Podcasts about KGS

Welcome to Day 2626 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom – Theology Thursday – “Jesus, God, a.k.a., The Name” –  I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible. Wisdom-Trek Podcast Script - Day 2626 Welcome to Wisdom-Trek with Gramps! I am Guthrie Chamberlain, and we are on Day 2626 of our Trek. The Purpose of Wisdom-Trek is to create a legacy of wisdom, to seek out discernment and insights, and to boldly grow where few have chosen to grow before. Today is the 55th lesson in our segment, Theology Thursday. Utilizing excerpts from a book titled: I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible written by Hebrew Bible scholar and professor the late Dr. Michael S Heiser, we will invest a couple of years going through the entire Bible, exploring short Biblical lessons that you may not have received in Bible classes or Church. The Bible is a wonderful book. Its pages reveal the epic story of God's redemption of humankind and the long, bitter conflict against evil. Yet it's also a book that seems strange to us. While God's Word was written for us, it wasn't written to us. Today's lesson is: “Jesus, God, a.k.a., The Name.” It only takes a few words to produce dramatic theology. In the short letter we know as 3 John, the apostle is writing to a beloved friend, Gaius (v. 1). He commends Gaius for ministering to fellow believers who were strangers because "they have gone out for the sake of the name" (v. 7). John doesn't use the phrase "in Jesus' name" or "the name of Jesus"; it's simply, "for the sake of the name." Why this phrase? Is John trying to keep a secret? John isn't trying to be cryptic. He's actually drawing on an Old Testament expression. When understood in that original context—and the context of his other writings—‘ odd wording amounts to a powerful statement on the deity of Jesus. The Name in the Old Testament In Deuteronomy 12:5, God instructed the people of Israel that—when they got into the promised land—He would show them the place where they were to worship Him. God described that location as "the place that the LORD your God will choose out of all your tribes to put his name." God wasn't talking about writing His name on a town or a building. He was referring to where the tabernacle—and ultimately the temple—was to be stationed. But He wasn't talking about writing "Yahweh" on that either. Nothing of the sort is ever recorded in Scripture. Rather, God was talking about the place where He would choose to meet Israel personally—His very presence. The description "the name" actually refers to the presence of God. This presence was at times visibly evident through the so-called "glory cloud" (e.g., 1 Kgs 8:10-11). At other times the name came in human form. For instance, in Exodus 23:20-23, God tells Moses that He is sending an angel to bring Israel to the promised land. God warned Moses that this angel would pardon no transgression since "My name is in him." We learn from Judges 2:1-5 that the angel did indeed lead them to the land. But how could God's name be in an angel? The answer is that "the name" referred to the very presence of God—His essence. This is confirmed in Deuteronomy 4:3 7. Here, we read that—instead of the angel being credited as the one who would bring Israel to Canaan—it is God who brought them there "with his own presence." Jesus Has and Is the Name Before His arrest and crucifixion, Jesus prays: "I am no longer in the world, but they...

Scripture Reading: 2 Samuel 12:26-31 With the daily reports of warfare in almost every corner of the world, we may not expect or desire to come to the Bible and read about wars.  But the stories of Old Testament Israel are filled with accounts of the fierce fighting between the Israelites and their enemies.  This is especially true of the reign of King David, who was described as a “man of war” (1 Chron 28:3).  2 Samuel 12:26-31 describes the battles between Israel and the Ammonites.  It was the Ammonites that Israel was fighting when David committed his sin of adultery (2 Sam 11:1).  One question for us is this: what are we to learn for our own lives from Old Testament passages like this, recounting the wars of Israel? One truth revealed in this passage is the faithfulness of God to His promises.  He had promised, "By the hand of My servant David I will save My people Israel from the hand of the Philistines and from the hand of all their enemies" (2 Sam 3:18).  God's promises and warnings are all true and utterly reliable.  God's faithfulness to His word is illustrated in this passage. Second, God's holiness and justice are revealed in this passage.  The Ammonites were a detestable, idolatrous people.  Their main god was Molech (or Moloch or Milcom) and people offered their children as sacrifices to this god (Lev 18:21; 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 23:10).  So when the Israelites defeated the Ammonites in war, this was God's judgment on the wickedness of these idolaters.  God used war as an instrument of His justice.  These Old Testament stories have relevance to us in that they reveal attributes of the living God who never changes.  This is the same God who reigns over his world today.  Let us come to know Him and rejoice.

Deut. 6:10–19 2 Kgs. 22:1–13 Matt. 4:1–11 Eph. 2:17–22 God is revealed in Creation and in Scripture, but what is Scripture and why do we take it to be authoritative? In this message, we begin to answer that question with the help of Belgic Confession article 5, which shows us how God's Word alone is the final authority for faith and practice.

Sarah, Matt, and Doug talk with KGS Public Resources Curator Cheyenne Hohman about KGS archiving, data dissemination over time, weird publications, maps, science and political winds, which Survey was most productive, and much more! And check out our oldest publication (to date - from 1794!) in the KGS catalog here: https://kgs.uky.edu/kygeode/services/pubs/pub.htm?id=4385 "Map of the State of Kentucky with the Adjoining Territories" You can search the entire KGS publication catalog here: https://kgs.uky.edu/kygeode/services/pubs/ 

Through the triumphal entry and the cleansing of the temple, Jesus publicly announced his claim to be the Messiah. The leaders of Jerusalem responded with a campaign to discredit him publicly that failed miserably. Knowing what would come, Jesus stayed the course until that fateful moment in Gethsemane when they took him into custody. Join us to relive the magnificent last days of Jesus leading up to his crucifixion and resurrection. Mark 11:1-2, 7 When Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey, he enacted an ancient prophecy (Zech 9:9-10) and simulated the coronation of a king (2 Kgs 9:11-13). Even the palm branches were politically charged (1 Macc 13:51-52). Mark 11:9-10 Even more striking was the proclamation of the crowd, associating Jesus with the coming Kingdom of David. Coming into Jerusalem this way crossed the line. Mark 11:15-19 Cleansing the temple got everyone's attention. Jesus interfered with the sacrificial system and the flow of money. The leaders of Jerusalem responded with a campaign to discredit Jesus publicly through stumper questions. Jesus answered them all and countered by confronting them with seven woes (Mat 23:13-16). Mark 14:1-9 Allowing a woman to pour out an ointment that cost 300 denarii on his head provoked criticism from onlookers. Jesus defended the woman for her ostentatious display of generosity. Mark 14:10-11 Judas went to the priests to betray Jesus. They needed an opportunity when Jesus was away from the crowds so a riot didn't break out. Judas could tell them where Jesus was at night, so they could arrest him secretly. Mark 14:32-36 At Gethsemane, Jesus knew his time was short. He had to stay the course, even if that meant he would face ridicule, torture, and death on a cross. He prayed and prayed and prayed, asking for a way out. The answer was, “No”. Jesus resigned himself to his Father's will and pushed through courageously to face his betrayer and those sent to arrest him. The post Christ Series 2: The Arrest of Christ first appeared on Living Hope.

The poem in Nahum 1 breaks its stride in 1:7, in terms of both the Hebrew poetic structure and thematic emphasis. In part by this means, it implicitly asks its Israelite readers, some of whom may have been collaborators with Assyria, whether they side with the Lord or the Lord's enemies. Dr. Mario Tafferner is Assistant Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature at Tyndale Theological Seminary, in Badhoevedorp, The Netherlands. His two most recent publications deal with "The Question of Future Hope in 2 Kgs 25.27–30" in Journal for the Study of the Old Testament (2024) and the translation of "Line 12 of the Mesha Inscription in Light of Shared Scribal Practices in Moab and Ancient South Arabia" in MAARAV (2024). Check out related programs at Wheaton College: B.A. in Classical Languages (Greek, Latin, Hebrew): https://bit.ly/3Rbjzpd  M.A. in Biblical Exegesis: https://bit.ly/3Rgdnwe 

Scripture Reading: 2 Samuel 12:13-21 In 2 Samuel 12:13, David heard the words he longed to hear more than any other words ... ”The LORD has taken away your sin; you shall not die.”  This statement is a display of the indescribable mercy of God.  But the next verse is a display of the holiness of God.  In order to demonstrate that sin carries consequences and that God is a God of justice, David heard the following words ... “However, because by this deed [adultery] you have given occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born to you shall surely die"  (2 Sam 12:14). When his son became ill, David prayed and fasted for 7 days, pleading with God for the life of his child.  But God did not answer his petition.  Or perhaps we should that God did answer David's request and His answer was ‘no'.  Sometimes God says ‘no' to our requests.  God said ‘no' to Moses' request to see His glory (Exod 33:18).  In profound discouragement and depression, both Elijah and Jonah prayed for God to take their lives and He refused (1 Kgs 19:4; Jonah 4:8).  Paul prayed for the removal of his “thorn in the flesh” and God said ‘no' (2 Cor 12:7-9).  When God says no to our petitions, we must remember that His answer is good (because God is good) and right (because God is righteous) and wise (because God is omniscient).  For Christians, because they have escaped God's wrath as His children, everything God does in their lives rises out of His love, even the pain He brings to their lives.  To understand these things is to learn to hope in God when He says ‘no' and to live with greater contentment and peace.   

Homily of Fr. Michael P. O'Connor from Mass on March 24, 2025 at Our Lady of the Gulf Catholic Church in Bay St. Louis, MS. Referenced Readings: 2 Kgs 5:1-15ab Lk 4:24-30

Listen along as we continue our series in Exodus. Exodus 5:1-9, 6:1-8 - Scott Reading Title: Battle Of The Gods “The exodus is a battle of the gods, in which only one can emerge from the ring victorious…The conflict between the deities: Egypt's against Israel's, the false against the true, the serpent against the seed, Pharaoh against the Lord. It is a mismatch. Battles against the Lord always are.” —Alistair J. Roberts & Andrew Wilson, Echos Of Exodus, (pg. 41) “Their words in 5:1 have all the hallmarks of a bold prophetic word, beginning with the classic “Thus says Yahweh” (author's translation) and framed as a simple imperative, “let my people go.” At first reading it sounds impressively courageous as a direct word from God. Except that it was not. That speech in verse 1 was not actually what God had told Moses to say to pharaoh, and the narrator knows this, since he records Moses and Aaron reverting in verse 3 to the words God had actually given Moses in 3:18. — Christopher Wright “That “long tradition” includes not only Job and the writers of many a psalm of lament, not only the poet who produced the prolonged and searingly poignant protest called Lamentations, but also the prophet Elijah (1 Kgs 19) and, especially, Jeremiah, whose depression and desperation lead to outbursts of astonishing honesty, some of which employ Moses's imploring “Why …?” (e.g., Jer 12:1–4; 15:10–21; 20:7–17). That “Why …?”—echoing through the pain of so many in the Old Testament—is heard from the cross at the moment of that greater exodus that Christ accomplished there. And indeed, it was a “Why …?” taken straight from the Scriptures that shaped Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34; Ps 22:1). We know why. And Jesus, too, knew why. He was doing what he had come to do, bearing in his own divine-human self the full and terrible weight and cost and consequences of the sin of the world. But the agony of doing so draws forth this cry of dereliction. Even in the silence of heaven at that moment, we may hear the echo of exactly what God said in answer to the “Why?” that Moses asked.” - Christopher Wright "Standing on business" means to firmly prioritize your responsibilities, commitments, and personal values in a professional or serious manner, essentially indicating a dedication to taking care of your business and following through on your words with actions; it implies a sense of duty, assertiveness, and a no-nonsense attitude towards achieving goals.”   - Google Ai “God just gets on with business. This is really good news for you and me because sometimes we lack faith in God, we lack enthusiasm, and we're not sure if God is going to make good on his promises. God's promises however, do not depend on us, they depend on him. And so, even if we're in a period of discouragement, we're not in danger of derailing God's plan. God will carry out the promises that he made with or without our participation. And here, God isn't just going to save the ones who are on his side and who are excited, he is going to save all of the Hebrews. He's giving them time to come around and by the time they leave Egypt, they will be on board and he will be able to rescue them.” - Dr. Carmen Imes

Revelation Class 14 – 19; Heading to the Final Showdown 12 February 2025 Revelation, Chapter Fifteen - Twenty    Patrick Henry Reardon, Revelation: A Liturgical Prophecy (Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2018), 79–. Chapter Fifteen John sees in heaven the tabernacle of testimony from the Book of Exodus, the traveling tent of the divine presence that Moses and the Israelites carried through the desert. This tent, however, is “heavenly,” which means that it is the original model, the very pattern that Moses copied (Ex 25:9, 40; Acts 7:44; Heb 8:5). … The tent itself is full of the cloud of the divine presence, the very cloud that led the Israelites through the desert of old. When that tent was dedicated in the desert, the divine cloud took up residence within it (Ex 40:34–38). That cloud later took residence in Solomon's temple (1 Kgs 8:1–12), where Isaiah beheld it (6:1–4). In prophetic vision Ezekiel saw that cloud return to the second temple built in 520–16 (Ez 44:4). Chapter Sixteen … As in the account in Exodus, the intent of this [these] plague[s] is that the idolaters should repent, but in neither case does it happen. … … Verse 15 contains a well-known saying of Jesus, in which he compares his final return to the coming of a thief in the dead of night. This dominical saying is preserved in the Gospels of Matthew (24:43) and Luke (12:39)…. Chapter Seventeen John's vision of the woman on the scarlet beast is better understood if one bears in mind certain features of his cultural and religious memory [idolatry as fornication; Jezabel as a wicked woman with loose morals connected with Baal;  Proverbs on good vs. bad woman (Wisdom vs. Folly); Cleopatra? And Berenice (daughter of Herod); and the city of Rome].  Chapter Eighteen This chapter deals with the city of sin, Babylon. It is not a prophecy of the downfall of Rome, such as that of AD 410 for instance, but an affirmation of hope for the downfall of what the pagan Roman Empire stood for. … John's complaint against the economic and commercial idolatry of his time should be regarded against the background of the Bible's prophetic literature, especially the prophecies of Amos and Isaiah, who spoke out frequently against the unjust practices of the business world that they knew. price fixing, monopoly, widespread unemployment, and so forth. Actually, such considerations are among the most common in the Bible. We observe that John does not see Babylon fall. An angel tells him that it has already happened. John, that is to say, has no violent vision. There is no projection, here, of a vindictive spirit; it is, rather, the divine resolution of a cosmic problem. … Chapter Nineteen The previous chapter spoke of the destruction of Babylon, pictured as a woman dressed in scarlet. …. We begin the chapter with the “Alleluia.” Although our own experience may prompt us to associate that fine prayer with the sight and scent of lilies, here in Revelation it resounds against the background of smoke rising from a destroyed city. The worship scene portrayed here is related to victory over the forces of hell… By portraying the reign of God as a marriage feast, John brings together three themes, all of them familiar to the Christians of his day. [banquet; wedding; garments]…

Revelation Class 12 – The Trumpets 22 January 2025 Revelation, Chapter Eight - Eleven    Patrick Henry Reardon, Revelation: A Liturgical Prophecy (Yonkers, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2018), 58–69. In the present text, the immediate response to the opening of the seventh seal is silence in heaven for thirty minutes (verse 1), while the angels with the seven trumpets prepare themselves (verses 2, 6), and the throne room is ritually incensed (verse 3). The silence that accompanies the incensing provides a time for prayers to be offered, the ascending of which is symbolized in the rising incense smoke (cf. Lk 1:9–10; Ex 30:1–9; Talmud, “Tamid” 3.1). In the temple ritual of Israel, it is likely that thirty minutes was required for the priest to make the rounds of the temple with his censer, though it sometimes took longer (cf. Lk 1:21)… The trumpets, moreover, will be sounded by the seven “angels of the Presence” (cf. Tob 12:15; Lk 1:19). The trumpets themselves are best understood in two points of reference. First, there were seven trumpets sounded in the procession around the walls of Jericho in Joshua 6. It is useful to bear in mind that the Ark of the Covenant was borne at the end of that procession, after the seven trumpets. Similarly, at the end of the sounding of the seventh trumpet in the Book of Revelation, the Ark of the Covenant will once again appear (cf. 11:15, 19). Second, that event of the fall of Jericho was given a constant liturgical expression in the ritual of the Jerusalem temple by the sounding of the trumpets (1 Chron 15:24; Neh 12:4–42). Almost any time anything of significance happened in the worship at the temple, such as prayers, sacrifices, and so forth, the trumpets were sounded. Thus, the blare of the trumpet symbolized Israel's constant and sustained worship of God. This is also the function of the trumpets here in Revelation 8. The blowing of the seven trumpets parallels the opening of the seven seals in several close particulars. Thus, the first four trumpets form a unified whole (verses 7–12), as did the first four seals (6:1–8). As in the case of the fifth and sixth seals (6:9–17), the fifth and sixth trumpets will be expressed in a longer and separate narrative (9:1–21). Finally, a pair of visions will precede the sounding of the seventh trumpet (10:1–11:14), as another pair preceded the opening of the seventh seal (7:1–17). In addition, by introducing various plagues upon the earth, the seven trumpets find another extensive parallel in the seven bowls of plague that will follow them. Finally, let us note that the plagues visited on the earth at the sounding of the trumpets, like the plagues visited on Egypt, do not touch those who, having been sealed, belong to God. Chapter 9 The first four trumpets produced plagues that resembled the seventh, first, and ninth plagues of Egypt (Ex 9:22–26; 7:20–21; 10:21). These plagues, prompted by the trumpets, affect only the physical and astrophysical world, not human beings—at least not directly. The final three, described by the heavenly eagle as “woes,” afflict mankind directly (8:13). The image of a fallen star already appeared in 8:10–11. Now another star falls in response to the fifth trumpet (verse 1; cf. Is 14:12–20). This star opens the bottomless pit, from which arises a hellish smoke (verse 2; cf. 8:12) that contrasts with the incense smoke of prayer. The abyss represents existence without the worship of God—the theological term for which is “hell.” As John watches, a massive swarm of locusts takes form within that hellish cloud (verse 3), reminiscent of Egypt's eighth plague (Ex 10:12–15). Unlike those former locusts, however, these locusts attack men themselves, not plant life (verse 4). Their activity is limited to five months, which is roughly the normal life span of locusts… The torture inflicted by these followers of Abaddon is spiritual, not physical, and the Christians, sealed with the sign of the Living God, are exempt from it. To the citizens of the Roman Empire the Euphrates River was a symbol analogous to the “Iron Curtain” of the Cold War era, that is, a border beyond which the enemy world lay massively in menace (verse 14). … The army that John sees, like the army of locusts summoned by the previous trumpet, comes right out of hell. Both of these invaders, the locusts and the horsemen, are sent to encourage men to repentance, but men's hearts, like the heart of Pharaoh, are hardened. The idolatries listed in verse 20 are the root of the other moral evils listed in verse 21. This relationship of idolatry to moral evil is identical to that in Romans 1:21–32 and Ephesians 5:6. Chapter 10 Just as there was a double interrupting narrative immediately prior to the opening of the seventh seal, so a pair of visions will now precede the sounding of the seventh trumpet. the angel holding the little scroll, and the two faithful witnesses. In the first of these, John is struck by the angel's numinous character, at once bright and obscure. The angel's body is clothed in a cloud, reminiscent of the cloud of the divine presence during ancient Israel's desert journey and the cloud associated with the tabernacle of the divine presence. The face of the angel, on the other hand, has the luminosity of the sun. Nonetheless, the very fierceness of his countenance is tempered by the rainbow arching over his head, a reminder of the eternal covenant between God and creation in Genesis 9.  The scroll the angel holds is smaller than the scroll in Chapter 5, a detail suggesting that its message may be less universal. Indeed, the message of that scroll is not directed to the world, but to the community of faith (verses 8–11). It is not read but eaten; John absorbs its message into himself. He assimilates the Word that he might then give expression to it. In this respect he imitates the prophet Ezekiel (cf. Ez 2:9–3:4). Chapter 11 In our reading of the Book of Revelation thus far we have encountered the Danielic expression, “a time, times, and half a time” (Dan 12:7). If we substitute the word “year” for “time,” the meaning of the expression is clear. “three and a half years,” or forty-two months, or (following the Hebrew calendar of thirty days per month) twelve-hundred and sixty days. In the Book of Daniel this was the length of time during which the Jerusalem temple was violated by Antiochus Epiphanes IV (Dan 9:27). Similarly here in Revelation it is the symbolic length of time of severe trial and the apparent triumph of evil (verses 2–3; 12:6; 13:5). John's contemporaries must also have been struck by the fact that the Roman siege of Jerusalem also lasted three and a half years, from AD 67–70. In the present chapter this length of time refers to the persecution of the Christian Church, of which Jerusalem's temple was a type and foreshadowing. Within the Christian Church, however, we find an inner court, as it were, a deep interior dimension that the forces of evil cannot trample. … This is the inner court of which John is told to take the measure (cf. Ez 40:1–4; Zech 2:1–2), a measuring that he will narrate later (21:15–17). The literary background of John's vision of the two witnesses is Zechariah 4:1–3, 11–14, where the prophet has in mind the anointed ruler Zerubbabel and the anointed priest Jeshua, the two men who preserved the worship in God's house. Those two figures represented royalty (Zerubbabel was a descendent of David) and priesthood (Jeshua was a descendent of Aaron), which are two essential aspects of the life in Christ (cf. Rev 1:6; 5:10). “Two” witnesses are required, of course, this being the minimum number required in order “to make the case” (Deut 19:15). But the two witnesses in this chapter of Revelation are the heirs, not only to Zerubbabel and Jeshua, but also to Moses and Elijah. It was the first of these who afflicted Egypt with plagues, and the second who closed up heaven for three and a half years (cf. Lk 4:25; Jas 5:17). This is John's way of asserting that the Christian Church, in her royal priesthood, continues also the prophetic war against false gods. She will destroy God's enemies by fire (verse 5), as did Moses (Num 16:35) and Elijah (2 Kgs 1:9–12). When the monster from the abyss kills these two servants of God (verse 7), the forces of evil seem to have triumphed (verse 10), but they will be carried up to heaven, again like Moses and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), because the victorious Lamb has the final word…. In the hymn that follows the seventh trumpet (verses 17–18), we should especially observe that God's wrath is salvific, a matter at which believers will rejoice, because God's reign is established by his wrath. God is not a neutral observer of history. … The wrath of God is the last thing in the world that Christians should be afraid of, for the wrath of God is on their side (Mt 23:35–36). As in the ancient procession around Jericho, the Ark of the Covenant appears after the seventh trumpet (verse 19).  

