"Not my God. Not my Jesus."

[Jesusfollower]

True and false teachers, yes. And Jesus spoke this before He died and rose again. And similar statements are made of false prophets.

What does the Bible say about those who are the true children of God?

1 John 2:21-23 KJV
21) I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
22) Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
23) Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

This shows it is not the Muslim.

1 John 2:19 KJV
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

It's not the one who leaves the church.

Romans 6:3-7 KJV
3) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5) For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6) Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7) For he that is dead is freed from sin.

Romans 5:1-10 KJV
1) Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
2) By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
3) And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
4) And patience, experience; and experience, hope:
5) And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
6) For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
7) For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
8) But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9) Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10) For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Read these passages, and then tell me that the one who denies the death of Christ, who denies the resurrection, as the Muslim does, has life in Christ.

1 Timothy 3:16 KJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Acts 20:28 KJV
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

Tell me that the one who denies that Jesus is God come as a man is trusting the same Jesus that we see in the Bible.

Galatians 1:3-9 KJV
3) Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,
4) Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
5) To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
6) I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7) Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9) As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Tell me that the one who preaches differently, that Jesus didn't die, that Jesus was a man like other men, isn't accursed. Again, be warned!

This isn't a book filled with flowery spiritual sounding speech, this is revelation from God, it's quite simply truth.

Much love!

truth yes! but also profusely proven by archaeological finds. and also by the conservation to perfection of biblical texts. , Nice post thank you.

 

[Matthias]

“Not my God. Not my Jesus.” -> evangelism opportunity

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Jesus healed anyone, and delivered from demons anyone who asked. Which itself is evident of the love of God, whether He be the Son of God or not. As we are called to love even our enemies, regardless of what they think of us

Thanks for your inspiring answer, Brakelite.

If Jesus didn’t put additional conditions, but just the faith in that they could be healed and forgiven by a Man whose true nature and mission they didn’t understand well, we shouldn't put additional conditions to any of our brothers and sisters.

God will not despise a broken heart. This is his promise. That’s what we should be preaching. “Repent and come to God, because you can be healed”

 

[marks]

Doctrines are getting in the way of a simple truth.

I'll say!

Much love!

 

[marks]

There is no “persona“ named Jesus…..his name was prophesied to be Immanuel, but that is not what he was called. Gabriel told Mary that his name was to be Jesus (Yeshua) a common name in Bible times.

Yes, "God with us". Some Name!

:)

Hebrews 7:22-25 KJV
22) By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23) And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24) But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25) Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

Jesus . . . Forever.

Much love!

 

[marks]

truth yes! but also profusely proven by archaeological finds. and also by the conservation to perfection of biblical texts. , Nice post thank you.

Indeed! Comparing the archeological evidence for the validity of the Bible to the Book of Mormon is very revealing! Considering there is no archeological evidence for the Book of Mormon. Big cities, great battles, roads, not a shred of archeological evidence!

People do themself a huge disservice by not adhering to standards of truth, and instead just accepting whatever comes down the pike.

"Let's agree, it's all the same god!"

Yes, let's ignore truth in the pursuit of happy feelings of unity! Let's build our unity on a lie, and not on the Rock, Who truly makes us one.

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 KJV
9) Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10) And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12) That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and No One comes to the Father except by Him. Jesus. None other.

Much love!

 

[Brakelite]

Jesus couldn't care less.
Please, read your Bible again, and point out to our readers a single episode, a single one, in which Jesus gave such an importance to the matter, that He couldn't forgive, heal or save a person until that person provided clear evidence of knowing that He was the Son of God.

I would suggest that rather than convincing anyone by his speech, even though He taught often in the synagogue and the temple precincts, it was His power and authority that convinced others as to Who He truly was. Even the demons all with unanimous unity declared Jesus the Son of God, thinking it was their time for their destruction. They totally knew Who He was. Their known Him for thousands of years. They recognised Him, not necessarily by His looks, but by His manner, His authority, and His demeanour. They had no choice but to submit to Him.
Jesus asked the disciples, who do people say that I am? Peter knew. The Son of the living God. People Jesus healed may not have been completely aware of Who He was, but Jesus didn't leave them in their ignorance.
I love John 9.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I know it is a verse often attributed to a prophecy about Yeshua, but there are problems with that. As I doggedly desire to see truth in passages of scripture, I cannot see Isaiah chapter 9 referring to the Son of God. As the Jews say, however, it does fit King Hezekiah.

