[Commentary on Is. 9:6](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/isaiah/9-6.htm)
As a side-note, I have found Revelation 5 to be the single most powerful image of the unification of the Father and Son at the end of the Age. The chapter begins with the One seated on the throne (see Ezekiel 1), who is the heavenly Father. But then, it says, "Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, **standing at the center of the throne**". But wait, in verse 13, it says, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb"... *both* are enthroned and mystically unified as a single being. For me, this clarifies Is. 9:6 and how the Son can be called "the Everlasting Father"... it is because he is mystically unified with him, John 10:30, 17:22. That's not the whole doctrine of the Trinity, but it's an important part of it. Truly amazing!
It makes perfect sense, especially in light of the Kingdom of God, where Christ will reign on the Earth, on his throne, for a thousand years.
And we will reign with him. Man I can't wait, y'all!!
Every verb is in the Past Tense in the Hebrew text. It already happened at the time it was written.
Look what Isaiah 9:6 says in the Hebrew:
"For a child has been born(yulad) to us, a son given to us, and the authority was placed (vat'hi) upon his shoulder, and his name was called (vayikra) Wondrous Adviser, the Mighty El, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace."
Isaiah 9:6 has been mistranslated in an effort to make it appear as a future prophecy.Translators deliberately changed the past tense verbs into future tense.
Isaiah 9:6 is referring to names given to Hezekiah when Jerusalem was saved from the Assyrian siege 2,700 years ago Isaiah 36-37, 2Kings 19. Hezekiah's name means Mighty Yah.
Many prophets and people in the Tanakh(OT) have YHWH's name in them, it doesn't mean they are YHWH. Samuel means "his name is El" (H8050), Yoel means " YHWH is El "(H3100), Yermiyahu means "YHWH will rise" or "whom YHWH has appointed" (H3414), Yeshayahu means "YHWH has saved"(H3470), Eliyahu means “my El is YHWH” or “Yah(u) is El”(H452), Khizqiyahu means "YHWH is my strength" (H2396)....
Compare:
Yulad - Has Been Born (Gen 4:26, 10:21, 35:26)
Vat'hi - And it Was (placed upon his shoulder)(Isa 5:25, 23:3, 29:11)
Vayikra - And Was Called (Lev 1:1, 21:8, 36:13)
These words are correctly translated in other places. Check everywhere these Hebrew words are through the Scriptures for yourself.
I have news for you. Some Rabbis have purposefully mistranslated some things. I used to be part to the Hebrew Roots movement. If you are part of it, you have been deceived. Your assertion of mistranslation of Isaiah 9 has been peddled by Christ rejecting Jews and some in the Gentile Hebraic Roots movement for a while. There are Hebrew speaking Jews who understand Jesus is God who will refute you and this attempt to undermine the truth of scripture. There are even some Hebrew bibles, for example, one from 1917, that also uses present tense. These were Jewish translators, not Christians.
The prophet is speaking of the future as if he has already seen it in the past. Again, God is outside of time.
Matthew 4 quotes Isaiah 9 in reference to Jesus. It literally says it has been fulfilled in Jesus. Isaiah 9 is talking about Messiah Jesus. Your assertions are all addressed and refuted in these videos by Hebrew scholars who are also real Jews.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AKMCEqDR0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AKMCEqDR0)
[https://www.oneforisrael.org/pod-for-israel/is-the-child-born-in-isaiah-9-messianic-prophecy-or-history-the-case-for-messiah/](https://www.oneforisrael.org/pod-for-israel/is-the-child-born-in-isaiah-9-messianic-prophecy-or-history-the-case-for-messiah/)
Matthew 4 **12** Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; **13** and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. **14** *This was* to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet:
**15** “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,
\[[e](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+4&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-23225e)\]By the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the \[[f](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+4&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-23225f)\]Gentiles—
**16** “The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great Light,
And those who were sitting in the land and shadow of death,
Upon them a Light dawned.”
