hahahah thanks MM. Keep in mind tho I'm looking at this from a futurist position believing many prophecies have NOT been fulfilled and Lula is saying they ALL have. The biggest question about them all being fulfilled tho is why isn't HE here then? Nothing more to fulfill then he should be here.

But I'll get back later when I have more time.

okay, then let's hear from Jesus himself when he quoted the OT book of Isaiah shall we? Look at Luke 4:14-21. I'll quote just a portion.

And there was delivered to him the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, "The spirit of the Lord is upon me becuse he has annointed me to preach the gospel to the poor, he has sent me to heal the brokenhearted to preach deliverance to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind to set at liberty them that are bruised. To preach the acceptable year of the Lord." and he closed the book and he gave it again to the minister and sat down. All the eyes of the all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say to them. "This day is the scripture fulfilled in your ears."

Jesus quoted the above from Isaiah 61:1-2a. Compare it. Notice He stopped reading in the middle of 61:2. Why? Because at His first coming he preached only the "acceptable year of the Lord." The "day of the vengeance of our God" (Isa 61:2b) was reserved for his second coming. Longsuffering and the cross are associated with His first coming, judgment and a crown with his second.

So it's clear that Isa was talking second coming in 61:2b and that's why Christ deliberately left that ending out before he said "THIS day is the scripture fulfilled..." Pretty simple.

Also if you keep reading in Isa it's all about the second coming. There is much in Isaiah that pertain to the second coming.

Let's look at another one in Isaiah...one you are familiar I'm sure. It's Isa 9:6-7 and one you've seen on Christmas cards.

"For unto us a child is born unto us a son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to order it and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this."

Can you spot which is first coming and which is second? This is not all first coming Lula. For one thing the everlasting rule of the Messiah awaits the second coming and that has not happened yet.

KFC POSTS:


The simple answer is the Old Testament prophets, Micheas, Ezekiel, Zecharias, Daniel, etc., prophecies are fulfilled becasue they pointed either to events cncerning Israel that would happen in their near future as well as to the Messiah's First Advent and the things that He would accomplish. Those have all already been fulfilled...He did come...their prophecies were fulfilled...It's called His First Advent, the one we Christians celebrate at Christmas and what He accomplished during the 33 years of His life on earth as God-made man.

KFC POSTS:


After reading these two sections of Isaias’ prophecy and comparing those with the DR version of St.Luke, I still maintain that Isaais’ prophecy has been fulfilled. At the same time, I must concede that one (especially a self-described Futurist such as yourself KFC) could easily interpret Isaias 61: 2b as pointing to Christ’s Second Coming.

Of whether or not the prophecy of Isaias 61: 1-2, was fulfilled, I only have to examine our Lord’s own words. After reading the prophecy of Isaias, Jesus told them that on “this day is the Scripture fulfilled in your ears.” That Jesus Himself said Isaias prophecy has been fulfilled satisfies me that it’s been fulfilled.

According to the Douay Rheims Version of St.Luke 4:18-19, this is what Christ read, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me. Wherefore he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor, he hath sent me to heal the contrite of heart, 19 to preach release to the captives, and sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of reward.” (I wonder why modern translations such as the NAB and KJV omit the last 5 words).

Isaias’ prophecy finds fulfillment in Christ, for He is the Anointed, the Messiah whom God sent, for the mission the Father has entrusted to Him. God has sent His son into the world-- to free His people from the bondage of sin and to liberate them from slavery to the devil and from eternal death.

These phrases according to St.Luke, v18-19, are the blessings God will send His people through the Messiah. According to the OT tradition and Jesus’ own preaching, ‘the poor’ is not so much to a social condition as to a very religious attitude of humility towards God which is to be found in those who, instead of relying on their possessions and merits, trust in God’s goodness and mercy. So, preaching the good news to the poor, means bringing them the good news that God has taken pity on them.
St.Luke also describes Jesus’ concern toward the economically and socially poor. They are at times, associated with the downtrodden, the oppressed, the afflicted, the forgotten and the neglected. The final definition of the “poor” will emerge in the Beatitudes.

