Now, let us consider the first of the “major prophets”, Isaiah. In Hebrew his name is יְשַׁעְיָה (yᵊšaʿyâh, “Yah has saved”). He was sent to prophesy to the Southern Kingdom of Judah, during the time of the kings Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, probably beginning in 740BC with his vision recorded in Isaiah 6:1-13 and extending at least as far as the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib in 701BC. There is a theory that the book of Isaiah was written by three different authors, chapters 1-39 being attributed to the prophet himself, chapters 40-55 is said to be written by a second author (Deutero-Isaiah), and chapters 56-66 by a third author (Trito-Isaiah) . Whether this is true or not does not take away from the fact that this entire book was spoken by God, whoever the authors may be. Besides, this theory only came about in the 1700s (like the “Documentary Hypothesis” about the book of Deuteronomy), and is not accepted by most conservative Bible scholars:
Most reputable Bible scholars reject the “Deutero-Isaiah” theory. Their conclusions include the similarity of writing styles in both sections, the consistent use of the same words throughout, and the familiarity of the author with Israel, but not Babylon. Furthermore, Jewish tradition uniformly ascribes the entire book to Isaiah. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain a complete scroll of Isaiah dated from the second century BC. The book is one unit with the end of chapter 39 and the beginning of chapter 40 in one continuous column of text. This demonstrates that the scribes who copied this scroll never doubted the singular unity of the book. Neither did the New Testament authors, nor the early church, as quotations from both sections are attributed only to Isaiah.
(https://www.gotquestions.org/Deutero-Isaiah.html)
Isaiah’s prophetic office was one of dire warnings, not only to the nation of Judah, but to the pagan nations surrounding them. One of Isaiah’s earliest prophecies is the Messianic prophecy found in Isaiah 7:14—(repeated in Matthew 1:23)—“Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.” This is the first of Isaiah’s Messianic prophecies. The word translated “virgin” is the Hebrew עַלְמָה (almah, “virgin, young woman; of marriageable age; maid or newly married”). In the Septuagint this word is rendered in the Greek as παρθένος (parthenos, “a virgin; a marriageable maiden; a woman who has never had sexual intercourse with a man; one's marriageable daughter”), as it is in Matthew 1:23. The fact that the Holy Spirit led Matthew to use this word παρθένος rather than a word which would insinuate a woman who had had sexual relations with a man should be enough to quell any thoughts that Mary was not a chaste virgin when the Holy Spirit came upon her. “Well, hold on now! In Genesis 34:3, the LXX uses the Greek word παρθένος to describe Dinah after she was raped! So how can you say that this word only means a chaste virgin??” Simple. Because Dinah was taken in rape, and it is probable that at the time she was still chaste. Genesis 34:3—His soul was strongly attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman and spoke kindly to the young woman (LXX, παρθένος). But in the very next verse (Genesis 34:4) the LXX uses the word παιδισκην (paidisken, “a young girl, damsel; a maid-servant, a young female slave”) for “young woman.” Genesis 34:4—So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me this young woman (LXX, παιδισκην) as a wife." So why did the translators of the LXX use two different words for “young woman” (KJV, “damsel”)? Here’s why: because before Shechem took her, she was a virgin. After he took her, she was now simply a “young woman”, no longer chaste. So let’s put these verses together. Genesis 34:3-4—His soul was strongly attracted to Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the young woman and spoke kindly to the young woman (Hebrew נַעֲרָה, [naʿărâ, “young woman”]; LXX, παρθένος). So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me this young woman (Hebrew יַלְדָּה [yaldâ, “marriageable girl”]; LXX, παιδισκην) as a wife." It is also possible that Shechem spoke kindly to her to get on her good side and seduce her and that when this didn’t work he took her by force. I found this at the website for Summit Theological Seminary (which appears to be affiliated with the Church of Christ. I do not agree with many of the doctrines of the Church of Christ, but that does not negate the fact that the following is most likely a correct exegesis of the text in Genesis 34):
Notice that the narrative in verses 1-3 are presented as a single event in time. That is, he saw her, he took her, he lay with her, he violated her, was attracted to her, loved her, and spoke kindly to her all at the same time. To read this as a progression of events each happening after the other is likely a mistake. Was he only attracted to her after he violated her? That is absurd. Why would he take her, lay with her, and violate her if he was not attracted to her? When exactly did he love her and speak kindly to her? Was it only after he had violated her? It is possible that the account is telling us that he loved her and spoke kindly to her before, during, and after he violated her. That in no way minimizes his guilt. In fact, it makes it that much worse. He raped a girl that he loved, spoke kindly to, and later wanted to marry. That is very twisted behavior. The original Hebrew structure of these verses also indicates that the events of verses 2 and 3 happened simultaneously. These verses contain a series of what is called vav-consecutives. Essentially, that is a list of actions strung together by conjunctions to indicate a quick series of events or events occurring simultaneously. It can be illustrated in English as follows:
And he saw her…
And he took her…
And he lay with her...