Join Father Kevin Drew as he preaches on this Memorial of Saint André Bessette, religious. Today's readings First Reading: 1 Kgs 19:16b, 19-21 Psalm: Ps 15:2-3ab, 3cd-4ab, 5 Gospel: Matt 18:1-5 Catholic Radio Network

January 5, 2025 2 Kgs. 25:8-30; Ps. 3:1-5; Prov. 1:24-28; Acts 23:1-10

January 2, 2025 2 Kgs. 21:1-22:2; Ps. 1:6; Prov. 1:7-9; Acts 21:37-40

December 29, 2024 2 Kgs. 18:13-19:4; Ps. 14:2-9; Prov. 31:8-9; Acts 21:1-6

December 25, 2024 2 Kgs. 15:1-31; Ps. 147:12-20; Prov. 30:29-31; Acts 19:13-22

December 23, 2024 2 Kgs. 13:1-25; Ps. 146:3-10; Prov. 30:21-23; Acts 18:23-28

December 20, 2024 2 Kgs. 10:1-31; Ps. 145:1-7; Prov. 30:15-16; Acts 17:16-34

Robert Caulk is responsible for directing software development, enabling research, coordinating company projects, quality control, proposing external collaborations, and securing funding. He believes firmly in open-source, having spent 12 years accruing over 1000 academic citations building open-source software in domains such as machine learning, image analysis, and coupled physical processes. He received his Ph.D. from Université Grenoble Alpes, France, in computational mechanics. Unleashing Unconstrained News Knowledge Graphs to Combat Misinformation // MLOps Podcast #279 with Robert Caulk, Founder of Emergent Methods. // Abstract Indexing hundreds of thousands of news articles per day into a knowledge graph (KG) was previously impossible due to the strict requirement that high-level reasoning, general world knowledge, and full-text context *must* be present for proper KG construction. The latest tools now enable such general world knowledge and reasoning to be applied cost effectively to high-volumes of news articles. Beyond the low cost of processing these news articles, these tools are also opening up a new, controversial, approach to KG building - unconstrained KGs. We discuss the construction and exploration of the largest news-knowledge-graph on the planet - hosted on an endpoint at AskNews.app. During talk we aim to highlight some of the sacrifices and benefits that go hand-in-hand with using the infamous unconstrained KG approach. We conclude the talk by explaining how knowledge graphs like these help to mitigate misinformation. We provide some examples of how our clients are using this graph, such as generating sports forecasts, generating better social media posts, generating regional security alerts, and combating human trafficking. // Bio Robert is the founder of Emergent Methods, where he directs research and software development for large-scale applications. He is currently overseeing the structuring of hundreds of thousands of news articles per day in order to build the best news retrieval API in the world: https://asknews.app. // MLOps Swag/Merch https://shop.mlops.community/ // Related Links Website: https://emergentmethods.ai News Retrieval API: https://asknews.app --------------- ✌️Connect With Us ✌️ ------------- Join our slack community: https://go.mlops.community/slack Follow us on Twitter: @mlopscommunity Sign up for the next meetup: https://go.mlops.community/register Catch all episodes, blogs, newsletters, and more: https://mlops.community/ Connect with Demetrios on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dpbrinkm/ Connect with Rob on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rcaulk/ Timestamps: [00:00] Rob's preferred coffee [00:05] Takeaways [00:55] Please like, share, leave a review, and subscribe to our MLOps channels! [01:00] Join our Local Organizer Carousel! [02:15] Knowledge Graphs and ontology [07:43] Ontology vs Noun Approach [12:46] Ephemeral tools for efficiency [17:26] Oracle to PostgreSQL migration [22:20] MEM Graph life cycle [29:14] Knowledge Graph Investigation Insights [33:37] Fine-tuning and distillation of LLMs [39:28] DAG workflow and quality control [46:23] Crawling nodes with Phi 3 Llama [50:05] AI pricing risks and strategies [56:14] Data labeling and poisoning [58:34] API costs vs News latency [1:02:10] Product focus and value [1:04:52] Ensuring reliable information [1:11:01] Podcast transcripts as News [1:13:08] Ontology trade-offs explained [1:15:00] Wrap up

Matt, Sarah, and Doug talk about data with KGSers Cheyenne Hohman and Liz Adams. They dig into KGS history and mission, saving data and maps from threats, progress of storage and dissemination, data curation, data management, metadata (ugh!), UKnowledge, and the future of data storage for KGS.

December 17, 2024 2 Kgs. 8:1-19; Ps. 143:7-12; Prov. 30:7-9; Acts 16:25-40

When we read the birth narratives of Jesus, we see that God chooses to work through human beings to bring about His plan of salvation. Zechariah, Elizabeth, Mary, and Joseph are the stars of the show. When the child comes, he is a human being too. Strikingly absent from Scripture is any indication that the baby had dual natures or was a hybrid “God-man.” Instead, God ordained that a man would be born to save mankind—an exciting truth worth celebrating! Luke 1:5-10 Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous and blameless according to the Law. Zechariah encountered the angel Gabriel who told him that he would have a child and to name him John. Luke 1:26-33 While Elizabeth was pregnant, Gabriel made a visit to Mary and prophesied that she would give birth to the Messiah. Luke 1:34-36 Although we would prefer a more specific explanation of precisely how Mary became pregnant by divine intervention, the angel just says God's power would overshadow her. Luke 1:37-45 Mary visited Elizabeth who greatly encouraged her right from the start. Elizabeth recognized that Mary was carrying her lord, a term used of many other humans throughout the Bible (Gen 18:12; 33:8; 42:10; Num 11:28; 1 Sam 24:8; 1 Kgs 1:31; 18:7; Ruth 2:13). Luke 1:46-57 This poetic statement of praise was Mary's response to Elizabeth. In it she focused on how God had humbled the powerful and exalted the weak. She would bear the Messiah—the most important human who had ever lived. Matthew 1:18-22 Joseph, Mary's fiancé, first decided to divorce her, but after a nocturnal angelic visit, he came to believe that “the child conceived in her is from the holy spirit.” This child, just like the boy born in Isaiah's time, signified that God had not abandoned His people, instead the child's birth meant “God is with us.”The post Birth of Christ 2: Saving the World through Humans first appeared on Living Hope.

December 14, 2024 2 Kgs. 5:1-27; Ps. 142:1-3; Prov. 29:26-27; Acts 15:36-16:5

December 11, 2024 2 Kgs. 3:1-27; Ps. 140:9-13; Prov. 29:21-22; Acts 14:21-28

December 8, 2024 1 Kgs. 22:29-53; Ps. 139:1-12; Prov. 29:15-17; Acts 13:38-43

December 5, 2025 1 Kgs. 20:16-43; Ps. 137:5-9; Prov. 29:5-8; Acts 13:13-15

December 2, 2024 1 Kgs. 18:20-46; Ps. 136:1-12; Prov. 28:27-28; Acts 12:1-19

Scripture Reading: 2 Kings 22:1-10 King Josiah was the 16th king of Judah and shone as one of the brightest stars in the galaxy of the kings of the southern kingdom.  He was the grandson of King Manasseh.  He ruled Judah for 31 years (640-609 B.C.) and the Biblical text gives him the following, rare, commendation … "And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and walked in all the way of David his father, and he did not turn aside to the right or to the left" (2 Kgs 22:2). Even after the late-in-life reforms attempted by Manasseh, following his conversion, there were still shrines on 'high places' to be destroyed and wooden images to be burned and metal images to be melted down. As was sometimes necessary in Judah's 350 history, the temple was in need of repair because it had been ignored.  In the process of cleaning, a book was discovered.  It was not just any book, but was the 'Book of the Law' (2 Kgs 22:8).  Our text uses the word 'book,' but certainly it was a scroll.  What they found was some part of the Pentateuch … perhaps part of Deuteronomy. Upon hearing the reading of this scroll, Josiah tore his clothes because he recognized how rebellious the people had been.  He instituted widespread reforms and called the people to repentance.  The word of God had become both a mirror and a law to Josiah.  Reflected in the commands of God Josiah saw his sinfulness … and he saw his guidance.  The Scriptures show us both the glory of God and the rebellion of our hearts.  Further, it is a light to our path.  Such a knowledge of God and a light for our journey are critical for life to have any lasting meaning.

November 29, 2024 1 Kgs. 15:25-16:28; Ps. 134:1-135:4; Prov. 28:21-22; Acts 10:34-48

November 26, 2024 1 Kgs. 13:7-34; Ps. 132:13-18; Prov. 28:15-16; Acts 10:1-8

Scripture Reading: 2 Chronicles 33:1-20 Manasseh was the 14th king of the southern kingdom of Judah and was the son of King Hezekiah.  His 55-year reign was the longest kingship in Judah's history, but it was characterized by a level of idolatry and corruption that exceeded the godless nations which God had driven out through the battles of Joshua.  "And he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to the despicable practices of the nations whom the Lord drove out before the people of Israel" (2 Kgs 21:2). His reign was marked by Baal worship, worship of the stars, child sacrifice, cult prostitution, fortune telling, seeking to communicate with the dead, violence (cf. 2 Kgs 21).  The sins of Manasseh's reign endured long after his death.  Fifty years later, when Babylon invaded Judah and took people captive, in the first deportation, it was because of the sins Manasseh had reinforced (2 Kgs 24:3,4). But the account of Manasseh is not only a story of extreme corruption … it is also a story of the grace and mercy of God.  Through a humiliating defeat, by the hands of the Assyrians and a time of captivity, God opened the eyes and heart of Manasseh and the wicked king repented of his profound sinfulness.  God forgave him and restored him to his throne (2 Chr 33;10-13). Manasseh was a changed man and sought to reverse the sinful practices he had brought to Judah (2 Chr 33:14-20).  Such is the grace of God to the repentant.  He truly forgives … meaning, He removes all penalty for sin.  And the heart is transformed from a spiritual deadness to spiritual life.  Manasseh was as depraved as a human being can be … and the grace of God produced in him a heart that genuinely pursued the righteousness of God. 

November 23, 2024 1 Kgs. 11:1-28; Ps. 130:6-8; Prov. 28:11; Acts 9:10-25

November 20, 2024 1 Kgs. 8:22-66; Ps. 129:1-4; Prov. 28:3-5; Acts 8:14-24

Scripture Reading: 2 Kings 18:1-8 Hezekiah was the 13th king of the southern kingdom of Judah, ruling in the last quarter of the 8th century before Christ (715-686 B.C.).  He was the most Godly king since David ruled, nearly 300 years earlier.  The description of Hezekiah is glowing.  "He did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, according to all that David his father had done. . . . He trusted in the LORD the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him" (2 Kgs 18:3.5). Hezekiah attempted to bring sweeping spiritual reform to the people of Judah (cf. 2 Chr 29-31).  He demolished the 'high places' which had been established as local shrines for worship of Baal and other false gods.  He opened the temple which had been closed by his father, Ahaz.  He gathered the priests and Levites to clean the temple.  He reinstated temple worship and the Passover festival. "He did what was good and right and faithful before the LORD his God.  And every work that he undertook in the service of the house of God and in accordance with the law and the commandments, seeking his God, he did with all his heart, and prospered" (2 Chr 31:20,21). Hezekiah was a born with a sinful nature, like every person, but he is an encouraging example to us that it is possible to serve God faithfully, from the heart.  Let us plead for God to grant us such a heart and life.   

