gadar perets
Messianic Hebrew
- May 11, 2016
- 4,252
- 1,042
- 71
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Unitarian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Isaiah 9 is written as a birth announcement regarding Hezekiah.
A "birth announcement" about a 39 year old king? I think not.
It even uses the past tense regarding his birth (כִּֽי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ "a child was born to us, a son was given to us" - the future would have been יִוָּלֵד and יִנָּתֵן, respectively). Why should it not be speaking about the child just born who would become the king of Judah (וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמ֑וֹ "and the governance is [has become] upon his shoulders" - "and the responsibility for governing is his")? In fact, even the "and his name will be called" is actually in the past tense (וַיִּקְרָ֨א for the past instead of וְקָרָא for the future). The child had already been named in this text. I don't see the problem there.[/QUOTE]
The Almighty knows the end from the beginning. He is declaring the birth and giving of the son as though it was a completed action even though it hadn't occurred yet. Consider Isa 5:13:
Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge: and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude dried up with thirst.
The people had not yet gone into captivity, yet the Almighty saw that end and inspired Isaiah to prophesy about a future event as though it was a completed event.
Consider, also, Isaiah 53 were the "Suffering Servant" is spoken of in the past tense. Many Jews believe this refers to Israel suffering in Isaiah's future even though it is written as past.
The problem you should be seeing is that Hezekiah does NOT fit the prophecy. See my next post.
Upvote
0