Similarly, Redemption, the “release” is to be understood in a spiritual sense----that Christ has come to free us from the oppression of sin which is slavery imposed upon us by the devil. Physical captivity can be felt, but spiritual captivity referred to here is worse. It is true that Christ in His public ministry, in His mercy, worked many cures, and cast out devils, etc. But He didn’t cure everyone, nor did He eliminate all forms of distress in this life, because pain, which entered the world through sin, has a permanent redemptive value when associated with the sufferings of Christ.

“To preach the acceptable year”---this is a reference to the jubilee year of the Jews in which the Law of God (Lev. 25:8) lays down as occurring every 50 years symbolizing the era of redemption and liberation which the Messiah would usher in. In the NT, the “acceptable year” is the era inaugurated by Christ, the era of the New Law, the time of mercy and redemption which will end at the end of the world and be obtained definitively in Heaven.

The Catholic Church has continued to celebrate the 50 year jubilee and the last Holy Year of the Jubilee was celebrated by Pope John Paul II. During this time the Church focuses on proclaiming and reminding the faithful of the redemption brought by Christ and of the full form it will take in the future life in Heaven.

“Today, this Scripture passage has been fulfilled in your hearing” -- after Jesus reads the passage of Isaias in the Synagogue at Nazareth, He tells them that “today the Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing”. By saying this, He is telling them that He is the one of whom Isaias spoke. He’s identifying Himself as the Messiah, the Christ, the one Anointed by the Holy Spirit. Jesus teaches that this prophecy, like the other prophecies in the OT refers to Him and finds its fulfillment in Him. St.Luke 24:44. We know that some Nazareans believed and some didn’t. Again, St.Luke’s Gospel presents Jesus’ reading of Scripture as fulfillment of the OT prophecy of Isaias. For St.Luke, even Jesus’ suffering, death, and Resurrection are done in fulfillment of the Scriptures. 24: 25-27, 44-46 ; Acts 3:18.

Now, linking St.Luke with Isaias....................

Isaias 61:1-2, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, becasue the Lord hath anointed me: he hath sent me to preach to the meek, to heal the contrite of heart, and to preach a release to the captives, and deliverance to them that are shut up. 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God: to comfort all those that mourn:”

In Isaias 61:1-2, verse one depicts the eschatological messenger speaking a soliloquy. It has connections with the song of the Servant, the pouring out of the Spirit, but this messenger is more than a king, more than a prophet. Isaias prophecies His mission as a dual one--a messenger and a comforter. As a messenger, like a king in times of war, he brings good tidings, he announces redemption for the slaves, and release of the prisoners. His message proclaims a new order of things where there will be no need for repression, and where concord and well-being will prevail.

Here in verse 2, “the acceptable year of our Lord’s favor” is similar to the jubilee year in Lev. 25:8-9 or the sabbatical year, Ex. 21:2-11, Jer. 34:14, Ezek. 46:17. It can be taken as the time of favor at which God shows Himself to be most gracious and bestows definitive salvation. The ‘acceptable day’ is the time we are presently in.

“ The day of vengeance of our God” is essentially to some a day of good news. To the wicked, it’s a day that they too will receive their just deserts. The day of vengeance is a day of judgment and God’s judgment is not reserved for only the Final day of Judgment at Christ’s Second Coming. We know from Sacred Scripture and history that God has judged mankind time and again throughout the ages and will continue to do so until the end of the world and Christ’s Second Advent.

yes, but he didn't read the whole verse from Isaiah. He shut the book in the middle of the thought or verse. So what he quoted exactly was fulfilled yes. I agree. But the rest of the verse (he didn't read) is reserved for the second coming.

If you can't see that, then there's no use continuing on this subject. We'll have to just agree to disagree when it comes to the OT being completely fulfilled or not.



this is not the debate. It's after "the acceptable year of the Lord" that's at stake here.

