CHAPTER SIX

 

 

6:1:  “In the year that king Uzziah died” = Uzziah is the same personage as Azariah.  According to “Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible,” “The Chaldee, however, reads this: ‘in the year when Uzziah was smitten with the leprosy;’ and most of the Jewish commentators so understand it. . .The rabbis say that the meaning is, that he then became ‘civilly’ dead, by ceasing to exercise his functions as a king, and that he was cut off as a leprous man from all connection with the people, and from all authority.”

 

“I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne” = “In this vision, Isaiah saw the Lord seated on a throne in the Most Holy Place, above the Ark containing His Commandments.”  PUR, July 17, 1902.  If this be the case, Isaiah is seeing after 1844 A.D., or this should read “Holy Place.”  I believe it should read “Holy Place,” because according to verse 6, “one of the seraphims” took “a live coal” “from off the altar,” which should be the Alter of Incense; located in the Holy Place.

 

“In the face of such conditions it is not surprising that when, during the last year of Uzziah’s reign, Isaiah was called to bear to Judah God’s messages of warning and reproof, he shrank from the responsibility.  He well knew that he would encounter obstinate resistance.  As he realized his own inability to meet the situation, and thought of the stubbornness and unbelief of the people for whom he was to labor, his task seemed to him almost hopeless.  Should he in despair relinquish his mission, and leave Judah undisturbed to their idolatry?  Were the gods of Nineveh to rule the earth, in defiance of the God of Heaven?  Such thoughts as these were crowding through Isaiah’s mind as he stood under the portico of the temple.  Suddenly the gate and the inner veil of the temple seemed to be uplifted or withdrawn, and he was permitted to gaze within, upon the holy of holies, where even the prophet’s feet might not enter.”  RH, March 11, 1915; PK:306-307.

 

“This was a revelation of the glory of Christ’s Divinity.”  RH, February 18, 1896.

 

“When God was about to send Isaiah with a message to His people, He first permitted the prophet to look in vision into the holy of holies within the sanctuary.  Suddenly the gate and the inner veil of the temple seemed to be uplifted or withdrawn, and he was permitted to gaze within, upon the holy of holies, where even the prophet’s feet might not enter.  There rose before him a vision of Jehovah sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, while the train of His glory filled the temple.  Around the throne were seraphim, as guards about the great King, and they reflected the glory that surrounded them.  As their songs of praise resounded in deep notes of adoration, the pillars of the gate trembled, as if shaken by an earthquake. With lips unpolluted by sin, these angels poured forth the praises of God.  ‘Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts,’ they cried; ‘the whole earth is full of His glory.’ ”  GW:21; AG:72.

 

6:2:  “seraphims” = The Hebrew for “Seraphim” is “saraph,” which literally translates as “fiery one.”  The word “Seraphim” is plural already and does not need the added “s.”  It is not as though it were a fiery flame, but as meaning “very active.”  Some think it applies to burning; but it really means “to burn with fiery zeal.” Many want to translate it as “serpent.”  But if we go to Numbers 21:6, which is where this concept comes from, we can clearly see that “saraph” is separated from the Hebrew word for “serpent,” which is “nachash.”  Thus, “fiery one” better fits the depiction.  See my Bible Study:  “ANGELS, A BREAKDOWN OF.”

 

6:3:  “Holy, holy, holy” = Could it be that the reason there are “three” “Holies” used is because of One for the “Father,” One for the “Son,” and One for the “Holy Spirit?”

 

6:6:  “live coal” = Fire is an agent of purification, because it burns away impurity (see Num. 31:23).  But the “live coal” is taken from off of the Altar Of Incense, located in the Holy Place, in order to light the incense.  Thus, Isaiah’s mouth became like incense; a holy fragrance if you will; spreading a holy message.

 

6:7:  “thy sin purged” = “In the vision that came to Isaiah in the temple court {HERE AGAIN this is incorrect; he would be in the Holy Place], he was given a clear view of the character of the God of Israel. . . {God}“had appeared before him in great majesty; yet the prophet was made to understand the compassionate nature of his Lord. . . In beholding his God, the prophet had found pardon and peace.”  RH, March 18, 1915; PK:314; CC:235.  SDA’s note the date.  Clearly her changed writings were not carefully checked before changing them.

