The Christian Greek Horse of Isaiah 9:6

Ben Masada

New member
The Christian Greek Horse of Isaiah 9:6


Here is a prophecy that has made many a Jew come to their knees, as they allow the Greek Horse into their abode supposing it to be a gift of God as the last and irrefutable word. Deep inside of one is the key for the truth deep inside of the other. But for lack of Knowledge my People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

When the Ten Tribes had been totally removed by Assyria, a group of Gentiles had been transfered to inhabit the cities of Samaria. After about 100 years, Judah in the South went into a temporary exile of 70 years in Babylon. In the meantime, Galilee became known as the District of the Gentiles, and eventually, the people started being called by the name of Samaritans.

Due to the approaching end of the Babylonian exile, the Gentile Priests of Galilee and Samaria had studied the prophecies of Isaiah and had been made aware of the end of the exile. They obviously had understood about the virgin Israel who had fallen and removed from existence, according to Amos 5:2 and Psalm 78:68, and that Judah, the son of that virgin, according to Isaiah 7:14,15, 22; 8:8, was about to return.

Now, to understand Isaiah 9:6, we must set it into the context of the whole chapter which speaks about the return of the Jews from Babylon, whose way back to Jerusalem was through the sea road west of the Jordan, called the Galilee of the Gentiles. (Isa. 9:1)

So, the people in this region, walking in darkness, saw a great light, which is a reference to the Jews returning through their lands in the direction of Jerusalem, and eventually settling throughout the Land, including the North. (Isa. 9:2)

The bottom line is that Isaiah 9:6 is a prophecy of Isaiah about those Gentiles in Galilee welcoming the great light they were getting with the return of the Jews. So, they would sing in the streets so to speak, proclaiming that a child was born to them, that the son had finally been given to them, and, as it is only natural and common among Gentiles, to render Divine attributes to the Benefactors, they would name the returning Jewish People as Wonderful, Counselor, even as the Mighty God Himself, the Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Just as the Egyptians would call Pharaoh himself. And Immanuel, God with us, which Isaiah himself had identified with Judah. (Isa. 8:8)

The point, therefore, is that Isaiah 9:6 is a prophecy about the excitement of the Gentiles welcoming the legitimate owners of the Land, who would reestablish the throne of David and bring peace to the Land and not a prophecy about someone who was supposed to come. (Isa. 9:7)
 

beameup

New member
So, when Nehemiah and Ezra describe the opposition to the return of the Jews by the Gentile usurpers living in Jerusalem, they were just "having a bad dream"?
 

Ben Masada

New member
So, when Nehemiah and Ezra describe the opposition to the return of the Jews by the Gentile usurpers living in Jerusalem, they were just "having a bad dream"?

No, when Ezra and Nehemiah returned with the Jews from Babylon, they knew that according to the "New Order" aka the New Covenant, the prophetic system had ceased to exist. (Daniel 9:24)
 

beameup

New member
No, when Ezra and Nehemiah returned with the Jews from Babylon, they knew that according to the "New Order" aka the New Covenant, the prophetic system had ceased to exist. (Daniel 9:24)

No, those gentiles who had moved into Canaan fought with the returning Jews, they did not "clap their hands" and "rejoice" at their return. Maybe you had a dream about this?
Many of the "minor prophets" came after the return from Babylon. And since you quoted Daniel 9, it emphatically states that "THE MESSIAH" "the PRINCE" would come near the BCE-CE point.
 

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings Ben Masada,
The point, therefore, is that Isaiah 9:6 is a prophecy about the excitement of the Gentiles welcoming the legitimate owners of the Land, who would reestablish the throne of David and bring peace to the Land and not a prophecy about someone who was supposed to come. (Isa. 9:7)
I am not sure how you can have the re-establishment of the throne of David, and not have a descendant, and even the principal descendant of David, the Messiah to sit upon that throne. Whether or not you accept Jesus as the Messiah, there must of necessity be the Messiah, and he must be David’s descendant.