Consider this: Who is the child in Isaiah 9:5-6?

There are plenty of prophecies regarding Yeshua, but not this one.

Thank you for your reply, but do we really need to refer to the opinions of those who rejected their MessIah (and still do) and who have formulated their rehearsed excuses to deny that this prophet spoke of the coming of Jesus Christ, (Immanuel) whom Isaiah also spoke of?
So who was “Immanuel” In the Jewish understanding? It’s not just the name, but the meaning of the Bible names that is important.
Immanuel

Does the evidence really fit Hezekiah? Should the Jewish explanation be accepted without question, since they have proven time and time again in their history to have disobeyed the God they claim to serve and lied about their accountability for the death of their Messiah?

I have to ask how it was possible to attribute the fulfillment of this prophecy as pertaining to Hezekiah when he certainly did not prove to be a “Mighty God,” an “Eternal Father,” or a “Prince of Peace,” nor did he establish the “throne of David” firmly, or sit on it, forever.

Why was Israel in such a poor state before Hezekiah’s reign began?

”When Hezekiah came to the throne, the kingdom of Judah was under God’s disfavor, for Hezekiah’s father Ahaz had committed many detestable acts before Jehovah and had let the worship of false gods run unrestrained in Judah. Therefore, Jehovah had permitted the land to suffer at the hands of its enemies, particularly the second world power, Assyria. Ahaz had stripped the temple and the palace to provide a bribe for the king of Assyria. Worse yet, he had cut up the utensils of the temple, closed its doors, and made altars for himself “at every corner in Jerusalem,” sacrificing to other gods. Ahaz, by an alliance, had placed his kingdom under the protection of the king of Assyria during his reign. (2Ki 16:7-9; 2Ch 28:24, 25) But Hezekiah, early in his reign, “proceeded to rebel against the king of Assyria.”—2Ki 18:7.

At Hezekiah’s accession to the throne of Judah, the northern ten-tribe kingdom of Israel was in even worse condition. For Israel’s gross sins Jehovah had allowed them to come into dire straits, becoming tributary to Assyria, and it would not be long until Assyria would swallow up Israel and carry her people into exile.—2Ki 17:5-23.”
Exerpt from Insight Volume 1 Hezekiah

The prophesy refers to someone much bigger than Hezekiah ever was…..the Jews will continue to deny Jesus as the Messiah until he comes, and then they will no longer be able to hold on to their delusions about him…..(Matt 23:37-39)

Speaking to Jews today, we see the same vehemence in their attitude as was expressed by them when Jesus walked the earth, and the animosity stirred up against him was at its peak. That animosity has not diminished, but nor has it stopped individual Jews from converting to ‘Christianity’…..the real position of the Jews who do so however, is revealed in what they call themselves……they do not identify as “Christians”….always as Jews, (Messianic Jews) so where does that leave gentile converts?

There is so much more to these issues than meets the eye, but motive must be considered.
Can I ask what real difference it makes to attribute Isaiah’s prophesy to Hezekiah in the big picture anyway?
It is denial for the sake of denial….isn’t it? Just another Jewish excuse to deny their Messiah has come and gone without them….they missed all his wonderful attributes because of their own wickedness. (Matt 23:13-15; 33)

 

[Aunty Jane]

If Jesus didn’t put additional conditions, but just the faith in that they could be healed and forgiven by a Man whose true nature and mission they didn’t understand well, we shouldn't put additional conditions to any of our brothers and sisters.

To whom was Jesus “sent” exclusively? Only to the Jews. (Matt 15:24) But don’t you have to ask why?
Only after a thorough campaign of preaching and miracles among God’s own people, were gentiles then included in their efforts to reach as many as possible with Christ’s message of salvation.