 

6:8:  “us” = Note the word “us.”  Is this the Godhead, or does God include all of the Heavenly hoast?  Most likely, just the Godhead.

 

6:9:  “Go, and tell this people” = “The prophet’s duty was plain; he was to lift his voice in protest against the prevailing evils.  But he dreaded to undertake the work without some assurance of hope.  ‘Lord, how long?’ (verse 11) he inquired.  Are none of Thy chosen people ever to understand, and repent, and be healed?  His burden of soul in behalf of erring Judah was not to be borne in vain.  His mission was not be to be wholly fruitless.  Yet the evils that had been multiplying for many generations could not be removed in his day.  Throughout his lifetime he must be a patient, courageous teacher -- a prophet of hope as well as of doom.  The divine purpose finally accomplished, the full fruitage of his efforts, and of the labors of all God’s faithful messengers, would appear.  A remnant should be saved.”  RH, March 11, 1915; PK:308-309; YRP:266.

 

6:10:  “and be healed” = Isaiah is here told beforehand that his message from God would not be accepted and none would be converted.  Indeed, “Woe is me,” verse 5, Isaiah exclaims.  According to the Apostle John, in John 12:37-39, quoting this verse, the same is done to Jesus.  This verse is quoted seven times in the New Testament.  The other six being, Matthew 13:14; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; Acts 28:26; and Romans 11:8.

 

6:13:  “so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof” = According to Ezra 9:2, the “holy seed” would be the people of God.  Thus, the meaning is that a portion, “a tenth” according to this verse to be exact, would accept the message and remain in the land.

 

The “Dead Sea Scrolls” translates verses 12 & 13 this way:  “Until the LORD removes people far away, and there are many empty places in the middle of the land.  Even though a tenth of its people remain in it, it will once again be burned, like a terebinth or an oak tree, the stump of which, though the tree has been felled, still contains holy seed.”

 

“This assurance of the final fulfillment of God’s purpose brought courage to the heart of Isaiah. . . he had the promise that the messages of Jehovah to backsliding Judah would be accompanied by the convicting power of the Holy Spirit; and the prophet was nerved for the work before him.  Throughout his long and arduous mission he carried with him the memory of this vision.  For sixty years or more he stood before the children of Judah as a prophet of hope, waxing bolder and still bolder in his predictions of the future triumph of the Church.”  RH, March 11, 1915; PK:310.

 

 

CHAPTER SEVEN

 

 

7:2:  “Ephraim” = Meaning, the northern kingdom.

 

7:3:  “Shearjashub thy son” = See my Isaiah 8:18 Note and my Introduction.  This very name carried in it a sign and pledge of the promised deliverance, signifying, “The remnant shall return;” for “Shearjashub” means, “The remnant shall return.”  His name (Isa. 7:3 & 14; 8:3) was a standing memorial to Ahaz and the Jews that the nation should not, notwithstanding the general calamity (Isa. 7:17-25; 8:6-8), be utterly destroyed (Isa. 10:21-22).  The prophetic name of Isaiah’s son was also intended to draw the king to Jehovah; signifying as it were, the promise of Jehovah God, the prophetic return of a remnant people devoted to Him.

 

This name that Isaiah gave his son was for a “sign” to the people, and had been given in order to keep before the nation the great truth that God was their Protector, and that however much they might suffer or be punished, yet the nation would not be totally destroyed, for the great Deliverer was still to come.  In short though, Isaiah’s sons name signified that the rest of the people would return out of their captivity after 70 years’ time.  In a side note the Targum interprets this not of Isaiah’s natural son, but of his disciples; paraphrasing it thus, “thou, and the rest of thy disciples, who have not sinned, and are turned from sin.”

 

7:4:  “neither be fainthearted for the two tails” = God is telling Isaiah that the coalition of “Rezin,” here and verse 1, and “Pekah,” verse 1, would not succeed.  The Assyrian Tiglathpileser would eventually destroy the Rezin-Pekah coalition (2Ki. 15:29).

 

7:8:  “within threescore and five years” = Within 65 years, Esarhaddon replaced Ephraim, northern Israel (2Ki. 17:24; Ezra 4:2 & 10) with colonists, ending the national existence of Ephraim.

 

7:9:  “If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established” = The “Dead Sea Scrolls” puts it this way, “If all of you don’t keep on believing, you’ll never remain loyal.”

