Two Prophecies in One

[Covenanter]

Read]Isaiah 9 from 8:1 through to 9:7 and you will see that the whole passage is figurative - Israel is in darkness, Messiah will bring light.

You are once more missing the point of the OP. Do you actually think that the prophecy of the incarnation in Is. 9:6 is not literal? Do you believe that Jesus is not a "Wonderful Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace"?

I believe those glorious prophecies, which should be read as a whole. Clear instruction & prophecy is given in figurative language. Figurative language so easy to understand that you call it some of it "literal" presumably to make a point about David's throne.

Clear instruction & prophecy is given in figurative language. Figurative language so easy to understand that you call it "literal." Isaiah's baby is given a significant name, as was Ahaz' baby "Immanuel." - 7:14.

Okay, so the prophecies of Christ's first coming were not literal? He was not born of a virgin at Bethlehem, did not flee with His family to Egypt, etc., etc.????

In context (!) the "Immanuel" prophecy was to Ahaz, & presumably concerned his virgin bride who would soon conceive in the normal way. The Messianic significance is of course clear as we consider the prophecy as a whole, which runs from 7:1 to 9:7. The Messianic prophecy to Ahaz is completed by 9:6-7 - Immanuel is born to us.

Why do you reject the obvious meaning in the passage - 1b? It agrees with what I wrote - "The concept of sitting on a throne is partly figurative - a king doesn't need to sit on a throne to be king - it is a sign of office."

You are once again being insulting, the reason I put you on ignore before. You are accusing me of rejecting Scripture. That is a terrible accusation to make, and untrue. Rejecting your interpretation is not rejecting Scripture.

Is quoting & agreeing with your own post being insulting?

Here is the BDB Hebrew lexicon definition of the Hebrew word for throne:

"1) seat (of honour), throne, seat, stool
1a) seat (of honour), throne
1b) royal dignity, authority, power (figuratively)"

It may be of interest that the Shunammite wanted a throne (H3678) (translated "stool") prepared for Elijah. 2 Kings 4:10.
---------------------------------------------------
You want an answer to your OP -
The passage, in its context is a real, understandable prophecy given partly in figurative language concerning real, literal events.

When Isaiah uses metaphors like -

8:5 The Lord spoke to me again:
6 ‘Because this people has rejected
the gently flowing waters of Shiloah
and rejoices over Rezin
and the son of Remaliah,
7 therefore the Lord is about to bring against them
the mighty floodwaters of the Euphrates –​

the meaning is clear - & explained as the prophecy continues.

When Isaiah writes of the glorious titles being given to Messiah, he includes the Kingship - the promised throne of David, aka the throne of the LORD. I consider that by insisting on a literal, physical fulfilment of "throne of David" you are missing the force of the prophecy & its glorious fulfilment in the resurrection, ascension & reign of our LORD Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Covenant Scriptures.

 

[kyredneck]

Start reading Isaiah 9 from 8:1 through to 9:7 and you will see that the whole passage is figurative - Israel is in darkness, Messiah will bring light.

Excellent.

 

[kyredneck]

just in the past couple of days:

You are once again being insulting, the reason I put you on ignore before. You are accusing me

https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/two-prophecies-in-one.111068/page-2#post-2474256

This is an insulting way to put it: "reading the pre-trib view into Scripture."

https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/how-did-you-discover-the-bible-teaches-a-pre-trib-rapture.111080/#post-2474064

Nope. He's nastier than you with his insults, and that's saying a lot.

https://www.baptistboard.com/threads/two-prophecies-in-one.111068/page-4#post-2474707

 

[David Kent]

Nathan? He wasn't in the royal line. Check your facts. The curse on Joseph's line came after Solomon.

Anyway, what's you're point? The usual explanation, which I hold to, is that Joseph's was the cursed line, so Christ came through Mary's line, which was still a valid royal line of David.

Check the new testament.

Mathew gives the genealogy of Joseph which was through Solomon. Luke gives the genealogy of Mary through Nathan. I thought you would have known that.

• Luke 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,

 

[Covenanter]

Off topic, but I didn't start the thought -

IIRC, Mary was also descended from David.

Excellent point.

