This is my cat Meeko, he’s only 2 months but he loves to play

2021.11.27 02:39 Fahad08afd This is my cat Meeko, he’s only 2 months but he loves to play

This is my cat Meeko, he’s only 2 months but he loves to play submitted by Fahad08afd to The8BitRyanReddit [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 kan1657 How does $STRONG make money? How is this different than other ponzi scheme?

submitted by kan1657 to strongblock [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 CosmicEpisode Rat babies! Raven and Rocket! (Posted earlier about them, was told they are 4 months old by breeder but I was suspecting they are much younger)

submitted by CosmicEpisode to RATS [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 TrabBukcip Wheat?

submitted by TrabBukcip to Dodocodes [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 starbug1988 My crimped Greninja star

submitted by starbug1988 to PokemonTCG [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Low_Assignment3767 Need help

Do anybody have a Dragon Bone Smasher they are willing to let me have please and thank you ai screwd me over my white tendency I'm soul level 9
submitted by Low_Assignment3767 to demonssouls [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Good-Plane-1020 Just Fair-launched!🚀 A Tidal Wave 🌊 of Profits to 🔱Aqua Shiba's investors! Join the Heroic Aqua Shiba on his heroic crusade to save the Crypto & Defi World! Join our Royal Atlantian Army as we embark on our campaign to become the #1 DeFi Token! Join the most Heroic Community in all of Crypto!

Just Fair-launched!🚀 A Tidal Wave 🌊 of Profits to 🔱Aqua Shiba's investors! Join the Heroic Aqua Shiba on his heroic crusade to save the Crypto & Defi World! Join our Royal Atlantian Army as we embark on our campaign to become the #1 DeFi Token in all of Crypto. Join 🔱Aqua Shiba Today.
🔱Aqua Shiba just Launched🚀 from depths of the Majestic Ocean and bringing a Tidal Wave 🌊 of Profits to his investors! Come Join Us Lets do this togeather!!!!!!!!
🌐BSC Scan:
Liquidity is locked:
Contract Ownership is Renounced:
📝Contract: 0x37B8996C92f9143aE82183280b120a3499Ab0b3C
Buy with 11% Slippage right here on PancakeSwap!
Aqua Shiba has assembled his greatest generals to form the Royal Atlantian Marketing Council to market our token far and wide by advertising via multiple avenues such as Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Token Listing sites, and much more.
The Bounties of Aqua Shiba's Heroic Campaign will be shared with all his loyal hodlers via Heroic Reflection Rewards, Token Airdrops and Community Awards and Prizes.
Our Tokenomics are as follows:
Auto-Liquidity: All Aqua Shiba transactions contribute 7% to our liquidity pool ensuring price stability, sustainable growth for all his Aqua Shiba investors. Multiple liquidity pools and stable coins parings with BUSD & USDC will be added as our community grows.
Safe & Secure: Aqua Shiba puts the safety and security of his Army as his top priority and has ordered that Contract Ownership be Renounced at launch & 100% of Liquidity be Locked, therefore, ensuring that his token is decentralized and no individual, group, or entity has control over his royal token and ensuring safety and security for all his investors.
Heroic Reflections: All Aqua Shiba holders will observe their token balance grow through Reflection Rewards at intervals as the community grows. This function will allow holders to effectively earn interest over time and will scale as the community grows.
Heroic Marketing: Aqua Shiba has formed the Royal Atlantian Marketing Council which will utilize the Royal Atlantian Treasury of which 3% of every transaction is contributed to launch a Marketing Campaign covering multiple avenues such as Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Token Listing sites, and much more. Aqua Shiba is going to save the entire crypto world and rain riches down on his loyal soldiers!
submitted by Good-Plane-1020 to AllCryptoBets [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 204rona If You’re Looking For Relief… This Might Help!

submitted by 204rona to perioraldermatitis [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Galactic_Terminal My friend told me to make a drawing with a dog wearing Nike shoes, I think I did a good job

My friend told me to make a drawing with a dog wearing Nike shoes, I think I did a good job submitted by Galactic_Terminal to drawing [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Dieyaw Armor and Weapons question

Is sword and shield with medium armor for dps a good combo or should I go with heavy armor instead? Only level 12 right now.
submitted by Dieyaw to newworldgame [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Robnsd1 Told my secret

I’ve had someone in my life since just before COVID that I’ve had sex with on average once or twice a week. We are kinda like boyfriends. But I’ve kept my meth use a secret from him. Because my use has been relatively infrequent (every few months or so) I’ve been able to keep it a secret. But not without him being puzzled by some of my actions when I avoided him physically and sexually. Those actions hurt his self esteem.
In the weeks before my last slip Nov 5th I was starting to push him away again. But this time I told him I think we should stop having sex. And he was hurt. It was my addiction trying to find a way to get away with using without him knowing.
I did slip, and I was able to get away with it. Until yesterday when I decided to tell him everything. I couldn’t stand seeing him hurt thinking I no longer cared for him.
So for several hours he listened. And he empathized. And he still loves me.
I give him a lot of credit. He knows nothing about meth. But he knows what’s it’s like to struggle.
I believe our relationship grew a lot yesterday. I know there’s an immense sense of relief for me and a better understanding for him. I wasn’t sure how he would react, and it being Thanksgiving I was thankful the way he did.
So today I’m grateful for this person in my life. And I can now let him in on my full life. And that’s one big secret off my chest. Day 20.
submitted by Robnsd1 to EndOfTheParTy [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 EQVATOR New COVID-19 variant: How dangerous is Omicron? | DW News

New COVID-19 variant: How dangerous is Omicron? | DW News submitted by EQVATOR to PandemicPreps [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 screwitup13 Scribd unlock please
submitted by screwitup13 to CheggAnswers [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 DivineBloodline [Question] TetherMe with VPN, Unthrottled but iOS usage still going up?