 

7:12:  “neither will I tempt the LORD” = This sounds like a great response, until you read Isaiah’s response to this rejection of God attempting to help Ahaz believe in Him.

 

7:13:  “Hear ye now” = Notice the change from “thy God,” in verse 11, to “my God,” here.  Plus, Isaiah is no longer just addressing Ahaz, but the entire “house of David.”

 

7:14:  “virgin” = The contested Hebrew word for the translation of “virgin” is, “almah.”  It is used six other times:

In Genesis 24:43, where a “virgin,” of “marriageable young woman age,” was sought for by Abraham's servant.  We can know this because Genesis 24:16 uses the Hebrew word “bethulah,” for “a virgin,” and follows with “neither had any man known her.”  Why would the Scriptures have to clarify “bethulah” as being “a virgin” if the Hebrew word, it-and-of-itself, is all conclusive?  Apparently, it isn’t.  Therefore, Isaiah’s Hebrew word “almah” is all conclusive as well representing a “virgin.”

In Exodus 2:8, where this is clearly referring to Moses’ sister, who at this age is obviously a “virgin.”  No question that this is in reference of “virginity.”

In Psalm 68:25, where it is unclear other than the word itself meaning ‘virgins.”

In Proverbs 30:19, where it could be considered to be unclear.  But to do so has a young man wooing a young woman whom he knows to be a non “virgin.”  Not likely.  Also, verse 20 is or may not be describing the same woman.

In Song Of Solomon 1:3 & 6:8, where harems of “virgins” are clearly described.  After Solomon had sexual relations with these, they would then be transferred into the concubine section, where the two terms are clearly identified as to their respective meanings in Song Of Solomon 6:8-9.

 

Thus, Isaiah used “almah” for a young woman who is mature enough to conceive and is still a “virgin.”  Whereas any other word (“bethulah”) he would have to add a description or clarification.  Let’s go over that again.  Of course, the Matthew 1:23-25 account and Luke 1:27 & 34, clearly describes Mary as being a “virgin.”  So why didn’t Isaiah just use the Hebrew word “bethulah,” as in Exodus 22:16 & 49, and other places (except possibly in Joel 1:8), which clearly defines the woman as being a “virgin?”  Because in other places it is not as clear and as pointed out in Genesis 24:16 & 43, it had to be defined.  Whereas “almah,” does not have to be defined, and in Isaiah’s mind, is more descriptive of a woman being a “virgin.”  I say this because if you are going to prove what a particular author means, use the same Author and not go to another Book of the Bible (Matthew or Luke) to interpret what that Author means.

 

Therefore, if we go to Isaiah 54:1-6, where in verse 4 Isaiah uses a form of “almah,” that being “kalam,” which describes a “virgin,” because of “forget the shame of thy youth,” a young maiden not yet married; shame in those times was a woman without children.  Whereas the solution for being baren is the taking of a “husband” in verse 5.  By contrast, “the reproach of thy widowhood,” means that she never had a child.  Bottom line, Isaiah likes the word “almah” to describe a “virgin” woman.

 

Also, to better clarify, “almah” refers to a very young “virgin.”  Whereas “Kalam” refers to an older “virgin,” or a young woman who has yet to be taken by a “husband.”  Thus, Isaiah is being more clear as to the nature of this “virgin.”  And thus, we can trust the accounts in Matthew and Luke.  For Isaiah’s play on words are clear, for how is it possible for “a virgin [“almah”] to conceive,” if she is not pregnant?  Meaning, she is.  And this is the “sign” that “Immanuel,” i.e., God has arrived -- is with you.  Now we can know for sure that Jesus, The Christ, fulfilled this prophecy of a Coming Messiah.  He is the “sign.”

 

In a side note, it must be remembered that according to Deuteronomy 22:20-21, if a man marries a presumed “virgin” and she be found not to be a “virgin,” she was to be stoned to death.  Bottom line, Isaih is clearly refering to this personage as being a “virgin.”