God will not despise a broken heart. This is his promise. That’s what we should be preaching. “Repent and come to God, because you can be healed”

This is true among those who respond to Christ’s teachings. Without repentance, there can be no forgiveness…..without forgiveness there is no way to enter the Kingdom…either as a ruler or a subject.
God will not forgive those who fail to acknowledge why Christ came in the first place.…and to accept him for who and what he was sent to be, and only to those who accepted him as such.

What are the mechanics of redemption?

 

[Aunty Jane]

I'll say!

As you might…..but who’s doctrine is in the way?
The doctrine I believe in is older than yours by many centuries…..
How do you explain that?

 

[marks]

As you might…..but who’s doctrine is in the way?

Watchtower doctrine is getting in the way of Apostolic Doctrine.

The doctrine I believe in is older than yours by many centuries…..
How do you explain that?

Complex question. A Logical Fallacy.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A complex question, trick question, multiple question, fallacy of presupposition, or plurium interrogationum (Latin, 'of many questions') is a question that has a complex presupposition. The presupposition is a proposition that is presumed to be acceptable to the respondent when the question is asked. The respondent becomes committed to this proposition when they give any direct answer. When a presupposition includes an admission of wrongdoing, it is called a "loaded question" and is a form of entrapment in legal trials or debates. The presupposition is called "complex" if it is a conjunctive proposition, a disjunctive proposition, or a conditional proposition. It could also be another type of proposition that contains some logical connective in a way that makes it have several parts that are component propositions.[1]

Complex question - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

More at the link . . .

Much love!

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

To whom was Jesus “sent” exclusively? Only to the Jews. (Matt 15:24) But don’t you have to ask why?
Only after a thorough campaign of preaching and miracles among God’s own people, were gentiles then included in their efforts to reach as many as possible with Christ’s message of salvation.


This is true among those who respond to Christ’s teachings. Without repentance, there can be no forgiveness…..without forgiveness there is no way to enter the Kingdom…either as a ruler or a subject.
God will not forgive those who fail to acknowledge why Christ came in the first place.…and to accept him for who and what he was sent to be, and only to those who accepted him as such.

What are the mechanics of redemption?

I agree and your last question is of paramount importance.
I’ve not been able to read and answer to posts today, Aunty, due to my workload at the company I work for.
Thanks for your patience. I may have time to comment on weekend.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Yes, "God with us". Some Name!

Not nearly as important as Yahweh though….God has but one name….Jesus has a few.
Jesus (Yeshua) was a common name at the time and not exclusive to Jesus bar Joseph…..so if others had that name, what did it mean? Was God with them too?
No one has the name Yahweh/Jehovah, except God or in names that incorporate it…like just about all the “J/Y” names in the Bible, including your KJV.

What’s in a name? In Bible times….everything.

Hebrews 7:22-25 KJV
22) By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23) And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death:
24) But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25) Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

Jesus . . . Forever.

Lets read that in a modern English translation so we get the meaning correctly understood…in a language we speak today……

In context……Heb 7:18-27….NASB.
”For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect)”

So the old covenant laws were weak and ineffective because no one could keep them. They were given to demonstrate to God’s people the need for a savior….but this arrangement for the temporary forgiveness of sins would suffice until it was time to bring Messiah into the world.

“and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. And inasmuch as it was not without an oath (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,“The Lord has sworn And will not change His mind, ‘You are a priest forever’”); so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.

The new covenant instituted by Jesus on the night before his execution, was to bring about the needed change.…a better hope through which the people could draw near to God….with a priest who never needs to offer sacrifices for his own sins because he did not have any. Jesus was the guarantee that the new and better covenant would bring about permanent blessings for obedient ones.

“The former priests, on the one hand, existed in greater numbers because they were prevented by death from continuing, but Jesus, on the other hand, because He continues forever, holds His priesthood permanently. Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens; who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.”

So Jesus has a priesthood…a permanent one that will be there to intercede for any who need to draw close to God in the future.…..but who is he serving as “High Priest” forever? Isn’t it his God?

 

[Wrangler]

Not many seem to know what the mechanics of redemption really are….and why the ransomer could not be an immortal who cannot die.

