 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi MoJo,
Good  | MoJo wrote: | Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
1. give me a general range of how old this child might be. IOW, what age would be classified as a child who wasn't old enough to choose between good and evil. |
We don't have either a verse or any contemporary text to give us a fix on child development, but I've heard people put the child at anything from 3 to 12. In any case the dating of the birth of Hezekiah can't be fixed exactly either since the standard Massoretic text numbers (St Petersburg OT. 8thC AD) are confused in 2 Kings - suggesting Ahaz became a father at 11 and so on (!).
| Quote: | | 2. Who is the land that "thou abhorrest" |
The land Ahaz and Judah were at war with - Syria, and Samaria which had formed an alliance against Judah during the time of Jotham and Ahaz (2 Kings 15:37)
| Quote: | | 3. who are both her kings? |
Answer in verse 1 of the Immanuel chapter:
Isaiah 7:1 In the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, son of Uzziah, king of Judah, Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah the king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to wage war against it, but could not yet mount an attack against it.
But, as Isaiah predicted, before the boy Immanuel was very old, a far greater threat to Jerusalem had swept away first Syria and Damascus:
2 Kings 16:9 And the king of Assyria listened to him. The king of Assyria marched up against Damascus and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir, and he killed Rezin.
then the Northern kingdom:
2 Kings 15:29 In the days of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria came and captured Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and he carried the people captive to Assyria.
30 Then Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah and struck him down and put him to death and reigned in his place, in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.
31 Now the rest of the acts of Pekah and all that he did, behold, they are written in the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel.
This is why all but everyone recognises that there was an Immanuel in Ahaz' day too, and many commentaries suggest that Ahaz' son Hezekiah is a more appropriate type for the true Immanuel than an unknown third son of Isaiah.
Is this okay?
Steven |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MoJo
Moderator
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 3238
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steven wrote: | MoJo wrote:
Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
1. give me a general range of how old this child might be. IOW, what age would be classified as a child who wasn't old enough to choose between good and evil.
We don't have either a verse or any contemporary text to give us a fix on child development, but I've heard people put the child at anything from 3 to 12. In any case the dating of the birth of Hezekiah can't be fixed exactly either since the standard Massoretic text numbers (St Petersburg OT. 8thC AD) are confused in 2 Kings - suggesting Ahaz became a father at 11 and so on (!). |
So this becomes the crux of the matter.
2Ki 15:30 And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and smote him, and slew him, and reigned in his stead, in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.
2Ki 17:1 In the twelfth year of Ahaz king of Judah began Hoshea the son of Elah to reign in Samaria over Israel nine years.
This places the Is 7 prophecy sometime before Ahaz's twelfth year which means if the child is Hezekiah, Pekah is slain before this child is very old. Ahaz reigns for sixteen years and is succeeded by Hezekiah who is 25 when he begins to reign.
So the math doesn't add up. So at best, your position has to be that all of the the scriptures concerning times and ages of the various kings are wrong. Is that your position?
_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi MoJo | MoJo wrote: | | So the math doesn't add up. So at best, your position has to be that all of the the scriptures concerning times and ages of the various kings are wrong. Is that your position? |
Correct, as I said, the MT math doesn't add up. But for the purposes of discussing whether El Gibor in Is9:6 has a prior contemporary fulfillment before Christ it really doesn't matter. Either way you've already accepted what everyone accepts, that Immanu-el, in first fulfillment, is someone contemporary with Rezin and Pekah.
No the math in the Massoretic Text doesn't add up, which leaves 2 options:
A. The Hebrew MT math is correctly copied, in which case the initial Emmanu-el is probably the prophet's own 3rd son. That I think is the view you'll find in most out-of-copyright Victorian commentaries.
B. More modern commentaries usually take the view that the Greek OT math (4thC codex Alexandrinus? I don't have my LXX apparatus here so can't check) is more correct than the Hebrew MT math (8thC St Petersburg codex). Although it's shocking to some folk that the Greek OT codices could ever be more accurate than the Hebrew OT codices it can happen sometimes - particularly where vowel pointing and digits are the issue. e.g. Acts 7 takes the Greek OT math re Exodus.