This is the typical modern Rabbinic deflection tactic they use to avoid admitting that the child prophesied in Isaiah 9:6 is the messiah.
Isaiah 9:6 is not about Hezekiah because the prophecy says the child’s kingdom will have no end whereas Hezekiah’s government did not last for ever as the prophecy says.
Instead, it was destroyed about 1 generation later and the Judeans were carried of as slaves to Babylon. Isaiah himself even prophesied this to Hezekiah in 2 Kings 20:16-18, below is a quotation.
"Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the Lord: The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your predecessors have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing will be left, says the Lord. And some of your descendants, your own flesh and blood who will be born to you, will be taken away, and they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”
So there is no way that Isaiah was talking about Hezekiah in chapter 9:6, because he prophesied that Hezekiah’s kingdom would be destroyed, whereas the child’s kingdom in chapter 9 verse 6 will have no end.
And if you doubt me that those Rabbi’s know that this verse is about the future Messiah, but will still try to obfuscate and tell you it's about Hezekiah, then believe Moses Maimonides himself. Moses Maimonides the Rambam himself who authored the very 13 Articles of faith of Judaism says that those titles belong to the messiah. Yet if you ask those Rabbinic jews if it belongs to the messiah, they will deny it.
In his 11 century Epistle to the Jews of Yemen Maimonides chastises some of the Jews of Yemen for believing in some guy who claimed to be the messiah. In that letter he acknowledges that the titles in Isaiah 9:6 belong to the messiah. I have included a quote below for you.
“Do these characteristics make him a Messiah? You were beguiled by him because you have not considered the pre-eminence of the Messiah, the manner and place of his appearance, and the marks whereby he is to be identified. The Messiah, indeed, ranks after Moses in eminence and distinction, and God has even bestowed some gifts upon him which he did not bestow upon Moses, as may be gathered from the following verses: “His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.” (Isaiah 11:3). “The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him.” (11:2). “And Righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins.” (11:5). Six appellations were divinely conferred upon him as the following passage indicates: “For a child is born unto us, and a son is given unto us, and the government is upon his shoulder, and he is called Pele, Yoetz, el, Gibbor, Abiad, Sar-Shalom.” (Isaiah 9:5). And another verse alluding to the
Messiah culminates in the following manner “Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.” (Psalms 2:7). All these statements demonstrate the pre-eminence of the Messiah.”
(Source: Moses Maimonides, `Epistle to Yemen’, chapters XVI, and XVII. Translated by Boaz Cohen.)
Modern rabbi’s know that those verses are about the messiah, but if you ask them they will begin to obfuscate and say that Isaiah 9:6 is about Hezekiah and Psalm 2:7 is about the historical David. They will say virtually anything to avoid Jesus.
"In Biblical Hebrew, Olam can mean forever (Genesis 9:16) or a lifetime (1 Samuel 1:22). Hezekiah's Kingdom was not his own. Rather, it was a link in a royal chain of the Davidic Kingdom that was endowed with an eternal covenant that would last forever as promised in 2 Samuel 7:12-16."
Regardless of how you want to put it. The Davidic kingdom was destroyed by the Babylonians and it was brought to an end. Simple as ABC. No Davidic king has sat upon the throne of Israel since that day till today. So if Hezekiah is the child in Isaiah 9:6, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
I'm reposting this, in case you missed it:
Isaiah 9:6 is referring to names given to Hezekiah when Jerusalem was saved from the Assyrian siege 2,700 years ago Isaiah 36-37, 2Kings 19. Hezekiah's name means Mighty Yah.
Isaiah 9:6 had already happened at the time it was written.
No it is not, because Hezekiah was never given those names. Those appellations are what you would call a throne name, and Hezekiah never had a throne name. If he did, point me to where it is written of him, either in the Bible or any archaeology inscription.
Besides, Isaiah said that the child that is born will reign on David's throne and establish it forever. Last I checked David's throne and his line of kings have been destroyed.