It's ironic that a non-christian brings this up for us. Well done, @Pancho Frijoles.

 

[Wrangler]

The doctrine I believe in is older than yours by many centuries…..
How do you explain that?

He can''t explain it. The exchange began by @marks gratuitously bashing your doctrines and when held accountable he runs and hides, as he always does.

It wasn’t a complex question

Agreed.

as all that an excuse to avoid answering it?

Obviously it was an excuse to avoid answering it.

One could excuse @marks for simply meaning a complicated question but he actually included a link, implying he just learned of the fallacy and wanted to invoke it but did it inappropriately.

The topic is not only forbidden but an aside from the OP.

 

[Wrangler]

You've given the rule, let's talk about why we should think we all have the same Jesus, while skirting the primary difference between the True Jesus

Ever hear of Why Men Hate Going to Church? A YouTube vid of the authors talked about one of their chapters where they revealed the results of a poll involving several thousand believers. The question was about the nature of this one True Jesus; does he have primary characteristics on list A or list B?

Nearly 70% said list A.

Then the author revealed the source of these 2 lists. They came from the book Women Are From Venus Men Are From Mars. List A are attributes associated with the feminine. Today's church has feminized the True Jesus.

 

[Wrangler]

I would say that they hold a common belief as to the nature of God and would indeed be praying to the same god…..it just isn’t the same God that Jesus prayed to…..Yahweh does not resemble their god at all.

I will show how, by claiming that the Baptist and Catholic persons are praying to a God which is not your God and my God, you are presenting an idea that has no biblical support at all, is irrational, dangerous and contrary to your own heart.

Seems many Christians in this thread reject the OP premise, meaning we are not actually worshipping the same God or believe in the same Jesus. Sadly Pancho, you are just regurgitating your own belief system, which has embraced THE PERVERSION OF EQUALITY. So much of what you write sounds good in theory but is simply not true in reality. It would be great if people did not have essential differences - but they do. It would be great if we could solve our own problems - but we can't. It would be great if we all believed in the same God - but we don't.

Regarding your no Biblical support claim. Have you even read the Bible? The last few epistles warn of precisely what you are denying. Even in Apostolic times, people were inventing a different Jesus. This is why Paul wrote Galatians 1:8. You don't warn against and curse action that cannot possibly happen.


Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you.
Galatians 1:8 (NLT)

 

[PS95]

The God I believe in identified himself in the Hebrew Scriptures….he is “one Yahweh”. (Deut 6:4) To put any other “god” in his place would be a breach of the first Commandment. (Ex 20:3) Did Jesus teach about a different God? Was he not Jewish and did he not use the Hebrew Scriptures exclusively? Find me your god in those Scriptures.

He is the “God and Father” of the one he “sent”. (John 20:17; John 17:3) The son was never said to be a god/man…he was a human but free from the sin of Adam so that he could die the same death, and pay the redemption price for the human race that he condemned to death.
Can mere humans kill God? Does that seem like a complex question as well?

Hello Jane,

I will keep this brief, as the trinity is a banned topic on these boards as you are well aware. It would be great if you would show the courtesy of obeying the rules here for once. I will not reply to another one of your 3 headed god posts from you. Pagans had 1 headed gods too and 5 headed gods. Stop this nonsense. It's not as if you dont know these things.
Yes, One God.
Then YHWH rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from YHWH out of heaven; Gen 19:24 <-- That is my God.

Jesus is the WORD OF GOD who BECAME flesh.
He is not a the man who was created by an angel's "impersonal life force" being put into Mary's ovum...........
So.... that Michael went out of existence, and then when Jesus died the life force went back to heaven, so that Michael could be re-created by God while the man Jesus is dead forever & dissolved onto gases! <- Watchtower fiction.
Nope. Bible doesnt teach any of that.

Jesus‘ sacrifice is the “atonement” for our sins….”at-one-ment”…..one for one…..the exact equivalent of the first Adam paid his debt as “the last Adam” by giving his sinless life in exchange for the one Adam lost for all of us.
His sacrifice is also called a “ransom”…or the price demanded to free someone held captive.
Not many seem to know what the mechanics of redemption really are….and why the ransomer could not be an immortal who cannot die.