And he violated her…
And he was attracted to her…
And he loved her…
And he spoke kindly to her…
The Septuagint translators evidently recognized this Hebrew construction as they used the Greek conjunction “kai” meaning “and” to begin each of the phrases in these verses. This is as close as you can come to mimicking the Hebrew vav-consecutives in Greek. This indicates that the translators were not saying that she was a virgin after he raped her, but when he raped her.
(Summit Theological Seminary, “Was Dinah a Virgin After She Was Raped?”, from “The Gospel Unashamed”, vol. 37 no. 1, found at https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://summit1.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/GUN_Vol_37_1_-_Jan_2024_-_Was_Dinah_a_Virgin_After_She_was_Raped_by_Terry_Carter.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjTlozYotCLAxXaRTABHf0gC7AQFnoECCkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2RtlDL2KZWYVH_ssRu-s9k)
Whatever the case may be, Matthew was well within his rights to use παρθένος to describe Mary, as Mary was still a chaste virgin at the time of Jesus’ conception. Luke 1:34—Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?" Luke’s words give still more evidence that this she was pure at the time of this miraculous event.
The next words of Isaiah we will look at are the words he wrote of the “Suffering Servant”. Keep in mind these words were written some 700 years before Jesus came and fulfilled them. When Messiah came, the people were looking for a military leader like David (as they knew Messiah would be the son of David) and throw off the yoke of the Romans as Judas Maccabee had done about 200 years prior. They were not looking for a Messiah who was coming to save the people from their sins, to die for those sins and unite Jew and Gentile into one body. They probably also expected him to be a handsome man like David was. They expected him to be popular, to be adored by all the people. But that was not the picture Isaiah drew of Him. Isaiah 53:3-10—3 He is despised and rejected by men, a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. 4 Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. 6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. 7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth. 8 He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken. 9 And they made His grave with the wicked—but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth. 10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand. So many prophecies just in these verses that were fulfilled by Christ:
1. He is despised and rejected by men (see Matthew 27:39)
2. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him (see Matthew 26:56)
3. Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows (see 1st Corinthians 15:3)
4. Yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted (see Matthew 27:46)
5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed (see 2nd Peter 2:24)
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way (see Romans 5:12),and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all (see Romans 5:15)
7. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth (see Luke 23:9)
8. And they made His grave with the wicked (see Luke 23:33)
9. But with the rich at His death (see John 19:38-41)
10. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed (see Matthew 28:16-17; Mark 16:7; Luke 24:36; John 20:19)
Ten prophecies in eight verses. And they all were fulfilled. No “Prophet” today could give even one prophecy that would come true. But what do we do with that phrase in verse 10, the one that says Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him? Was the Father really looking forward to watching His Son beaten and crucified to death? Was He really that vindictive? Do we Christians serve, as we have been accused by many, of belonging to a “blood cult” that vicariously derives some sick and twisted pleasure from the Father watching with unbridled glee as the murder of His Son is carried out? God forbid! God did not take delight in the death of Jesus, but that what He willed from before the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8) was coming true. Why? Why did God ordain that His Son should suffer and die? The answer is simple: He did it for us. And in all actuality, He did it for His glory. He would not wipe out Israel for their groanings in the desert for one reason: His glory. And He would not allow the crown of his creation to all go to eternal destruction for one reason: His glory.
When he comes,
our glorious King,/all his ransomed home to bring,
Then anew this song we'll sing:/Hallelujah, what a Savior!
Jesus ransomed us from eternal death in the depths of Hell so that He might bring many sons to glory (Hebrews 2:10), and by so doing He brought glory to the Father (John 17:1). We could talk about so many more prophecies we find in the book of Isaiah, but I think that will suffice for now.
