Isaiah 61???

In Isaiah 61, who is doing the talking?

Who is saying: “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek”?

I know that Christians apply this to Jesus Christ.


I will let others answer, but there is a remarkable parallel

Lk 4:18 • “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Wherefore he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor, he hath sent me to heal the contrite of heart,”

Oh, yes!

Given that the Gospels reference this verse, I’d say yes, it’s HIM!


I don’t think it has to be one person talking… it can be more than one. Looking at the immediate context, it appears that Isaiah (or whoever is writing this) is referring to himself. But, that doesn’t mean that there is not a prophetic fulfillment in Jesus of these verses. It is called a “double-fulfillment.”

I would say that Isaiah had spoken it originally (as a Prophet of God). However, since Jesus read this in public and declared that it had been fulfilled in the hearing of those present, it obviously applies to Jesus (and has been fulfilled in Him). I don’t know about you, but I think Jesus is a very reliable source as far as interpreting Scripture.

The Prophecy was fulfilled by Isaiah and I would think every other prophet. In Jesus the ultimate fulfillment is found.
Prophet speaks for God -is God’s voice in the world.Not job many would want since may were ridiculed hounded and even killed…Prophecy was a fire in the belly that couldn’t be quenched until he spoke God’s word
Jesus is not only the voice of God He is God. No human voice could be as clear as God’s straight from the mouth of Jesus.
Ultimate Priest, Ultimate Prophet and Ultimate King

[quote=juliamajor] The Prophecy was fulfilled by Isaiah and I would think every other prophet.

Are you saying that every prophet from Isaiah to Jesus could have announced that “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing”?

We have to read this verse in its context. Catholics don’t read individual verses apart from the context. The context helps us understand the senses of scripture.

Isaiah was preaching to the tribe of Judah about their imminent return to Jerusalem from exile in Persia. This is the literal sense of the passage.

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me,
because the LORD has anointed me
to bring good tidings to the afflicted;
he has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives
and the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
(Isaiah 61:1)

There are also three spiritual senses
*]Allegorical Sense - how it points to Christ
*]Moral Sense - how it helps us live out our lives as Christians
*]Anagogical Sense - from the Greek word anagoge which means “leading.” The eternal signifigance of the passage for us personally and for the Church.

The literal sense comes first and the three spiritual sense flow from that. The prophet was preaching to the tribe of Judah he had been appointed by God to spread the news that they would soon be shown mercy and granted return from captivity to the land and blessing promised by God to their fathers. We then apply the spiritual sneses - how it points to Christ, how it helps us live moral lives and how it points to the end of all things.

The literal and spiritual senses of Scripture are an authentic Catholic method for interpreting Scripture within the framework of the Church. Pope Leo XII wrote the encyclical Providentissimus Deus and Pope Pius XII wrote the encyclical **Divino Afflante Spiritu **about the senses of Scripture. The senses of Scripture are covered at the very beginning of the Catechism in paragraphs 115 through 119.


[quote=TimothyH] The literal sense comes first and the three spiritual sense flow from that.

So, which “sense” did Jesus use when He applied this to Himself as the fulfillment? Just wanting to know how His interpretation fits with yours.

Read my post again .Jesus the ultimate prophet.Besides “today in your hearing” is NOT part of the Isaiah quote, is it. It’s Jesus’ proclamation to the world, that salvation has come.

There is no definitive one reading of scripture.Many Protestants believe that scripture is either/or.
Catholic biblical take is both/and.
Mary is the Mother of God and mother of Jesus- she is both.Not only …but also
You’d be hard pressed to find that thinking in modern Protestant theology who see Mary as Jesus’ mother but not the Mother of God.

For a clearer statement follow the link.

You are challenging me and others because you have not read our posts correctly.

I did not interpret anything. I spoke about a framework for interpretation - the senses of scripture - and its wide acceptance to the point where Popes have written encyclicals on the subject.

The literal sense is historical fact. The prophet was preaching to the Jews from the tribe of Judah who were about to return from exile in Persia. That is fact.

Jesus, being a Jew, knew the historical basis for the writings of this particular prophet. Jesus, being God, knew the inspiration which the Holy Spirit had given the prophet to write the words. He knew the literal and spiritual senses even if he didn’t identify them as such.

As another has said, read my post again, and then take up your argument with the Popes and theologians throughout the centuries who have identified and recommended the senses of scripture.


[quote=juliamajor] Read my post again .Jesus the ultimate prophet.Besides “today in your hearing” is NOT part of the Isaiah quote, is it. It’s Jesus’ proclamation to the world, that salvation has come.

Obviously you didn’t understand my question, so I’ll rephrase it -

The Prophecy was fulfilled by Isaiah and I would think every other prophet.

Since you say that this applies to Isaiah and every Prophet between him and Jesus (the ultimate Prophet), then could every Prophet from Isaiah to Jesus also proclaim that “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing”? For example, could Jonah have quoted this Scripture and proclaim that “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” while preaching in Ninevah? The “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing” is the way Jesus interpreted this Scripture (I never said it was part of Isaiah 61).

I’m not going to derail the thread, but I’d like to briefly point out that the idea some Catholics proclaim—that Protestant theology and Biblical interpretation is “either/or” as opposed to “both/and”—is a mischaracterization of how most Protestant really think. I did read the link; it’s very good in itself, but, again, the writer oversteps his area of competence in his attempt to describe Protestant understanding of the “Solas”. He would do better to simply describe and illustrate what “both/and” means without trying to use Protestants as a foil.

I’m sorry for interjecting this complaint into this thread, but I’ve seen this kind of mischaracterization here (by Catholics in speaking about Protestants) too often and I’ve gotten sick of it. :mad:

If I’ve hurt your feelings I apologize.It may be a mischaracterization for some branches of protestantism but not it’s entirety
.How Protestants really think is very different from what is proclaimed as doctrine .That is what I am dealing with.



One thing I have learned here in the deep south is not to dump all non-Catholic Christians into the same theological bucket. Many Evangelicals don’t even consider themselves to be Protestant.


Julia and Timothy—I’m sorry if I’m coming across as a grouch. Thanks, both of you, for letting me say what I think without snapping back. :slight_smile: I often see Catholics feeling understandably upset by Protestants who mischaracterize Catholic beliefs and practices; I wish that being on the receiving end of those mischaracterizations would make Catholics more sensitive and aware to refrain from doing the same thing to Protestants. “What is hateful to yourself do not do to others.”

Also, Julia, I don’t mean this as picking on you. :o I’m an Evangelical who sometimes clicks on a thread here expecting to read about the thread topic. Numerous times here, though, a Catholic poster has inserted an unnecessary and irrelevant comparison to what they perceive to be a common negative characteristic of Protestants, which they use as a foil; as if to say, “We Catholics (pause here to thump chest) are not like those (stupid) Protestants who (for example) always think in either/or terms while we (superiorly) think in both/and.” I think the reality is that all ways of thinking can be easily found among any group of people. And chest thumping, however subtle, is unattractive unless you actually look like Tarzan. :stuck_out_tongue:

And yes, Protestants are of course a diverse bunch. A person can say just about anything and it will be true of some Protestants.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit