verses you quoted in your OP.
אלוקים - G-d.
את - [no English counterpart, points to object]
הנער - the lad

And G-d was the lad. The lad in context is Ishmael.

So will take that as a partial answer, some of the Jews have a disability to comprehend basic language, as they're overly pedantic, thus have missed the obvious.

Yeah. Minor details. Like grammar.

Comprehending metaphoric texts, means allowing multiple methodologies of comprehension at the same time.

So your OP should really be, "why does no one understand the metaphors that I made up?"

The term Yeshua isn't a name, it is a concept of Salvation from God....

The noun yeshuah is a concept that makes no reference to G-d unless given it through surrounding context.

Also compare with:

the text told them in advance Yeshua was to be the physical representative from their Lord??​

The idea that it needs to be a noun to comprehend the metaphoric concepts, leads to lots of problems, as that would then be implying that Yeshua was God in human form.

Perhaps that indicates a problem with your metaphor.

Whereas I've question this, and it makes no difference in terms of prophetic writings; any word can be any form of grammar, a verb could appear as a noun, a noun as a concept to be done.

So anything can be anything, so long as it fits with the preconceived ideas that you need the text to be saying.
And also you wonder why no one understands what you're rambling on about.
Got it.

 

[wizanda]

There are multiple rabbis who can understand the logic of their group.

Unfortunately our people have been cut off for following fake leaders (Rabbis, etc), who've not been instructed by the Lord...

Thus after a few thousand years of illogical indoctrination, not surprised.

Like grammar.

If all our people have left is their own god of grammar, as they've denied the Messiah, rejected their invite to the Messianic age, dismissed the Lord, etc, can understand why.

So your OP should really be, "why does no one understand the metaphors that I made up?"

These are ancient text; now it is nice you recognize my divinity, yet these aren't my text alone.

I had no understanding of these things at 5/6 years old, these metaphors can be understood simply by being logical, and experimenting with all interpretations.

Because I'm someone who will check the extra options, just to see what happens; it is illogical for me, for someone not to try the extra options, when they are blatantly available.

you mean like in Gen. 21:20 when G-d becomes Ishmael.

See this is where having lots of references is better than reading the language on your own.

The word you're saying 'את - [no English counterpart, points to object]', within Strongs this is referenced as:

H854
אֵת
'êth
ayth
Probably from H579; properly nearness (used only as a preposition or adverb), near; hence generally with, by, at, among, etc.: - against, among, before, by, for, from, in (-to), (out) of, with. Often with another preposition prefixed.
Total KJV occurrences: 995

Therefore it isn't the same sentence structuring....

My understanding of Genesis 21:10 is 'The Divine shall become 'one' with the boy'; as in, 'they shall guide, assist, and progress his path'...Which if we look at what is being said, that fits.

Perhaps that indicates a problem with your metaphor.

I'm not bothered which theological concept is within a religious texts down here, doesn't affect reality...

Thus if it makes Yeshua physically YHVH Elohim, it doesn't bother my whole understanding...

Yet felt for Jewish constraints tried to simplify it to something that could be understood.

The noun yeshuah is a concept that makes no reference to G-d unless given it through surrounding context.

That is interesting, and something hadn't questioned, so thank you...

Have you got a case of Yeshuah (H3444) not being about some form of Salvation given by God?

So anything can be anything, so long as it fits with the preconceived ideas that you need the text to be saying.

Reversing things on to me, isn't going to work... My thinking has changed loads, I'm not limited by a religious boundary, thus have explored the concepts for what they're stating.

 

[Tumah]

Unfortunately our people have been cut off for following fake leaders (Rabbis, etc), who've not been instructed by the Lord...

There is no our. There's yours and mine.

Thus after a few thousand years of illogical indoctrination, not surprised.

You don't seem qualified to make the distinction.

If all our people

We do not share the same nation.

have left is their own god of grammar, as they've denied the Messiah, rejected their invite to the Messianic age, dismissed the Lord, etc, can understand why.

Yes. In recognition of the actual Word of G-d, we've rejected some concepts you made up when you were 5 or 6 and later reread into the text by ignoring conventional grammar and logic.

These are ancient text; now it is nice you recognize my divinity, yet these aren't my text alone.

Is this your version of humor?

I had no understanding of these things at 5/6 years old, these metaphors can be understood simply by being logical, and experimenting with all interpretations.

Nothing's changed since then.

Because I'm someone who will check the extra options, just to see what happens; it is illogical for me, for someone not to try the extra options, when they are blatantly available.

You haven't done this.

See this is where having lots of references is better than reading the language on your own.

The word you're saying 'את - [no English counterpart, points to object]', within Strongs this is referenced as:

Therefore it isn't the same sentence structuring....

My understanding of Genesis 21:10 is 'The Divine shall become 'one' with the boy'; as in, 'they shall guide, assist, and progress his path'...Which if we look at what is being said, that fits.

Try Strong's 853.

I'm not bothered which theological concept is within a religious texts down here, doesn't affect reality...

I'm don't think you're bothered by reality altogether.

Thus if it makes Yeshua physically YHVH Elohim, it doesn't bother my whole understanding...

Let's talk about understanding...

Yet felt for Jewish constraints tried to simplify it to something that could be understood.

I don't think that's the problem.

That is interesting, and something hadn't questioned, so thank you...

Have you got a case of Yeshuah (H3444) not being about some form of Salvation given by God?

1 Sam. 14:45

Reversing things on to me, isn't going to work... My thinking has changed loads, I'm not limited by a religious boundary, thus have explored the concepts for what they're stating.