 

“call His Name Immanuel” = This may sound odd, but hear me out.  This was a statement, an understanding, and not necessarily a name, but a title.  This is proven by seeing Isaiah’s prophecy in Chapter 8.  In verse 3, “the LORD” told Isaiah to (name his child) “Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.”  Yet, according to verse 8 the child will be referred to in a different name after Isaiah’s prophecy in verses 4-8 take place, that being, “O Immanuel.”  Which is interpreted and used again in verse 10, “God is with us.”  Thus, that Jesus is the name of the Messiah, and not “Immanuel,” can be explained as “Immanuel” is just a statement, title, or whatever you would like to call it, as opposed to the actual name. Here is the point.  Otherwise, Isaiah is a false prophet and we should throw his writings out of the Sacred Word.

 

7:15:  “Butter and honey” = From “John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible” we read:  “As the Messiah Jesus no doubt did; since He was born in a land flowing with milk and honey, and in a time of plenty, being a time of general peace; so that this phrase points at the place where, and the time when, the Messiah should be born, as well as expresses the truth of His human nature, and the manner of His bringing up, which was in common with that of other children [which shows His true humanity].”

 

The word rendered “butter” Hebrew, “chemah,” denotes not butter, but thick and curdled milk.  This was the common mode of using milk as an article of food in the East, and is still.  In no passage in the Old Testament does “butter” seem to be meant by the word.  The same is true with verse 22.

 

According to Bochart, in his work, “Hieroz,” P. i. lib. xi. ch. li. p. 630, this was the usual diet proscribed by the prescription of physicians for infants in those days.  Barnabas, in his epistle says, “The infant is first nourished with honey, and then with milk.”  Paulus says, “It is fit that the first food given to a child be honey, and then milk.”  So also Aetius, “Give to a child, as its first food, honey; see Bochart.”

 

The implication, in my opinion, is that Messiah will be born when there is relative peace in the land.  But by verse 23, trouble shall come to the land.

 

7:18:  “shall hiss” = Better, “shall call for” these things to come and desolate the land.

 

7:22:  “Butter” = See my Isaiah 7:15 Note.

 

7:23:  “briers and thorns” = See my Isaiah 7:15 Note.

​

 

CHAPTER EIGHT

 

 

8:1 & 3: “Mahershalalhashbaz” = “Mahershalalhashbaz” means, “swift is booty, speedy is prey,” or “speed the spoil, hasten the plunder.”  Thus, Isaiah’s child’s name intimates that a nation (in this case the Assyrian army) would come upon the Jewish state with great speed and make a great spoil.  So it is that they (in this case the Assyrians), would hasten to the spoil (namely, to spoil of Syria and Samaria), and speed to the prey (that is, plunder the people through torture and the scattering of them throughout the kingdom of Assyria).  The “Targum” renders it, “hasten to seize the prey, and to take away the spoil.”  And some translate this as, “in hastening the prey, the spoiler hastens.”  Perhaps it may be better rendered, “hasten to the spoil, hasten to the prey,” as if the words were spoken to the Assyrian monarch to hasten to the spoil of Damascus and Samaria.  It is the repetition of the same thing in different words, thus most probably has respect to the spoils of both.

 

“The accession of Ahaz to the throne brought Isaiah and his associates face to face with conditions more appalling than any that had hitherto existed in the realm of Judah.  Many who had formerly withstood the seductive influence of idolatrous practices, were now being persuaded proving untrue to their trust. . . even some of the priests were teaching for hire [Mic. 3:11].”  RH, April 1, 1915; PK:322.

 

8:3: “I went unto the prophetess” = Notice that Isaiah’s wife is a “prophetess.”  Unfortunately, we have no record of her prophecies or life events.

 

8:7: “bringeth up upon them the waters of the river” = Meaning, Assyria’s armies would overflow the land of the northern kingdom.

 

8:8: “pass through Judah” = Notice that the Assyrian army “pass through Judah,” but don’t harm them, for their close of probation is not yet.  Also, Judah did not help, nor could they, in stopping the destruction of its northern family.

 

8:12: “A confederacy” = The undertone is that “confederacy” of the Church with the world never turns out well.

 

8:14: “for a Stone of Stumbling and for a Rock of Offence” = A clear reference to the Messiah and Israel’s rejection of Him.  See First Corinthians 10:4.

 

“gin” = The Hebrew is “H6341; pach,” meaning, “a snare; a trap.” As opposed to “a snare,” Hebrew “H4170; moqesh,” meaning, “to ensnare; bait, lure, snare.”