Just checked. Matthew has Joseph's genealogy through Solomen. Luke has Mary's through Nathan another son of David.

Nathan? He wasn't in the royal line. Check your facts. The curse on Joseph's line came after Solomon.

Anyway, what's you're point? The usual explanation, which I hold to, is that Joseph's was the cursed line, so Christ came through Mary's line, which was still a valid royal line of David.

How does that resolve the problem of the lines converging & diverging & converging again? Matthew gives the kingly line David to Zerubbabel, while Luke gives a completely different line via Nathan.

Matthew -

11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,

Josiah - Jeconiah - Shealtiel - Zerubbabel - Abihud - ...... -Jacob - Joseph
​

Luke -

the son of Josek, the son of Joda,
27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melki,

Melki - Neri - Shealtiel - Zerubbabel - Rhesa - ...... - Heli - Joseph​

 

[Squire Robertsson]

C, you're an Englishman think of the House of Stuart (Jacobite) and the House of Hannover. In this case, Joseph is the Stuart and Mary the Hannover. In Jesus, the Jacobite is made happy, but the Devine decree removing the crown from the Solomonic is also satisfied.

How does that resolve the problem of the lines converging & diverging & converging again? Matthew gives the kingly line David to Zerubbabel, while Luke gives a completely different line via Nathan.

 

[John of Japan]

Check the new testament.

Mathew gives the genealogy of Joseph which was through Solomon. Luke gives the genealogy of Mary through Nathan. I thought you would have known that.

• Luke 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,

Oops, sorry. I thought you were talking about Nathan the prophet who rebuked David. My bad, as the young people say.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

JoJ, all I can say is tum, te, tum, tum.

Oops, sorry. I thought you were talking about Nathan the prophet who rebuked David. My bad, as the young people say.

 

[David Kent]

C, you're an Englishman think of the House of Stuart (Jacobite) and the House of Hannover. In this case, Joseph is the Stuart and Mary the Hannover. In Jesus, the Jacobite is made happy, but the Devine decree removing the crown from the Solomonic is also satisfied.

Interesting.

But how did the father of Zerubbabel have two different fathers?

 

[David Kent]

Will it be a literal king's chair? I believe it will. Will it be the literal king's chair of David? It could be. God certainly could do that. Whether it is or not, it will be a genuine reign like David on a genuine throne, one you can sit on, as Christ Himself said: "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats" (Matt. 25:31-32).

The Judgement Seat of Christ A.K.A .The Great White Throne.

 

[Covenanter]

C, you're an Englishman think of the House of Stuart (Jacobite) and the House of Hannover. In this case, Joseph is the Stuart and Mary the Hannover. In Jesus, the Jacobite is made happy, but the Devine decree removing the crown from the Solomonic is also satisfied.

Interesting.
But how did the father of Zerubbabel have two different fathers?

I think the basic difference down to Jeconiah is that Matthew is recording the "official" line of kings - as UK would from William 1 to Elizabeth 2, regardless of the actual blood line, whereas Luke is recording the actual blood line.

Note that Jeconiah was declared childless - Jer. 22:30

This is what the Lord says:
‘Record this man as if childless,
a man who will not prosper in his lifetime,
for none of his offspring will prosper,
none will sit on the throne of David
or rule any more in Judah.’​

Thus the continuation was through another Davidic line - through Nathan.

 

[John of Japan]

The Judgement Seat of Christ A.K.A .The Great White Throne.

How do you conflate these completely different terms, referred to in completely different contexts in the Bible? Paul speaks of the judgment seat of Christ to Christians in his epistles. We will never be judged for sin, since "there is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus."

However, John speaks of a judgment in Rev. 20 after which those judged will be thrown into the lake of fire. That's not believers.

 

[kyredneck]

Paul speaks of the judgment seat of Christ to Christians in his epistles. We will never be judged for sin

???

10 For we must all be made manifest before the judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 2 Cor 5

 

[Squire Robertsson]

That's what I tried to say.

I think the basic difference down to Jeconiah is that Matthew is recording the "official" line of kings - as the UK would from William 1 to Elizabeth 2, regardless of the actual bloodline, whereas Luke is recording the actual bloodline.