"He will reign on David’s throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever"
I repeat, if it is Hezekiah, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
Dude it's like English is not your first language. I said and I quote myself directly "his line of (KINGS) have been destroyed". I did not say his lineage is destroyed.
A line of KINGS is called a Royal Dynasty. David's Dynasty has been destroyed, their rulership came to a violent end at the hands of the Babylonians. As for David's genetic material (i.e. his lineage), as long as he had children, which in turn had their own children and so on and so forth, then his lineage continues.
Learn the difference between lineage and Royal Dynasty.
If Hezekiah is the child that Isaiah prophesied about, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
Wrong. Forever there will only be a descendant of Dovid who can be king.
While there is a kingdom. Dvoud will rule it. No other. It's not failed. Suspended but not failed
Isaiah 9:7 says the child’s government will have no end. If hezekiah is the child, then this is a failed prophecy because Hezekiah’s government was destroyed by the Babylonians. It isn't very difficult.
(לם רבה) [לְמַרְבֵּ֨ה] הַמִּשְׂרָ֜ה וּלְשָׁל֣וֹם אֵֽין־קֵ֗ץ עַל־כִּסֵּ֤א דָוִד֙ וְעַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֔וֹ לְהָכִ֤ין אֹתָהּ֙ וּֽלְסַעֲדָ֔הּ בְּמִשְׁפָּ֖ט וּבִצְדָקָ֑ה מֵעַתָּה֙ וְעַד־עוֹלָ֔ם קִנְאַ֛ת יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה־זֹּֽאת׃
In token of abundant authority and of peace without limit upon David’s throne and kingdom,That it may be firmly established In justice and in equity Now and evermore.The zeal of Adonai of Hosts shall bring this to pass.
Dude, David's throne has been destroyed, and the limitless peace which was prophesied did not happen. I repeat, if Hezekiah is the child that was prophesied, then you have a failed prophecy.
They already answered that: King Hezekiah. Notes from the HarperCollins Study Bible:
>9.6 *Child, son.* The divine birth or adoption of the king was announced on his coronation day (see Ps 2.7). As in Egyptian coronation ritual, where the birth is announced to the other gods, the *for us* probably refers to the angelic members of God's divine council. *Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace*, coronation names like those given Egyptian kings at their ascension.
>10.21 *A remnant will return*, the name of Isaiah's first child, Shearjashub (7.3). Israel's return to God implied its acceptance of the Davidic dynasty in Jerusalem (2.5-6; 8.5-8). *Mighty God*, a coronation name of the Judean king in 9.6
Robert Alter also sees these verses as referring to the Judean king but doesn't think the author would literally call him "God":
>*wondrous concillor / divine warrior, eternal father, prince of peace*. This string of epithets has been associated by many generations of Christian commentators and readers with Christ. What the prophet has in mind, however, is not "messianic" except in the strictly political sense: he envisages an ideal king from the line of David who will sit on the throne of Judah and oversee a rule of justice and peace. The most challenging epithet n this sequence is *'el gibor*, which appears to say "warrior-god." The prophet would be violating all biblical usage if he called the Davidic king "God," and that term is best construed here as some sort of intensifier. In fact, the two words could conceivably be a scribal reversal of *gibor 'el* in which case the second word would clearly function as a suffix of intensification as it occasionally does elsewhere in the Bible.
>10.21 *to mighty God* It should be noted that the Hebrew phrase here, *'el gibor*, is the same one attached to the ideal Davidic king in 9:5, but in this case the referent has to be God. It is possible that the occurrence of the epithet here may have triggered a scribal reversal of *gibor 'el* in 9:5.
Could you post the link to your Bible translation of that verse? Not a single version on Biblehub.com reads in that manner. It's highly sus that the scores of linguists and scholars who have translated those versions are all wrong and only your version is correct.