I'm thinking your last five words is just worded diff? Are you sure it's in Luke and not Isaiah? Mine says "and the day of vengeance of our God to comfort all that mourn." Yours is saying reward. Both speak of 2nd coming. That's my whole point. But I do have a Gk bible that has the English underneath each word. I can check that out. If not, I'm wondering if the translator of the DR (a bishop messed with it after Jerome) ADDED to the words thinking that it was left out by mistake?



ok now we're getting to the nitty gritty. Why didn't he read it then? Because..... The day of vengeance HAS NOT happened yet. That's why Christ shut the book BEFORE he said "today this has been fulfilled in your hearing." He diliberately left that part out. Why? Becuase it was part of his second coming not his first. Even in Luke you can see it was deliberate by the wording of the whole scene. Christ said many times that he came to save not to destroy....the first time. Vengeance is for later.

Paul spoke of this same day in 2 Thess 1:7-8 when he said:

"And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. In flaming fire taking VENGEANCE on them that know not God and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."

There's a ton just on this subject. To x-reference check Heb 10:26-31 (severe warning) Ps 79:6, Rev 21:8, 2 Peter 3:7...or "day of vengeance" Check it out yourself.

If you can't see this Lula, it's not because you CAN'T, it's because you WON'T because the CC commentary is not leading you and instead telling you something diff. Put down the commentary and look at both scriptures again. When God says to love him with your whole heart, soul and MIND...he meant it. You know me Lula...I have to say it...use your own mind not the CC's.

Also keep reading in Isaiah and see the thought continue...4-11 is speaking of the future millennial kingdom...hasn't happened yet. When has righteousness and praise to spring to God from ALL THE NATIONS happened?

Also look at Isaiah 63:1-6. Do you not see the same language in Revelation 14:18-20 and 19:13? Isaiah is pointing to the same thing that John would write about much later. Both reference the 2nd coming. When did this happen? Isaiah writes alot about the 2nd coming as do ALL the OT prophets.

Here are both passages from the Douay Rheims version:






According to St.Luke, Christ closed the book after He read the last phrase, "and the day of the reward"...and then He said the Scripture was fulfilled in their hearing. I can only conclude that since Jesus said Isaias' prophecy was fulfilled, therefore "the day of the reward" must be fulfilled in some way other than the Second Coming.




KFC, It's no biggy that I interpret Isaias' prophecy differently. I concede your point that St.Luke's, "the day of reward", could very well be interpreted to mean Christ's Second Coming and the Final Judgment.

The prophecy of Isaias 63: 1-6 has been fulfilled. The poem refers to a victory that appears to have 2 different effects. On the one hand, victory is obtained after a very real and bloody struggle, symbolized by the treading of the wine press and it ends with bloody stained clothes v.3. The conquerer works on his own unaided v. 5. On the other hand, his victory over the enemy means redemption for his people, and the conquerer is first and foremost the Redeemer.

The interpretation of Isaias' poem as a prophecy applies to Jesus Christ who shed His blood during His Passion. And just as the wine harvestor does his heavy work on his own, with none to help him, v. 5, so too, Jesus Christ was abandoned by His disciples and left alone on Calvary when he was redeeming the world.

well not if it's in Luke it can't because Christ was saying "today" it was fullfilled in their hearing. Now we know all the other stuff made sense for the first coming. We agree on that. What seems strange to me with your version is that you don't see your last five words in Luke in Isaiah....even in the DR. You have the same Isaiah as I do so there's no diff there.



I looked at that ending again. It's diff than the vengeance mentioned in Isaiah. Here it's saying "preaching the day of the reward." So it could still fall under the first coming so that's not the issue so much as where did those 5 extra words come from? Not Isaiah right? I don't have that in either Isaiah or Luke. So why does the DR have it?



Did you read Rev 19:15? It says:

And out of his mouth goes a sharp sword that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron (compare to Psalm 2) and he treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God."

No Lula Jesus was not angry or wrathful his first coming. This in Isaiah and Psalm 2 is speaking of 2nd coming further identified here in Rev. It has NOT been fulfilled at the cross. Just before this happensin Rev 19 we see heaven open with Christ on a white horse...and the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses clothed in fine linen white and clean....not happened yet as far as I know. If so, I missed it.

