Podcasts about nevi

WEEK SIXTEEN: WEEKLY READING PAGE 105-106 Beshalach “When he sent away” Torah: Exodus 13:17-17:16 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 2 Samuel 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 93-98 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Acts 4-9 Scripture Memory: Matthew 7:21-23 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonderful works in Your name?’ 23 But then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from Me, you who practice evil.’”

WEEK SIXTEEN: WEEKLY READING PAGE 105-106 Beshalach “When he sent away” Torah: Exodus 13:17-17:16 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 2 Samuel 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 93-98 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Acts 4-9 Scripture Memory: Matthew 7:21-23 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonderful works in Your name?’ 23 But then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you. Depart from Me, you who practice evil.’”

This Day in Legal History: 19th Amendment Passed in SenateOn June 4, 1919, the U.S. Congress passed the 19th Amendment, marking a turning point in American constitutional and civil rights history. The amendment stated simply that the right to vote "shall not be denied or abridged... on account of sex," legally enfranchising millions of women. The road to this moment was long and contentious, spanning more than seven decades of organized activism. Early suffragists like Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony laid the groundwork in the 19th century, while a new generation, including Alice Paul and the National Woman's Party, employed more confrontational tactics in the 1910s.Although the House of Representatives had passed the amendment earlier in the year, the Senate had repeatedly failed to approve it. The June 4 vote in the Senate—passing by just over the required two-thirds majority—was the final congressional hurdle. The legislative victory came amid shifting national sentiment, in part due to women's contributions during World War I and growing pressure from suffrage organizations.The amendment was then sent to the states, needing ratification by three-fourths to become law. That process concluded over a year later with Tennessee's pivotal ratification on August 18, 1920. The 19th Amendment was certified on August 26, finally making women's suffrage the law of the land. This day marks not just a legal transformation but the culmination of one of the most significant civil rights struggles in U.S. history.Disbarred attorney Tom Girardi was sentenced to 87 months in federal prison for stealing $15 million in settlement funds from his clients. U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton also imposed a $35,000 fine and ordered Girardi to pay over $2.3 million in restitution. The sentence followed his August 2024 conviction on four counts of wire fraud. Girardi, who turned 86 on the day of his sentencing, had sought leniency due to age, liver issues, and dementia claims, but the court found him competent and sided with prosecutors who sought a significant term.Girardi's legacy was once tied to his successful pollution suit against Pacific Gas and Electric—dramatized in the film Erin Brockovich. However, his downfall involved stealing settlement funds in various personal injury cases, including millions owed to families of victims of the 2018 Boeing 737 MAX crash. A federal judge in Chicago recently dismissed related charges, citing the active California case, though the prosecution of Girardi's son-in-law, David Lira, is still set to proceed there. Lira denies wrongdoing.At trial, Girardi blamed the fraud on Christopher Kamon, his firm's former CFO, who has already been sentenced to over ten years after pleading guilty. Girardi's attorneys continue to claim cognitive decline, but the court maintained that he was mentally fit to face justice.Lawyer Tom Girardi sentenced to 87 months in prison for wire fraud | ReutersA federal appeals court is set to hear its first case reviewing the constitutionality of Donald Trump's executive order limiting birthright citizenship. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments in Seattle as the Trump administration appeals a nationwide injunction issued by U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, who called the order “blatantly unconstitutional.” The directive, signed by Trump on January 20, his first day back in office, seeks to deny citizenship to U.S.-born children whose parents are neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents.Critics—including 22 Democratic attorneys general and immigrant advocacy groups—argue the order violates the 14th Amendment, which has long been interpreted to grant citizenship to nearly anyone born on U.S. soil. Federal judges in Massachusetts and Maryland have also issued rulings blocking the order. