I want to soar on the music mentioned in this entry! It certainly does bring me joy! For years I've enjoyed hearing (and singing) "For Unto Us a Child Is Born," feeling wonderful that such glorious music accompanies such a glorious--and Biblical-- occasion. I never questioned, I just enjoyed and accepted that these verses from Isaiah applied to Jesus.
Now, I have questions. The author of the devotional is following the traditionally accepted connections with Isaiah's words and the birth of Jesus. I am the one with the questions.
Question 1--How can these verses in Isaiah's context apply to Jesus's birth? In Isaiah's time, the Israelites were being threatened by attacking armies, and Isaiah's words were supposed to bring comfort because they told of someone who was going to swoop in to save the day for the Israelites so that their country would not be destroyed. Jesus's time came 800 years later. As another responder mentioned on a previous post about Immanuel, could these verses apply to someone else in Isaiah's time . . . and maybe also to Jesus in a more symbolic way?
Question 2--What's up with the verb tense in Isaiah 9:6? Both translations I am looking at use the same verb tense in reference to this child who is to save Israel and rule with justice and righteousness. Isaiah says the child "has been born." That's the present perfect tense, which indicates an action occurring in the past and CONTINUING to occur in the present. My reading of the verse in this past perfect tense tells me that the birth of this child had been occurring and was continuing to occur in the present day of Isaiah's time. The baby was there.
Questions 3+ Is there someone else in Isaiah's time who was supposed to be Immanuel, God with Us, the save-the-day hero to rule Israel justly? Do the verses in Isaiah apply to that baby AND to Jesus in a "God's Heavenly Kingdom" kind of way? If the verses apply only to Jesus, then where is the comfort for the frightened Israelites of Isaiah's time?
Question 4--I realize that Matthew, the Gospel author, wanted to bring legitimacy to the claims of Jesus being the Messiah. In Matthew 1:23, he references the verses from Isaiah 7:14 about Jesus being Immanuel as the prophets foretold. At least musically, we've added the "For unto us a child is born" verses to refer to Jesus, also. Why have I/we accepted that without needing any explanation?
Maybe my process of questioning is more important than the answers to my questions, as another responder has commented. Still, I'm getting a bit frustrated with myself. Why couldn't I simply enjoy the fulfillment of the prophecy as the devotional mentioned? Will I ever be able to listen to Handel's Messiah the same way again?
I want to soar on the music mentioned in this entry! It certainly does bring me joy! For years I've enjoyed hearing (and singing) "For Unto Us a Child Is Born," feeling wonderful that such glorious music accompanies such a glorious--and Biblical-- occasion. I never questioned, I just enjoyed and accepted that these verses from Isaiah applied to Jesus.
Now, I have questions. The author of the devotional is following the traditionally accepted connections with Isaiah's words and the birth of Jesus. I am the one with the questions.
Question 1--How can these verses in Isaiah's context apply to Jesus's birth? In Isaiah's time, the Israelites were being threatened by attacking armies, and Isaiah's words were supposed to bring comfort because they told of someone who was going to swoop in to save the day for the Israelites so that their country would not be destroyed. Jesus's time came 800 years later. As another responder mentioned on a previous post about Immanuel, could these verses apply to someone else in Isaiah's time . . . and maybe also to Jesus in a more symbolic way?
Question 2--What's up with the verb tense in Isaiah 9:6? Both translations I am looking at use the same verb tense in reference to this child who is to save Israel and rule with justice and righteousness. Isaiah says the child "has been born." That's the present perfect tense, which indicates an action occurring in the past and CONTINUING to occur in the present. My reading of the verse in this past perfect tense tells me that the birth of this child had been occurring and was continuing to occur in the present day of Isaiah's time. The baby was there.
Questions 3+ Is there someone else in Isaiah's time who was supposed to be Immanuel, God with Us, the save-the-day hero to rule Israel justly? Do the verses in Isaiah apply to that baby AND to Jesus in a "God's Heavenly Kingdom" kind of way? If the verses apply only to Jesus, then where is the comfort for the frightened Israelites of Isaiah's time?
Question 4--I realize that Matthew, the Gospel author, wanted to bring legitimacy to the claims of Jesus being the Messiah. In Matthew 1:23, he references the verses from Isaiah 7:14 about Jesus being Immanuel as the prophets foretold. At least musically, we've added the "For unto us a child is born" verses to refer to Jesus, also. Why have I/we accepted that without needing any explanation?
Maybe my process of questioning is more important than the answers to my questions, as another responder has commented. Still, I'm getting a bit frustrated with myself. Why couldn't I simply enjoy the fulfillment of the prophecy as the devotional mentioned? Will I ever be able to listen to Handel's Messiah the same way again?