I’m on iOS 14.6 if that matters. I’m using TetherMe Demo with a paid VPN and Share From Auto-Detect Active VPN enabled.
My HotSpot was throttled and unusable before and now I’m at full speed again. So I’m inclined to think it is working, and hiding my HotSpot usage. However, in my Cellular Data Setting on my device it still show my that I download 2GB of data. This is what confuses me, and I’m not sure the best way to effectively say this but is this a local recording as in my iPad knows this but my carrier does not? Hopefully that made sense. I haven’t received any text messages about going over my hotspot limit.
Is this normal, and I’m worried about nothing or should I stop tethering if I don’t want to be hit with a massive bill?
submitted by DivineBloodline to jailbreak [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 LunaForever_ Explore - A Christmas themed startpage

Explore - A Christmas themed startpage submitted by LunaForever_ to startpages [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 skipstoneonglasslake Close-up

Close-up submitted by skipstoneonglasslake to carolinecasbon2 [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 latovict Warrenty question

Hello, I purchased a Thinkpad around this time last year and have been thinking about sending it in for repairs because it came with a 1 year warrenty but I'm unsure if several things at once would be allowed - my screen has some faint burn in and two of my keys (left control and N) were pried off and don't work as smoothly as they used to. If anyone's sent in their purchases for repair please let me know how it went! :)
submitted by latovict to Lenovo [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 AstroidTea unless someone wants ok art for their mod im never gonna get my chance

unless someone wants ok art for their mod im never gonna get my chance submitted by AstroidTea to FridayNightFunkin [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 there_will_be_snacks I don’t like pineapple /on/ pizza, but…

I don’t like pineapple /on/ pizza, but… submitted by there_will_be_snacks to PizzaCrimes [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 uhohdontknow an embarrassing predicament

an embarrassing predicament submitted by uhohdontknow to GenshinGays [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 Sand1101 Sent ONE to Ledger Nano X (Metamask) - now stuck

I guess I misread that ONE was supported on the X. I sent some coins to Metamask hooked up to the X, but nothing I do will get them back out. They show in the Meta wallet. How do I get them out? I can buy an S and restore if that will work, but am stumped (and a bit upset at myself that I missed this). I'm hoping they aren't lost to the void here. Really hoping not.
submitted by Sand1101 to ledgerwallet [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 TribeofYHWH Argument From Prophecy: Jesus in the Book of Isaiah (550-750 years before He Ever Lived)

Thesis: I will argue that the authors of the book of Isaiah predicted Jesus in a way which seems inconceivable unless the authors were somehow inspired by God, thus serving as good evidence for the Christian God.
Because this is such a controversial topic, and because I'm arguing against such a hill, I can't help but have my post be very long. So be warned. For that I apologize.
In Isaiah, the Messiah would:

  1. Be born of a young virgin (Isa. 7:14). For recent groundbreaking evidence of the woman in Isaiah's context, see Christophe Rico in his book here;
  2. Be born during a time of want and adversity in the land of Israel (Isa. 7:15-16);
  3. Be YHWH (God) Himself (Isa. 7:14; 9:6; 11:10; 52:13);
  4. Will be known for the miraculous (Isa. 9:6). The "Son" here is called "wonderful counselor" in most translations. Wonderful is descriptive of "counselor." The English word is watered down in current usage (as has its close synonym ‘marvellous’). Thus, even H.G.M. Williamson says "we need to understand it here in its fuller sense, which may certainly include, but is not narrowly limited to, the miraculous" (Isaiah 6-12 [ICC, 2018], pp. 399).
  5. Be a light to the gentiles and the nations (Isa. 9:1-2; 11:10, 12; 42:4, 6; 49:1, 6; 52:13; 53:11-12) so that God's "salvation may reach to the end of the earth." (Isa. 49:6). Thus, "the coastlands wait for his teaching" (Isa. 42:4; cf. 49:1);
  6. Be associated with Nazareth in Galilee - "Jesus of Nazareth" (11:1). The Messiah in Isa. 11:1 is associated with "branch" imagery. The Hebrew word for "branch" or "scion" in Isa. 11:1 is neṣer. As Christophe Rico points out in The Mother of the Infant King, the word neṣer contains consonants which approximate those to the ancient town Nazareth; N, Z, and R. The mention of "Galilee of the nations/gentiles" in Isa. 9:1 is noteworthy given this;
  7. Be just, righteous, and without deceit (Isa. 7:15; 9:6-7; 11:2-5; 42:2-4; 53:9, 11);
  8. Be Davidic (Isa. 7:13f.; 9:6-7; 11:1, 10);
  9. Be a teacher (Isa. 42:4; 49:1; esp. 50:4);
  10. Initiate a new covenant (Isa. 42:6; cf. Jer. 31:31-34);
  11. Be eventually recognized by the kings and princes of the nations (Isa. 49:7; 52:15);
  12. Preach to Israel so that "Israel might be gathered to [God]" (Isa. 49:5-6), and yet fail in his mission to do so (Isa. 49:4);
  13. Be physically abused (Isa. 50:6; 53:5);
  14. Be rejected by the Jewish people and "others" (Isa. 53:2-4);
  15. Be pierced, killed, and buried for the sins of the world (Isa. 53:5-12);
  16. Have followers after him (whom he "sees" post-mortem). See my section on the "servants" of the Servant below.
  17. Be brought back to life from the dead (Isa. 53:10-11). James P. Ware writes: "that the Servant is portrayed in the fourth Song as restored from death to life is recognized by the majority of interpreters" (James P. Ware, Paul and the Mission of the Church, Philippians in Ancient Jewish Context, 2011, pp. 75).
Etcetera. Who can predict something so specific hundreds of years in advance? This is much different than, say, ordering a steak and calling that 'prophecy.'