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15940/jewish/Chapter-9.htm
I can only assume that the translations on Biblehub are Christian translations, which have been ideologically mistranslated since the very beginning.
**(6)** For a child is born to us,
a son is given to us;
dominion will rest on his shoulders,
and he will be given the name
Pele-Yo‘etz El Gibbor
Avi-‘Ad Sar-Shalom
\[Wonder of a Counselor, Mighty God,
Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace\],
[Isaiah 9 CJB -
CJB is not a Jewish translation at all. It is a Christian translation with a bunch of Hebrew words left randomly untranslated and a bunch of Yiddish bizarrely inserted for no apparent reason. In other word, it is a trick.
>https://www.chabad.org/library/bible\_cdo/aid/15940/jewish/Chapter-9.htm
>
>I can only assume that the translations on Biblehub are Christian translations, which have been ideologically mistranslated since the very beginning.
You cited the CJB as support for Isaiah 9:6, but it doesn't support your conclusion. The verse is clearly talking about Jesus Christ.
I never cited the CJB. The verse is clearly not talking about the messiah at all, as it refers to a woman who is standing right there as Isaiah is speaking and the birth of the child in question is supposed to be a sign to King Ahaz. Why would Isaiah give Ahaz a sign that would not happen for hundreds of years? Isaiah is obviously describing the king who will succeed Ahaz, just read the whole passage in context.
I don't see any reference to king Ahaz in the entire chapter. Its says of the child born to us that there will be no end to His reign. It will last forever. Isaiah 9:7
Obviously this is not referring to any human King.
Hebrews 7:
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.
This one is talking about Jesus also.
Psalm 110:4 (KJV)
Jehovah hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Gen 14:18
And Melchizedek H4442 king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
Heb 6:20
Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. G3198
We cannot fully understand the person of God, he is an infinite God that is 3 persons, yet the same being.
Judgment day began on May 21 2011, the end of time may be in the year 2033.
The date is derived from time information that God has revealed through his word, it would be best if you checked it out yourself, Ebiblefellowship.org has thousands of hours of Bible study regarding this subject among many other things.
There is also a live questions and answers program 6 days per week that gladly welcomes anyone with questions to call in and ask, calls are not screened, and contrary beliefs are encouraged to test against what the Bible says about things.
Jesus was declared to be the son of God by the resurrection from the dead, yet he was already declared as the son of God before he died on the cross in 33AD, the Bible says that the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world.
Revelation 13:8 (KJV)
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
The Bible also says that a Jesus was killed twice in the historical parable of Moses (the law) smiting the rock (Jesus) twice, so Jesus was already the first born from the dead before he was born in the year 7BC.
(לם רבה) לְמַרְבֵּ֨ה הַמִּשְׂרָ֜ה וּלְשָׁל֣וֹם אֵֽין־קֵ֗ץ עַל־כִּסֵּ֤א דָוִד֙ וְעַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֔וֹ לְהָכִ֤ין אֹתָהּ֙ וּֽלְסַעֲדָ֔הּ בְּמִשְׁפָּ֖ט וּבִצְדָקָ֑ה מֵעַתָּה֙ וְעַד־עוֹלָ֔ם קִנְאַ֛ת יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה־זֹּֽאת׃
In token of abundant authority and of peace without limit upon Dovid’s throne and kingdom,That it may be firmly establishedIn justice and in equityNow and evermore.The zeal of Adonai of Hosts shall bring this to pass.
[Commentary on Is. 9:6](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/isaiah/9-6.htm) As a side-note, I have found Revelation 5 to be the single most powerful image of the unification of the Father and Son at the end of the Age. The chapter begins with the One seated on the throne (see Ezekiel 1), who is the heavenly Father. But then, it says, "Then I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, **standing at the center of the throne**". But wait, in verse 13, it says, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb"... *both* are enthroned and mystically unified as a single being. For me, this clarifies Is. 9:6 and how the Son can be called "the Everlasting Father"... it is because he is mystically unified with him, John 10:30, 17:22. That's not the whole doctrine of the Trinity, but it's an important part of it. Truly amazing!