 

8:16: “testimony, seal the Law” = “The seal of God’s Law is found in the Fourth Commandment.  This only, of all the Ten, brings to view both the Name and the Title of the Lawgiver.” 4SP:284.

 

8:19: “Seek unto them that have familiar spirits” = In an astonishing fact, when people seek materialism and it does not satisfy, where they turn next is spiritualism and necromancy.  See my Bible Study: “DEATH, THE BIBLICAL TRUTH ABOUT.”

 

8:20: “To the Law and to the testimony” = The Hebrew word for “Law” here is, “Torah.”  In other words, Isaiah is speaking of the five Books of Moses (Deu. 4:44; 31:9).  In regards to “testimony,” The Hebrew word used here is “Tudah,” or the “Eudah,” as found in Second Chronicles 23:11.  That the “testimony” refers to, and is, the Ten Commandments, see these two Hebrew words as used in Exodus 25:16; 30:6, 36; 31:18; 32:15; 34:29; 38:21; Numbers 17:4; Second Kings 11:2; Psalm 99:7.

 

“the Testimony” = A “testimony” is whoever is giving it.  Thus, the “Testimoner” if you will, in this case, is Jesus.

 

“if they speak not according to this Word” = “God is displeased with us when we go to listen to error, without being obliged to go; for unless He sends us to those meetings where error is forced home to the people by the power of the will, He will not keep us.  The angels cease their watchful care over us, and we are left to the buffetings of the enemy, to be darkened and weakened by him and the power of his evil angels; and the light around us becomes contaminated with the darkness.” EW:125.

​

 

CHAPTER NINE

 

 

9:1:  “Galilee of the nations” = Here is a prophecy of the coming Messiah to the land of “Galilee.”

 

9:2:  “upon them hath the light shined” = The region of Lake Galilee is depicted here (as in the day of Midian,” verse 4) because it was among the first territories of Israel to be conquered.  In response to Ahaz’s request for aid, Tiglath-pileser III took the Galilee and Transjordanian regions of northern Israel, carried some of the people captive, and turned the territories into Assyrian provinces (2Ki. 15:29).  So, Isaiah’s message is that the first to be conquered would be the first to see deliverance.  Matthew quotes from and to the fulfillment of this verse in Matthew 4:13-16.  The reason it is a little different in Matthew’s quotation of it is because Matthew is quoting from the “Septuagint,” the Greek translation of the Scriptures, instead of the Hebrew.

 

9:3:  “they joy before Thee according to the joy in harvest” = This could very well be in reference to the Second Coming, as many Bible commentators have noted.

 

9:4:  “yoke. . . staff.. . rod” = Possibly a reference to the Satanic trinity.  See Revelation 16:13, “dragon; beast; false prophet.”  God will eventually “break” this up.

 

9:6:  “unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given” = The Bible writers were very careful to express everything correctly in regards to Divinity, i.e., “Child” equals the Humanity of Christ, while “Son” is equivalent to the Divinity of Christ.  Only a “Child” can be “born,” while a “Son” has to be “given” by the Father.  That God chose to enter into His creation (Colossians 1:16-17) and become a man (forever) is astonishing.  See Hebrews 2:17; Revelation 5:4-5; and others.

 

“Wonderful” = Just as the Divine Angel of the “LORD,” Judges 13:15-18, described His own name to Samson’s father as being “wonderful,” Judges 13:18.  The “KJV” translates it as being “secret.”  But the same Hebrew root for “Wonderful” is used in Judges 13:18, as is used in Judges 13:19, for the Angels name.  And as he then ascended toward Heaven in the sacrificial flame on Manoah’s altar (Judg. 13:20), he thereby prefigures Christ’s offering of Himself more than one thousand years later.

 

“Counsellor” = A title more appropriate to the Holy Spirit, which shows that the Three are One.

 

“The Mighty God” = For Jehovah’s Witnesses, see my Bible Study:  “JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES, LETTER TO A,” and these comments).  This should be expressive enough that Jesus is God, in that He is the only “God” “born” as “a Child.”  However, “everlasting Father” truly expresses this fact in a way which cannot be denied (see my comments below).  In reference to “The Mighty God,” so called the Divine God in Romans 9:5 and First John 5:20.  Very clear in Colossians 1:16-17.