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court, which heard related arguments on May 15, is considering whether to limit lower courts' power to issue nationwide injunctions rather than deciding on the constitutionality of the policy itself.If implemented, the order could deny citizenship to over 150,000 newborns annually, according to the plaintiffs. The lawsuit before the 9th Circuit was filed by several states and individual pregnant women. The three-judge panel includes two Clinton-era appointees and one Trump appointee, potentially shaping the outcome. The administration maintains that birthright citizenship doesn't apply to children of undocumented or temporary-status immigrants, a stance at odds with long-standing interpretations of the 14th Amendment.To be clear, this case revolves around the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment. This clause states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States... are citizens of the United States,” forming the basis of birthright citizenship. The case centers on how this clause should be interpreted, making it the key constitutional question in this challenge. On the side of birthright citizenship is, frankly, the plain language of the amendment. On the side of the executive order are racists and racist people without basic reading comprehension – full stop. There is no “other side” here, and there is no real debate. Ultimately the courts may decide to pretend there is some nuance, but that changes nothing about the clear language of the amendment. Trump's birthright citizenship order to face first US appeals court reviewA group of former U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) employees has filed a class action lawsuit against HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Elon Musk, alleging that their departments used flawed data to justify the firing of 10,000 federal workers. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, claims that HHS and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which Musk leads, violated the 1974 Privacy Act by using inaccurate personnel records during a mass reduction in force (RIF).The plaintiffs argue that the agencies relied on data riddled with errors, including incorrect performance reviews, job descriptions, and office locations. One named plaintiff, Catherine Jackson, reportedly received an RIF notice based on false performance ratings. Another, Melissa Adams, was allegedly terminated by officials who didn't even know her work location.The lawsuit seeks at least $1,000 in damages per affected employee and a court declaration that the government's actions were unlawful. The complaint also suggests that the terminations were ideologically driven, referencing a troubling incident where an FDA employee was warned by a man invoking DOGE shortly before receiving her RIF notice.The mass firings, which began April 1, impacted key HHS agencies like the CDC, FDA, and NIH. Kennedy defended the cuts as part of a broader reorganization to address chronic disease. The plaintiffs, however, see the action as a politically motivated purge that disregarded legal safeguards.By way of brief background, the Privacy Act of 1974 mandates that federal agencies maintain accurate records when making decisions that adversely affect individuals. It is central to the lawsuit because the plaintiffs claim their terminations were based on data that was factually wrong, violating this statutory requirement.RFK Jr., Musk Accused of Using Faulty Data in Firing HHS WorkersA new conflict over federal spending power is emerging between the Trump White House and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), centered on a $5 billion electric vehicle infrastructure program. The GAO recently concluded that the Trump administration's pause of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) grants—originally authorized under President Biden's 2021 infrastructure law—violated the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which prohibits presidents from withholding funds for policy reasons. In response, the White House issued a sharply worded memo instructing the Department of Transportation to disregard the GAO's opinion entirely.The memo, written by OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta, accuses the GAO of partisan bias and undermining President Trump's “historic and lawful spending reforms.” It signals a broader strategy to challenge the authority of congressional watchdogs and reframe presidential control over budget implementation. This dispute could serve as the first legal test of Trump's intent to challenge the constitutionality of the Impoundment Act itself.The delay in EV funding is part of a broader rollback of Biden-era policy priorities, including guidance on equity and charger placement. Meanwhile, the administration has proposed over $9 billion in spending rescissions, aimed at areas like public broadcasting and foreign aid, under