The Existence of Jesus of Nazareth:
While not controversial in the secular scholarly community, a historical Jesus who lived and did at least some things ascribed to him is not controversial in scholarship. Justin J. Meggitt writes:
Virtually no scholar working in the field of New Testament studies or early Christian history doubts the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth.
(Meggitt, "‘More Ingenious than Learned’? Examining the Quest for the Non-Historical Jesus," New Testament Studies, 2019, pp. 443)
Most of not all of the prophecy here is adequately attested for.

The Book of Isaiah
The Book of Isaiah is typically split into three parts: 1st Isaiah (Isaiah 1-39); 2nd Isaiah (Isaiah 40-55); and 3rd Isaiah (Isaiah 56-66). First Isaiah contains many oracles written first hand by Isaiah son of Jerusalem mostly in the 8th century B.C.E., but there are also some blocks and snip bits of material within First Isaiah that were added sometime after the original penning of these oracles. Second and Third Isaiah were in my opinion written by the same person but at different times (by a genuine prophet writing in the tradition of Isaiah), with the former being written around 550-520 B.CE., and the latter around 515-450 B.C.E (I lean early). Either way, the oracles date 500+ years before Jesus.

The Existence of Isaiah son of Amoz
There are many good argument to think, despite all of this expansion onto the original Isaiah's material, that there was a historical Isaiah of Jerusalem. One can ascertain this just from the writings from book of Isaiah itself. See for example Jaap Dekker (Leiden: Brill, 2009) to see how this can be done. But aside from the Bible itself, the strongest and most direct evidence for Isaiah the prophet comes from archaeology, and it is the (likely) seal of Isaiah himself, something that was found just ten feet away from the bulla of King Hezekiah. The seal says "belong to Isaiah nvy." This isn't proof of his existence, since the location of where the aleph would be to render the letters on the seal as "prophet" at the end is damaged. There have also been three other "Isaiah's" found archeologically speaking in ancient Israel. However, given the combination of letters that are there ("nvy"), where an aleph in the damaged portion of the seal would render the word "prophet," and (especially) given the proximity of this Isaiah seal just three meters away from Hezekiah's bulla, is extremely suggestive and good evidence.

Manuscripts of 'Isaiah'
We have multiple scrolls of Isaiah that have been dated. The famous Isaiah scroll (1QIsaa), which encompasses the entirety of the book of Isaiah (minus a few damaged portions) has been dated hundreds of years before Jesus ever lived by both paleography and science (radiocarbon dating). See also 1QIsab and other manuscripts as well that date before 70 CE (e.g., 4QIsad).
The Immanuel Oracle (Isaiah 7) When Assyria continued to march westward in the year 734 B.C.E., Ephraim and Syria wanted Judah to form an alliance with them to defend against the Assyrian swarm. When Judah refused, Ephraim and Syria (known as "Aram") teamed up against Judah so they could lay a siege against it and install a puppet King, "the son of Tabeel." While Ahaz and his people fear (Isa. 7:2), Isaiah and his son is sent to Ahaz to encourage him to have complete trust in YHWH (v. 3-6), with v. 6-9 announcing the failure of Judah's enemies.
Isaiah 7:10-13
In v. 10-11, Isaiah says YHWH encouraged Ahaz to ask for a sign "as deep as Sheol or high as heaven," but Ahaz refused, and v. 12 gives the reason: "I will not ask, and I will not put the LORD to the test." The imperative verbs are all second person masculine singular in form, as well as two pronouns. V. 13 than switches to the second person plural, indicating that the sign is for the ENTIRE Davidic house, not just for Ahaz in particular (v. 13 thus alludes to v. 9b, which also uses the plural). This switch from the referent being Ahaz in v. 12 to the entire dynasty of the House of David in v. 13 after Ahaz refused the sign is key. Peter J. Gentry explains:
The quoted speech [in v. 13] begins as follows: “Hear O House of David, is it too trivial for you humans that weary my God?” The two verbs, “hear” (וּעמשׁ) and “you must weary” (וּאלתּ) are second person plural in form. The one pronoun employed with the infinitive “to weary” is also second person plural. Yahweh/Isaiah is no longer addressing Ahaz directly or specifically; he is addressing the entire dynasty of David: past, present, and future—the whole House of David. The pronoun in verse 14 is also second masculine plural in form. The sign in verse 11 was offered specifically to Ahaz. Ahaz declined. In spite of Ahaz’s response, Yahweh gave a sign. The sign he gave was for the entire family line of David and is therefore not at all tied to the time of Ahaz.
(Peter J. Gentry, "Isaiah 7:12-16—A Direct Prediction of a Distant Future Relative to Isaiah’s Time?," in The Mother of the Infant King [Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2020], pp. 188).
So Isa. 7's sign spans the entire history of the remaining Davidic family tree, something that will be clarified in Isa. 11:1. Verses 15-16a continue to speak in the third person masculine singular about the promised boy. Then, suddenly, v. 16b switches to second masculine singular in form, once again addressing specifically Ahaz and his days again, including what follows (v. 17-25).