 

“everlasting Father” = According to ancient history and the “Targum” (the Aramaic translation of the Old Testament), the “Father of Glory” is “Glorious,” the “Father of Wisdom,” is “Wise,” the “Father of Love,” is “Lovely,” the Father of Eternity,” is “Eternal,” Etcetera.  In other words, the Father of anything is the originator and possessor of it.  Just as Jabal, “was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle,” Genesis 4:20, and Jubal, “was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ,” Genesis 4:21, so the “everlasting Father,” as expressed here, is teaching us that Jesus, being the Originator, or better, the Creator of everything (Col. 1:16-17), is the “Father of creation;” not God the Father.  The verse then, would also teach us that Jesus possesses Deity and is eternal; without beginning and ending.  In the ancient Near East, kings and deities had multiple names to show their greatness.

 

Arguments are contrived against this verse in order to discount the true Biblical FACT that this is speaking of the Coming Messiah, or that the names do not apply to the “child.”  One of the arguments is that “a Child is born” and “a son is given” are already in the past tense.  This argument goes away by reading further, “His Name shall be called,” which clearly links all to future tense constructive Hebrew language.

 

Another argument is brought out in the “Chabad” translation, which is Hebrew based but ignores the Hebrew, or uses the Hebrew how they want instead of sticking to the rules of translating Hebrew (verbs in this case).  Here is its translation, after “everlasting Father, called his name, ‘the prince of peace.’ ”  In other words, by adding a verb incorrectly into the Hebrew text here, God the Father is all the Names of God the Father, but the “child” is “called” “the prince of peace.”  When translators take such liberties, the agenda becomes quit clear.

 

The Biblical Hebrew supports the FACT that all the Names given apply to the “Child.”  Why?  Because in every other instance that the Hebrew verb “qara” is used, when it is followed next by a “name,” plus a predominant suffix, such as “his name,” her name,” “their name,” and then immediately after that, a proper name.  The proper name always then becomes the object, and NEVER the subject.  Examples are:  Genesis 11:9; 16:11; 19:37-38; 25:25-26 & 30; 26:21-22; 27:36; 29:32-35; 30:6 & 8 & 18; 31:48; 35:8 & 18; 38:29-30; 50:11; Exodus 2:10; 15:23; 17:15; Judges 1:26 15:19; Ruth 4:17; First Chronicles 4:9; 7:16; Isaiah 7:14; 8:3; Hosea 1:4 & 6 & 9.  Thus, to argue that the names apply to the Father God and not to the Child is to go against Hebrew syntax (which equals “History of Jewish Interpretation”) and the verses context.

 

But the real problem here is that Jewish scholars did not want the “child” to be “called” either “Mighty God,” or “Everlasting Father.”  The “Septuagint,” which is the Jewish translation of Hebrew into Greek, even goes so far as to translate this passage as, “his name is called the Messenger of great counsel, for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.”  Thus, even before the time of Christ, the Jewish scholars were not ready, nor are they now ready, to call this future “Child,” -- “Mighty God.”  See Isaiah 10:21 & Daniel 7:14, where Divinity is assigned to the “Son.”

 

Another argument is that this “child” is referring to king Hezekiah, for Isaiah 9:4 speaks of a “rod,” and Isaiah 10:27 speaks of “his yoke,” and Isaiah 14:25 refers to “his yoke” again, meaning, in Hezekiah’s day the Assyrian “yoke” would be broken by this “child,” being Hezekiah, staying in context.  Plus, in Isaiah 10:8-11 and 37:11-13, the “kings of Assyria” ask in taunting, “where is your God against the power of our gods?”

 

This argument ignores Isaiah 9:7 (staying in context), which states that this “Child’s” “government” will be “establish[ed]” “even for ever.”  And we know that Hezekiah’s kingdom was not set up forever; but a Coming Messiah’s would.  And to counteract the context verses given for this argument, if we look at Isaiah 2:2-4 & 11:3-9, these are futuristic (no disagreement; nor do they apply AT ALL to Hezekiah; for these promises cannot apply to him).  Thus, context used from different Chapters is pushing the envelope for agenda.  See also First Chronicles 17:11-14, which is promised to the “Son” Who Comes through the house of David.  Even the post Hezekiah prophets understood that this promised “Child” had not yet appeared (see Zec. 9:9-10).  That Hezekiah is a Messianic prototype can be well argued however.