Let us move on then to the prophet Jeremiah. He was called as a prophet before he was born, before he was even conceived in the womb. Jeremiah 1:4-5—4 Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying: 5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you; I ordained you a prophet to the nations." His was a sad calling, as he was called during the reign of Josiah and Josiah’s wicked son Jehoakim, all the way through until the captivity of Judah under King Zedekiah (Jeremiah 1:1-3). He was to prophesy to the people about their coming exile into Babylon. Not a very happy message to be delivering to the people. Not one you would hear on TBN these days. Not gonna fill a stadium for Jesse Duplantis. But such was the lot in Jeremiah’s life; such was the burden he carried for Judah. They had seen the Northern Kingdom of Israel taken into captivity 135 years prior, and now the same fate was going to befall them. And Jeremiah had seen it all in his prophecies, and was going to live it out in flesh and blood.
And why did they go into captivity? Jeremiah 2:1-5—1 Moreover the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2 “Go and cry in the hearing of Jerusalem, saying, 'Thus says the LORD: "I remember you, the kindness of your youth, the love of your betrothal, when you went after Me in the wilderness, in a land not sown. 3 Israel was holiness to the LORD, the firstfruits of His increase. All that devour him will offend; disaster will come upon them," says the LORD.'” 4 Hear the word of the LORD, O house of Jacob and all the families of the house of Israel. 5 Thus says the LORD: “What injustice have your fathers found in Me, that they have gone far from Me, have followed idols, and have become idolaters?” Jehoiakim, Jehoachin and Zedekiah were the final kings in Judah, and they all did wicked before the LORD. Jehoiakim’s name was Eliakim before Pharaoh Necoh changed it to Jehoiakim (2nd Kings 23:34). It was during his reign that Nebuchadnezzar came up to Judah to take it into captivity (2nd Kings 24:1). Jeremiah had had his scribe Baruch write a letter, a prophecy he had received from God in Jeremiah 36 to warn Jehoiakim of the captivity that was to come upon Judah. And much like many things that God said to rebellious people, this was not taken well. In fact, Jehoiakim was so outraged that this prophet dare say that Jehoiakim’s reign would come to an end that he burned the scroll that Jeremiah had dictated to Baruch (Jeremiah 36:23). And he thought this would be the end of the thing God said He would do. But God is God, and His plans will not be foiled by men, so He ordered Jeremiah to take another scroll and write on it the very same words He had given the prophet in the previous scroll (Jeremiah 36:28-32).
In Jeremiah 37:1 we read these words, Now King Zedekiah the son of Josiah reigned instead of Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, whom Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon made king in the land of Judah. Coniah was the name given to Jehoiachin (also rendered as Jeconiah in 1st Chronicles 3:17), who was cursed by God in Jeremiah 22:24, 30—24 “As I live,” says the LORD, “though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet on My right hand, yet I would pluck you off…30 Thus says the LORD: 'Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not prosper in his days; for none of his descendants shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah.'” The words 'Write this man down as childless' present us with a problem, however. For Coniah—along with his son Shealtiel—is mentioned in the genealogy of Christ in Matthew 1:11-12. If he were childless, how could he beget Shealtiel and be listed in this genealogy? In fact, 1st Chronicles 3:17-18 list the sons of Jehoiachin. So how do we answer when this is brought up as a challenge to the inerrancy of Scripture? Here is where a deeper study of Scripture is warranted. In 2nd Kings 7:12-13, God says to David, 12 “When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.” So God had promised to David that a king would sit on the throne of Israel forever (see also Jeremiah 33:17, which says “‘David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel’”). Yet Coniah (Jehoachin), who was descended from David, was to be “written as childless” and is yet included in the genealogy of Christ.