Isaiah 7:14: The Virginity of Immanuel's Mother
Christophe Rico in a recent monograph argues that ‘almāh means "young virgin," distinct from betûlāh, which refers to a virgin of any age. This overcomes, by far, the most weighty and frequent objection made to the meaning of ‘almāh not denoting virginity, which is: what would distinquish ‘almāh and betûlāh if ‘almāh meant "virgin." The key is that ‘almāh means "young virgin." Many different languages from all different types of family languages have a distinction between ‘girl,' ‘virgin’ and ‘young virgin' (e.g., Arabic [fatâ’ah, bikr, ‘ażra’]; Catalan [noia, poncella, verge]; Russian [devuška, devica, devstevenica]), so it isn't hard to believe that the same set of distinctions existed in ancient Hebrew before ‘almāh eventually became a technical musical term later on. For the full case for "young virgin," see Rico's full book. Rico claims to make arguments regarding ‘almāh purely as a linguist.
A key point though is that the birth of Immanuel is a "sign" (’ôt). While it is true that ’ôt doesn't necessarily denote anything miraculous, the context and use of ’ôt suggests this:
  1. The verb ’nissâ ("to test") occurs in the context of Isa. 7:14 (cf. v. 12). As Rico points out, when used in the context of a sign request, the verb nissâ occurs in only one other place in the Bible. That occurrence is found in the Midian episode with Gideon (see the use in Judg. 6:39), where the sign is miraculous. The use of the verb nissâ in the context of Isa. 7:14 thus suggests that the sign is meant to be miraculous as well. There are striking parallels to this story in Judges with the oracles of Isaiah 7-11, which strengthen this link with Isa. 7 and the Gideon episodes. See my this post for the parallels.
  2. Mark D. Schutzius (II) argues in The Hebrew Word for 'sign' and Its Impact on Isaiah 7:14 (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2015) that every miraculous use of the word ’ôt has YHWH specifically provide the sign. Instructive is Isa. 38:7 ("This is the sign to you from the LORD . . ."), where the sign is miraculous. Contrary to verses like this, uses of the word ’ôt that aren't miraculous do not come directly from YHWH. Rather, they describe God designating ordinary people, things, or events as "signs" (e.g., Gen. 1:14; 9:11-17; 17:11; Exod. 3:11-12; 12:7-13; Num. 2:2; 16:38; Ezek. 14:8). If ’ôt in 7:14 did not denote a miracle, it would be far out of step with the typical usage of ’ôt where YHWH says he provided it.

"Immanuel" in Isaiah 7:14
"Immanuel" isn't the actual historical name that the Son will be given (just like actual historical name of the "Son" of Isaiah 9 that is to be born isn't 'Peleʾ yōʿēṣ ʾēl gībbōr ʾáḇī-ʿaḏ śar-šālōm,' "Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace"). Saying this is a failed prophecy because Jesus wasn't named 'Immanuel' is to miss the point of the name in Isaiah original context.

Isaiah 7:15
Peter J. Gentry summarizes the child “eating curds and honey" (Isa. 7:15):
The fact that the child will eat curds and honey means that the land will be dominated by pastoralists and not farmers. This is an indication of the devastation and destruction resulting in exile and the conquest by the Assyrians and Babylonians.
(Gentry, "Isaiah 7:12-16," pp. 215)
The negative use of this same terminology in used 7:21-22 suggests that this analysis of the curds and honey is correct. The Immanuel boy within Isa. 7 is to be born beyond the immediate future during the aftermath of destruction, for Isa. 7:15's curds and honey "signifies the aftermath of catastrophe and the disruption of a thriving agricultural society" (Etan Levine, “The Land of Milk and Honey,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 2000, pp. 57). So construed, Immanuel eating curds and honey means that he will be born during a time of want and adversity in Israel. This fits Jesus' time and place.