 

“Jesus is not only our shepherd; He is our ‘everlasting Father.’ ”  DA:483.

 

From the “Advent Review and Sabbath Herald,” June 6, 1871, James White writing, “We have not as much sympathy with Unitarians that deny the Divinity of Christ, as with Trinitarians who hold that the Son is the eternal Father, and talk so mistily about the three-one God.  Give the Master all that Divinity with which the Holy Scriptures clothe Him.”

 

“The Prince of Peace” = This is how Messiah was presented to the world by the Heavenly angels (Luke 2:14).

 

9:10:  “we will build” = The meaning is, “We will rebuild again better than before.”  In a miss-used sense, this verse was used after “911” and the falling of the “Twin Towers” in New York City.  The builders did not realize that this verse was speaking in arrogance against God.  Or did they?

 

9:12 & 17 & 21 (& 5:25 & 10:4):  “For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still” = God still offers redemption by putting forth His hand to you; but you must take it.

 

 

CHAPTER TEN

 

 

10:8:  “Are not My princes altogether kings” = God will now list the nations and cities He will use to demolish His unrepentant people.

 

10:14:  “his fat ones” = The “his” not meaning God’s, but Assyria’s army that had become fattened with the spoils of victory.

 

10:22:  “a remnant of them shall return” = We see this in the Book of Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah, that only a few return to the land of Israel.

 

10:24:  “be not afraid of the Assyrian” = “The boastful Assyrian, while used by God for a season as the rod of His anger (see Isa. 10:5) for the punishment of the nations, was not always to prevail. [Verses 24-27 quoted and Isa. 14:24-28].  The power of the oppressor was to be broken.  Yet Hezekiah in the earlier years of his reign had continued to pay tribute to Assyria, in harmony with the agreement entered into by Ahaz.”  RH, May 20, 1915; PK:349-350.

 

10:27:  “because of the anointing” = Better, the “Dead Sea Scrolls” has it as, “because you’ve become obese.”

 

10:34:  “shall fall by a Mighty One” = I believe this to be a reference (dual application; one for the destruction of Assyria and one referencing) to the Second Coming of Christ.

 

 

CHAPTER ELEVEN

 

 

11:1 & 10:  “(1) a Rod from the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his [Jesse’s] roots & (10) Root of Jesse” = Identification of this personage has never been in doubt by any reputable Bible commentator, until Bible versions after 1881 A.D. (see my Bible Study upon that subject).  Therefore, let’s establish Whom this personage is without question.

 

Let’s break down some Hebrew terminology first:

“Rod” = Hebrew, “kho’ter,” meaning, “a shoot; a twig.”  Job 14:7-9.

“Stem” = Hebrew, “geh’zah,” meaning, “a stump (indicating the decaying remains of a felled tree).”  Yet out of it shall Come forth the “Root of David,” Romans 15:12.

“Branch” = Hebrew, “netser,” meaning, “a sprout, a branch (indicating a sprout that grows from a decaying tree’s root system to become a new tree).”  Isaiah 4:2; Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; 6:12.  The Holy Spirit may be using “netser” as a play on words to indicate that our Lord would be known as coming from Nazareth.  “Jesus of Nazareth,” Matthew 26:71; etcetera.

“Grow out” = Hebrew, “paw’raw,” meaning, “to bear fruit, to be fruitful, to flourish.”

“Root” = Hebrew, “sheh’resh,” meaning, “a root, roots, depths (a metaphor for family or people group, ones descendants, family roots).”

 

According to Luke 4:21, Jesus claims, “This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.”  Speaking of verse 2.  But let’s look further.  In Psalm 52:8-9, king David identifies himself as “a green olive tree in the house of God.”  So David is the tree out of the “roots” of the line of Jesse.  Then we go to Jeremiah 11:9-10 &16-17, where the “green olive tree” is cut down and “its branches are broken.”  Meaning, David’s lineage is broken up because of sin.  Or better, the Israelite nation as a whole.  So now, only the “stump” is left.  But out of that “stump,” the “root” system, will come the Messiah, according to Matthew 1:1-2 & 6 & 16; confirmed again in Acts 13:21-23.  See also the Messiah Chapter, in Isaiah 53, specifically verse 2.