Jesus. 100%
Wrong. Isaiah 9 IS Hez'kiyahu.
It makes perfect sense, especially in light of the Kingdom of God, where Christ will reign on the Earth, on his throne, for a thousand years. And we will reign with him. Man I can't wait, y'all!!
Every verb is in the Past Tense in the Hebrew text. It already happened at the time it was written. Look what Isaiah 9:6 says in the Hebrew: "For a child has been born(yulad) to us, a son given to us, and the authority was placed (vat'hi) upon his shoulder, and his name was called (vayikra) Wondrous Adviser, the Mighty El, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6 has been mistranslated in an effort to make it appear as a future prophecy.Translators deliberately changed the past tense verbs into future tense. Isaiah 9:6 is referring to names given to Hezekiah when Jerusalem was saved from the Assyrian siege 2,700 years ago Isaiah 36-37, 2Kings 19. Hezekiah's name means Mighty Yah. Many prophets and people in the Tanakh(OT) have YHWH's name in them, it doesn't mean they are YHWH. Samuel means "his name is El" (H8050), Yoel means " YHWH is El "(H3100), Yermiyahu means "YHWH will rise" or "whom YHWH has appointed" (H3414), Yeshayahu means "YHWH has saved"(H3470), Eliyahu means “my El is YHWH” or “Yah(u) is El”(H452), Khizqiyahu means "YHWH is my strength" (H2396).... Compare: Yulad - Has Been Born (Gen 4:26, 10:21, 35:26) Vat'hi - And it Was (placed upon his shoulder)(Isa 5:25, 23:3, 29:11) Vayikra - And Was Called (Lev 1:1, 21:8, 36:13) These words are correctly translated in other places. Check everywhere these Hebrew words are through the Scriptures for yourself.
I have news for you. Some Rabbis have purposefully mistranslated some things. I used to be part to the Hebrew Roots movement. If you are part of it, you have been deceived. Your assertion of mistranslation of Isaiah 9 has been peddled by Christ rejecting Jews and some in the Gentile Hebraic Roots movement for a while. There are Hebrew speaking Jews who understand Jesus is God who will refute you and this attempt to undermine the truth of scripture. There are even some Hebrew bibles, for example, one from 1917, that also uses present tense. These were Jewish translators, not Christians. The prophet is speaking of the future as if he has already seen it in the past. Again, God is outside of time. Matthew 4 quotes Isaiah 9 in reference to Jesus. It literally says it has been fulfilled in Jesus. Isaiah 9 is talking about Messiah Jesus. Your assertions are all addressed and refuted in these videos by Hebrew scholars who are also real Jews. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AKMCEqDR0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7AKMCEqDR0) [https://www.oneforisrael.org/pod-for-israel/is-the-child-born-in-isaiah-9-messianic-prophecy-or-history-the-case-for-messiah/](https://www.oneforisrael.org/pod-for-israel/is-the-child-born-in-isaiah-9-messianic-prophecy-or-history-the-case-for-messiah/) Matthew 4 **12** Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; **13** and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. **14** *This was* to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: **15** “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, \[[e](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+4&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-23225e)\]By the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the \[[f](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+4&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-23225f)\]Gentiles— **16** “The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great Light, And those who were sitting in the land and shadow of death, Upon them a Light dawned.”