Isaiah 7:16
Many point to Isa. 7:16 for the imminence of the Immanuel boy. But this v. is hard to render. It is thus immature to speak about the imminence of the birth of Immanuel from this alone. Peter J. Gentry correctly argues:
The pronoun on the suffixed noun, “her kings” must refer to “land” since the pronoun is feminine singular . . . The two kings cannot be the King of Israel and the King of Aram . . . because one could not say of them, that “the land had two kings."
Gentry interprets the two kings as that of Northern Israel and Judah, which would expand the horizon of the oracle. One doesn't have to agree with Gentry's translation of v. 16 to recognize that the NRSV contradicts Hebrew grammar though.
H.G.M. Williamson has "before whose two kings you are in dread," but thinks that it is an interpolation. Williamson than writes in what relates to Gentry's point:
It is incongruous to have one land mentioned with two kings . . . (ibid., 168).
Thus, in ibid., 167 Williamson translates the earliest text behind the current oracle in v. 16 as:
For before the lad knows to reject the bad and choose the good, the land will be abandoned.
This also may imply that Judah will be deserted (with no decisive temporal indictor).
Christophe Rico, in his book The Mother of the Infant King (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2020), pp. 144-147 argues that the v. should be translated as:
Before [Immanuel] knows to reject evil and to choose good the land which disgusts you because of its two kings will be abandoned.
Rico's translation is most supported by the versions and I agree with it. "The text implies that the country would be emptied of its inhabitants" (ibid., 147). This broadens the horizon of this prophecy, for "the abandonment of the land can refer either to the campaign of Tiglath-Pileser in 732 or to the successive deportations which occurred in Samaria (722-21) and in Judah (597 and 586)" (ibid., 147). So Rico interprets this v. as speaking about one country 'the land (Judah) whose two kings you hate, that land will be abandoned.'
The 'El-Gibbôr Oracle (Isaiah 9) Isaiah 9:1-2
The word כִּ֣י in 9:1 continues the thought of Isa. 8:19-22. "Zebulun and the land of Naphtali" were the first to fall to the Assyrians "in the former time."
"Galilee of the Nations" is a phrase that is unique in the Hebrew Bible. No one else who mentions Galilee in the Hebrew Bible "found it necessary to call attention to Gentiles" (J. Motyer Alec, The Prophecy of Isaiah, kindle loc. 3002). But the authors of the Hebrew Bible conceived of a Messiah for the entire world, not just Israel (see below//Isa. 11:4, 10)!
"The people" include gentiles and is alluded to in Isaiah 11:10 ("the peoples"), which no doubt refers to gentiles. Isaiah 9:2 also picks up on an important theme from Isaiah 2:2-5 by picking up the imagery of light: "let us walk in the light of the Lord" (Isa. 2:5). The thought of Isaiah 2:5 follows 2:2-4, as evidenced by a number of literary echoes that 2:5 picks up from 2:2-4 (for evidence of this, see Bertil Wiklander, Prophecy as Literature: A Text Linguistic and Rhetorical Approach to Isaiah 2-4 [ConBOT 22; Stockholm: Liber Tryck, 1984], pp. 101). Isa. 2:5 thus functions as an "exhortation to the house of Jacob to imitate the nations in their conversion from idols to the true God. This has the literary effect of associating the imagery of light in 2:5 with the revelation of God to the nations in 2:2-4" (James P. Ware, Paul and the Mission of the Church, pp. 57). Since Isaiah 2 envisioned gentiles walking in the light of the LORD, so too does Isaiah 9:2.
As Isaiah 9 picks up on themes from Isaiah 2, Isaiah 11:9-10 does the same thing with both Isaiah 9 and 2. All "these intertextual connections link the dawning of the light upon the mixed gentile populace of northern Israel (“Galilee of the nations”) in Isaiah 9 . . . with the conversion of the gentiles envisioned in 11:9-10" (ibid., 57).

Isaiah 9:3-5
Many interpret these verses as referring to an end to war (or a victory from a battle with the Assyrians) and a return of the exiles from northern Israel in connection with the advent of the Davidide. But neither options are being communicated literally. Christopher Seitz writes: "the cause for joy is not so much pending military victory but the “birth” of a new ruler" (Seitz, Isaiah 1-39, pp. 147). Supporting this interpretation is the "for" construction (starting in Isa. 9:3) leading up to the birth of the "Son." So the joy experienced from "the people" due to the coming of the "Son" is like or is compared to the joy over a return from exile or the conquering of Israel's enemies.

Isaiah 9:6-7
Many dispute seeing Jesus in this passage because of the detail of the "Son" having the "authority" on his shoulders. I guess the question for one would have to be: what 'authority' do the authors of the New Testament have for you? The writers of the NT affirm that the ascension of Jesus to the right hand of God's throne is the assumption of the government/authority upon his shoulders. In fact, Psalm 110 is the most quoted Psalm in the NT.
I will now go into the titles given to the "Son." Here, an unspecified group of people call the "Son" God.
"Wonderful Counselor"
Markus Zehnder notes that, whenever Isaiah "uses the root פלא, either in the form of the noun פלא ("wonder”) or the verb פלא in the hiphil conjugation (“to work wonders”), it is used with God as the subject of the wonders" (Zehnder, "The Question of the “Divine Status of the Davidic Messiah," Bulletin for Biblical Research, 2020, pp. 497). The root פלא thus strictly relates to the realm of divine action in Isaiah. Markus Zehnder also writes that: "In two of the three instances, פלא is combined with the root יעץ ("counsel”), exactly as we find it in Isa 9:5[6], and in both instances it is clear that it is God himself who is designated as a “wonder-counselor" (Isa 25:1; 28:29)" (ibid., 497). H.G.M. Williamson adds:
The root יָעָ֖ץ, whether as verb or noun, is also used in relation to God at 14.24, 27; 19.12, 17; 23.9
(Williamson, Isaiah 6-12, pp. 399)