Trump's Department of Government Efficiency initiative. Advisors have floated a tactic called “pocket rescission,” a timing strategy that critics argue violates legal requirements for obligating federal funds.This isn't the first time a president has clashed with GAO over spending powers—Trump and Biden both previously faced scrutiny for pauses in Ukraine aid and border wall funds, respectively. However, the White House's open defiance of GAO marks a significant escalation in an ongoing constitutional debate over who ultimately controls the federal purse.More specifically, the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 restricts the executive branch from withholding or delaying funds Congress has appropriated unless explicitly authorized. It plays a central role in this dispute, as the GAO argues Trump's delay of NEVI grants constitutes an illegal impoundment, while the administration disputes the law's constitutionality and GAO's oversight role.White House Memo on EV Grants Sets Up Fight Over Spending Power - Bloomberg This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The Torah was given in a pattern of threes —a recurring theme that carries deep meaning. The Talmud teaches: the Torah (which itself has three parts—Torah, Nevi'im, Ketuvim) was given to a people divided into three groups (Kohanim, Levi'im, Yisraelim), through the third child of Amram (Moshe), in the third month (Sivan), on the third day (after three days of preparation). Why so many "threes"? The answer reflects the essence of Torah and mitzvot. The Bnei Yissaschar explains that every mitzvah is made up of three components: Action – physically performing the mitzvah. Speech – reciting a beracha, or saying the source verse. Thought – having kavana (intent) and awareness of why we're doing the mitzvah. This three-part formula also aligns with: The body : lower body (action), chest/lungs (speech), head (thought). The soul : nefesh (action), ruach (speech), neshama (thought). Spiritual development : ibur (embryo—action), yenika (nursing—speech), mochin (intellect—thought). Shabuot also commemorates the three stages of Jewish growth: Yetzias Mitzrayim – physical birth (action). Marah – first exposure to Torah laws (speech). Matan Torah – full spiritual maturity (thought and understanding). Even creation itself reflects Torah's structure. On the third day of creation , two Torah-like principles emerged: The grass obeyed a Torah-style kal vachomer and chose to grow "according to its kind," though not explicitly commanded—showing initiative in following Torah logic. The trees , however, failed to follow a potential hekesh (a Torah logic tool), producing fruit without making their trunks edible as commanded. Because of this, grass is honored in our synagogues on Shabuot with greenery—but trees are not included , as per the Vilna Gaon, who also rejected their use due to Christian associations. And finally, it was Moshe Rabbenu who made the famous hekesh —a Torah principle—on his own, delaying the giving of the Torah from the 6th of Sivan to the 7th so that the three-day preparation would be complete. In the Diaspora, where we keep two days of Yom Tov, the second day of Shabuot actually aligns with the true day of Matan Torah ! Summary: Shabuot celebrates a Torah of "threes"—a reflection of how we must serve Hashem with action, speech, and thought; body, soul, and spirit. From creation to redemption to revelation, the pattern of three teaches us how to elevate our lives and deepen our connection to Torah.

In this episode of In-Between Charges, Kevin and Mike welcome Chris Kaiser, founder of PlugIn and longtime clean energy advocate. Chris shares his journey from energy-efficient lighting to launching his own EV charging network, which is built on reliability, a great driver experience, and, now, the Monta platform. His story offers a candid look at what it takes to build a charging business in the U.S. from the ground up.They dive into why many early charging efforts failed, the dominance of Tesla and ChargePoint, and why Chris believes ownership and accountability are key to long-term success. He explains how metrics like PlugShare scores and kWh per day guide his team's approach, and how pairing strong software with trusted hardware is helping Plug In grow.The conversation also covers the uncertain policy landscape, including tax credits and NEVI funding, and why Chris remains optimistic. His belief is simple: EVs are just better—and that's what will drive adoption forward. If you care about the future of charging in the U.S., this is an episode you won't want to miss.Happy charging!