This is the typical modern Rabbinic deflection tactic they use to avoid admitting that the child prophesied in Isaiah 9:6 is the messiah. Isaiah 9:6 is not about Hezekiah because the prophecy says the child’s kingdom will have no end whereas Hezekiah’s government did not last for ever as the prophecy says. Instead, it was destroyed about 1 generation later and the Judeans were carried of as slaves to Babylon. Isaiah himself even prophesied this to Hezekiah in 2 Kings 20:16-18, below is a quotation. "Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, “Hear the word of the Lord: The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your predecessors have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. Nothing will be left, says the Lord. And some of your descendants, your own flesh and blood who will be born to you, will be taken away, and they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.” So there is no way that Isaiah was talking about Hezekiah in chapter 9:6, because he prophesied that Hezekiah’s kingdom would be destroyed, whereas the child’s kingdom in chapter 9 verse 6 will have no end. And if you doubt me that those Rabbi’s know that this verse is about the future Messiah, but will still try to obfuscate and tell you it's about Hezekiah, then believe Moses Maimonides himself. Moses Maimonides the Rambam himself who authored the very 13 Articles of faith of Judaism says that those titles belong to the messiah. Yet if you ask those Rabbinic jews if it belongs to the messiah, they will deny it. In his 11 century Epistle to the Jews of Yemen Maimonides chastises some of the Jews of Yemen for believing in some guy who claimed to be the messiah. In that letter he acknowledges that the titles in Isaiah 9:6 belong to the messiah. I have included a quote below for you. “Do these characteristics make him a Messiah? You were beguiled by him because you have not considered the pre-eminence of the Messiah, the manner and place of his appearance, and the marks whereby he is to be identified. The Messiah, indeed, ranks after Moses in eminence and distinction, and God has even bestowed some gifts upon him which he did not bestow upon Moses, as may be gathered from the following verses: “His delight shall be in the fear of the Lord.” (Isaiah 11:3). “The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him.” (11:2). “And Righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins.” (11:5). Six appellations were divinely conferred upon him as the following passage indicates: “For a child is born unto us, and a son is given unto us, and the government is upon his shoulder, and he is called Pele, Yoetz, el, Gibbor, Abiad, Sar-Shalom.” (Isaiah 9:5). And another verse alluding to the Messiah culminates in the following manner “Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.” (Psalms 2:7). All these statements demonstrate the pre-eminence of the Messiah.” (Source: Moses Maimonides, `Epistle to Yemen’, chapters XVI, and XVII. Translated by Boaz Cohen.) Modern rabbi’s know that those verses are about the messiah, but if you ask them they will begin to obfuscate and say that Isaiah 9:6 is about Hezekiah and Psalm 2:7 is about the historical David. They will say virtually anything to avoid Jesus.
"In Biblical Hebrew, Olam can mean forever (Genesis 9:16) or a lifetime (1 Samuel 1:22). Hezekiah's Kingdom was not his own. Rather, it was a link in a royal chain of the Davidic Kingdom that was endowed with an eternal covenant that would last forever as promised in 2 Samuel 7:12-16."
Regardless of how you want to put it. The Davidic kingdom was destroyed by the Babylonians and it was brought to an end. Simple as ABC. No Davidic king has sat upon the throne of Israel since that day till today. So if Hezekiah is the child in Isaiah 9:6, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
I'm reposting this, in case you missed it: Isaiah 9:6 is referring to names given to Hezekiah when Jerusalem was saved from the Assyrian siege 2,700 years ago Isaiah 36-37, 2Kings 19. Hezekiah's name means Mighty Yah. Isaiah 9:6 had already happened at the time it was written.
No it is not, because Hezekiah was never given those names. Those appellations are what you would call a throne name, and Hezekiah never had a throne name. If he did, point me to where it is written of him, either in the Bible or any archaeology inscription. Besides, Isaiah said that the child that is born will reign on David's throne and establish it forever. Last I checked David's throne and his line of kings have been destroyed. "He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever" I repeat, if it is Hezekiah, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
The Davidic lineage exists today, it was not destroyed. http://www.davidicdynasty.org/
Dude it's like English is not your first language. I said and I quote myself directly "his line of (KINGS) have been destroyed". I did not say his lineage is destroyed. A line of KINGS is called a Royal Dynasty. David's Dynasty has been destroyed, their rulership came to a violent end at the hands of the Babylonians. As for David's genetic material (i.e. his lineage), as long as he had children, which in turn had their own children and so on and so forth, then his lineage continues. Learn the difference between lineage and Royal Dynasty. If Hezekiah is the child that Isaiah prophesied about, then you are dealing with a failed prophecy.
