Can any Christian / Jew explain this?

[JoelB]

like I said earlier, Sola scriptura is a protestant problem. The assumption that the entirety of the bible is divine is a difficult idea to consider

Unless you speak to some holy fathers/rabbis its not going to make sense right away to you.

Thats why I dont like cherry picking the bible but reading full chapters as the context gets messed up if you quote just a few lines all the time.

I agree, but in conversations like this where we're chopping it up...sometimes you have to get a the heart of a matter quickly

Isaiah 28:10-13​

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:​

You call it cherry picking, but Isaiah tells us precept upon precept, line up line, here a lil, there a little.

 

[MMS]

I agree, but in conversations like this where we're chopping it up...sometimes you have to get a the heart of a matter quickly

Isaiah 28:10-13​

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:​

You call it cherry picking, but Isaiah tells us precept upon precept, line up line, here a lil, there a little.

well we'll have to agree to disagree on that sentiment and that interpretation of prophecy

IE look at what you cherry picked

Isaiah 28:8-11

8 For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean.

9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

just within that one statement you used it to make a point that Isaiah was not making.

 

[JoelB]

well we'll have to agree to disagree on that sentiment and that interpretation of prophecy

IE look at what you cherry picked

Isaiah 28:8-11


just within that one statement you used it to make a point that Isaiah was not making.

Ok, so explain to me vs. 10 and 11

 

[JoelB]

@MMS

Isaiah 28:10-13​

​

New Life Version​

10 For He says, ‘Law on law, law on law, rule on rule, rule on rule, a little here, a little there.’” 11 The Lord will speak to these people through men from other lands and in strange languages.

another translation. Where is the contradiction?

Isaiah 28:10-13

English Standard Version
​

10 For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
line upon line, line upon line,
here a little, there a little.”
11 For by people of strange lips
and with a foreign tongue
the Lord will speak to this people,
12 to whom he has said,

 

[MMS]

Ok, so explain to me vs. 10 and 11

Isaiah 28 is a prophecy against the "drunkards of Ephraim" who is one of the tribes with lineage from Joseph

so this can be taken as a prophecy against Egypt specifically. Like I said its better to read the full chapter. I am not a "holy father" or a Rabbi so it would be better to get their full interpretation. I will quote out of my study bible for you:

"28:1 The passage is interpreted by Eusebius and Cyril as relating to the downfall of the Pharisees and chief priests, who are the crown of arrogance, and to the specific treachery of Judas, who was descended from the tribe of Ephraim"
"28:4-6 Just as the fig replaces the fading flower, Christ will supersede the fading law and become the crown of hope, woven of glory."

 

[MMS]

@MMS

Isaiah 28:10-13​

​

New Life Version​

10 For He says, ‘Law on law, law on law, rule on rule, rule on rule, a little here, a little there.’” 11 The Lord will speak to these people through men from other lands and in strange languages.

another translation. Where is the contradiction?

Isaiah 28:10-13​

​

English Standard Version​

​

10 For it is precept upon precept, precept upon precept,
line upon line, line upon line,
here a little, there a little.”
11 For by people of strange lips
and with a foreign tongue
the Lord will speak to this people,
12 to whom he has said,

the problem isnt the passage its your usage in what I'm assuming is attempting to defend Sola scriptura

Isaiah would not necessarily be a christian. His name means "YHWH is Salvation"

not Jesus is Salvation.

 

[JoelB]

Isaiah 28 is a prophecy against the "drunkards of Ephraim" who is one of the tribes with lineage from Joseph

so this can be taken as a prophecy against Egypt specifically. Like I said its better to read the full chapter. I am not a "holy father" or a Rabbi so it would be better to get their full interpretation. I will quote out of my study bible for you:

"28:1 The passage is interpreted by Eusebius and Cyril as relating to the downfall of the Pharisees and chief priests, who are the crown of arrogance, and to the specific treachery of Judas, who was descended from the tribe of Ephraim"
"28:4-6 Just as the fig replaces the fading flower, Christ will supersede the fading law and become the crown of hope, woven of glory."

A commentary from the blue letter

 

[MMS]

A commentary from the blue letter

ok but how does that defend sola scriptura?

during the times of isaiah there were no gospels/epistles/revelation

and without isaiah none of those have any credence. In fact without Isaiah you would not know you needed a messiah. so once again I said that not all scripture is divine. That passage doesnt make uninspired books like ecclesiastes divine or worth reading.

