I don't agree that the KJV is most accurate but the rest, yes...some interesting facts...
I don't agree that the KJV is most accurate but the rest, yes...some interesting facts...
I had to stop listening once the speaker claimed an anachronism written about Babylon during the Exilic period, was claimed to have been "written" (and thus "prophecy fulfilled") during the Assyrian period a couple centuries earlier.
OM
I had to stop listening once the speaker claimed an anachronism written about Babylon during the Exilic period, was claimed to have been "written" (and thus "prophecy fulfilled") during the Assyrian period a couple centuries earlier.
OM
What do you disagree with?
The quote about Cyrus was written by Deutero-Isaiah during the Exilic period, whereas the speaker intentionally attributes the passage as somehow being written by Proto-Isaiah a couple centuries earlier during the Assyrian period. That was intellectually dishonest, so I figured the rest wasn't worth listening to.
OM
Was the Book of Isaiah written by three authors or one? Did Daniel preach during the Babylonian Exile or is the book written in his name a pious forgery authored less than 2,200 years ago? In this eye-opening broadcast, Rabbi Singer responds to academic scholars who argue against the traditional Jewish authorship of these holy books.
The quote about Cyrus was written by Deutero-Isaiah during the Exilic period, whereas the speaker intentionally attributes the passage as somehow being written by Proto-Isaiah a couple centuries earlier during the Assyrian period. That was intellectually dishonest, so I figured the rest wasn't worth listening to.
That's more liberal hogwash. Liberals critics don't believe in the supernatural so they late-date the prophecy. That's also why they try to break up Isaiah into 2 or 3 separate authors.
To refute:
"...as an interesting sidelight, we note that Josephus, the Jewish historian, stated that the Jews in Babylonian captivity showed Cyrus the prophecies of the Old Testament Scriptures which contain his name and described his role in the scheme of God. The historian says that it was this circumstance that motivated the ruler “to fulfill what was written” (Antiquities of the Jews 11.1.2), and thus to issue his edict permitting Israel’s return to her homeland."
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/264-cyrus-the-great-in-biblical-prophecy
You haven't done your homework.
That's more liberal hogwash. Liberals critics don't believe in the supernatural so they late-date the prophecy. That's also why they try to break up Isaiah into 2 or 3 separate authors.
To refute:
"...as an interesting sidelight, we note that Josephus, the Jewish historian, stated that the Jews in Babylonian captivity showed Cyrus the prophecies of the Old Testament Scriptures which contain his name and described his role in the scheme of God. The historian says that it was this circumstance that motivated the ruler “to fulfill what was written” (Antiquities of the Jews 11.1.2), and thus to issue his edict permitting Israel’s return to her homeland."
https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/264-cyrus-the-great-in-biblical-prophecy
Antiquities / Josephus: https://textcritical.net/work/antiquities-of-the-jews/11/1/2
You haven't done your homework.
Wayne Jackson, being the con man he was, is making the invalid assumption about the dates of when thing were written. He is neither a learned or valid resource.
Nobody with any learning in Biblical theology is buying your Dr. No routine, Ramoss.
The quote about Cyrus was written by Deutero-Isaiah during the Exilic period, whereas the speaker intentionally attributes the passage as somehow being written by Proto-Isaiah a couple centuries earlier during the Assyrian period. That was intellectually dishonest, so I figured the rest wasn't worth listening to.
OM
The quote about Cyrus was written by Deutero-Isaiah during the Exilic period, whereas the speaker intentionally attributes the passage as somehow being written by Proto-Isaiah a couple centuries earlier during the Assyrian period. That was intellectually dishonest, so I figured the rest wasn't worth listening to.
The "Deutero- Isaiah" and "Proto-Isaiah" concepts (two separate authors of Isaiah in two different time periods 150-200 years apart) have a lot of problems. To wit:
"Most conservative Bible scholars are in agreement that Isaiah was the sole author of the book that bears his name. However, there are some liberal scholars who are skeptical about anything that points to supernatural inspiration of the Bible. In fact, they go so far as to explain the fulfilled prophecies in these books by re-dating them to after the events occurred! The theory of multiple Isaiahs is one example of skepticism from those who want to call into question the Bible as God’s inspired Word. This theory of “Deutero-Isaiah” (or second Isaiah) came about near the end of the eighteenth century. Supposedly, Isaiah himself wrote only the first 39 chapters, leaving one of his students to write the second part (chapters 40–66) sometime after the Babylonian captivity started (after 586 BC). This later date would explain explicit mentions of “Cyrus, King of Persia” in Isaiah 44:28–45:1 without requiring predictive prophecy."
"Again, 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
In addition, "Furthermore, both the apostles and Jesus Himself frequently quote from both sections of Isaiah, always attributing them to Isaiah with no suggestion that they were referring to two different men. For example, Jesus attributes His quote of Isaiah 40:3 to “the prophet Esaias” (Matthew 3:3) and His quote of Isaiah 6:9-10 to “Esaias the prophet” (John 12:40-41)." - ICR.org
That's a horribly written article. I will also point out the definition of 'reputable' from gotquestions is' Those that agree with me', rather than mainstream or majority.
Somehow, your declarations don't impress other people.
Unfortunately, many scholars and professors believe the same, as pointed out in the video I posted from the Rabbi...his quote..."the academic world is a godless world"...
I don't understand. Are scholars and professors not part of the academic world? What about bible scholars?
Most conservative Bible scholars are in agreement...
...most reputable Bible scholars reject the “Deutero-Isaiah” theory.
I don't understand. Are scholars and professors not part of the academic world? What about bible scholars?