The Sex, the Violence, the Hideous Crimes in the Holy Bible: Lot’s Story

[yellowstone123]

I think the issue might be since you are likely reading a very sanitized Old Testament. If one goes to to the 2nd century bc Dead Sea scrolls, you will find not what the Jewish Greek scholars who wrote as a virgin shall conceive of a child but the Dead Sea scrolls write ha-almah which is young woman.

Two kings, one from Israel and another from Syria are planning to attack Judah, but by the time the young man is able to choose between right and wrong, those two kings will be dead. It then goes on to tell how great Hezekiah will be wonderful counselor, everlasting god. A historical plus for Judah. The only problem is outside sources such as the king of Assyria Sennacherib who writes in stone that he caputured the holy city and now Hezekiah is trapped like a bird in a cage.

[huckelberry]

Yellowstone, "young woman" is what is written in the Bible I use, Revised standard. I suppose you can wonder about the miraculous rescue in Kings, but however it went, Jerusalem survived the attack in question.

I think you may correctly be seeing that if people try to fit all the Isaiah material into New Testament expectation almost all of what is going on in Isaiah is missed.

[yellowstone123]

Huckleberry, I forgot about Jerusalem being surrounded and then an angel came out at night and killed 185,000 or around that figure. At my old job we always heard the world corroborate. I think Sennacherib is another source about Jerusalem at the time.

I see Isaiah talking about his day, the poor, widowed, captives. Just like President Nelson is not talking about 700 years in the future, he’s talking about times today.

[huckelberry]

Huckleberry, I forgot about Jerusalem being surrounded and then an angel came out at night and killed 185,000 or around that figure. At my old job we always heard the world corroborate. I think Sennacherib is another source about Jerusalem at the time.

I see Isaiah talking about his day, the poor, widowed, captives. Just like President Nelson is not talking about 700 years in the future, he’s talking about times today.

Yellowstone, I can see sense in looking for collaboration as you suggest. Sennacherib would give a different point of view, one not necessarily objective. I think there are limits on how clearly ancient times can be seen. But curiosity still makes sense.

Of course Isaiah is looking at his own time and it certainly makes sense to remember that. At the same time it is possible to see parallels to other times, maybe our own. Of course there is no guarantee of a parallel but there might be. One would have to look and see. I think Matthew saw a similar sort of parallel to Jesus in what Isaiah was speaking about. That does not mean Isaiah saw Jesus and it is not a proof about Jesus. It is a parallel which might help understand Jesus.

[yellowstone123]

Hi Huckleberry. What you says makes a lot of sense. But we need outside sources not just one source such as the Hebrew Bible written on parchment. Like Sennacherib writing his thoughts on his stone, there is the Moabite Stone also. It seems the parchment is very delicate these days where the stone seems to be in good shape. Interesting about your thoughts about Sennacherib and what he wrote about Hezekiah. I was doing some research and the webpage added that Sennacherib put his political spin on the situation. I thought "spin," why would you think it was spin if it differed from the Hebrew text? Isaiah did say that Hezekiah was going to be a great king and the government would rest on his soldiers. I think the Hebrew text wanted to lift the hearts of those who believed in modern day prophets, that is prophets between the 800 BC and 700 BC era. I think there were three other prophets when Isaiah was present. It was a bad situation and the New Testament demonstrates that Jesus liked Isaiah.

But as to Jesus, I can really see the writers of the New Testament being very familiar with the writings of psalms and Isaiah etc., and so they could just do some creative writing, know that something is not fulfilled and write that Jesus completed the task. I will say this: I never did good in English and math but loved history. I bought books from Barnes and Noble before the internet came around about who wrote the Bible. I think I read one by Robin Lane Fox who was/is an English scholar, and atheist, and would disagree with just about all religious historians today. He says the Gospel of John is first source material meaning it was written by someone who knew Jesus. The rest of the Bible is hearsay, legends, etc. I thought perhaps it was written mostly by Mary Magdalene with help from Jesus's mother, Mary, and Martha. How would Mary Magdalene know there was a race to the hidden tomb and John got there first?

I also read a magazine in the 80s called the Humanist. I loved their writing because it was simple and clear and based on evidence.