November 17, 2024 1 Kgs. 7:1-26; Ps. 127:3-5; Prov. 27:23-27; Acts 7:44-50

Jesus Tells Us What God Truly Desires In today's Gospel, we hear the story of people placing their offerings into the treasury. Jesus takes His disciples, sits down, and observes the people making their contributions. Many offer substantial amounts. However, one widow steps forward and places two small coins—everything she possesses. We have all heard this story before, but what deeper message is God revealing to us? St. Jerome's Encounter With Jesus At the beginning of the Homily, we learn about St. Jerome, a priest from the 4th century. At the request of the pope, St. Jerome dedicated many years—even decades—to translating the Bible into Latin. The Homily then shares a story of an encounter between St. Jerome and Jesus. In this interaction, Jesus asks St. Jerome for a gift. The saint offers the newly completed translation of the Bible, but Jesus replies that it is not what He desires. Jerome offers other valuable items, but each time, Jesus indicates they are not what He wants. To understand what Jesus truly desires, listen further to the Homily. The Gospel passage and St. Jerome's story both convey the same message: trust. Jesus calls us to give with complete trust in God. Perhaps our personal ambitions remain unfulfilled. We may feel disappointed. Our spiritual life might feel dry, leaving us unable to sense God's presence despite our prayers. Or maybe we face the heartache of seeing our children grow in ways that differ from our expectations. Even in these moments, Jesus invites us to trust—to place our faith entirely in God. Explore more of this reflection by listening to this Meditation Media. Listen to: Jesus Tells Us What God Truly Desires ----------------------------------------- Image: The Widow's Mite : French Painter: James Tissot: 1886 ----------------------------------------- Gospel Reading: Mark: 12: 38-44 First Reading: 1 KGS 17: 10-16 Second Reading: HEB 9: 24-28

November 14, 2024 1 Kgs. 4:1-34; Ps. 126:1–3; Prov. 27:17; Acts 7:1-10

Thirty-Second Sunday in Ordinary Time Reading I - 1 Kgs 17: 10-16 Responsorial Psalm  - Ps 146 Reading II - Heb 9: 24-28 Gospel - Mk 12: 38-44

Thirty-Second Sunday in Ordinary Time Reading I - 1 Kgs 17: 10-16 Responsorial Psalm  - Ps 146 Reading II - Heb 9: 24-28 Gospel - Mk 12: 38-44

Right now, it's far more helpful – emotionally, psychologically, relationally – to be proactive and focus on the things over which we have some influence, rather than to send ourselves into tailspins reacting to what we can't control. Think about God's initiative in your own life. Today, concretely, what can you influence? Who can you help?   Readings at this Mass: 1 Kgs 17:10–16 | Heb 9:24–28 | Mk 12:38–44

November 11, 2024 1 Kgs. 2:1-25; Ps. 124:7–8; Prov. 27:13; Acts 5:12-42

Fr. Patrick preached this homily on November 10, 2024. The readings are from 1 Kgs 17:10-16, Ps 146:7, 8-9, 9-10, Heb 9:24-28 & Mk 12:38-44. — Connect with us! Website: https://slakingthirsts.com/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCytcnEsuKXBI-xN8mv9mkfw

Scripture Reading: 2 Kings 14:23-29 Jeroboam II was the 14th king of the northern kingdom of Israel.  He had a long reign of 41 years and enjoyed security, and even the expansion of his kingdom.  It was the most prosperous time in the history of the northern kingdom.  2 Kings 14;23-29 tell us of the material success of Jeroboam II, while Amos and Hosea … prophets contemporary with him … tell us of the spiritual corruption of Israel during this time. There was great expansion of territory under the rule of Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14;25) and God saved the Israelites from its enemies (2 Kgs 14:26,27), but this was a display of divine grace because Jeroboam II "did what was evil in the sight of the LORD" (2 Kgs 14:24). But beneath the surface of material success was a dark spiritual reality.  The land was filled with lying, murder, theft, adultery, and oppression of the poor (Hos 4:1,2; Amos 4:1).  The people had forgotten God's law (Hos 4:6) … and His omniscience and judgment (Hos 7:2) … and His steadfast love (Hos 11:1-4).  Spiritually speaking, they were 'feeding on the wind.'  When we turn away from God, we replace Him with water that does not satisfy and bread that does not nourish.  In His mercy God beckons to us "Listen diligently to me, and eat with is good" (Isa 55:2).

Welcome to Day 2491 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom – Theology Thursday – Why the Ark of the Covenant Will Never be Found – I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible. Wisdom-Trek Podcast Script - Day 2491 Welcome to Wisdom-Trek with Gramps! I am Guthrie Chamberlain, and we are on Day 2491 of our Trek. The Purpose of Wisdom-Trek is to create a legacy of wisdom, to seek out discernment and insights, and to boldly grow where few have chosen to grow before. Today is the twenty-eighth lesson in our segment, Theology Thursday. Utilizing excerpts from a book titled: I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible written by Hebrew Bible scholar and professor the late Dr. Michael S Heiser, we will invest a couple of years going through the entire Bible, exploring short Biblical lessons that you may not have received in Bible classes or Church. The Bible is a wonderful book. Its pages reveal the epic story of God's redemption of humankind and the long, bitter conflict against evil. Yet it's also a book that seems strange to us. While God's Word was written for us, it wasn't written to us. Today's lesson is: Why the Ark of the Covenant Will Never Be Found. I can still recall the thrill of first seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark. As a young adult, I had already been infected with the Biblical archaeology bug. This movie boosted my interest to a whole new level. As Providence would have it, I followed the path of Indiana Jones—at least on a cursory basis. I'm still fascinated by the ark, but I no longer believe it is lost and awaiting discovery. I have Jeremiah to blame for that. The idea that the ark of the covenant survived Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Judah is based on the absence of any explicit reference to the ark being among the vessels of gold carried to Babylon (2 Chr 36:5-8). Likewise, the list of items brought back to Judah after the end of the exile makes no mention of the ark (Ezra 1:5-11). The simplest explanation is that the ark was among the “vessels of gold in the temple of the Lord” that Nebuchadnezzar cut to pieces (2 Kgs 24:13). No one would pay to see that movie. From ancient times until the present day, people have resisted the idea that God would allow Nebuchadnezzar to destroy Israel's holiest object. Testifying to the power of this resistance, there are nearly a dozen theories on how the ark survived. Some of these theories are drawn from biblical events. Perhaps Hezekiah gave the ark to Sennacherib as part of his tribute payment (2 Kgs 18). Might it have been removed by faithful priests when Manasseh put an idol in the temple (2 Kgs 21:1-9)? Indiana Jones told millions that Pharaoh Shishak took the ark to the city of Tanis in Egypt when he invaded Jerusalem (1 Kgs 14:25- 28). Perhaps the most intricate theory involves Menelik I, the alleged son of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, taking the ark to Ethiopia. The Ethiopian royal chronicle, the Kebra Nagast, presents this idea so seriously that rulers of Ethiopia well into the 20th century had to prove their descent from Menelik I. Other theories grew out of specific passages in ancient texts. 2 Maccabees 2:5 records Jeremiah hiding the ark in a cave before Nebuchadnezzar's invasion. 2 Baruch 6:1-9 describes the ark being supernaturally swallowed up by the earth before the invasion,...