Switching Shop Management Systems isn't as hard as you think! Give Shop Controller a try HEREIf your DVI isn't certified, you're losing customers! Get a FREE certification when you touch HERE!In this episode, Braxton is joined by Ryan McKinnon from the Charge Ahead Partnership to break down the recent end of the NEVI program under the Trump administration. Ryan highlights why the program, despite being well designed to leverage existing businesses for EV charging infrastructure, ultimately stumbled due to poor implementation by many states. The conversation also explores Florida's unique approach to EV charging and the push for free market solutions over utility-run charging stations, emphasizing the importance of policies that encourage private investment in the evolving EV marketplace. 00:00 "Criticism of Ineffective EV Initiative"05:06 Transportation Grants Continue Amid Program Halt10:14 EV Charging Competition in Florida12:42 State Attitudes on Federal EV Funding15:47 Utility Control Over EV Charging20:49 Ineffective Public Charger Deployment23:43 EV Charging Policy Advocacy Platform27:00 "Engage with Automotive Repair News"

Diarrhea is one of the more common concerns in emergency medicine worldwide and in the United States, yet we often do not spend enough time understanding the breadth of causes and considerations for this syndrome. Do you know which patients benefit from Zinc? Would you like to review HUS? Can you mixup Oral Rehydration Solution if you needed to? We cover all of this and more in this “code brown” of a chapter! So come, get dirty with Alex and Venk in this truly crappy chapter of Always on EM!   CONTACTS X - @AlwaysOnEM; @VenkBellamkonda YouTube - @AlwaysOnEM; @VenkBellamkonda Instagram – @AlwaysOnEM; @Venk_like_vancomycin; @ASFinch Email - AlwaysOnEM@gmail.com REFERENCES & LINKS Shane AL, Mody RK, Crump JA, Tarr PI, Steiner TS, Kotloff K, Langley JM, Wanke C, Warren CA, Cheng AC, Cantey J, Pickering LK. 2017 Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Infectious Diarrhea. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Nov 29;65(12):e45-e80. doi: 10.1093/cid/cix669. PMID: 29053792; PMCID: PMC5850553. Gore JI, Surawicz C. Severe acute diarrhea. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2003 Dec;32(4):1249-67. doi: 10.1016/s0889-8553(03)00100-6. PMID: 14696306; PMCID: PMC7127018. Freedman SB, van de Kar NCAJ, Tarr PI. Shiga Toxin–Producing Escherichia coli and the Hemolytic–Uremic Syndrome. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2023;389(15):1402-1414. doi:10.1056/NEJMra2108739. Logan C, Beadsworth MB, Beeching NJ. HIV and diarrhoea: what is new? Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2016 Oct;29(5):486-94. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000305. PMID: 27472290. Chassany O, Michaux A, Bergmann JF. Drug-induced diarrhoea. Drug Saf. 2000 Jan;22(1):53-72. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200022010-00005. PMID: 10647976. Schiller LR. Secretory diarrhea. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 1999 Oct;1(5):389-97. doi: 10.1007/s11894-999-0020-8. PMID: 10980977. Gong Z, Wang Y. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Mediated Diarrhea and Colitis: A Clinical Review. JCO Oncol Pract. 2020 Aug;16(8):453-461. doi: 10.1200/OP.20.00002. Epub 2020 Jun 25. PMID: 32584703. Do C, Evans GJ, DeAguero J, Escobar GP, Lin HC, Wagner B. Dysnatremia in Gastrointestinal Disorders. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 May 13;9:892265. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.892265. PMID: 35646996; PMCID: PMC9136014. Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging; Chang KJ, Marin D, Kim DH, Fowler KJ, Camacho MA, Cash BD, Garcia EM, Hatten BW, Kambadakone AR, Levy AD, Liu PS, Moreno C, Peterson CM, Pietryga JA, Siegel A, Weinstein S, Carucci LR. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Suspected Small-Bowel Obstruction. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 May;17(5S):S305-S314. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.01.025. PMID: 32370974. Rami Reddy SR, Cappell MS. A Systematic Review of the Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Small Bowel Obstruction. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2017 Jun;19(6):28. doi: 10.1007/s11894-017-0566-9. PMID: 28439845. Modahl L, Digumarthy SR, Rhea JT, Conn AK, Saini S, Lee SI. Emergency department abdominal computed tomography for nontraumatic abdominal pain: optimizing utilization. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Nov;3(11):860-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2006.05.011. PMID: 17412185. Scheirey CD, Fowler KJ, Therrien JA, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Acute Nonlocalized Abdominal Pain. Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR. 2018;15(11S):S217-S231. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2018.09.010. Atia AN, Buchman AL. Oral rehydration solutions in non-cholera diarrhea: a review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009 Oct;104(10):2596-604; quiz 2605. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2009.329. Epub 2009 Jun 23. PMID: 19550407. Musekiwa A, Volmink J. Oral rehydration salt solution for treating cholera: ≤ 270 mOsm/L solutions vs ≥ 310 mOsm/L solutions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Dec 7;2011(12):CD003754. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003754.pub3. PMID: 22161381; PMCID: PMC6532622. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Scombroid fish poisoning associated with tuna steaks--Louisiana and Tennessee, 2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2007 Aug 17;56(32):817-9. PMID: 17703171. Résière D, Florentin J, Mehdaoui H, Mahi Z, Gueye P, Hommel D, Pujo J, NKontcho F, Portecop P, Nevière R, Kallel H, Mégarbane B. Clinical Characteristics of Ciguatera Poisoning in Martinique, French West Indies-A Case Series. Toxins (Basel). 2022 Aug 3;14(8):535. doi: 10.3390/toxins14080535. PMID: 36006197; PMCID: PMC9415704. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Ciguatera fish poisoning--Texas, 1998, and South Carolina, 2004. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2006 Sep 1;55(34):935-7. PMID: 16943762. Thyroid Inferno EM Blog: https://emblog.mayo.edu/2014/11/01/thyroid-inferno/  Lazzerini M, Wanzira H. Oral zinc for treating diarrhoea in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 20;12(12):CD005436. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005436.pub5. PMID: 27996088; PMCID: PMC5450879. Dhingra U, Kisenge R, Sudfeld CR, Dhingra P, Somji S, Dutta A, Bakari M, Deb S, Devi P, Liu E, Chauhan A, Kumar J, Semwal OP, Aboud S, Bahl R, Ashorn P, Simon J, Duggan CP, Sazawal S, Manji K. Lower-Dose Zinc for Childhood Diarrhea - A Randomized, Multicenter Trial. N Engl J Med. 2020 Sep 24;383(13):1231-1241. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1915905. PMID: 32966722; PMCID: PMC7466932. Dalfa RA, El Aish KIA, El Raai M, El Gazaly N, Shatat A. Oral zinc supplementation for children with acute diarrhoea: a quasi-experimental study. Lancet. 2018 Feb 21;391 Suppl 2:S36. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30402-1. Epub 2018 Feb 21. PMID: 29553435.   WANT TO WORK AT MAYO? EM Physicians: https://jobs.mayoclinic.org/emergencymedicine EM NP PAs: https://jobs.mayoclinic.org/em-nppa-jobs   Nursing/Techs/PAC: https://jobs.mayoclinic.org/Nursing-Emergency-Medicine EMTs/Paramedics: https://jobs.mayoclinic.org/ambulanceservice All groups above combined into one link: https://jobs.mayoclinic.org/EM-Jobs

WEEK FOURTEEN: WEEKLY READING Pages 104-105 Va'era “and I appeared” Torah: Exodus 6:2-9:35 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 2 Samuel 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 81-86 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: John 13-18 Scripture Memory: Matthew 6:33-34 “But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be given to you. 34 Therefore, take no thought about tomorrow, for tomorrow will take thought about the things of itself. Sufficient to the day is the trouble thereof."

WEEK FOURTEEN: WEEKLY READING Pages 104-105 Va'era “and I appeared” Torah: Exodus 6:2-9:35 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 2 Samuel 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 81-86 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: John 13-18 Scripture Memory: Matthew 6:33-34 “But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be given to you. 34 Therefore, take no thought about tomorrow, for tomorrow will take thought about the things of itself. Sufficient to the day is the trouble thereof."

When it comes to electrifying commercial vehicle fleets, one company offers a transformative modular platform that can drastically reduce the time to market.   REE Automotive is a publicly traded company that designs and manufactures advanced software-defined vehicles (SDVs) that are fully electric, capable of autonomy, and compatible with existing fleet management software. The company recently began production on its first medium-duty truck for the US market and has since seen a 230% growth in reservations, indicating strong customer interest and positive feedback.   To learn more, Roberto Baldwin, Sustainability Editor, SAE Sustainable Mobility Solutions, recently sat down with Daniel Barel, CEO, and Pete Dow, VP of Engineering, to discuss REE Automotive's revolutionary approach to scaling software-defined commercial EV fleets.   For more information on the evolution of sustainability, head on over to sustainablecareers.sae.org. There, you can check out our podcast on the state of NEVI.   We'd love to hear from you. Share your comments, questions and ideas for future topics and guests to podcast@sae.org. Don't forget to take a moment to follow SAE Tomorrow Today—a podcast where we discuss emerging technology and trends in mobility with the leaders, innovators and strategists making it all happen—and give us a review on your preferred podcasting platform.   Follow SAE on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Follow host Grayson Brulte on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.