KFC POSTS:


Isaias 61 is basically the same in the Douay Rheims and the King James version. In St.Luke the passage, "the day of vengeance of our God: to comfort all those that mourn:” is absent in both the DR and the KJV. The only difference is that the DR has the phrase "the day of reward" included as part of St.Luke's Gospel account of what Jesus read that day in the synagogue in Nazareth...while the more modern versions, such as the New American Bible and the King James Version doesn't.

In answer to your question, I'd say the DR has it there becasue ever since it was first translated into English in 1582, the DR has been considered by theologians and scholars across the spectrum as the most accurate and reliable English translation there is. Therefore, at least to me, it's not so much why does the DR have it, as it is---why do the other versions not have it?

KFC POSTS:


We agree, the ending in St.Luke is different than the vengeance phrase in Isaias. That's why I've come to the conclusion that Isaias' prophecy as fulfilled in St.Luke's account.

LULAPILGRIM POSTS:


KFC, I'll reiterate. I think(not in the dogmatic sense)that all of the Old Testament prophecies have been fulfilled. Yet,regarding interpretion of the Scriptures, I recognize that there are other various interpretative possiblities out there from which no doubt, being relatively new at Scripture study, I can learn something.

Isaias wrote in the 8th century BC and the latter chapters concern the background of problems that arose in Judah and particularly in Jerusalem on the return from exile. The returned exiles was punctured by harsh realities; Judah was in ruins; the people had different priorities and tensions developed; the Persian rule was by foreigners. In ch. 56-66, Isaias' message was geared to encourage the people to stay faithful to God and to be sincere in their religious practice by avoiding idolatry and corruption among leaders. It's hopeful prophecy always looking forward to a restoration of Jerusalem and the whole world. The chapters we've discussed concern judgments against various nations; remembrance of God kindness towards Israel and a desire for Him to reveal Himself again. Isaias' prophecy mainly contains the theme of God, the offense of man's sin and the universal scope of salvation--- from the Messiah that is to come through the hope in regard to the End time.



We're knocking heads seeing Isaias' prophecy from different angles and lenses. You always tend towards the End time skipping over the time of Christ First Advent and His mission work, while I see his prophecy fulfilled in the time of Christ, His Redemptive mission and in His kingdom.

Many believe, as I do also, that the prophets NEVER saw the church age. They only saw Christ's coming and wrote down what they "saw" or were inspired to write. They were writing from a Jewish perspective. You're looking at this from a Christian or a Catholoic POV and trying to fit this together all under the first coming when it doesn't fit.

They saw the Messiah coming. The never expected that their own people would reject him. Remember they were all waiting for the Messiah with baited breath. Moses spoke about this coming prophet as did all the prophets. They saw his vengeance like here in Isaiah 61:2b, wrote it down and took that to mean on their enemies. That's why they never accepted Christ because he did not come as expected. He did not come in vengeance so they rejected him. He was NOT their king. Zechariah says that when Christ does come the second time they will weep and mourn for him knowing they missed him the first time. They will understand then. That's why I said to read the OT book of Zech 12-14.

They just never expected two comings.

It's like they saw this time line ahead of them but never saw the 2,000 blip that went under their timeline. Then it will resume and go on as they saw it with the day of God's vengence upon the earth. At that point is when God will turn back to the Jews. I know Paul talked alot about the "mystery" of the Jew and Gentile being joint heirs alot in his epistles.

It goes all the way back first to Genesis after the flood when it was prophesied that Noah's son Japeth (Gentile line) would be sheltered under the tents of Shem (Jewish Line). Jew and Gentile together and even goes way back to Abraham when he was promised "all nations would be blessed because of him." We as Gentile Christians are grafted into the Jewish Abrahamic Tree. Jesus talked about this in John 15.

There is still alot of unfullfilled prophecy in the OT. I'm thinking of writing a blog on this...the diff instructions given to the Jew and the Christian. They both have diff instructions regarding end time happenings. Maybe tomorrow.