Neither A nor B affects Is9:6. FWIW, since you ask, my personal feeling (not dogmatic, say 80%) is that the 20thC commentaries present a better case for B, and 18th-19thC tradition that it's Isaiah's 3rd son are somewhat dull to the context of Isaiah Ahaz and Hezekiah, and rather naive about the accuracy of numerals in the Hebrew MT. But A or B is for each of us to weigh up for him/herself. Anyway... let's move on...
Having established there are two options re. Immanu-el, how would those affect Is9:6 "called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom" 
if A  then Immanu-el is initially fulfilled by Isaiah's 3rd son, after Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz,
but Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom can still be initially fulfilled by Hezekiah. i.e. 4 names, 4 boys, very clean.
if B then there perhaps needs to be an explanation why Hezekiah is called Immanu-el twice, then Isaiah switches to Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom.
So really, it's not that revolutionary - since once someone has recognised that the "two kings" in Is7:16 are the same as in 7:1 (Pekah and Rezin), then there has to be an initial fulfillment for Immanu-el, and whether the first Immanu-el was Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz's brother, or not, the child "called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom" should fit the series of Immanu-el, Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Except the child "called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom" is even less likely to be Isaiah's 4th son than Immanu-el is Isaiah's 3rd son, all rather unlikely. Hezekiah is a much better type*:
2 Kings 18:5 He trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him**, nor among those who were before him.
God bless
S.
(*I'm assuming everyone knows what a type is? Another word would be "(fore)shadow" or "pattern")(**The difference with Josiah being trusted in the LORD, not the law).
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoJo
Moderator
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 3238
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While I try to digest your post, I thought this might be an interesting read. I found it interesting, anyway.
http://www.ldolphin.org/icc-am.html
_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theseldomscene
Banned
Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i could not get it  ...also... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoJo
Moderator
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 3238
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steven wrote: | if A then Immanu-el is initially fulfilled by Isaiah's 3rd son, after Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz,
but Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom can still be initially fulfilled by Hezekiah. i.e. 4 names, 4 boys, very clean.
if B then there perhaps needs to be an explanation why Hezekiah is called Immanu-el twice, then Isaiah switches to Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom.
So really, it's not that revolutionary - since once someone has recognised that the "two kings" in Is7:16 are the same as in 7:1 (Pekah and Rezin), then there has to be an initial fulfillment for Immanu-el, and whether the first Immanu-el was Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz's brother, or not, the child "called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom" should fit the series of Immanu-el, Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Except the child "called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom" is even less likely to be Isaiah's 4th son than Immanu-el is Isaiah's 3rd son, all rather unlikely. Hezekiah is a much better type*: |
I must be having a blond moment because you've completely lost me on this. Don't know how we got to a third son of Isaiah or what you mean by fitting the series. ????? Could you rephrase and use the english for Is 9:6 so I don't have to strain my brain. If you want to use strong's translation that's fine.
And just to be clear, I haven't yet accepted this;
| Quote: | | Either way you've already accepted what everyone accepts, that Immanu-el, in first fulfillment, is someone contemporary with Rezin and Pekah. |
All I am doing is clarifying context, not voicing a conclusion.
_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi MoJo, I don't think anyone's being blond. Sorry, that was a very condensed post assuming a lot of historical background.
There are 4 boys with prophetic names:
1. Is7:3 Shear-jashub = A-remnant-shall-return
2. Is8:1,3 Maher-shalal-hash-baz = The spoil speeds, the prey hastens
3. Is7:14, 8:8 Immanu-El = With us God.
4. Is9:16 called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom =
Wonderful-counselor-Mighty one-everlasting-father-prince of peace.
1. is definitely Isaiah's 1st son.
1. is definitely Isaiah's 2nd son.
3. may be Isaiah's 3rd son or Ahaz' son Hezekiah. + in the NT is Christ.