Comparing the Hebrew of Isaiah 9.6 to most popular English translations results in some serious questions. Why have our translations changed the tense of the verbs from past to future? Why is this child called “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father”? In this presentation I work through Isaiah 9.6 line by line to help you understand the Hebrew. Next I look at interpretive options for the child as well as his complicated name. Not only will this presentation strengthen your understanding of Isaiah 9.6, but it will also equip you to explain it to others. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts —— Links —— See my other articles here Check out my class: One God Over All Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read Sean’s bio here Below is the paper presented on October 18, 2024 in Little Rock, Arkansas at the 4th annual UCA Conference. Access this paper on Academia.edu to get the pdf. Full text is below, including bibliography and end notes. Abstract Working through the grammar and syntax, I present the case that Isaiah 9:6 is the birth announcement of a historical child. After carefully analyzing the name given to the child and the major interpretive options, I make a case that the name is theophoric. Like the named children of Isaiah 7 and 8, the sign-child of Isaiah 9 prophecies what God, not the child, will do. Although I argue for Hezekiah as the original fulfillment, I also see Isaiah 9:6 as a messianic prophecy of the true and better Hezekiah through whom God will bring eternal deliverance and peace. Introduction Paul D. Wegner called Isaiah 9:6[1] “one of the most difficult problems in the study of the Old Testament.”[2] To get an initial handle on the complexities of this text, let's begin briefly by comparing the Hebrew to a typical translation. Isaiah 9:6 (BHS[3]) כִּי־יֶ֣לֶד יֻלַּד־לָ֗נוּ בֵּ֚ן נִתַּן־לָ֔נוּ וַתְּהִ֥י הַמִּשְׂרָ֖ה עַל־שִׁכְמ֑וֹ וַיִּקְרָ֨א שְׁמ֜וֹ פֶּ֠לֶא יוֹעֵץ֙ אֵ֣ל גִּבּ֔וֹר אֲבִיעַ֖ד שַׂר־שָׁלֽוֹם׃ Isaiah 9:6 (ESV) For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Curiosities abound in the differences between these two. The first two clauses in English, “For to us a child is born” and “to us a son is given,” employ the present tense while the Hebrew uses the perfect tense, i.e. “to us a child has been born.”[4] This has a significant bearing on whether we take the prophecy as a statement about a child already born in Isaiah's time or someone yet to come (or both). The ESV renders the phrase,וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo), as “and his name shall be called,” but the words literally mean “and he called his name” where the “he” is unspecified. This leaves room for the possibility of identifying the subject of the verb in the subsequent phrase, i.e. “And the wonderful counselor, the mighty God called his name…” as many Jewish translations take it.  Questions further abound regardingאֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor), which finds translations as disparate as the traditional “Mighty God”[5] to “divine warrior”[6] to “in battle God-like”[7] to “Mighty chief”[8] to “Godlike hero,”[9] to Luther's truncated “Held.”[10]  Another phrase that elicits a multiplicity of translations is אֲבִיעַד (aviad). Although most versions read “Eternal Father,”[11] others render the word, “Father-Forever,”[12] “Father for all time,”[13] “Father of perpetuity,”[14] “Father of the Eternal Age,”[15] and “Father of Future.”[16] Translators from a range of backgrounds struggle with these two phrases. Some refuse to translate them at all, preferring clunky transliterations.[17] Still, as I will show below, there's a better way forward. If we understand that the child had a theophoric name—a name that is not about him, but about God—our problems dissipate like morning fog before the rising sun. Taking the four pairs of words this way yields a two-part sentence name. As we'll see this last approach is not only the best contextual option, but it also allows us to take the Hebrew vocabulary, grammar, and syntax at face value, rather than succumbing to strained translations and interpretational gymnastics. In the end, we're left with a text literally rendered and hermeneutically robust. Called or Will Call His Name? Nearly all the major Christian versions translate וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “he has called,” as “he will be called.” This takes an active past tense verb as a passive future tense.[18] What is going on here? Since parents typically give names at birth or shortly thereafter, it wouldn't make sense to suggest the child was already born (as the beginning of Isa 9:6 clearly states), but then say he was not yet named. Additionally, וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra) is a vav-conversive plus imperfect construction that continues the same timing sequence of the preceding perfect tense verbs.[19] If the word were passive (niphal binyan) we would read וַיִּקָּרֵא (vayikarey) instead of וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra). Although some have suggested an emendation of the Masoretic vowels to make this change, Hugh Williamson notes, “there is no overriding need to prefer it.”[20] Translators may justify rendering the perfect tense as imperfect due to the idiom called a prophetic past tense (perfectum propheticum). Wilhelm Gesenius notes the possibility that a prophet “so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him.”[21] Bruce Waltke recognizes the phenomenon, calling it an accidental perfective in which “a speaker vividly and dramatically represents a future situation both as complete and independent.”[22] Still, it's up to the interpreter to determine if Isaiah employs this idiom or not. The verbs of verse 6 seem quite clear: “a child has been born for us … and the government was on his shoulder … and he has called his name…” When Isaiah uttered this prophecy, the child had already been born and named and the government rested on his shoulders. This is the straightforward reading of the grammar and therefore should be our starting point.[23] Hezekiah as the Referent One of the generally accepted principles of hermeneutics is to first ask the question, “What did this text mean in its original context?” before asking, “What does this text mean to us today?” When we examine the immediate context of Isa 9:6, we move beyond the birth announcement of a child with an exalted name to a larger prophecy of breaking the yoke of an oppressor (v4) and the ushering in of a lasting peace for the throne of David (v7). Isaiah lived in a tumultuous time. He saw the northern kingdom—the nation of Israel—uprooted from her land and carried off by the powerful and cruel Assyrian Empire. He prophesied about a child whose birth had signaled the coming freedom God would bring from the yoke of Assyria. As Jewish interpreters have long pointed out, Hezekiah nicely fits this expectation.[24] In the shadow of this looming storm, Hezekiah became king and instituted major religious reforms,[25] removing idolatry and turning the people to Yahweh. The author of kings gave him high marks: “He trusted in Yahweh, the God of Israel. After him there was no one like him among all the kings of Judah nor among those who were before him” (2 Kgs 18:5).[26] Then, during Hezekiah's reign, Sennacherib sent a large army against Judea and laid siege to Jerusalem. Hezekiah appropriately responded to the threatening Assyrian army by tearing his clothes, covering himself with sackcloth, and entering the temple to pray (2 Kings 19:1). He sent word to Isaiah, requesting prayer for the dire situation. Ultimately God brought miraculous deliverance, killing 185,000 Assyrians, which precipitated a retreat. There had not been such an acute military deliverance since the destruction of Pharaoh's army in the sea. Indeed, Hezekiah's birth did signal God's coming deliverance. In opposition to Hezekiah as the referent for Isa 9:6, Christian interpreters have pointed out that Hezekiah did not fulfill this prophecy en toto. Specifically, Hezekiah did not usher in “an endless peace” with justice and righteousness “from this time onward and forevermore” (Isa. 9:7). But, as John Roberts points out, the problem only persists if we ignore prophetic hyperbole. Here's what he says: If Hezekiah was the new king idealized in this oracle, how could Isaiah claim he would reign forever? How could Isaiah so ignore Israel's long historical experience as to expect no new source of oppression would ever arise? The language, as is typical of royal ideology, is hyperbolic, and perhaps neither Isaiah nor his original audience would have pushed it to its limits, beyond its conventional frames of reference, but the language itself invites such exploitation. If one accepts God's providential direction of history, it is hard to complain about the exegetical development this exploitation produced.[27] Evangelical scholar Ben Witherington III likewise sees a reference to both Hezekiah and a future deliverer. He writes, “[T]he use of the deliberately hyperbolic language that the prophet knew would not be fulfilled in Hezekiah left open the door quite deliberately to look for an eschatological fulfillment later.”[28] Thus, even if Isaiah's prophecy had an original referent, it left the door open for a true and better Hezekiah, who would not just defeat Assyria, but all evil, and not just for a generation, but forever. For this reason, it makes sense to take a “both-and” approach to Isa 9:6. Who Called His Name? Before going on to consider the actual name given to the child, we must consider the subject of the word וַיִּקְרָא (vayikra), “and he called.” Jewish interpreters have and continue to take אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor), “Mighty God,” as the subject of this verb. Here are a few examples of this rendering: Targum Jonathan (2nd century) And his name has been called from before the One Who Causes Wonderful Counsel, God the Warrior, the Eternally Existing One—the Messiah who will increase peace upon us in his days.[29] Shlomo Yitzchaki (11th century) The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah's name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.[30] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi (16th century) “For a child is born to us.” A son will be born and this is Hezekiah. Though Ahaz is an evildoer, his son Hezekiah will be a righteous king. He will be strong in his service of the Holy One. He will study Torah and the Holy One will call him, “eternal father, peaceful ruler.” In his days there will be peace and truth.[31] The Stone Edition of the Tanach (20th century) The Wondrous Adviser, Mighty God, Eternal Father, called his name Sar-shalom [Prince of Peace][32] Although sometimes Christian commentators blithely accuse Jewish scholars of avoiding the implications of calling the child “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father,” the grammar does allow multiple options here. The main question is whether Isaiah specified the subject of the verb וַיִקְרָ (vayikra) or not. If he has, then the subject must be אֵל גִבּוֹר (el gibbor). If he has not, then the subject must be indefinite (i.e. “he” or “one”). What's more, the Masoretic punctuation of the Hebrew suggests the translation, “and the Wonderful Adviser, the Mighty God called his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace'”[33] However, Keil and Delitzsch point out problems with this view on both grammatical and contextual grounds. They write: [I]t is impossible to conceive for what precise reason such a periphrastic description of God should be employed in connection with the naming of this child, as is not only altogether different from Isaiah's usual custom, but altogether unparalleled in itself, especially without the definite article. The names of God should at least have been defined thus, הַיּוֹעֵץ פֵּלֶא הַגִּבּוֹר, so as to distinguish them from the two names of the child.”[34] Thus, though the Masoretic markings favor the Jewish translation, the grammar doesn't favor taking “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God” as the subject. It's certainly not impossible, but it is a strained reading without parallels in Isaiah and without justification in the immediate context. Let's consider another possibility. His Name Has Been Called Instead of taking אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as the subject, we can posit an indefinite subject for וַיִקְרָ (vayikra): “one has called.” Examples of this outside of Isaiah 9:6 include Gen 11:9; 25:26; Exod 15:23; and 2 Sam 2:16. The phenomenon appears in Gesenius (§144d) and Joüon and Muraoka (§155e), both of which include our text as examples. However, the translation “one has called his name” is awkward in English due to our lack of a generic pronoun like on in French or man in German. Accordingly, most translations employ the passive construction: “his name has been called,” omitting the subject.[35] This is apparently also how those who produced the Septuagint (LXX) took the Hebrew text, employing a passive rather than an active verb.[36] In conclusion, the translation “his name has been called” works best in English. Mighty Hero Now we broach the question of how to render אֵל גִּבּוֹר el gibbor. As I've already noted, a few translations prefer “mighty hero.” But this reading is problematic since it takes the two words in reverse order. Although in English we typically put an adjective before the noun it modifies, in Hebrew the noun comes first and then any adjectives that act upon it. Taking the phrase as אֵל גִּבּוֹר (gibbor el) makes “mighty” the noun and “God” the adjective. Now since the inner meaning of אֵל (el) is “strong” or “mighty,” and גִּבּוֹר gibbor means “warrior” or “hero,” we can see how translators end up with “mighty warrior” or “divine hero.” Robert Alter offers the following explanation: The most challenging epithet in this sequence is ‘el gibor [sic], which appears to say “warrior-god.” The prophet would be violating all biblical usage if he called the Davidic king “God,” and that term is best construed here as some sort of intensifier. In fact, the two words could conceivably be a scribal reversal of gibor ‘el, in which case the second word would clearly function as a suffix of intensification as it occasionally does elsewhere in the Bible.[37] Please note that Alter's motive for reversing the two words is that the text, as it stands, would violate all biblical usage by calling the Davidic king “God.” But Alter is incorrect. We have another biblical usage calling the Davidic king “God” in Psalm 45:6. We must allow the text to determine interpretation. Changing translation for the sake of theology is allowing the tail to wag the dog. Another reason to doubt “divine warrior” as a translation is that “Wherever ʾēl gibbôr occurs elsewhere in the Bible there is no doubt that the term refers to God (10:21; cf. also Deut. 10:17; Jer. 32:18),” notes John Oswalt.[38] Keil and Delitzsch likewise see Isa 10:21 as the rock upon which these translations suffer shipwreck.[39] “A remnant will return,” says Isa 10:21, “the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.” The previous verse makes it clear that “mighty God” refers to none other than “Yahweh, the holy one of Israel.” Without counter examples elsewhere in the Bible, we lack the basis to defy the traditional ordering of “God” as the noun and “mighty” or “warrior” as the adjective.[40] Mighty God-Man Did Isaiah foresee a human child who would also be the mighty God? Did he suddenly get “a glimpse of the fact that in the fullness of the Godhead there is a plurality of Persons,” as Edward Young thought?[41] Although apologists seeking to prove the deity of Christ routinely push for this reading, other evangelical scholars have expressed doubts about such a bold interpretation.[42] Even Keil and Delitzsch, after zealously batting away Jewish alternatives, admit Isaiah's language would not have suggested an incarnate deity in its original context.[43] Still, it would not be anachronistic to regard a king as a deity in the context of the ancient Near East. We find such exalted language in parallels from Egypt and Assyria in their accession oracles (proclamations given at the time a new king ascends the throne). Taking their cue from the Egyptian practices of bestowing divine throne names upon the Pharaoh's accession to the throne, G. von Rad and A. Alt envisioned a similar practice in Jerusalem. Although quite influential, Wegner has pointed out several major problems with this way of looking at our text: (1) the announcement is to the people in Isa 9:6, not the king; (2) Isa 9:6 does not use adoption language nor call the child God's son; (3) יֶלֶד (yeled), “child,” is never used in accession oracles; (4) the Egyptian parallels have five titles not four as in Isa 9:6; (5) Egyptians employ a different structure for accession oracles than Isa 9:6; and (6) we have no evidence elsewhere that Judean kings imitated the Egyptian custom of bestowing divine titles.[44] Another possibility, argued by R. A. Carlson, is to see the names as anti-Assyrian polemic.[45] Keeping in mind that Assyria was constantly threatening Judah in the lifetime of Isaiah and that the child born was to signal deliverance, it would be no surprise that Isaiah would cast the child as a deliberate counter-Assyrian hero. Still, as Oswalt points out, “[T]he Hebrews did not believe this [that their kings were gods]. They denied that the king was anything more than the representative of God.”[46] Owing to a lack of parallels within Israel and Isaiah's own penchant for strict monotheism,[47] interpreting Isa 9:6 as presenting a God-man is ad hoc at best and outright eisegesis at worst. Furthermore, as I've already noted, the grammar of the passage indicates a historical child who was already born. Thus, if Isaiah meant to teach the deity of the child, we'd have two God-men: Hezekiah and Jesus. Far from a courtly scene of coronation, Wegner makes the case that our text is really a birth announcement in form. Birth announcements have (1) a declaration of the birth, (2) an announcement of the child's name, (3) an explanation of what the name means, and (4) a further prophecy about the child's future.[48] These elements are all present in Isa 9:6, making it a much better candidate for a birth announcement than an accession or coronation oracle. As a result, we should not expect divine titles given to the king like when the Pharaohs or Assyrian kings ascended the throne; instead, we ought to look for names that somehow relate to the child's career. We will delve more into this when we broach the topic of theophoric names. Mighty God's Agent Another possibility is to retain the traditional translation of “mighty God” and see the child as God's agent who bears the title. In fact, the Bible calls Moses[49] and the judges[50] of Israel אֱלֹהִים (elohim), “god(s),” due to their role in representing God. Likewise, as I've already mentioned, the court poet called the Davidic King “god” in Ps 45:6. Additionally, the word אֵל (el), “god,” refers to representatives of Yahweh whether divine (Ps 82:1, 6) or human (John 10.34ff).[51] Thus, Isa 9:6 could be another case in which a deputized human acting as God's agent is referred to as God. The NET nicely explains: [H]aving read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king's deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God's representative on earth. …When the king's enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself.[52] Raymond Brown admits that this “may have been looked on simply as a royal title.”[53] Likewise Williamson sees this possibility as “perfectly acceptable,” though he prefers the theophoric approach.[54] Even the incarnation-affirming Keil and Delitzsch recognize that calling the child אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) is “nothing further…than this, that the Messiah would be the image of God as no other man ever had been (cf., El, Ps. 82:1), and that He would have God dwelling within Him (cf., Jer. 33:16).”[55] Edward L. Curtis similarly points out that had Isaiah meant to teach that the child would be an incarnation of Yahweh, he would have “further unfolded and made central this thought” throughout his book.[56] He likewise sees Isa 9:6 not as teaching “the incarnation of a deity” but as a case “not foreign to Hebrew usage to apply divine names to men of exalted position,” citing Exod 21:6 and Ps 82:6 as parallels.[57] Notwithstanding the lexical and scholarly support for this view, not to mention my own previous position[58] on Isa 9:6, I'm no longer convinced that this is the best explanation. It's certainly possible to call people “Gods” because they are his agents, but it is also rare. We'll come to my current view shortly, but for now, let's approach the second controversial title. Eternal Father The word אֲבִיעַד (aviad), “Eternal Father,” is another recognizable appellative for Yahweh. As I mentioned in the introduction, translators have occasionally watered down the phrase, unwilling to accept that a human could receive such a title. But humans who pioneer an activity or invent something new are fathers.[59] Walking in someone's footsteps is metaphorically recognizing him as one's father.[60] Caring for others like a father is yet another way to think about it.[61] Perhaps the child is a father in one of these figurative senses. If we follow Jerome and translate אֲבִיעַד (aviad) as Pater futuri saeculi, “Father of the future age,” we can reconfigure the title, “Eternal Father,” from eternal without beginning to eternal with a beginning but without an end. However, notes Williamson, “There is no parallel to calling the king ‘Father,' rather the king is more usually designated as God's son.”[62] Although we find Yahweh referred to as “Father” twice in Isaiah (Isa 63:16; 64:7), and several more times throughout the Old Testament,[63] the Messiah is not so called. Even in the New Testament we don't see the title applied to Jesus. Although not impossible to be taken as Jesus's fatherly role to play in the age to come, the most natural way to take אֲבִיעַד (aviad) is as a reference to Yahweh. In conclusion, both “mighty God” and “eternal Father” most naturally refer to Yahweh and not the child. If this is so, why is the child named with such divine designations? A Theophoric Name Finally, we are ready to consider the solution to our translation and interpretation woes. Israelites were fond of naming their kids with theophoric names (names that “carry God”). William Holladay explains: Israelite personal names were in general of two sorts. Some of them were descriptive names… But most Israelite personal names were theophoric; that is, they involve a name or title or designation of God, with a verb or adjective or noun which expresses a theological affirmation. Thus “Hezekiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) is my strength,” and “Isaiah” is a name which means “Yah (= Yahweh) has brought salvation.” It is obvious that Isaiah is not called “Yahweh”; he bears a name which says something about Yahweh.[64] As Holladay demonstrates, when translating a theophoric name, it is customary to supplement the literal phrase with the verb, “to be.” Hezekiah = “Yah (is) my strength”; Isaiah = “Yah (is) salvation.” Similarly, Elijah means “My God (is) Yah” and Eliab, “My God (is the) Father.” Theophoric names are not about the child; they are about the God of the parents. When we imagine Elijah's mother calling him for dinner, she's literally saying “My God (is) Yah(weh), it's time for dinner.” The child's name served to remind her who her God was. Similarly, these other names spoke of God's strength, salvation, and fatherhood. To interpret the named child of Isa 9:6 correctly, we must look at the previously named children in Isa 7 and 8. In chapter 7 the boy is called “Immanuel,” meaning “God (is) with us” (Isa 7:14). This was a historical child who signaled prophecy. Isaiah said, “For before the boy knows to reject evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be abandoned” (Isa 7:16). In Isa 8:1 we encounter “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz,” or “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.”[65] This child has a two-sentence name with an attached prophecy: “For before the boy calls, ‘my father' or ‘my mother,' the strength of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off before the king of Assyria” (Isa 8:4). Both children's sign names did not describe them nor what they would do, but what God would do for his people. Immanuel is a statement of faith. The name means God has not abandoned his people; they can confidently say, “God is with us” (Isa 8:10). Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz does not mean that the child would become a warrior to sack Damascus and seize her spoils, but that God would bring about the despoiling of Judah's enemy. When we encounter a third sign-named child in as many chapters, we are on solid contextual grounds to see this new, longer name in the same light. Isaiah prophecies that this child has the government upon his shoulder, sits on the throne of David, and will establish a lasting period of justice and righteousness (Isa 9:5, 7). This child bears the name “Pele-Yoets-El-Gibbor-Aviad-Sar-Shalom.” The name describes his parents' God, the mighty God, the eternal Father. Although this perspective has not yet won the day, it is well attested in a surprising breadth of resources. Already in 1867, Samuel David Luzzatto put forward this position.[66] The Jewish Publication Society concurred in their 2014 study Bible: Semitic names often consist of sentences that describe God … These names do not describe that person who holds them but the god whom the parents worship. Similarly, the name given to the child in this v. does not describe that child or attribute divinity to him, but describes God's actions.[67] The New Oxford Annotated Bible (NRSV) footnote on Isa. 9:6 says, “As in many Israelite personal names, the deity, not the person named, is being described.”[68] Additional scholars advocating the view also include Holladay (1978), Wegner (1992), Goldingay (1999, 2015), and Williamson (2018). Even so, Keil and Delitzsch eschew “such a sesquipedalian name,” calling it “unskillful,” and arguing that it would be impractical “to be uttered in one breath.”[69] But this is to take the idea too literally. No one is going to actually call the child by this name. John Goldingay helpfully explains: So he has that complicated name, “An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Father-is-an-officer-for-well-being.” Like earlier names in Isaiah (God-is-with-us, Remains-Will-Return, Plunder-hurries-loot-rushes), the name is a sentence. None of these names are the person's everyday name—as when the New Testament says that Jesus will be called Immanuel, “God [is] with us,” without meaning this expression is Jesus' name. Rather, the person somehow stands for whatever the “name” says. God gives him a sign of the truth of the expression attached to him. The names don't mean that the person is God with us, or is the remains, or is the plunder, and likewise this new name doesn't mean the child is what the name says. Rather he is a sign and guarantee of it. It's as if he goes around bearing a billboard with that message and with the reminder that God commissioned the billboard.[70] Still, there's the question of identifying Yahweh as שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom). Since most of our translations render the phrase “Prince of Peace,” and the common meaning of a prince is someone inferior to the king, we turn away from labeling God with this title. Although HALOT mentions “representative of the king, official” for the first definition their second is “person of note, commander.”[71] The BDB glosses “chieftain, chief, ruler, official, captain, prince” as their first entry.[72] Wegner adds: “The book of Isaiah also appears to use the word sar in the general sense of “ruler.””[73] Still, we must ask, is it reasonable to think of Yahweh as a שַׂר (sar)? We find the phrase שַׂר־הַצָּבָא (sar-hatsava), “prince of hosts,” in Daniel 8:11 and שַׂר־שָׂרִים (sar-sarim), “prince of princes,” in verse 25, where both refer to God.[74]  The UBS Translators' Handbook recommends “God, the chief of the heavenly army” for verse 11 and “the greatest of all kings” for verse 25.[75] The handbook discourages using “prince,” since “the English word ‘prince' does not mean the ruler himself but rather the son of the ruler, while the Hebrew term always designates a ruler, not at all implying son of a ruler.”[76] I suggest applying this same logic to Isa 9:6. Rather than translating שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar shalom) as “Prince of Peace,” we can render it, “Ruler of Peace” or “Ruler who brings peace.” Translating the Name Sentences Now that I've laid out the case for the theophoric approach, let's consider translation possibilities. Wegner writes, “the whole name should be divided into two parallel units each containing one theophoric element.”[77] This makes sense considering the structure of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, which translates two parallel name sentences: “The spoil speeds, the prey hastens.” Here are a few options for translating the name. Jewish Publication Society (1917) Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of peace[78] William Holladay (1978) Planner of wonders; God the war hero (is) Father forever; prince of well-being[79] New Jewish Publication Society (1985) The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler[80] John Goldingay (1999) One who plans a wonder is the warrior God; the father for ever is a commander who brings peace[81] John Goldingay (2015) An-extraordinary-counselor-is-the-warrior-God, the-everlasting-Fathers-is-an-official-for-well-being[82] Hugh Williamson (2018) A Wonderful Planner is the Mighty God, An Eternal Father is the Prince of Peace[83] My Translation (2024) The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace[84] I prefer to translate אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) as “warrior God” rather than “mighty God” because the context is martial, and  גִּבּוֹר(gibbor) often refers to those fighting in war.[85] “Mighty God” is ambiguous, and easily decontextualized from the setting of Isa 9:6. After all, Isa 9:4-5 tells a great victory “as on the day of Midian”—a victory so complete that they burn “all the boots of the tramping warriors” in the fire. The word פֶּלֶא (pele), though often translated “wonderful,” is actually the word for “miracle,” and יוֹעֵץ (yoets) is a participle meaning “adviser” or “planner.” Since the context is war, this “miracle of an adviser” or “miraculous planner” refers to military plans—what we call strategy, hence, “miraculous strategist.” Amazingly, the tactic God employed in the time of Hezekiah was to send out an angel during the night who “struck down one hundred eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians” (Isa 37:36). This was evidently the warrior God's miraculous plan to remove the threat of Assyria from Jerusalem's doorstep. Prophecies about the coming day of God when he sends Jesus Christ—the true and better Hezekiah—likewise foretell of an even greater victory over the nations.[86] In fact, just two chapters later we find a messianic prophecy of one who will “strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall kill the wicked” (Isa 11:4). The next phrase, “The eternal Father,” needs little comment since God's eternality and fatherhood are both noncontroversial and multiply attested. Literally translated, שַׂר־שָׁלוֹם (sar-shalom) is “Ruler of peace,” but I take the word pair as a genitive of product.[87] Williamson unpacks this meaning as “the one who is able to initiate and maintain Peace.”[88] That his actions in the time of Hezekiah brought peace is a matter of history. After a huge portion of the Assyrian army died, King Sennacherib went back to Nineveh, where his sons murdered him (Isa 37:37-38). For decades, Judah continued to live in her homeland. Thus, this child's birth signaled the beginning of the end for Assyria. In fact, the empire itself eventually imploded, a fate that, at Hezekiah's birth, must have seemed utterly unthinkable. Of course, the ultimate peace God will bring through his Messiah will far outshine what Hezekiah achieved.[89] Conclusion We began by considering the phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo). We noted that the tense is perfect, which justifies a past-tense interpretation of the child who had already been born by the time of the birth announcement. I presented the case for Hezekiah as the initial referent of Isa 9:6 based on the fact that Hezekiah’s life overlapped with Isaiah’s, that he sat on the throne of David (v7), and that his reign saw the miraculous deliverance from Assyria's army. Furthermore, I noted that identifying the child of Isa 9:6 as Hezekiah does not preclude a true and better one to come. Although Isa 9:6 does not show up in the New Testament, I agree with the majority of Christians who recognize this text as a messianic prophecy, especially when combined with verse 7. Next we puzzled over the subject for phraseוַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ  (vayikra sh'mo.) Two options are that the phrase פֶּלֶא יוֹעֵץ אֵל גִּבּוֹר (pele yoets el gibbor) functions as the subject or else the subject is indefinite. Although the Jewish interpreters overwhelmingly favor the former, the lack of definite articles and parallel constructions in Isaiah make me think the latter is more likely. Still, the Jewish approach to translation is a legitimate possibility. I explained how a passive voice makes sense in English since it hides the subject, and settled on “his name has been called,” as the best translation. Then we looked at the phrase אֵל גִּבּוֹר (el gibbor) and considered the option of switching the order of the words and taking the first as the modifier of the second as in “mighty hero” or “divine warrior.” We explored the possibility that Isaiah was ascribing deity to the newborn child. We looked at the idea of Isaiah calling the boy “Mighty God” because he represented God. In the end we concluded that these all are less likely than taking God as the referent, especially in light of the identical phrase in Isa 10:21 where it unambiguously refers to Yahweh. Moving on to אֲבִיעַד (aviad), we considered the possibility that “father” could refer to someone who started something significant and “eternal” could merely designate a coming age. Once again, though these are both possible readings, they are strained and ad hoc, lacking any indication in the text to signal a non-straightforward reading. So, as with “Mighty God,” I also take “Eternal Father” as simple references to God and not the child. Finally, we explored the notion of theophoric names. Leaning on two mainstream Bible translations and five scholars, from Luzzatto to Williamson, we saw that this lesser-known approach is quite attractive. Not only does it take the grammar at face value, it also explains how a human being could be named “Mighty God” and “Eternal Father.” The name describes God and not the child who bears it. Lastly, drawing on the work of the Jewish Publication Society, Goldingay, and Williamson, I proposed the translation: “The warrior God is a miraculous strategist; the eternal Father is the ruler who brings peace.” This rendering preserves the martial context of Isa 9:6 and glosses each word according to its most common definition. I added in the verb “is” twice as is customary when translating theophoric names. The result is a translation that recognizes God as the focus and not the child. This fits best in the immediate context, assuming Hezekiah is the original referent. After all, his greatest moment was not charging out ahead of a column of soldiers, but his entering the house of Yahweh and praying for salvation. God took care of everything else. Likewise, the ultimate Son of David will have God's spirit influencing him: a spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and fear of God (Isa 11:2). The eternal Father will so direct his anointed that he will “not judge by what his eyes see or decide by what his ears hear” (Isa 11:3). In his days God will bring about a shalom so deep that even the animals will become peaceful (Isa 11:6-8). An advantage of this reading of Isa 9:6 is that it is compatible with the full range of christological positions Christians hold. Secondly, this approach nicely fits with the original meaning in Isaiah’s day, and it works for the prophecy’s ultimate referent in Christ Jesus. Additionally, it is the interpretation with the least amount of special pleading. Finally, it puts everything into the correct order, allowing exegesis to drive theology rather than the other way around. Bibliography Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament. Altamonte Springs: OakTree Software, 2012. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917. The Jewish Study Bible. Edited by Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler. Second ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Net Bible, Full Notes Edition. Edited by W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer. 2nd ed. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019. The New Oxford Annotated Bible. Edited by Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins. Third ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. The Stone Edition of the Tanach. Edited by Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz. Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996. Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text. 4th, Reprint. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985. Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan. Translated by Eidon Clem. Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015. Alter, Rober. The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im. Vol. 2. 3 vols. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019. Ashkenazi, Jacob ben Isaac. Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English. Translated by Morris M. Faierstein. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017. https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Baumgartner, Ludwig Koehler and Walter. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by M. E. J. Richardson. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Brown, Raymond E. Jesus: God and Man, edited by 3. New York: Macmillan, 1967. Carlson, R. A. “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974): 130-5. Curtis, Edward L. “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7.” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 336-41. Delitzsch, C. F. Keil and F. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Finnegan, Sean. “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity.” Paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA, 2008, https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. Goldingay, John. “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6).” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 239-44. Goldingay, John. Isaiah for Everyone. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015. Holladay, William L. Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978. III, Ben Witherington. Isaiah Old and New. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. Luzzatto, Samuel David. Shi’ur Komah. Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867. O’Connor, Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990. Ogden, Graham S., and Jan Sterk. A Handbook on Isaiah. Ubs Translator's Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies, 2011. Oswalt, John. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39. Nicot. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986. Péter-Contesse, René and John Ellington. A Handbook on Daniel. Ubs Translator’s Handbooks. New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993. Roberts, J. J. M. First Isaiah. Vol. 23A. Hermeneia, edited by Peter Machinist. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001. Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996. Walter Bauer, Frederick W. Danker, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Wegner, Paul D. “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6.” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103-12. Williamson, H. G. M. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27. Vol. 2. International Critical Commentary, edited by G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett. New York: Bloomsbury, 2018. Yitzchaki, Shlomo. Complete Tanach with Rashi. Translated by A. J. Rosenberg. Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998. https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. Young, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965. End Notes [1] Throughout I'll refer to Isaiah 9:6 based on the versification used in English translations. Hebrew Bibles shift the count by one, so the same verse is Isaiah 9:5. [2] Paul D. Wegner, “A Re-Examination of Isaiah Ix 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum 42, no. 1 (1992): 103. [3] BHS is the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, the standard Hebrew text based on the Leningrad Codex, a medieval Masoretic text. [4] In Hebrew the perfect tense roughly maps onto English past tense and the imperfect tense to future tense. [5] See NRSVUE, ESV, NASB20, NIV, NET, LSB, NLT, NKJ, ASV, KJV. [6] See translations by Robert Alter, James Moffat, and Duncan Heaster.  Also see Westminster Commentary, Cambridge Bible Commentary, New Century Bible Commentary, and The Daily Study Bible. [7] See New English Bible. [8] See Ibn Ezra. [9] See An American Testament. [10] “Held” means “hero” in German. In the Luther Bible (1545), he translated the phrase as “und er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Kraft, Held, Ewig -Vater, Friedefürst,” separating power (Kraft = El) and hero (Held = Gibbor) whereas in the 1912 revision we read, “er heißt Wunderbar, Rat, Held, Ewig-Vater Friedefürst,” which reduced el gibbor to “Held” (hero). [11] See fn 4 above. [12] See New American Bible Revised Edition and An American Testament. [13] See New English Bible and James Moffatt's translation. [14] See Ibn Ezra. [15] See Duncan Heaster's New European Version. [16] See Word Biblical Commentary. [17] See Jewish Publication Society translation of 1917, the Koren Jerusalem Bible, and the Complete Jewish Bible. [18] In the Dead Sea Scrolls, 1QIsaa 8.24 reads “וקרא,” the vav-conversed form of “קרא,” translated “he will call,” an active future tense. This reading is implausible considering the unambiguous past tense of the two initial clauses that began verse 6: “a child has been born…a son has been given.” [19] “Here the Hebrew begins to use imperfect verb forms with the conjunction often rendered “and.” These verbs continue the tense of the perfect verb forms used in the previous lines. They refer to a state or situation that now exists, so they may be rendered with the present tense in English. Some translations continue to use a perfect tense here (so NJB, NJPSV, FRCL), which is better.” Graham S. Ogden, and Jan Sterk, A Handbook on Isaiah, Ubs Translator's Handbooks (New York: United Bible Societies, 2011). [20] H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27, vol. 2, International Critical Commentary, ed. G. I. Davies and C. M. Tuckett (New York: Bloomsbury, 2018), 371. [21] Wilhelm Gesenius, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, ed. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910), §106n. [22] Bruce K. Waltke and Michael P. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Esenbrauns, 1990), §30.5.1e. [23] John Goldingay takes a “both-and” position, recognizing that Isaiah was speaking by faith of what God would do in the future, but also seeing the birth of the son to the king as having already happened by the time of the prophecy. John Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2015), 42. [24] Jewish authors include Rashi, A. E. Kimchi, Abravanel, Malbim, and Luzzatto. [25] See 2 Kings 18:3-7. [26] Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own. [27] J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, vol. 23A, Hermeneia, ed. Peter Machinist (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 153. [28] Ben Witherington III, Isaiah Old and New (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017), 95-6, 99-100. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ggjhbz.7. [29] Translation of Targum Onkelos and Jonathan, trans. Eidon Clem (Altamonte Springs, FL: OakTree Software, 2015). [30] Shlomo Yitzchaki, Complete Tanach with Rashi, trans. A. J. Rosenberg (Chicago, IL: Davka Corp, 1998). https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Isaiah.9.5.2?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [31] Jacob ben Isaac Ashkenazi, Tze’enah Ure’enah: A Critical Translation into English, trans. Morris M. Faierstein (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017). https://www.sefaria.org/Tze’enah_Ure’enah%2C_Haftarot%2C_Yitro.31?lang=bi&with=About&lang2=en. [32] Square brackets in original. The Stone Edition of the Tanach, ed. Nosson Scherman and Meir Zlotowitz (Brooklyn, NY: Artscroll, 1996). [33] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, ed. W. Hall Harris III James Davis, and Michael H. Burer, 2nd ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2019), 1266. [34] C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 249-50. [35] As mentioned above, the Hebrew is not actually passive. [36] The LXX reads “καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ” (kai kaleitai to onoma autou), which means “and his name is called.” [37] Rober Alter, The Hebrew Bible: Prophets, Nevi’im, vol. 2, 3 vols. (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2019), 651. [38] John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39, Nicot (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 247. [39] Delitzsch, 252. [40] The אֵלֵי גִבּוֹרִים (eley gibborim) of Ezek 32.21 although morphologically suggestive of a plural form of el gibbor, is not a suitable parallel to Isa 9:6 since אֵלֵי (eley) is the plural of אַיִל (ayil), meaning “chief” not אֵל (el). Thus, the translation “mighty chiefs” or “warrior rulers” takes eley as the noun and gibborim as the adjective and does not actually reverse them. [41] Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-18, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1965), 338. [42] Translator's note A on Isa 9:6 in the NET states, “[I]t is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way.” Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [43] “The Messiah is the corporeal presence of this mighty God; for He is with Him, He is in Him, and in Him He is with Israel. The expression did not preclude the fact that the Messiah would be God and man in one person; but it did not penetrate to this depth, so far as the Old Testament consciousness was concerned.” Delitzsch, 253. [44] See Wegner 104-5. [45] See R. A. Carlson, “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Is. Ix, 1-6,” Vetus Testamentum, no. 24 (1974). [46] Oswalt, 246. [47] Isa 43:10-11; 44:6, 8; 45:5-6, 18, 21-22; 46:9. Deut 17:14-20 lays out the expectations for an Israelite king, many of which limit his power and restrict his exaltation, making deification untenable. [48] Wegner 108. [49] See Exod 4:16; 7:1. The word “God” can apply to “any person characterized by greatness or power: mighty one, great one, judge,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament.. The BDAG concurs, adding that a God is “that which is nontranscendent but considered worthy of special reverence or respect… of humans θεοί (as אֱלֹהִים) J[ohn] 10:34f (Ps 81:6; humans are called θ. in the OT also Ex 7:1; 22:27,” s.v. “θεός” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. [50] See Exod 21.6; 22:8-9. The BDB includes the definition, “rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power,” s.v. “אֱלֹהִים” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [51] Thayer points this out in his lexicon: “Hebraistically, equivalent to God’s representative or vicegerent, of magistrates and judges, John 10:34f after Ps. 81:6 (Ps. 82:6)” s.v. “θέος” in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. [52] Net Bible, Full Notes Edition, 1267. [53] Raymond E. Brown, Jesus: God and Man, ed. 3 (New York: Macmillan, 1967), 25. [54] Williamson, 397. [55] Delitzsch, 253. See also fn 40 above. [56] Edward L. Curtis, “The Prophecy Concerning the Child of the Four Names: Isaiah Ix., 6, 7,” The Old and New Testament Student 11, no. 6 (1890): 339. [57] Ibid. [58] Sean Finnegan, “Jesus Is God: Exploring the Notion of Representational Deity” (paper presented at the One God Seminar, Seattle, WA2008), https://restitutio.org/2016/01/11/explanations-to-verses-commonly-used-to-teach-that-jesus-is-god/. [59] Jabal was the father of those who live in tents and have livestock (Gen 4:20) and Jubal was the father of those who play the lyre and the pipe (Gen 4:21). [60] Jesus told his critics, “You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father's desires” (John 8:44). [61] Job called himself “a father to the needy” (Job 29:16) and Isaiah prophesied that Eliakim would be “a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem” (Isa 22:21). [62] Williamson, 397. [63] For references to Yahweh as father to the people see Deut 32:6; Ps 103:13; Prov 3:12; Jer 3:4; 31.9; Mal 1.6; 2:10. For Yahweh as father to the messiah see 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chron 7:13; 28:6; Ps 89:27. [64] William L. Holladay, Isaiah: Scroll of Prophetic Heritage (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1978), 108. [65] See NRSVUE fn on Isa 8:1. [66] והנה המכוון במאמר פלא יועץ וגו’ הוא כי האל הגבור שהוא אבי עד ואדון השלום, הוא יועץ וגוזר לעשות פלא לישראל בזמן ממלכת הילד הנולד היום, ואח”כ מפרש למרבה המשרה וגו’. ולפי הפירוש הזה לא לחנם האריך כאן בתארי האל, כי כוונת הנביא לרמוז כי בבוא הפלא שהאל יועץ וגוזר עתה, יוודע שהוא אל גבור ובעל היכולת ושהוא אב לעד, ולא יפר בריתו עם בניו בני ישראל, ולא ישכח את ברית אבותם. ושהוא אדון השלום ואוהב השלום, ולא יאהב העריצים אשר כל חפצם לנתוש ולנתוץ ולהאביד ולהרוס, אבל הוא משפילם עד עפר, ונותן שלום בארץ, כמו שראינו בכל הדורות. Chat GPT translation: “And behold, the intention in the phrase ‘Wonderful Counselor’ and so on is that the mighty God, who is the Eternal Father and the Prince of Peace, is the Counselor and decrees to perform a wonder for Israel at the time of the reign of the child born today. Afterwards, it is explained as ‘to increase the dominion’ and so on. According to this interpretation, it is not in vain that the prophet elaborates on the attributes of God here, for the prophet’s intention is to hint that when the wonder that God now advises and decrees comes about, it will be known that He is the Mighty God and possesses the ability and that He is the Eternal Father. He will not break His covenant with His sons, the children of Israel, nor forget the covenant of their ancestors. He is the Prince of Peace and loves peace, and He will not favor the oppressors whose every desire is to tear apart, destroy, and obliterate, but He will humble them to the dust and grant peace to the land, as we have seen throughout the generations.” Samuel David Luzzatto, Shi’ur Komah (Padua, IT: Antonio Bianchi, 1867). Accessible at Sefaria and the National Library of Israel. [67]The Jewish Study Bible, ed. Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, Second ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 784. [68] The New Oxford Annotated Bible, ed. Carol A. Newsom Marc Z. Brettler, Pheme Perkins, Third ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 991. [69] Delitzsch, 249. [70] Goldingay, 42-3. [71] Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, ed. M. E. J. Richardson (Leiden: Brill, 2000). [72] See s.v. “שַׂר” in The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon [73] Wegner 112. [74] Keil and Delitzsch say the sar of Dan 8:11 refers to “the God of heaven and the King of Israel, the Prince of princes, as He is called in v. 25,” Delitzsch, 297. [75] René and John Ellington Péter-Contesse, A Handbook on Daniel, Ubs Translator’s Handbooks (New York, NY: United Bible Societies, 1993). [76] Ibid. [77] Wegner 110-1. [78] The main text transliterates “Pele-joez-el-gibbor-/Abi-ad-sar-shalom,” while the footnote translates as indicated above. The Holy Scriptures According to the Masoretic Text: A New Translation (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1917), 575. [79] Holladay, 109. [80] Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures: The New Jps Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text (4th: repr., Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985), 634. [81] John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6),” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999): 243. [82] Goldingay, Isaiah for Everyone, 40. [83] Williamson, 355. [84] An alternative is “The warrior God is planning a miracle; the eternal Father is the ruler of peace.” [85] For גִּבּוֹר in a military context, see 1 Sam 17:51; 2 Sam 20.7; 2 Kgs 24:16; Isa 21.17; Jer 48:41; Eze 39:20; and Joel 2:7; 3:9. [86] See 2 Thess 2:8 and Rev 19:11-21 (cp. Dan 7:13-14). [87] See Gesenius § 128q, which describes a genitive of “statements of the purpose for which something is intended.” [88] Williamson, 401. [89] Isaiah tells of a time when God will “judge between nations,” resulting in the conversion of the weapons of war into the tools of agriculture and a lasting era when “nation shall not lift up sword against nation; neither shall they learn war any more” (Isa 2:4).