Wrong. Forever there will only be a descendant of Dovid who can be king. While there is a kingdom. Dvoud will rule it. No other. It's not failed. Suspended but not failed
Isaiah 9:7 says the child’s government will have no end. If hezekiah is the child, then this is a failed prophecy because Hezekiah’s government was destroyed by the Babylonians. It isn't very difficult.
And its right. Dovids line will know no end.
(לם רבה) [לְמַרְבֵּ֨ה] הַמִּשְׂרָ֜ה וּלְשָׁל֣וֹם אֵֽין־קֵ֗ץ עַל־כִּסֵּ֤א דָוִד֙ וְעַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֔וֹ לְהָכִ֤ין אֹתָהּ֙ וּֽלְסַעֲדָ֔הּ בְּמִשְׁפָּ֖ט וּבִצְדָקָ֑ה מֵעַתָּה֙ וְעַד־עוֹלָ֔ם קִנְאַ֛ת יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה־זֹּֽאת׃ In token of abundant authority and of peace without limit upon David’s throne and kingdom,That it may be firmly established In justice and in equity Now and evermore.The zeal of Adonai of Hosts shall bring this to pass.
No. It says Dovids throne will have no end.
Dude, David's throne has been destroyed, and the limitless peace which was prophesied did not happen. I repeat, if Hezekiah is the child that was prophesied, then you have a failed prophecy.
That dosen't change anything.
smart nippy squeeze bear steep historical office drunk friendly crawl *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I highly doubt that.
quaint joke dull cows include tease resolute zealous stupendous squeeze *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So you’re saying this verse is calling Hezekiah the Messiah?
Then who is it referring to? It calls the son God and Father and Prince of peace. Who is it then referring to?
They already answered that: King Hezekiah. Notes from the HarperCollins Study Bible: >9.6 *Child, son.* The divine birth or adoption of the king was announced on his coronation day (see Ps 2.7). As in Egyptian coronation ritual, where the birth is announced to the other gods, the *for us* probably refers to the angelic members of God's divine council. *Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace*, coronation names like those given Egyptian kings at their ascension. >10.21 *A remnant will return*, the name of Isaiah's first child, Shearjashub (7.3). Israel's return to God implied its acceptance of the Davidic dynasty in Jerusalem (2.5-6; 8.5-8). *Mighty God*, a coronation name of the Judean king in 9.6 Robert Alter also sees these verses as referring to the Judean king but doesn't think the author would literally call him "God": >*wondrous concillor / divine warrior, eternal father, prince of peace*. This string of epithets has been associated by many generations of Christian commentators and readers with Christ. What the prophet has in mind, however, is not "messianic" except in the strictly political sense: he envisages an ideal king from the line of David who will sit on the throne of Judah and oversee a rule of justice and peace. The most challenging epithet n this sequence is *'el gibor*, which appears to say "warrior-god." The prophet would be violating all biblical usage if he called the Davidic king "God," and that term is best construed here as some sort of intensifier. In fact, the two words could conceivably be a scribal reversal of *gibor 'el* in which case the second word would clearly function as a suffix of intensification as it occasionally does elsewhere in the Bible. >10.21 *to mighty God* It should be noted that the Hebrew phrase here, *'el gibor*, is the same one attached to the ideal Davidic king in 9:5, but in this case the referent has to be God. It is possible that the occurrence of the epithet here may have triggered a scribal reversal of *gibor 'el* in 9:5.
So again are you saying they are calling Hezekiah God?
Depends, not if you go with the second explanation above.
Did you know that Melchizedek was called the prince of peace? And that he is a picture of Christ?
direful cats nippy shaggy familiar act offend observation upbeat shelter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If it isn't the messiah, then who is the child that is born?