4. may be Isaiah's 4th son or Ahaz' son Hezekiah + in the NT is Christ, or may not exist in Isaiah's time at all.
The reason most modern commentators identify 3. as Hezekiah not Isaiah's son is
1. There is no record of Isaiah having a 3rd son.
2. Isaiah would have had to get married again to a virgin.
3. Is 8:8 "and it will sweep on into Judah, it will overflow and pass on, reaching even to the neck, and its outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel.” (Immanuel's land = Judea, king of Judea = O Hezekiah)
4. Is 8:10 "Take counsel together, but it will come to nothing; speak a word, but it will not stand, for God is with us." The Hebrew here for God is with us is Immanuel again, fulfilled when the angel of death destroyed the Assyrian army encircling Hezekiah in Jerusalem.
5. etc. there's plenty more.
| MoJo wrote: | | Quote: | | Either way you've already accepted what everyone accepts, that Immanu-el, in first fulfillment, is someone contemporary with Rezin and Pekah. |
All I am doing is clarifying context, not voicing a conclusion. |
7:8 For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.
S
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MoJo
Moderator
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 3238
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Steven. That was very much clearer, thanx.
On careful research and study of all the scriptures dealing with this time period, I've reached a semi-conclusion for the moment until further enlightenment. I believe the latter part of Is 7 is a prophecy concerning Jesus as per Matt. I believe Is 8 is speaking of Isaiah's second son and that Is 9 jumps from the time of Ahaz and fast forwards to Jesus.
This is how the context and the supporting scriptures concerning the kings and Assyria and the events, etc are speaking to me at the moment.
_________________
matt 6: 34 "Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steven3
Lion King
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 1205
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi MoJo | MoJo wrote: | | Hi Steven. That was very much clearer, thanx. |
you're more than welcome. | Quote: | | On careful research and study of all the scriptures dealing with this time period, I've reached a semi-conclusion for the moment until further enlightenment. I believe the latter part of Is 7 is a prophecy concerning Jesus as per Matt. I believe Is 8 is speaking of Isaiah's second son |
The two Immanu-El verses in 8:8 and 8:10 (translated in KJV) refer to Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz in 8:3? That's one possibility. But generally commentators make a big deal about which comes first - a baby saying "mother, father" or a baby "tell wrong from right". Did Isaiah mean Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz would be younger than Immanu-el, or older, or the same age...? Lots of options here. | Quote: | | and that Is 9 jumps from the time of Ahaz and fast forwards to Jesus. |
With no relation to Isaiah and Hezekiah whatsoever? I'm not sure that's sound: 9:5 is generally read as having an initial fulfillment in Is37:36. 9:9,14 specifically mentions Samaria and Ephraim, which has no NT or Last Day equivalent. | Quote: | | This is how the context and the supporting scriptures concerning the kings and Assyria and the events, etc are speaking to me at the moment. |
Okay, the details don't really matter - the important thing is appreciating that Isaiah works on two levels - some refers to the time of Ahaz/Hezekiah, some refers to Christ, some refers to both. But I think you're still having difficulty with accepting the basic premise that one OT verse can simultaneously refer to both Christ and a contemporary type-of-Christ.
The OT isn't so neat and tidy: | hypothetical neat clean division wrote: |
9:4 "exult when dividing plunder" = Sennacherib's camp
9:5 "boots of the trampling warriors" = Assyrians
[700 year gap]
9:6 "a child has been born to us" = definitely absolutely has absolutely no possible initial fulfillment or shadow whatsover in the one called Strength of Yah (Hezekiah). |
 
In fact even the NT isn't so neat and tidy. I challenge anyone to divide every verse in the Olivet Prophecy between initial fulfillment under Titus and Christ's second coming. (actually scratch that, I don't challenge , the last thing I need to read is someone doing that).
God bless
S
_________________
Jo5:26 The Father ... has granted the Son also to have life in himself.
Ro6:10 the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.
2Co13:4 he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
