My daily exploration of the Bible, taking it one chapter at a time. If I do it everyday, it'll take 1189 days.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

Isaiah 11

Israel restored

Someone will come from Jesse's line, and the Spirit will be on him. He will trust God, not his senses, and will judge rightly. All animals will be at peace. His people will come to him; God will draw them. Israel will come and not be bitter amongst itself, and the nations around will be subject to them.

Key verse:
1. A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse;
from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.

My thoughts:
One could say that this prophecy has only really begun to be fulfilled when the new Israeli state began in the 1940s.

This prophecy, which I believe to be fulfilled in Jesus, is, however, still not an entirely surprising prophecy. The concept of a leader in the line of David coming to bring Israel back in power was a 'common' Messianic expectation around Jesus' time, and Jesus' fulfilment of such prophecy was radical rather than expected.


Anonymous Deane said...

One could say that this prophecy has only really begun to be fulfilled when the new Israeli state began in the 1940s.

Now you're just being silly.

12:31 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

A little bit yes.

It is obviously clearly impossible that a prophecy might actually prophesy something that will actually happen in the future. Of course I was being ridiculous.

1:40 pm

Anonymous Deane said...

Nonsense, and a silly caricature.

Correct prophetic predictions about the future occur all the time. There is nothing "impossible" about it at all. Just because the Old Testament has no prophetic predictions about Jesus does not mean that there are no correct prophetic predictions. While there are clear grounds for demonstrating that the Old Testament has no prophetic predictions about a certain subject (Jesus), there are no grounds for dismissing prophetic predictions altogether.

11:04 am

Blogger Pete W said...

Why, then, was my initial statement, which you quoted, that ridiculous? I don't think I mentioned Jesus.

Don't get me wrong... I'm not trying to convince anyone that Isaiah 11 refers to the formation of the Israel in the 1940s...

2:52 pm

Blogger Dave said...


1. deane says prophecying about 1940s is silly

2. pete sarcastically agrees

3. deane disagrees with pete pretending to be agreeing with deane

4. pete agrees with deane disagreeing with pete pretending to agreeing with deane

Conclusion: I am a bee

12:50 am

Blogger Pete W said...

David, that is ridiculous. You are clearly anatomically not a bee.

9:25 am

Anonymous Deane said...

"For Matthew - as was true of virtually all New Testament interaction with the Old Testament - the relationship to the Hebrew Scriptures is dialogic rather than linear. "Fulfillment" does not mean simply a matter of applying Old Testament quotations to events in the light of Jesus. The events of Jesus' life are illuminated and their authority revealed in the light of the Old Testament and, at the same time, new understandings of the voice of God in the Scriptures and the history of Israel are revealed in the light of Jesus' person and mission."
- D. Senior, "The Lure of the Formula Quotations: Re-assessing Matthew's Use of the Old Testament with the Passion Narrative as Test Case" in C.M. Tuckett (Ed) The Scriptures in the Gospels (Brussell: Leuven University Press, 1997), 89-115, 104.

9:37 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

Hmmm... I have very little problem agreeing with Senior

11:51 pm

Blogger Dave said...

Me neither

8:49 am

Anonymous Guy Incognito said...

Me neither...

1:42 pm

Anonymous Deane said...

I do. But I'm special.

9:37 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

very special indeed. What exactly is required of us in this exegesis for Hebrew?

10:09 pm

Anonymous Deane said...

The exegetical notes were fairly limited in the prior year Hebrew exam - just "justify your translation where necessary" and "offer comments on points of textual, aesthetic, and exegetical interest".

The BHS notes to the text were also printed in the exam, so knowing what those mean could be helpful.

4:07 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

Yea... That still doesn't give me much info on how much I need... But its not an essay is it? It's literally just a bunch of sidenotes to your translation aye?

11:28 am

Anonymous Deane said...

Yeh - bro.

Note any ambiguous words, special significances, interesting tit-bits, etc. It's not a thorough exegesis, more of a highlighting of the more important stuff. And its not weighted all that high. But do it in full sentences, not in notes.

4:53 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

Cheers bro!

So if we can translate and parse, and generally know why we're translating, then we shud be sweet yea?

5:51 pm

Anonymous Deane said...

For true, bro. That's the way I've approached it.

11:04 am

Anonymous Deane said...

It took me quite a long time to read 1 Sam 9-13 to 2 Kgs 2-9, straight through. And I suspected that last year's Hebrew reading was considerable smaller. After doing a quick calculation using the NRSV translation, pasted into Microsoft Word, I found that it was much smaller. In fact, it was only a wee bit more than half the quantity we covered this year. Darn.

Hashalom itka?

2:11 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

Mah leshalom liy lek?!?

Just this second I finished my first reading thru all the passages. It took me almost 40 minutes per chapter! It is a lot of text. I hope we get marked appropriately... There's still a lot of vocab to learn. I'm guna read thru the NRSV a cupla time just to make sure I know the stories well!

I figure I'm basically gunna make sure I can translate it pretty well, and pretty much wing the rest!

3:26 pm

Anonymous Deane said...

It's a monster - for any man who pisses against the wall (biblically speaking).

Dr H has a nasty habit of leaving the pointing out of the words you have to parse. Makes it more challenging.

4:32 pm

Blogger Pete W said...

Yes. I've seen this. Surely sometimes a Piel and a Qal are identical without pointing tho... Poor Dr H... so out of touch with reality...

4:38 pm


Post a Comment

<< Home