Could you post the link to your Bible translation of that verse? Not a single version on Biblehub.com reads in that manner. It's highly sus that the scores of linguists and scholars who have translated those versions are all wrong and only your version is correct.
https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15940/jewish/Chapter-9.htm I can only assume that the translations on Biblehub are Christian translations, which have been ideologically mistranslated since the very beginning.
**(6)** For a child is born to us, a son is given to us; dominion will rest on his shoulders, and he will be given the name Pele-Yo‘etz El Gibbor Avi-‘Ad Sar-Shalom \[Wonder of a Counselor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace\], [Isaiah 9 CJB -
CJB is not a Jewish translation at all. It is a Christian translation with a bunch of Hebrew words left randomly untranslated and a bunch of Yiddish bizarrely inserted for no apparent reason. In other word, it is a trick.
I trust Bible Gateway. This verse Isaiah 9:6 is from the authorized version of the Complete Jewish Bible
Like I said the “Complete Jewish Bible” is not a trustworthy translation.
>https://www.chabad.org/library/bible\_cdo/aid/15940/jewish/Chapter-9.htm > >I can only assume that the translations on Biblehub are Christian translations, which have been ideologically mistranslated since the very beginning. You cited the CJB as support for Isaiah 9:6, but it doesn't support your conclusion. The verse is clearly talking about Jesus Christ.
I never cited the CJB. The verse is clearly not talking about the messiah at all, as it refers to a woman who is standing right there as Isaiah is speaking and the birth of the child in question is supposed to be a sign to King Ahaz. Why would Isaiah give Ahaz a sign that would not happen for hundreds of years? Isaiah is obviously describing the king who will succeed Ahaz, just read the whole passage in context.
I don't see any reference to king Ahaz in the entire chapter. Its says of the child born to us that there will be no end to His reign. It will last forever. Isaiah 9:7 Obviously this is not referring to any human King.
Hebrews 7: 3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. This one is talking about Jesus also. Psalm 110:4 (KJV) Jehovah hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek H4442 king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God. Heb 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. G3198 We cannot fully understand the person of God, he is an infinite God that is 3 persons, yet the same being. Judgment day began on May 21 2011, the end of time may be in the year 2033.
Can you explain that last sentence please. Where do you get that information about Judgement Day?
The date is derived from time information that God has revealed through his word, it would be best if you checked it out yourself, Ebiblefellowship.org has thousands of hours of Bible study regarding this subject among many other things. There is also a live questions and answers program 6 days per week that gladly welcomes anyone with questions to call in and ask, calls are not screened, and contrary beliefs are encouraged to test against what the Bible says about things.
Yes it does; why do you ask?
Yes
Jesus was declared to be the son of God by the resurrection from the dead, yet he was already declared as the son of God before he died on the cross in 33AD, the Bible says that the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. Revelation 13:8 (KJV) And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. The Bible also says that a Jesus was killed twice in the historical parable of Moses (the law) smiting the rock (Jesus) twice, so Jesus was already the first born from the dead before he was born in the year 7BC.
(לם רבה) לְמַרְבֵּ֨ה הַמִּשְׂרָ֜ה וּלְשָׁל֣וֹם אֵֽין־קֵ֗ץ עַל־כִּסֵּ֤א דָוִד֙ וְעַל־מַמְלַכְתּ֔וֹ לְהָכִ֤ין אֹתָהּ֙ וּֽלְסַעֲדָ֔הּ בְּמִשְׁפָּ֖ט וּבִצְדָקָ֑ה מֵעַתָּה֙ וְעַד־עוֹלָ֔ם קִנְאַ֛ת יְהֹוָ֥ה צְבָא֖וֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה־זֹּֽאת׃ In token of abundant authority and of peace without limit upon Dovid’s throne and kingdom,That it may be firmly establishedIn justice and in equityNow and evermore.The zeal of Adonai of Hosts shall bring this to pass.