"Mighty God"
The same exact words, 'ēl gibbôr, is applied for YHWH Himself in 10:20-21 - the very next chapter that follows Isaiah 9. Outside of the verse in question, 'ēl gibbôr is a "divine designation which is never used elsewhere for a human being" (Williamson, Isaiah 6-12 [ICC, 2018], pp. 399). See Deut. 10:17 and Jer. 32:18 for example. There is one example from Ezekiel 32:21, a text written 120+ years after Isa. 9:6-7, where a modified form of 'ēl gibbôr is not used for YHWH, but for mighty warriors. However, unlike Isaiah 9:6; 10:21 (and Deut. 10:17 and Jer. 32:18), the term in Ezekiel is "plural and overtly linked in a genitive relation" (J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, pp. 105). H.G.M. Williamson says that "it is difficult to relate the plural in any direct way with the name/title in our verse" (Williamson, Isaiah 6-12 [ICC, 2018], pp. 399, n. 121). The usage of the phrase in Isa. 10:20-21 is much more illuminating than the text in Ezekiel anyway.

"Eternal Father"
The use of "Father" for the Israelite king is unattested (the king was rather usually designated as YHWH's son).
Interesting is Isaiah 1:2-3, where "the fatherhood of God underlies the opening metaphor of the book" (Williamson, Isaiah 6-12, pp. 400). See also the use of "Father" for YHWH in Isa. 63:16 and 64:7. The notion of eternity only further supports the divinity of the "Son."
The Stump of Jesse Oracle (Isaiah 11) Space precludes in-depth analysis of this oracle. Here you have an outstanding and deep Christian-like understanding of how the Spirit is resting upon Messiah (Isa. 11:2), as it does with Jesus in the NT. The text also clearly speaks of a person who obeys YHWH in righteousness who will be sought after by the gentiles (Isa. 11:10, 12) in a new spiritual exodus (Isa. 11:11-16), and this surely fits Jesus.
The Servant of YHWH While the Servant is identified as Jacob-Israel as a collective outside of the Songs (Isaiah 41:8, 9; 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21; 45:4; 48:20), the nation of Israel is revealed within the dynamic movement of the Servant Songs as being embodied and reduced down to one suffering Messianic individual figure. In other words, the Servant never departs from being Israel, but "Israel" undergoes an extreme reduction within Second Isaiah, and it seems to me that it's reduced to one person - "a faithful embodiment of the nation Israel who has not performed its chosen role (48:1–2)" (Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah, pp. 541 [kindle version]). To see how Isaiah 49:3 is not in contradiction with an individual interpretation of the Servant, see Jaap Dekker's 2012 article here (pp. 38-39). Joseph Blenkinsopp also writes:
"Ever since Christopher R. North surveyed the range of opinion on the identity of the Servant in 1948 (2d ed., 1956), no significant new options have emerged. While there was then and still is a strong critical preference for an individual rather than a collective interpretation, none of the fifteen individuals named as candidates by one commentator or another and listed by North has survived scrutiny" (Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55, pp. 355).
There are many reasons to think that the nation of Israel has been reduced down to one person within the Servant Songs themselves, one of them being Isaiah 49:5-6, where the Servant has a mission to collective Israel. I will give two such weighty reasons in this list among many:
Fine Old Testament scholars have made and still make strong arguments for some sort of messianic interpretation of the Servant Songs within Isaiah, or at least Isaiah 52:13-53:12. If one can show that the Servant is an individual, than Messianic interpretations are easy to make given the intertextuality shared between the Servant in Second Isaiah and the Messiah in First Isaiah (and other Messianic texts in the Hebrew Bible).

The Deity of the Servant
Wilcox and Paton Williams observe: "throughout Isaiah 1–66, the adjectives “exalted”, “lifted up” and “very high” are virtually technical terms, applied almost exclusively to Yahweh" (Peter Wilcox and David Paton-Williams, ‘The Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah’, JSOT 42 [1988], pp. 95). Isaiah 52:13 and 57:15 can be shown to be dependent on Isaiah 6:1, which means that the Servant is YHWH. So Jaap Dekker writes: “the intertextual connection with 6.1 reveals that the Servant is granted the highest possible position, which according to the book of Isaiah, however, exclusively belongs Holy One Himself . . . Therefore, the Day of the Lord is and against all that is lifted up and high (2.12; 2.11a, 17a; 10:12) . . . The theology of these text is clear and unambiguous. Being high and lofty (2.11, 17; 6:11) or arising and lifting oneself up (33.10; cf. 30.18) are only apropos of God and are not appropriate for any earthly power whatsoever (cf. 14.13; see also 37.23)” (Jaap Dekker, “The High and Lofty One Dwelling in the Heights and with his Servants: Intertextual Connections of Theological Significance between Isaiah 6, 53 and 57,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 2017, pp. 485-86). Thus, the Servant shares the glory of YHWH which however only belonged to God in Second Isaiah (Isaiah 42:8; 48:11). ‘I will give my glory to no other." Yet in Isaiah 52:13, Mark Gignilliat writes that: "the Servant is narratively depicted as one who is sharing in what belongs to YHWH alone, that is, his glory" (Mark Gignilliat "Who is Isaiah's Servant? Narrative identity and theological potentiality," Scottish Journal of Theology, 2008, pp. 132).