One area of interest when considering Isaiah’s prophecies is to try to understand what the prophecy meant when given. When the history of the time is determined, and when the era of the respective king is also considered, then there can be a better assessment of the message. Isaiah 7-12 appears to be given in Ahaz’s time, and spoken to the southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Ahaz was a wicked king, and Isaiah seems to bypass him after the failed contact in Isaiah 7. He speaks of a future descendant of David, and this king would be faithful. In the context of Ahaz’s time, this child would be Hezekiah, and he partially fulfils Isaiah’s prophecies about a Prince of Peace upon the Throne of David. This framework of a partial fulfilment helps us to understand more fully the future descendant of David who will sit upon the throne of David in Jerusalem, and also be a King-Priest Isaiah 2:1-4, Psalm 110:4.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

Ben Masada

New member
No, those gentiles who had moved into Canaan fought with the returning Jews, they did not "clap their hands" and "rejoice" at their return. Maybe you had a dream about this? Many of the "minor prophets" came after the return from Babylon. And since you quoted Daniel 9, it emphatically states that "THE MESSIAH" "the PRINCE" would come near the BCE-CE point.

No, they did not fight the returnee Jews from Babylon at the beginning. Rather their welcome was prophesied by Isaiah in 9:5,6. That was a fantastic welcome as if they were welcoming gods. Only later on, when the Jews started building the walls
of Jerusalem and still worse when the Jews started building the Temple. Those Gentiles had become like the Palestinians of today.
 

Ben Masada

New member
Greetings Ben Masada,
I am not sure how you can have the re-establishment of the throne of David, and not have a descendant, and even the principal descendant of David, the Messiah to sit upon that throne. Whether or not you accept Jesus as the Messiah, there must of necessity be the Messiah, and he must be David’s descendant.

One area of interest when considering Isaiah’s prophecies is to try to understand what the prophecy meant when given. When the history of the time is determined, and when the era of the respective king is also considered, then there can be a better assessment of the message. Isaiah 7-12 appears to be given in Ahaz’s time, and spoken to the southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Ahaz was a wicked king, and Isaiah seems to bypass him after the failed contact in Isaiah 7. He speaks of a future descendant of David, and this king would be faithful. In the context of Ahaz’s time, this child would be Hezekiah, and he partially fulfils Isaiah’s prophecies about a Prince of Peace upon the Throne of David. This framework of a partial fulfilment helps us to understand more fully the future descendant of David who will sit upon the throne of David in Jerusalem, and also be a King-Priest Isaiah 2:1-4, Psalm 110:4.

Kind regards
Trevor

To begin with, Jesus was neither from the Tribe of Judah if we are to believe the NT and, second, Jesus never became a king in the Land of Israel. If you are of those who claim that he will become a king when he returns, you might have to wait perhaps another 2000 years.

Now, with the establishment of the New Covenant according to Jeremiah 31:31 aka the New Order, the Tribal system in Israel among other things ceased to exist and, since then, all is Judah the Tribe HaShem promised David to spare as a Lamp
forever in Jerusalem. (I Kings 11:36) Today, there is no need to check if one is from the Tribe of Judah or not. All is Judah, the new Israel.
 

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings again Ben Masada,

To begin with, Jesus was neither from the Tribe of Judah if we are to believe the NT and, second, Jesus never became a king in the Land of Israel.
I am not sure how you come to that conclusion as the following indicates that Mary was a descendant of David:
Luke 1:30-35 (KJV): 30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
This teaches that the one God whom David worshipped, known in the NT as God the Father, was the father of Jesus, while Mary was his mother, and thus Jesus is literally the Son of God. Thus Jesus is the seed of David as promised in 2 Samuel 7:12-16. And yes, he will rule over Jacob as the first dominion of the Kingdom of God when he returns to sit upon the throne of David in Jerusalem. The fact that he must reign forever, as promised in the covenant to David, necessitated that he be given immortality. This was granted after he suffered and died, as also prophesied. His miraculous birth was also prefigured in the birth of Isaac, and his antitypical burnt offering, or the true burnt offering was also typified in the offering of Isaac in Genesis 22.
If you are of those who claim that he will become a king when he returns, you might have to wait perhaps another 2000 years.
Ezekiel 38 depicts these events to occur soon after the scattered Israelites have returned to their land after the land had been desolate for many years, and they have returned as agriculturalists and traders. There have been various Aliyahs, but apart from some more Jews returning from Europe, this process could be almost complete. I personally expect these events to happen soon, especially as we see the Russian involvement in the Middle East, and I believe that Russia is the King of the North.
Now, with the establishment of the New Covenant according to Jeremiah 31:31 aka the New Order, the Tribal system in Israel among other things ceased to exist and, since then, all is Judah the Tribe HaShem promised David to spare as a Lamp forever in Jerusalem. (I Kings 11:36) Today, there is no need to check if one is from the Tribe of Judah or not. All is Judah, the new Israel.
I am not sure of what you are saying here, but you could explain. I do not believe that Jeremiah 31:31 has yet been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled when the Israelites accept their Messiah when he is revealed to them.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