Scripture Reading: 1 Kings 16:29-33 Ahab was the seventh king of the northern kingdom of Israel.  Much like the first king of Israel, Jeroboam, the name of Ahab became notorious as a standard of wickedness.  Subsequent kings in Israel … and even Jehoram, a king of Judah in the south … were compared to Ahab in terms of his wickedness. "Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel in Samaria twenty-two years.  And Ahab the son of Omri did evil in the sight of the Lord, more than all who were before him" (1 Kgs 16:29,30).  Ahab's wife was Jezebel and she was completely given to the worship of Baal, the shameful deity of the Canaanites.  "Ahab did more to provoke the Lord, the God of Israel, to anger than all the kings of Israel who were before him" (1 Kgs 16:33).  This summary statement sets the stage for what happens in 1 Kings 20,21.  Upon being besieged by the Syrians, God sends a prophet to tell Ahab that He would save Israel from them.  It is pure divine grace.  Ahab had not sought the Lord's help, but God spared Israel … twice … from the Syrian armies. Upon Elijah's prophecy of the death of Ahab and Jezebel (1 Kgs 21:17-24), Ahab contritely humbled himself and God postponed widespread destruction in Israel until after Ahab's death (1 Kgs 21:28,29).  It is the prominent theme of the Bible … the wickedness of the human heart, on the one hand … and the merciful grace of God toward rebels, on the other hand.  Of course, the apex of the display of God's mercy is the giving of His Son, that Jesus might bring us to God by His sacrifice for us. 

