This is my first time reading through the book of Isis, and just wondering if all these prophesies come true. I recognize some of them as dealing with Christ and realize they did come true from reading the Gospels. But the ones dealing with the old testament?
Do You mean Isaiah?
Ah yeah, I read the dewey rhimes version. Yeah Isaac
He probably meant Isaias, the Latinized rendering of Isaiah in the Douay-Rheims version.
Ahhhhh ok! Thanks. I didn’t realize there were alternate spellings…
Prophetic pronouncements were for the time the prophets lived in and the future. Isaiah was one of the few prophets who was well known and well respected.
. As far as I’ve read he was right in both his present and the future. The book of Isaiah was written by several people over a period of time. It was believed that had prophetic followers with a prophetic school that continued to live on .
I presume you mean Isaiah:)
If you could be more specific we could be more helpful. “ALL” covers an awful lot of information.
God Bless you
Not yet, but they will.
Well, there has to be more than one fulfillment. The Gospel fulfillment is either an pentultimate, or an ultimate fulfillment.
If a prophet made false statements, even if most of his statements were true; he would be condemned as a liar. Hence, the preservation of Isaiah’s writings depends on there being a way to interpret his prophecies multiple times in history according to the Hebrew tradition.
Take for example, the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14. “The virgin shall be with child” (Greek Parthenos, Hebrew Almah ) . That is a prophecy that applies both to Mary (in Jesus’ time) and an unknown woman in Hezekia’s court long before her birth. This is a royal woman, whoever she was.
Matthew quotes the Greek version of the prophecy exactly.
The old testament Greek reads:
Isaiah 7:14. (LXX) διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ.
If you go to any new testament Greek site, you will see the exact same words “THE virgin” (not just a virgin.)
There is no reason to go to the Hebrew, for the newest Greek copy is hundreds of years older than the Masoretic Hebrew copy of that passage. Jews, not Christians, interpreted the prophecy to Hezekia as being about a specific and well known maiden loooooong before Jesus was born. That’s why the Greek texts read “the Virgin.” Matthew was not changing the Greek to suit Christian ideals, he was quoting a Jewish tradition (exactly.)
However, I’ll include a link to Hebrew for completeness.
Isaiah 7:14 (Hebrew, Masoretic.)
The hebrew says “He-almah”, eg: a young maiden that is not yet married. Therefore, she is someone who is supposed to be a virgin. Girls were not allowed to have intercourse out of marriage or they would be stoned to death. That’s the law of Moses. The point of the word “almah” is the same as the word “virgin”; If she is not a virgin, a huge scandal must be involved. (Therefore, don’t get tied up with hair splitting arguments over “young girl” or “virgin”; If she is not virgin, she ought to be dead. )
What is important to notice about the prophecy is that Isaiah gave Hezekia very specific historical outlines of when the child will be born. Those historical foot notes all require a young protected (virgin) woman to become raped/inseminated/etc. which made her pregnant. The prophet promises that God will give “you all” a sign, so that you will trust him about the war which is coming in the next two decades. (Not hundreds of years into the future.)
The sign was fulfilled, but we don’t know how.
It’s not necessary to believe that there are two completely virgin women, who became pregnant in the same miraculous way. But the Jews accepted Isaiah as a true prophet, therefore they must have believed a son was born within Hezekiah’s lifetime. The child would have been named emmanuel (as a sign.)
God has made these kinds of signs in the past. Moses, for example, took a young boy and re-named him. The boy’s original name has been erased. We only know that the boy came from a man named ‘nun’. Moses renamed the boy, Jesus. (In Hebrew, Jesus is spelled phonetically like Joshua. It literally means, saving God / saving Lord. The personal name of God is Juah. So, God named a boy after the Lord in the Hebrew dialect of his time. eg: Ye-Juah pronounces Yeshua, or Joshua. We pronounce it Jesus. BUT – it’s the SAME name! )
And “the virgin” of Hezekia’s time is a pre-figurement of Mary.
Jesus son of “nun” is a pre-figurement of Jesus son of Joseph.
Think about that for a moment. The relationship goes even deeper.
Jesus, son of nun lead the Hebrew people into the land of Israel.
Jesus, son of Joseph leads us into the promised land of heaven.
The prophecy of Moses, and that of Isaiah were both about the same thing. Saving people from death in a promised land.
What I’m trying to point out is that prophecy can (and is) fulfilled multiple times.
Isaiah had an immediate meaning to convey to the people of his time, and a latter meaning fulfilled more perfectly in Jesus (for us).
A prophet is much more than a predictor of the future.
Our modern sense of the word is not the full sense.
A prophet speaks for God. He warns, exhorts, etc…
Whether or not his words “come true” is somewhat beside the point.
Besides, which point?
All the things you said about a prophet are correct, but signs are in fact part of the ancient definition.
Sometimes a prophet gives a sign about a hidden past (revealing the past). ( John 4:16-19 )
(paraphrase) You are right in saying you have no husband, for you have had seven and the one you are with now is not your husband.
“Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet."
Sometimes a prophet gives a sign about the future ( Either predicting, or promising/changing the future Acts 21:11)
(paraphrase) After we had stayed there several days, a prophet named `Agabus came to Paul and took off his belt. He then tied himself up by hand and foot with the belt, prophecied “The Holy Spirit says, that the owner of this belt will be tied up in the same way by the Jews in Jerusalem and handed over to the Gentiles.”
Only God knows the future and sometimes only God can reveal the past.
Not even the Angels and Devils with all their power can tell the “truth” about the revealing of the sons of man. The Angels look forward with longing about the revelation.
But, if a prophet speaks about the future and his words are not “true”; then He CAN NOT really be speaking for God.
By definition, God is the “life”, the “TRUTH”, and “the way.”
That’s the law of prophecy.
Therefore, What do you mean by this?
Whether or not his words “come true” is somewhat beside the point.
How do you interpret the old testament “prophet” without equating their word with “truth” ?
(paraphrase)** if a prophet presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded**, or speaks by the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.
If you wonder, “How can we recognize that a word is one the LORD has not spoken?”,
A prophet who speaks in the name of the LORD but the word does not come true, That word is one the LORD did not speak.
Truth is not merely something provable after the fact. People drive themselves nuts trying to figure out if various prophecies have “come true”, as if prophecy were akin to fortune telling. That is not the kind of “truth” we are talking about.