beameup

New member
No, they did not fight the returnee Jews from Babylon at the beginning. Rather their welcome was prophesied by Isaiah in 9:5,6. That was a fantastic welcome as if they were welcoming gods. Only later on, when the Jews started building the walls
of Jerusalem and still worse when the Jews started building the Temple. Those Gentiles had become like the Palestinians of today.

Your opinion is not supported by the facts.
 

Ben Masada

New member
Greetings again Ben Masada,

I am not sure how you come to that conclusion as the following indicates that Mary was a descendant of David: Luke 1:30-35 (KJV)

Even if Mary had been a literal daughter of David, that would not make of Jesus from the Tribe of Judah. Tribal genealogy went down through the father, not the mother.The mother only gave the child its Jewish identity.

30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Jesus was indeed a son of God but as part of the People of Israel whom HaShem Himself declared, "Israel is My son..." (Exodus 4:22,23)

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

All Israel was called the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23. However, the way the NT claims Jesus was born is not Jewish but Hellenistic. Therefore, it did not happen.

This teaches that the one God whom David worshipped, known in the NT as God the Father, was the father of Jesus, while Mary was his mother, and thus Jesus is literally the Son of God.

Sorry Trevor, but this is possible only among the Greeks aka Mythology. Since Jesus was a Jew, it did not happen.

Thus Jesus is the seed of David as promised in 2 Samuel 7:12-16.

There is nothing in 2 Samuel about being Jesus of the seed of David.

And yes, he will rule over Jacob as the first dominion of the Kingdom of God when he returns to sit upon the throne of David in Jerusalem. The fact that he must reign forever, as promised in the covenant to David, necessitated that he be given immortality. This was granted after he suffered and died, as also prophesied.

Oh! He will be a king only when he return! Sorry but, you might have to wait another 2000 years.

His miraculous birth was also prefigured in the birth of Isaac, and his antitypical burnt offering, or the true burnt offering was also typified in the offering of Isaac in Genesis 22. Ezekiel 38 depicts these events to occur soon after the scattered Israelites have returned to their land after the land had been desolate for many years, and they have returned as agriculturalists and traders. There have been various Aliyahs, but apart from some more Jews returning from Europe, this process could be almost complete. I personally expect these events to happen soon, especially as we see the Russian involvement in the Middle East, and I believe that Russia is the King of the North.

Now, you are simply speculating according to Christian preconceived notions as you can't produce any evidence for what you say above.

I am not sure of what you are saying here, but you could explain. I do not believe that Jeremiah 31:31 has yet been fulfilled, but will be fulfilled when the Israelites accept their Messiah when he is revealed to them.

The New Covenant was fulfilled when the New World Order was establish after the Jews returned from Babylon and formed the 2nd Jewish Commonwealth. (Ezekiel 37:22)

Kind regards
Trevor
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
10 For the Lord has poured out on you The spirit of deep sleep, And has closed your eyes, namely, the prophets; And He has covered your heads, namely, the seers.
 

TrevorL

Well-known member
Greetings again Ben Masada,
Even if Mary had been a literal daughter of David, that would not make of Jesus from the Tribe of Judah. Tribal genealogy went down through the father, not the mother. The mother only gave the child its Jewish identity.
I accept the NT statement that Mary was a descendant of David. You may like to add a rule to exclude Mary, but she is the link to David. Jesus’ father was the one God, God the Father. There are other NT claims to Jesus’ descent from David, and the first is by a Jew to Jews, and the second is by a Jew to mainly Gentiles. None of these introduced your supposed rule, or rejected their claims on the basis of your rule:
Acts 2:29-32 (KJV): 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

Romans 1:1-4 (KJV): 1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:


Jesus was indeed a son of God but as part of the People of Israel whom HaShem Himself declared, "Israel is My son..." (Exodus 4:22,23)
Luke 1:35 indicates that Jesus was also the Son of God because God the Father was his father, and Mary was his mother. Romans 1:4 also indicates that he was shown to be the Son of God because of his holy character, and by his being resurrected from the dead.