The New Law and Covenant from the Servant of YHWH: Isaiah 42:4, 6 and 49:1, 8
These texts reveal that the Servant will give teachings to the world (Isa. 42:4; 49:1) and be a covenant for the people. Actually, Isaiah 42:4 is better rendered as "law," since the Hebrew word used (tôrātô) means "his Torah." Thus, the Servant brings a new law, discontinuities with the Mosaic law. In Isaiah 42:6, it is also revealed that the Servant will be "given . . . as a covenant to the people." This parallels Jeremiah 31:31-34, where there is a new law and a new covenant, a covenant with a clear discontuity with the old Law of Moses in such a way as to render the law of Moses as merely a foreshowing of this new work of YHWH to come. Jeremiah 31:32 says:
"It [the new covenant] will not be like the covenant that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt . . ."
"Not be like" is a negation. "The phrase underscores . . . utter dissimilarity." Thus, "this emphatic negative phrase does not suggest a renewal of the Mosaic covenant here" (Fẹmi Adeyẹmi, The New Covenant Torah in Jeremiah and the Law of Christ in Paul, Peter Lang, 2006, pp. 51). Notice also a forgiveness of sins at the end of the oracle in Jeremiah 31:34, which comes just by merely "know[ing] the LORD"! Keep in mind that Jer. 31 is placed in-between three different Messianic oracles (Jer. 23:5-8; 30:7-10; 33:14-22) and is related to them, confirming the role of the Messiah in this new covenant and new law. The thought of the Servant/Messiah in Deutero-Isaiah and Jeremiah bringing a new law and covenant is well into Christian territory here.

The Physical Abuse the Servant Endures
The Servant clearly goes through physical abuse, as Jesus does in his last days: "I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting" (Isaiah 50:6). The speakers in Isaiah 53 also speak of being healed because of the Servant's "bruises," and much more.

The Rejection of the Servant by the Jewish People: Isaiah 53
As noted above, the speaker in Isaiah 53 has to be the Jewish people as per the original intent of the author, whether one likes it or not. Here, the authoprophet speaks on behalf of Israel's people who says that the Servant "had no form or majesty that we should look at him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him," and that "we held him of no account."
Many Jewish people are expecting and have always expected a warrior like Messiah. Jesus wasn't and isn't this to them. Before 70 C.E., Jews who were expecting a Messiah expected a warrior like Davidic Messiah (though this wasn't universal among those expectation a Messiah for sure). That's why Messianic interpretations of the Servant in Isaiah 52:13-53:12 turned the Servant into a warrior Messiah (see e.g., the Parables of Enoch; Isaiah Targum). This is thus an amazing prophecy fulfilled.
That the Servant would encounter trouble and in some sense even fail in his initial mission to Israel is actually first alluded to in Isaiah 49:4 (cf. J.L. Koole), where the Servant says that: “I have labored in vain, I have spent my strength for nothing and vanity."

The Death of the Servant for the Sins of the World
The “many nations” of 52:13-15 is included in "the many” of 53:11-12 where the Servant makes them righteous and will bear and פָגַע (“intervene/intercede”) for their sins. James P. Ware writes that: "through literary recurrence the Song thus links both the illumination of the “many nations” in 52:13-15, and the first-person confession of Israel in 53:1-9, with the description of the Servant’s redemption of the “many” in the closing divine oracle in 53:10-12 . . . by the close of the poem, the reader comprehends that the “many” of the climactic final oracle (53:10-12) includes both Israel and the gentiles" (Ware, Paul and the Mission of the Church, Philippians in Ancient Jewish Context, pp. 77).
Thus, the Servant truly does bear the sins of the world in Deutero-Isaiah's original context.