Direktør Klavs Bundgaard har hyret sladderdronningen Ditte Okman som ny programchef. Men bestyrelsesformand Mikael Bertelsen har set Den Gule Sofa med Allan Sindberg og pludselig ændrer omstændighederne sig. Men måske har Klavs hele tiden haft det samme sigte - at få sin guldfugl tilbage! Afsted det går til Kgs. København med Rune Ingemann som wingman.  Episoden er lavet i samarbejde med Meny og Andel Energi. Bliv medlem: https://r8dio.dk/bliv-medlem/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Like Isaiah and Daniel, Ezekiel saw God. In Ezekiel's vision, God was with strange spiritual creatures that were hard for him to describe. The whole experience clearly communicates how transcendent God is. Ezekiel 1:4-28 The prophet Ezekiel has a vision of four-winged living creatures with a fire in their midst, huge gleaming wheels, and God Himself sitting on a throne above them. He struggled mightily to describe the scene, employing the word “like” twenty-three times in this chapter. Ezekiel 10:15-22 A little over a year later, Ezekiel was able to process the initial vision he saw. When he had a second one, he could describe it without using so many analogies. Furthermore, he realized that the living creatures were cherubim. Cherubim were on the lid of the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:17-22), standing fifteen feet tall on either side of the ark (1 Kgs 6:23-28), sewn into the curtain separating the holy of holies (2 Chr 3:14), and on the door and walls in the temple (1 Ki 6:29-35). Ezekiel 1:1-3 After five years in exile, Ezekiel was now thirty years old—the age he would become ordained and enter his service as a priest in the temple. God showed him a powerful vision far beyond what he would have experienced if he were serving in the temple back in Jerusalem. Ezekiel's vision communicates that God is transcendent. He's not like everyone else; he's extraordinary, other, beyond what we know (Ps 113:5-6; Job 36:26; Isa 40:18-28; 55:8-9).The post Seeing God 3: Transcendence first appeared on Living Hope.