All Israel was called the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23. However, the way the NT claims Jesus was born is not Jewish but Hellenistic. Therefore, it did not happen.
Good logic, but I accept the NT to predate the many corruptions that were introduced into Apostate Christendom by Greek philosophy.

There is nothing in 2 Samuel about being Jesus of the seed of David.
2 Samuel does speak of David’s descendant and uses the following terms:
2 Samuel 7:12-16 (KJV): 12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: 15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. 16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
This last part necessitates David’s resurrection, and this resurrection and this new covenant in total is termed “the sure mercies of David”.

Oh! He will be a king only when he return! Sorry but, you might have to wait another 2000 years.
I have already given one indication why I believe it is soon. Another is Daniel 8 where the 2300 evening mornings find their fulfilment from BC 334-333 to AD 1967 when Jerusalem was returned to the control of the Israelis. This is a first step in restoring worship at Jerusalem when Jesus returns.

Now, you are simply speculating according to Christian preconceived notions as you can't produce any evidence for what you say above.
Except for what the prophecy of Ezekiel 38 and its context simply and clearly states.

The New Covenant was fulfilled when the New World Order was establish after the Jews returned from Babylon and formed the 2nd Jewish Commonwealth. (Ezekiel 37:22)
Jeremiah 31:31-34 (KJV): 31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
The return under Ezra and Nehemiah and guided by Zerubbabel, Haggai and Zechariah did see some reestablishment of true worship, but this was only temporary, and it was a partial restoration of the Mosaic Covenant. Malachi clearly indicates that the Nation of Judah were failing again, and the devastation of AD 70 is clear testimony that this New Covenant is still future with respect to the nation of Israel and their worship.

Kind regards
Trevor
 

Ben Masada

New member
Greetings again Ben Masada, I accept the NT statement that Mary was a descendant of David.

Greetings! You have all the right in the world to but do not forget that Jesus was a Jew and Joseph his father was the one from the Tribe of Judah. If Jesus was not a biological son of Joseph, he could not have been from the Tribe of Judah.

You may like to add a rule to exclude Mary, but she is the link to David.

The point here is not Mary but Jesus. As I said before, even if Mary was a direct daughter of King David, Jesus could not have been from the Tribe of Judah
if he was not a biological son of Joseph.

Jesus’ father was the one God, God the Father. There are other NT claims to Jesus’ descent from David, and the first is by a Jew to Jews, and the second is by a Jew to mainly Gentiles. None of these introduced your supposed rule, or rejected their claims on the basis of your rule:

The rule is not mine. Ask any Rabbi if a child could become of the Tribe of the mother rather than of the father and you will have the same rule I stated.

Acts 2:29-32 (KJV): 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;



31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
 

Ben Masada

New member
Greetings! You have all the right in the world to but do not forget that Jesus was a Jew and Joseph his father was the one from the Tribe of Judah. If Jesus was not a biological son of Joseph, he could not have been from the Tribe of Judah.

The point here is not Mary but Jesus. As I said before, even if Mary was a direct daughter of King David, Jesus could not have been from the Tribe of Judah if he was not a biological son of Joseph.

The rule is not mine. Ask any Rabbi if a child could become of the Tribe of the mother rather than of the father and you will have the same rule I stated.

Acts 2:29-32 (KJV): 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

"Christ" by definition means the Anointed One of the Lord. If you read Prophet Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what "Christ" is, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23.

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

The term "witnesses" is usually from hear-say. An eyewitness would be more to the point and there was none. But I don't need an eyewitness as I already have going on for me that the Scriptures, which Jesus always referred to as the Word of God states loud and clear that, "Once dead no one will ever return from the grave." (II Samuel 12:23; Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; Psalm 49:12,20)
 
Top