The Followers/Spiritual Offspring of the Servant (Isaiah 53:10)
The "offspring" in 53:10 do not refer to literal children, according to most scholars, but rather those redeemed by the Servant. After Isaiah 53, they are identified as “servants” (Isaiah 54:17 and after), in the plural (56:6; 63:17; 65:8, 9, 13, 14, 15; 66:14), as well as "offspring" (Isa 59:21; 61:8-9; 65:9, 23; 66:22). A community that follows the servant can be seen as early as Isa. 50:4-11. See also Psalm 22:30 for a use of זֶ֥רַע that does not denote literal children, but rather followers - a text which is based on the Servant Songs (especially the last two) and the passages about the "servants" of the Servant. Regarding the nature of these "servants," James P. Ware writes:
"The offspring of the Servant . . . not only follows him but also imitates him, in some mysterious fashion taking up his vocation of suffering, participating in his redemptive mission, and sharing in his victory (Isa 57:1–13; 59:9–21; 65:8–16; 66:1–5). The Servant’s role as a “light to the nations” (42:6; 49:6) is thus taken up and extended by the servants of the Servant (Isa 63:1–3, 19–22; 62:1–3)"
(Ware, "The Servants of the Servant in Isaiah and Philippians," in Isaiah's Servants in Early Judaism and Christianity: The Isaian Servant and the Exegetical Formation of Community Identity, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 2021, pp. 261).
As made evident by Isaiah 56:6-8 (and elsewhere), the "servants" include gentiles (cf. Isa. 56:1-8).
Appendix: Is The "Son" in Isaiah 7 and 9 Hezekiah? Many think that the child of Isaiah 7 and 9 is Ahaz's son, Hezekiah. However, the equation of Hezekiah with the "Son" in Isa. 7 and 9 is specious:
  1. Hezekiah is not mentioned anywhere in the immediate literary context.
  2. Hezekiah was already born according to the historical context. J.J. Collins writes: "According to 2 Kgs 18.10, the fall of Samaria (722/721 BCE) was in the sixth year of Hezekiah, but according to v. 13 in the same chapter, the campaign of Sennacherib in 701 BCE was in his 14th year . . . Accordingly, his date of accession is variously given as 728/27 or 715 BCE. In 2 Kgs 18.1 we are told that he was 25 years old when he came to the throne, and if this is correct he would have been born too early on either date of accession" (J.J. Collins, "The Sign of Immanuel," in Prophecy and Prophets in Ancient Israel, 2010, pp. 232). See also Antti Laato, "Isaiah in Ancient, Medieval, and Modern Jewish Traditions," in The Oxford Handbook of Isaiah, 2020, pp. 511: "Hezekiah cannot be identified with Immanuel."
  3. It would be awkward if Isaiah saw Hezekiah as Immanuel or the "Son" of Isaiah 9. As Antti Laato points out, "Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria. This political decision was, according to Isaiah, nothing but filth in the eyes of the Lord (Isa 30,1-5; 31,1-3)" - Antti Laato, "History and ideology in the old testament prophetic books," Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament, 1994, pp. 294. Isa. 22:1-14; 32:9-14 (and 1:4-9) also show that Isaiah son of Amoz was very critical with Judah's foreign policy under Hezekiah (see Antti Laato, "Understanding Zion Theology in the Book of Isaiah," in Studies in Isaiah, History, Theology, and Reception, Bloomsbury, 2017, pp. 31, 42-43).
  4. Details within Isaiah 7-11 reveal the boy to be the future Messiah, not Hezekiah.
  5. The biggest point here is: there is no evidence of Isaiah viewing Hezekiah as deity, as the "Son" is.
(6) The author of Isaiah 36-39 thought Hezekiah was not the fulfillment of the oracles in Isaiah 7-11. Jacob Stromberg writes for example:
Hezekiah, having been told that “days” (ימים) are coming when his kingdom will be dismantled by the Babylonians, responds by noting that “there will be peace [שלום] and security in my days" (39:8 → 38:3) . . . This, the last line of the story, seems carefully calculated to tell the reader that, although Hezekiah had earlier looked like the fulfillment of the days anticipated by 9:1–7, in the end, he was not: the scope of peace (שלום) in those days would be “without end” (9:7).
(Stromberg, "The Book of Isaiah: Its Final Structure," in The Oxford Handbook of Isaiah, 2020, pp. 25-26).
Isaiah 39 overall has a negative view of Hezekiah as well. For example, he trusted in his gold to deliver himself rather than YHWH and was trying to impress the Babylonian delegation and, thus, the king of Babylon with his wealth. It is thus most important to note that Isaiah 38 and 39 are not in chronological order. Given this, it is striking that in Isaiah 38, Hezekiah at last puts his trust in YHWH alone, unlike Ahaz. But in Isaiah 39, we are presented with 'bad Hezekiah.' As Sehoon Jang points out, by purposely switching the chronology of the story by ending with a negative portrayal of Hezekiah, the author of Isaiah 36-39 is implying that Hezekiah was not the coming king prophesied in the royal oracles of Isaiah 6-12. This is because, as noted above, the author of Isaiah 36-39 at first leads on the reader to think that Hezekiah was the fulfillment of the royal oracles. For this argument further fleshed out, see:
While Hezekiah was thought of as a better king, he wasn't good enough (and apparently not as good as Josiah, per 2 Kings 23:25).
submitted by TribeofYHWH to DebateAnAtheist [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 panicbuns [LF] Olivia [FT] Nmt or Bells

I'm looking for Olivia in boxes, I am willing to pay bells and tickets ouo
submitted by panicbuns to ACNHvillagertrade [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 LookAtItCl0sely Racist hoes on rant.

submitted by LookAtItCl0sely to trashy [link] [comments]

2021.11.27 02:39 if-we-all-did-this What vegetables do plumbers hate?

submitted by if-we-all-did-this to plumbercracks [link] [comments]