NO! Jesus did not die for only Adam's sin. ( and according to you Adam will never be forgiven) Jesus died for our sins. Many bible verses attest to that FACT. Complete rubbish to deny that. Even Keiw finally saw that when presented the verses!! Your Gnostic angel christ could only die for one man according to JW doctrine. NOWHERE does the bible teach that Michael's IMPERSONAL LIFE FORCE was PUT INTO MARY"S OVUM. NOWHERE. That is a Watchtower fiction.
You teach that when you die your sins will be forgiven because of your DYING. That is not what Romans 6:7 and 23 is teaching. NO! you arent the perfect sacrifice. ONLY Jesus is. Read the context of Romans 6! The watchtower is not telling the truth!
Nope. Bible doesn't teach any of that.

Christendom OTOH, has three “gods” in one “head”, which was not even introduced into Christian thinking until the foretold apostasy was well underway after the first century. It became gradually accepted in “the church” (the RCC) long after the death of the savior and his apostles…so it never was an apostolic doctrine.

Christiandom as you like to call Christians meant in the JW derogatory way... does NOT have 3 Gods. You know this by now, yet you continue to spout that. The trinity teaches NO SUCH THING. It is rather deceitful of you, and all JWs to purposefully misrepresent what Christans believe. You know full well that Christians believe in one God.
JWS claim one God and one a god. true? Yep.
Did the Apostolic fathers teach what you do? Certainly not. They taught the Father was God and the Son was God, fire from fire and light from light- same substance. And if you refuse to believe that then so be it. You have certainly been told enough. You refuse to read the writings of the Apostolic fathers because they arent in the bible. WHAT? lol They are how the bible canon you read was decided!!!! It was the primitive church! They were pupils and 2nd pupils under Apostles John and Paul. There were a lot of oral truths not written in those days. The most common way to teach was orally. You say you are progressive in theology. Why do you insist then that the early church was not? If you refuse church history that's on you, Jane. The Watchtower has lied & misrepresented so many times when discussing this topic. I will have to do a new thread on that, after I expose the ungodly hypocritical JW blood doctrine of man.
Sometime, consider reading Iraneus and Justin Martyr "Dialogue with Trypho". Can't hurt.

Paul spoke for all the apostles when he said…..
”For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.” (NASB)

Is there ambiguity in that statement? “FOR US there is ONE GOD, the Father”…..”AND one Lord Jesus Christ”
The third party is missing as it usually is. We exist “for” God and we exist “through” Jesus.
What is the difference?

For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”—
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 1 Cor 8:5-6

Now listen to reason. To you, this means Paul is saying,
Father is God SO Jesus is not God.
Do you also believe that the Father is not Lord?
If you read it your way, then you must also say Father is not Lord, or you are being intellectually dishonest & biased.
You know full well that Jesus referred to the Father as Lord. God and Lord are titles, do you agree?
Paul is merely stating the titles they used perhaps to make a differenciation between Father and Son when communicating.
Notice, he says, "To us...." That is in reference to- as oppposed to so-called false gods and lords. Jesus is (a god) to Jws. If there is but one true God that would make Jesus a false god. Do you believe that's true?
What Paul is NOT saying is The Father is God and Lord + Jesus is ( Lord) and (a god.)
Yet, that is what you are trying to sell us!
Nope. Bible doesn't teach any of that.

 

[PS95]

Seems many Christians in this thread reject the OP premise, meaning we are not actually worshipping the same God or believe in the same Jesus. Sadly Pancho, you are just regurgitating your own belief system, which has embraced THE PERVERSION OF EQUALITY. So much of what you write sounds good in theory but is simply not true in reality. It would be great if people did not have essential differences - but they do. It would be great if we could solve our own problems - but we can't. It would be great if we all believed in the same God - but we don't.

Regarding your no Biblical support claim. Have you even read the Bible? The last few epistles warn of precisely what you are denying. Even in Apostolic times, people were inventing a different Jesus. This is why Paul wrote Galatians 1:8. You don't warn against and curse action that cannot possibly happen.


Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you.
Galatians 1:8 (NLT)

Nice signature Wrangler. I concur.

 

[Spyder]

Thank you for your reply, but do we really need to refer to the opinions of those who rejected their MessIah (and still do) and who have formulated their rehearsed excuses to deny that this prophet spoke of the coming of Jesus Christ, (Immanuel) whom Isaiah also spoke of?
So who was “Immanuel” In the Jewish understanding? It’s not just the name, but the meaning of the Bible names that is important.
Immanuel

Does the evidence really fit Hezekiah? Should the Jewish explanation be accepted without question, since they have proven time and time again in their history to have disobeyed the God they claim to serve and lied about their accountability for the death of their Messiah?

I have to ask how it was possible to attribute the fulfillment of this prophecy as pertaining to Hezekiah when he certainly did not prove to be a “Mighty God,” an “Eternal Father,” or a “Prince of Peace,” nor did he establish the “throne of David” firmly, or sit on it, forever.

Why was Israel in such a poor state before Hezekiah’s reign began?

”When Hezekiah came to the throne, the kingdom of Judah was under God’s disfavor, for Hezekiah’s father Ahaz had committed many detestable acts before Jehovah and had let the worship of false gods run unrestrained in Judah. Therefore, Jehovah had permitted the land to suffer at the hands of its enemies, particularly the second world power, Assyria. Ahaz had stripped the temple and the palace to provide a bribe for the king of Assyria. Worse yet, he had cut up the utensils of the temple, closed its doors, and made altars for himself “at every corner in Jerusalem,” sacrificing to other gods. Ahaz, by an alliance, had placed his kingdom under the protection of the king of Assyria during his reign. (2Ki 16:7-9; 2Ch 28:24, 25) But Hezekiah, early in his reign, “proceeded to rebel against the king of Assyria.”—2Ki 18:7.

At Hezekiah’s accession to the throne of Judah, the northern ten-tribe kingdom of Israel was in even worse condition. For Israel’s gross sins Jehovah had allowed them to come into dire straits, becoming tributary to Assyria, and it would not be long until Assyria would swallow up Israel and carry her people into exile.—2Ki 17:5-23.”
Exerpt from Insight Volume 1 Hezekiah

The prophesy refers to someone much bigger than Hezekiah ever was…..the Jews will continue to deny Jesus as the Messiah until he comes, and then they will no longer be able to hold on to their delusions about him…..(Matt 23:37-39)

Speaking to Jews today, we see the same vehemence in their attitude as was expressed by them when Jesus walked the earth, and the animosity stirred up against him was at its peak. That animosity has not diminished, but nor has it stopped individual Jews from converting to ‘Christianity’…..the real position of the Jews who do so however, is revealed in what they call themselves……they do not identify as “Christians”….always as Jews, (Messianic Jews) so where does that leave gentile converts?

There is so much more to these issues than meets the eye, but motive must be considered.
Can I ask what real difference it makes to attribute Isaiah’s prophesy to Hezekiah in the big picture anyway?
It is denial for the sake of denial….isn’t it? Just another Jewish excuse to deny their Messiah has come and gone without them….they missed all his wonderful attributes because of their own wickedness. (Matt 23:13-15; 33)

Dear Jane,

I don't have an issue considering perspectives on scriptures given by those who study them - even if they don't believe Yeshua was the Son of God. Their opinions simply show how passages can be seen.

Back to my other questions... When was Yeshua ever called the Everlasting Father? Yeshua did not claim to be a Prince of Peace since He said that He came to divide. We who follow Him find peace if we abide in Him, but the world does not. I certainly do not call Him the Everlasting Father, but the people of a nation can refer to their king that way.

My nature is to examine the words and details. I can't just shirk off the words that make the passage false regarding Yeshua. I realize it is very popular to accuse the passage of being about Him, but something needs to be known about all the words given.

This is simply a case - for me - that I need God's spirit to give me understanding. Until He does, I can't simply say that I agree. This is simply another "sticky note" on my bulletin board.