 

Now if we go to Matthew 2:23, we have this prophecy, “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”  However, nowhere do we find this prophecy in the Old Testament, unless we go to the root word for “Branch,” which is, “ney’tser,” which is where we get our root term for “Nazareth,” Greek, “Nazoraios,” or better, “ney’tser,” which was founded by the descendants of king David.  In referance, “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?”  John 1:46.  Also, according to Revelation 22:16, Jesus claims to be “the Root and offspring of David.”

 

Now to the lovely “green olive tree” that was cut down.  If we go to John 15:1 & 4, Jesus is claiming to be the “true vine,” the “Branch,” that “shall grow out of his [Jesse’s] roots,” which are still alive.  Basically, everyone knew Whom the Isaiah, Chapter Eleven, prophecy was referring to (The Messiah).  Here is a ancient interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, i.e., the “Aramaic Targum,” which translates Isaiah 11:1 as, “And a king shall proceed from the sons of Jesse, and the Messiah from his sons’ sons shall arise.”  See also Romans 15:8-9 & 12.

 

11:2:  “And the Spirit of the Lord (1) [Center shaft of the seven branched Candlestick] shall rest upon Him, the spirit of wisdom (2) and understanding (3), the spirit of counsel (4) and might (5), the spirit of knowledge (6) and of the fear of the Lord (7)”  = Herein is seen a breakdown of the seven characteristics of the Holy Spirit and identification of His ministry.  These are referred to in Revelation 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6.

 

11:4:  “with the breath of his lips shall He slay the wicked” = Without God’s breath (Gen. 2:7), connected to the body, man dies.  “The wicked” could be translated as “the wicked one,” meaning Satan.  But I believe it is all conclusive.

 

11:6:  “a little child shall lead them” = “There man will be restored to his lost kingship, and the lower order of beings will become gentle, and the timid trustful.”  RH, July 1, 1915; ED:304; Mar:353.

 

11:10:  “Root of Jesse” = See my Isaiah 11:1 & 10 Note.

 

“ensign” = Meaning, “standard.”  The Law of God being that.

 

11:11:  “the second time” = The Books of Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah describe the first time.  We are living in the “second time,” just before the Second Coming of Christ.  See Revelation 14:12 for who they are.

 

11:12:  “four corners of the earth” = Here is my Revelation 7:1 & 20:8 Note:  “four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth” “four quarters of the earth” =  Isaiah (11:12) and John are just using figurative language.  To make this mean anything other than that is to miss the main point of the text.  Focusing on “four corners” however, they are just using the expression as we do today when we say, for example, that “the sun is setting,” or that the wind “rose from the east.”  To insist on a literal interpretation of these prophetic texts, when the context indicates a figurative idea of north, south, east, and west, is to take these passages out of context and make them teach something that they are not teaching.

 

In Matthew 24:31 we find our Lord “gather[ing] together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”  This is done while these “four angels” hold events, “that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.”  In Matthew 15:19, Jesus was not talking about human physiology, or the literal human heart. He was using a figure of speech to make a moral point.

 

In regards to the prophecy in Isaiah, Israel is to be gathered and protected from its enemies (upon condition of obedience; of course; and as verse 16 shows, only a “remnant” will be delivered).  In regards to Revelation 7:1, the “four winds” are held in check in order for “till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads,” Revelation 7:3.  Check this with Ezekiel, Chapter 9, verses 1-6.  In Jeremiah 23:19-20 (see also Dan. 7:2) we learn that “winds” stand for Gods method of using destructive forces (judgments) upon the wicked.  Therefore, this description has nothing to do with a flat earth.  See my Bible Study:  “FLAT EARTH.”

 

 

CHAPTER TWELVE

 

 

12:ALL:  Isaiah, Chapter 12, is a short psalm of praise to God for His merciful and powerful comfort.  Actually, it is a song.

 

12:2:  “draw water out of the wells of salvation” = During the Feast of Tabernacles the priest “bore the flagon to the altar, which occupied a central position in the court of the priests.  Here were two silver basins, with a priest standing at each one.  The flagon of water was poured into one, and a pipe which communicated with the Kedron, and was conducted to the Dead Sea.  This display of the consecrated water represented the fountain that at the command of God had gushed from the rock to quench the thirst of the children of Israel.  Then the jubilant strains rang forth, [verses quoted].”  DA:449.