You aren't limited by any boundary...

 

[wizanda]

There is no our. There's yours and mine.

So are you not of the same genealogy then? That explains why you don't get our book then, thanks.

You don't seem qualified to make the distinction.

Biblical prophets make it, Ezekiel 34, Jeremiah 23, Zechariah 11, Isaiah 29, etc...

There are multiple references that speak of the Shepherds over the people since the 2nd temple destruction being useless, and cheating the people, whilst feeding themselves; thus the Lord brings the Messiah to shepherd, as clearly they don't know what they're doing.

Is this your version of humor?

Everything has multiple contexts; humor was one of them.

Try Strong's 853.

So we're on the same page, suggest you get a copy of Esword, that way we can have strong references on every word, in both Hebrew+ and KJV+; it makes it far easier to check each specific words contexts then.

1 Sam. 14:45

Looked at that one myself multiple times, as it seems none contextual in a single verse; yet then we have to look at paragraph context, Jonathan brought them Salvation in battle, which comes from YHVH giving them victory.

You aren't limited by any boundary...

Limited by logic.

 

[Desert Snake]

Exodus 15:2 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation. This is my God, and I will praise him; my father’s God, and I will exalt him.

Psalms 118:14 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation.

Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation. I will trust, and will not be afraid; for Yah, Yahweh, is my strength and song; and he has become my salvation.”

So for Moses, David, and Isaiah, the Lord YHVH became Yeshua...

Really not sure how anyone could get this confused, and miss that the text told them in advance Yeshua was to be the physical representative from their Lord??

Its just that Scripture is not always easy to decipher.

 

[Desert Snake]

Exodus 15:2 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation. This is my God, and I will praise him; my father’s God, and I will exalt him.

Psalms 118:14 Yah is my strength and song. He has become my salvation.

Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation. I will trust, and will not be afraid; for Yah, Yahweh, is my strength and song; and he has become my salvation.”

So for Moses, David, and Isaiah, the Lord YHVH became Yeshua...

Really not sure how anyone could get this confused, and miss that the text told them in advance Yeshua was to be the physical representative from their Lord??

This is also why Jesus led the Israelites out of Egypt, according to the NT.

 

[Brickjectivity]

NIV says "The LORD is my strength and my defense[fn]; he has become my salvation...." Note it does not translate "He has become Joshua" which is what the OP tries to imply. Notice that it means 'The LORD Preserves.' and directly refers to sacred Jewish concepts. In other words it represents that Jews should keep the Torah and the LORD will preserve them. This makes so much sense, and to deny it is to deny that the Jews have been preserved through this means. Here they are, preserved, still here. The meaning of the text is plain.

Its also plain that Moses servant Hoshea gets his name changed to Joshua and that Jesus Christ is then named after him. The name Hoshua meaning 'Preservation' becomes 'The LORD Preserves' . Jesus is named after him. Matthew says its because he will save his people from their sins, exactly the same thing Joshua does. Its the same job so the same name. Jesus is explicitly named after Joshua.

Spoiler: Two references about the names Joshua and Jesus

Moses changes the name of a man named Hoshea to Joshua in Numbers 13:16.

Mary's son is named with the same letters, for the same stated reason, making it clear that he has the same name as Joshua though we pronounce it differently today. Matthew 1:21.

 

[wizanda]

This is also why Jesus led the Israelites out of Egypt, according to the NT.

Could you be specific please, not 100% sure where you're meaning?

 

[wizanda]

Jesus is explicitly named after Joshua.

Agreed, that it is a symbolic name given to them, because they'd bring Salvation in someway.

Note it does not translate "He has become Joshua" which is what the OP tries to imply.

In Isaiah 52:10 we have Yeshuat Eloheinu, the Salvation from our God; it isn't the point of defining a name, it is a metaphoric concept.

This makes so much sense, and to deny it is to deny that the Jews have been preserved through this means.

Sort of confused, as a 'Christian' view point, the Jews reject the fulfillment of prophecy by jesus; how then can we say they accept something, that they've clearly rejected?

 

[Desert Snake]

Could you be specific please, not 100% sure where you're meaning?

Hebrews 8:6-10

This is clearly a reference to Jesus in Spirit form, and He is the person who is making the "New Covenant"! Yet also, He is referenced as the one who made the "Old Covenant", and led the Israelites out of Egypt!

 

[Brickjectivity]

Agreed, that it is a symbolic name given to them, because they'd bring Salvation in someway.

In Isaiah 52:10 we have Yeshuat Eloheinu, the Salvation from our God; it isn't the point of defining a name, it is a metaphoric concept.

Sort of confused, as a 'Christian' view point, the Jews reject the fulfillment of prophecy by jesus; how then can we say they accept something, that they've clearly rejected?

When they see Jesus fulfills the purpose of Abraham they will accept it, and until it is plain they ought not to. I bet they'd be pleased as punch to see it, but for them it would be dishonest to turn away from real, obvious Salvation to follow a dream. They haven't seen Christ do what Christians believe will be accomplished in Christ. There is salvation in obeying the Torah, but there is a hope that one day all people will have Torah within themselves. Christians believe this is fulfilled in Christ and the dead in Christ rest in peace believing this will be obvious to all someday and that God will be all and in all. It is plain, however, that this fulfillment is in the future not in the present. In the words of Jesus his kingdom is not of this 'Epoch'. There is no point pretending that everything is honkey-dory, but call Jesus bright future into being and work to bring it about. Your faith is the evidence that it will come. "Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. This is what the ancients were commended for." (Hebrews 11:1-2) We do not see it, because it has not happened yet.