WEEK THIRTEEN: WEEKLY READING Page 104 Shemot “Names” Torah: Exodus 1:1 - 6:1 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 25-31 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 76-80 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: John 7-12 Scripture Memory: Matthew 6:9-15 “Therefore pray in this manner: Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be Your name. 10 Your kingdom come; Your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. 14 For if you forgive men for their sins, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men for their sins, neither will your Father forgive your sins.”

WEEK THIRTEEN: WEEKLY READING Page 104 Shemot “Names” Torah: Exodus 1:1 - 6:1 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 25-31 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 76-80 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: John 7-12 Scripture Memory: Matthew 6:9-15 “Therefore pray in this manner: Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be Your name. 10 Your kingdom come; Your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen. 14 For if you forgive men for their sins, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men for their sins, neither will your Father forgive your sins.”

Welcome to our daily Bitachon series. We are now on the last lesson of Chol Hamoed. The pasuk in Bereshit 15,14 tells us וְאַחֲרֵי כֵן יֵצְאוּ בִּרְכֻשׁ גָּדוֹל / After that (referring to the 10 plagues ), we will leave with a great wealth which Rashi explains - בממון גדול with a lot of money, as it says in Shemot 12 וינצלו את מצרים/They emptied out Mitzrayim Of course, Rashi is giving the simple explanation. Rechush Gadol means a lot of money . But the Chida in his sefer Nachal Kedumim on Bereshit 15,14 quotes the Arizal that says it means they sifted out and took out the sparks of holiness that were in Mitzrayim. What does that mean exactly? So the Sefer Pri Etz Chaim Shaar Keriat Shema perek asks, why is it that every day, we have to remember Yetziat Mitzrayim more than any other of the Geulot . He says that whenever the Jewish people go to a certain place, their job is to take out the Kedusha from that place. I once heard from Rav Wolbe, that every nation has in it good qualities. When Adam HaRishon sinned, he caused the good and bad to be mixed. So there are good qualities in every nation. The Germans are very meticulous and exacting. That's nice when it comes to being perfect with Mitzvot and having the right shiurim and sizes, but it could go a little haywire when it comes to creating extermination camps and gas chambers and use it that way. The French are very romantic. That might be good for developing Ahavat Hashem but it could go in the wrong way if you misuse it, and so on. So there are sparks of holiness in every nation, and throughout our years of exile, our job is integrate the holiness of each of the nations into our ways and lift it up and take out that Kedushah. In general, it doesn't happen that we take everything out. Only when Mashiach comes will we be able to fully integrate all of those qualities into the Jewish people. But the spot of Kedusha of Mitzrayim , he says, was totally taken out. That's what it means Vayinatzlu Et Mitzrayim , the same pasuk that Rashi says they emptied out Egypt monetarily also means they spiritually emptied it out and took everything out with it. With the other Geulot , we did not have that full cleansing. And he says with that, we can understand a unbelievable concept. Why is it that it specifically says we're never allowed to go back to Egypt again? Why are we stricter about going back to Egypt than other any place? Because there's no need to go back to Egypt. We took everything out of it. So why go back? The sefer HaKatav V'HaKabbalah was written by Rabbi Yaakov Tzvi from Kallenberg, who lived from 1785 to 1865. One of the great rabbis of Germany, he was very famous for his sefer, and was one of the original fighters against the Reform. movement. He quotes his Yedidi, Marash Chen Tov in Bereshit 15,14 and concurs that when talking about leaving Egypt and taking everything out, it means taking out the spiritual wealth. He points out that when we use the word Rechush for general wealth, it says Rechush Rav, like in perek 13 of Bereshit , which means they had a lot of wealth. The term Rav usually indicates a quantitative concept and it's used for money, generally speaking. Here however, we see a strange terminology. It says Rechush Gadol , not a lot, but great . The word great is usually qualitative. Li Gadol Hashem, Ish Moshe Gadol… Adam Gadol doesn't mean he's large in weight , it means he's qualitatively great. So the great wealth , is not a lot of wealth, but qualitatively great, which is a spiritual wealth. So continuing with this theme of going from place to place and sucking out the Kedusha, the sefer Shem Gedolim also from