And here is where we come to our solution: The genealogy found in Matthew is the descent of Joseph (the one found in Luke is the descent of Mary). Was Joseph the natural father of Jesus? No. Matthew 1:18—Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. Joseph could not have fathered Jesus, as (1) Joseph was a man—a decent man, but one tainted by the curse of sin, and would have passed his sinful nature to his son; and (2) Joseph was naturally descended from Jeconiah. The answer lies in Luke’s genealogy. Luke 3:27-28—27…the son of Joannas, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmodam, the son of Er… In 1st Chronicles 3:16-17 we read that Jeconiah was the son of Jehoiakim. 1st Chronicles 3:16-17—16 The sons of Jehoiakim were Jeconiah his son and Zedekiah his son. 17 And the sons of Jeconiah were Assir, Shealtiel his son... So Jeconiah and Neri were two different people, having different fathers. The best explanation for Luke listing Neri as the father of Shealtiel (that I have found) is that Shealtiel was the product of a Levirate marriage and was born to Jeconiah’s wife after Jeconiah went into captivity to Babylon, thus not a natural son of Jeconiah. Luke was a meticulous historian and would not have overlooked something as simple as the parents of Shealtiel. And if he was indeed the product of a Levirate marriage (and not Jeconiah’s natural son), this would fit even better into Luke’s genealogy. Keep in mind, Luke listed Jesus’ lineage as “X, the son of Y, the son of Z”. Thus, it would be very probable that this would be the case. “So why does Matthew say that Jeconiah begat Shealtiel?” Because Matthew is not listing Jesus’ credentials as king, whereas Luke is. Remember the words of God, 'Write this man (Jeconiah) down as childless'. Thus, the theory that a Levirate marriage produced Shealtiel is further undergirded. More evidence is provided by this rather lengthy passage from Keil and Delitzsch:
The omission of Assir in the genealogies in Matthew and the Seder olam also proves nothing, for in the genealogies intermediate members are often passed over. Against the appellative interpretation of the word, on the contrary, the want of the article is decisive; as apposition to יְכָנִיָה, it should have the article. But besides this, according to the genealogy of Jesus in Luke 3:27, Shealtiel is a son of Neri, a descendant of David, of the lineage of Nathan, not of Solomon; and according to Haggai 1:1, 12; Ezra 3:2. 5:2; and Matthew 1:12, Zerubbabel is son of Shealtiel; while, according to 1st Chronicles 3:18-19, he is a son of Pedaiah, a brother of Shealtiel. These divergent statements may be reconciled by the following combination. The discrepancy in regard to the enumeration of Shealtiel among the sons of Jeconiah, a descendant of Solomon, and the statement that he was descended from Neri, a descendant of Nathan, Solomon's brother, is removed by the supposition that Jeconiah, besides the Zedekiah mentioned in 1st Chronicles 3:16, who died childless, had another son, viz., Assir, who left only a daughter, who then, according to the law as to heiresses (Numbers 27:8, 36:8), married a man belonging to a family of her paternal tribe, viz., Neri, of the family of David, in the line of Nathan, and that from this marriage sprang Shealtiel, Malchiram, and the other sons (properly grandsons) of Jeconiah mentioned in 1st Chronicles 3:18. If we suppose the eldest of these, Shealtiel, to come into the inheritance of his maternal grandfather, he would be legally regarded as his legitimate son. In our genealogy, therefore, along with the childless Assir, Shealtiel is introduced as a descendant of Jeconiah, while in Luke he is called, according to his actual descent, a son of Neri.
I know that whole explanation may have been a bit long, but sometimes you must go around the whole block to make a left-hand turn. So, in stating that Jehoiachin would be written down as childless, Jeremiah was saying that he would have no natural sons.
The next prophecy of Jeremiah we will look at is the word that came to him from God that God would establish a New Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-34—31 “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” We are no longer under the Old Covenant. Nobody is. That was done away with at the Cross. When Christ died, was buried, and rose from the grave, a New Covenant came into effect, doing away with the regulations found in the Law, and ushering in a new era of grace (not that the Old Covenant was without grace).
So “Now”, you may ask, “Who and what is Israel?” It is not the physical descendants of Jacob that are Israel, but rather those who are of faith in Christ who are Israel. Do not be mistaken, however, there are some who are physical descendants of the Patriarchs who are of faith in Christ and who are, therefore, Israel. Romans 11:1-2—1 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. But we Gentiles who also believe in Christ are Israel. Romans 11:11—I say then, have they (the Jews) stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. God has always accepted Gentiles into the congregation of His people. But they had to go through certain rites (e.g., circumcision) to be accepted into that people. They had to become like the Jews. But now, there are no special things we need to do to be counted among the people of God. He has grafted us wild branches into the natural olive tree. Romans 11:17-21—17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in." 20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either. God broke off some of the natural branches of the natural olive tree and has grafted in us Gentiles—wild branches—that we may be one people with the natural Jews. In other words, He has made the two—Jew and Gentile—one, through the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. Ephesians 2:11-14—11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands—12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation.
Part 3 next week