Welcome to Day 2446 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom – Theology Thursday – Sanctified Dirt – I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible Wisdom-Trek Podcast Script - Day 2446 Welcome to Wisdom-Trek with Gramps! I am Guthrie Chamberlain, and we are on Day 2446 of our Trek. The Purpose of Wisdom-Trek is to create a legacy of wisdom, to seek out discernment and insights, and to boldly grow where few have chosen to grow before. Today is the eighteenth lesson in our segment, Theology Thursday. Utilizing excerpts from a book titled: I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible written by Hebrew Bible scholar and professor the late Dr. Michael S Heiser, we will invest a couple of years going through the entire Bible, exploring short Biblical lessons that you may not have received in Bible classes or Church. The Bible is a wonderful book. Its pages reveal the epic story of God's redemption of humankind and the long, bitter conflict against evil. Yet it's also a book that seems strange to us. While God's Word was written for us, it wasn't written to us. Today, our lesson is, Sanctified Dirt. Elisha's healing of Naaman, the leper, commander of the army of the king of Syria, is a familiar story to many (2 Kgs 5:1-27). Naaman hears that Elisha, the prophet of Israel, can heal him, so he makes the trip. When the two meet, Elisha tells him rather dismissively that he needs to take a bath in the Jordan River. Naaman doesn't take this well and prepares to go home. At the behest of some servants, he consents to dip himself in the Jordan. The simple act miraculously heals him. The display of power, so transparently without sacrifice or incantation, awakens Naaman to the fact that Yahweh of Israel is the true God. Here's where the story usually ends in our telling, but that would result in the omission of one very odd detail—what Naaman asks to take back home. In 2 Kings 5:15-19, the elated Naaman returns to Elisha and begs him to take payment for healing him. Elisha repeatedly refuses. Finally, before embarking on a trip to Syria, Naaman makes a strange request: to load two mules with dirt to take back with him. Dirt? I can think of a few favors I would ask of a prophet in a receptive mood, but dirt certainly isn't one of them. The request is so odd that it's hard to avoid wondering if Naaman needed some other kind of therapy. Why would he ask for dirt? But Naaman was completely in his right mind. In 2 Kings 5:17, Naaman follows the request with an explanation: “From now on, I will never again offer burnt offerings or sacrifices to any other god except the Lord.” The dirt and Naaman's new allegiance to the God of Israel are related. Naaman was a man who had significant duties in his home country. He couldn't stay in Israel, but he could take Israel with him. Why would he want to? Naaman's unusual request stems from the ancient—and biblical— conception that the earth is the locale for a cosmic turf war. Naaman wanted dirt from Israel because Israel was Yahweh's territory. The dirt, which is Yahweh's domain, is holy ground. The idea of “holy ground” is an essential element of Israelite theology. This phrase is used when Moses is in the presence of the Angel of the Lord and the God of Israel at the burning bush (Exod 3:1-5) and when Joshua meets the Angel of the Lord...

Welcome to Day 2436 of Wisdom-Trek, and thank you for joining me. This is Guthrie Chamberlain, Your Guide to Wisdom – Theology Thursday – The Divine Arrow – I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible Wisdom-Trek Podcast Script - Day 2436 Welcome to Wisdom-Trek with Gramps! I am Guthrie Chamberlain, and we are on Day 2436 of our Trek. The Purpose of Wisdom-Trek is to create a legacy of wisdom, to seek out discernment and insights, and to boldly grow where few have chosen to grow before. Today is the seventeenth lesson in our segment, Theology Thursday. Utilizing excerpts from a book titled: I Dare You Not To Bore Me With The Bible written by Hebrew Bible scholar and professor the late Dr. Michael S Heiser, we will invest a couple of years going through the entire Bible, exploring short Biblical lessons that you may not have received in Bible classes or Church. The Bible is a wonderful book. Its pages reveal the epic story of God's redemption of humankind and the long, bitter conflict against evil. Yet it's also a book that seems strange to us. While God's Word was written for us, it wasn't written to us. Today, our lesson is, The Divine Arrow. Few characters in the Bible are as maligned for their wickedness as King Ahab of Israel. While Ahab's predecessors “did evil in the sight of the Lord' Ahab had an agenda:  He did more to provoke the anger of the Lord, the God of Israel, than any of the other kings of Israel before him. (1 Kgs 16:33). Ahab's rule includes Baal worship, forbidden foreign covenants (Syria) and foreign alliances (Jezebel), and the murder of Naboth. In 1 Kings 22, the prophet Micaiah warns Ahab of his impending fate. This isn't a run-of-the-mill prophecy. It's mixed with a vision of how God came to the final details of His decision: a divine boardroom discussion. Yes-Men and Yahweh's Man The 12 tribes of Israel had been split into two kingdoms for a century by the time Ahab took the throne (ca. 869 bc). Ahab ruled the northern kingdom (called Israel or Ephraim), which often fought with the southern kingdom, Judah. After peace reigned between Israel and Judah for three years (22:1), Ahab decided he wanted to capture the city of Ramoth in Gilead from the Arameans. He asked Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, for military assistance. Jehoshaphat agreed to the battle for political reasons, but he wanted assurance that God was in the endeavor (22:5). The 400 prophetic yes-men Ahab consulted endorsed the idea, but Jehoshaphat wanted another opinion (22:6, 11-12). Ahab agreed to summon Micaiah, the prophet of Yahweh, though he openly admitted to hating him (22:8). The real prophet of Yahweh never had anything positive to say about the ungodly Ahab and his rule. The Prophecy At first, Micaiah told Ahab that God loved the plan, but Ahab saw through his mockery. Apparently, this was not the first time: “How many times must I demand that you speak only the truth to me when you speak for the Lord?” (22:16). Micaiah proceeded to tell Ahab he was about to meet his Maker, so chances are good he wanted Ahab to go through with the battle, knowing the end result. Rebuked by Ahab, Micaiah holds nothing back, revealing to Ahab and to us the inner workings of God's counsel:...