 

[JoelB]

ok but how does that defend sola scriptura?

during the times of isaiah there were no gospels/epistles/revelation

and without isaiah none of those have any credence. In fact without Isaiah you would not know you needed a messiah. so once again I said that not all scripture is divine. That passage doesnt make uninspired books like ecclesiastes divine or worth reading.

breh we're mixing points now. Let me take a step back bc that might be my fault.

1. I brought up precept upon precept to provide support of the particular style of responses im giving you. If we believe the almighty power of the cosmos created us and gave us teachings to learn and grow from...should we not be able go from one book to another maintaining the essence of the book? I can go from Genesis to Malachi, Apocrypha, NT and believe I can provide a clear synopsis of what the creator want us to take away. You called that cherry picking which I can understand, but that commentary I posted showed otherwise.


2. Sola scriptura - again, if the all powerful mind created us and want us to be near and inspired books...why is it that we cant go 5 minutes in a convo without saying "Thats inherently wrong, thats unreliable, how can we 100% know the truth, its up to every individual to figure it out I guess" - I dont agree. I think the message in there and with prayer and study we can get the wisdom.

How many people have come in this thread and said "the Bible is full of lies, it's plagiarized, it's the white mans book" and disregard the wisdom inside it. Thats dangerous.

I encourage every person to study diligently. I dont claim to know all. Im still a babe spiritually, but like David said "blessed is the man that walkers not in the way of sinners nor sitters in the seat of the scornful but his delight is in the LAW of the lord". Lets delight in the words breh

 

[JoelB]

***I was typing fast so there are typos in my quoting of Psalm 1

 

[MMS]

breh we're mixing points now. Let me take a step back bc that might be my fault.

1. I brought up precept upon precept to provide support of the particular style of responses im giving you. If we believe the almighty power of the cosmos created us and gave us teachings to learn and grow from...should we not be able go from one book to another maintaining the essence of the book? I can go from Genesis to Malachi, Apocrypha, NT and believe I can provide a clear synopsis of what the creator want us to take away. You called that cherry picking which I can understand, but that commentary I posted showed otherwise.


2. Sola scriptura - again, if the all powerful mind created us and want us to be near and inspired books...why is it that we cant go 5 minutes in a convo without saying "Thats inherently wrong, thats unreliable, how can we 100% know the truth, its up to every individual to figure it out I guess" - I dont agree. I think the message in there and with prayer and study we can get the wisdom.

How many people have come in this thread and said "the Bible is full of lies, it's plagiarized, it's the white mans book" and disregard the wisdom inside it. Thats dangerous.

I encourage every person to study diligently. I dont claim to know all. Im still a babe spiritually, but like David said "blessed is the man that walkers not in the way of sinners nor sitters in the seat of the scornful but his delight is in the LAW of the lord". Lets delight in the words breh

no we cant because the context of those books arent even close to the same

this is the sickness of sola scriptura. The assumption it all has mutual context. Some of these books are referring to Gods that you dont know nor serve.

and saying "power of the cosmos" is misleading...even "all powerful mind"

God is outside of reality. He fashioned everything that is and will be. Even terms like that limit what he is.

 

[Diunx]

The bible is full of shyt like that, hod could had used a good editor.

 

[JoelB]

no we cant because the context of those books arent even close to the same

this is the sickness of sola scriptura. The assumption it all has mutual context. Some of these books are referring to Gods that you dont know nor serve.

and saying "power of the cosmos" is misleading...even "all powerful mind"

God is outside of reality. He fashioned everything that is and will be. Even terms like that limit what he is.

breh do you believe God gave mankind a clear message to learn and understand from

 

[MMS]

breh do you believe God gave mankind a clear message to learn and understand from

of course

the 5 books of Moses were transcribed to him by God at Mt Sinai.

the gospels were transcribed by the apostles after Pentecost.

Why are you struggling with this?

 

[JoelB]

of course

the 5 books of Moses were transcribed to him by God at Mt Sinai.

the gospels were transcribed by the apostles after Pentecost.

Why are you struggling with this?

Because in this very thread you said the words of Moses could potentially be unreliable. (im assuming due to translations or maybe you have a different reason). Thats why I'm struggling with. Im not talking about the Gospels. Notice I stopped even bringing them up like that in this convo. I'm staying in the Tanakh

If we cant even read exodus or Deut without it being problematic, then we're all wasting our time studying this book.