the Chida, in the section on Sefarim in an appendix on the topic of Talmud , says, an unbelievable concept. He says in the city where there were many great Amoraim who set up the Talmud, there was a pillar of fire there twice a year. They were great Geonim. But in his times (the Chida lived about 300 years ago), the Torah had dwindled so much in that place that they didn't even know how to pray-not by heart and not from a siddur. Most of them only know how to say Ashrei Yoshveh Betecha and Shema Yisrael. They go to the Mikveh before they pray. They're quiet throughout the prayers. And when they get up to Ashrei, they all say Ashrei together. They say Keriat Shema until V'Ahavtah and that's it. He says, What's going on over here? He says, this is not a coincidence, because there was such a strong, powerful force of Torah in that place through the Limud HaTorah (which is one of the main ways we suck out Kedusha) that the Kedusha was taken out and therefore there's not that much left. Then he says, they went to Spain, and Torah moved to Spain, and then again the Torah was developing until they were sent out to a new spot. Because we didn't need it anymore. So as we leave a city, it rarely comes back to its greatness. The great Spanish golden era is no longer. Then they went to Turkey, then it went to France, Germany and it went to different places.. Every time we go from place to place, it's for one goal for us to be there and integrate into ourselves, into our ways, the qualities of that nation. Certain Jews might be very hospitable. They were more hospitable towns, and they took that Kedusha out. And he says דכל עניני ישראל הם בכלל ופרט וגם כשהאדם הולך מעיר לעיר הכל היא סיבה לברר ניצוצי הקדושה , . Every concept of the Jewish people, whether it's in general or specific, when a person goes from city to city, it's all because there's some holiness there. There's something you have to integrate into yourself. Jews are traveling all over the world and there's a reason for it. He says this is all from the wonders of the God Who's perfect in His ways. We don't know why we move from place to place but it's not a coincidence. Suddenly all the Sephardic Jews left the Muslim countries, the Ashkenazi Jews leave Europe. And we go basically to America and Eretz Yisrael. No Jew lived in America. It was new country and it introduced a new concept. There's a some Kedusha that's here and we have to take out. What is that Kedusha? I suggest ( it's my own humble opinion, I have no backing for this) that America is a melting pot. America is all about tolerance and being open-minded and so on. There are people from China with people from Argentina, Mexico and New Zealand all living together; possibly we have to integrate that (what I'll call) tolerance because when Mashiach comes, we're going to have all different kinds of Jews together. We never had Sephardim, Ashkenazim, Hasidim, all praying in the same shtiebl or Bet Knesset. We have get to know each other and reconcile with each other. That American trait might be what's necessary for us to integrate into our ways. The Or HaChaim HaKadosh, in Shemot 19,5 says the same concept. He says that if we would have been learning Torah more intensely in Eretz Yisrael, we'd have no need to search the globe to bring back the kedusha.Rather, it would be like a magnetic force that would suck everything out without even going there. Additionally, the Chida says in sefer Chomat Anach in Melachim 1, chapter 11, Pasuk 1, that that's why Shlomo Hamelech married all of those wives- they were princesses from countries all over the world, because he thought that way he would be able to avoid the Galut by taking out the Kedusha from each nation. The Bitachon lesson for us is that sometimes we get stuck in situations and we don't know why. Why did the plane divert to a certain place and land on a certain runway and sit there for an hour? Because there's some Kedusha on the runway in Virginia, and you had to say Birkat HaMazon there at that spot. Everything is planned. Everything has a reason. Everything is an opportunity for us to gain and grow from. The Ramchal in his commentary to Nevi'im on Micha on the pasuk אל תשמחי אויבתי לי כי נפלתי קמתי כי אשב בחושך ה ' אור לי / Enemy don't be happy that I fell, because I got up, I'm in the darkness. Hashem is my light, he says, we go down to Galut in order to take out the Kedusha . And he says, when the negative forces see that the Jewish people are going to Galut , they say, Wow, we're controlling the Jewish people. That's it. They think we're going to sink down further. But the evil forces don't know that we're coming down here for a Tikkun and that's why it says Don't be happy, my enemies, when I fell in Galut, I'll get up and come out stronger and get even more. . And that's an important rule. Sometimes we see people fall and drop, but they bounce back. Sheva yipol Sadik v'kam A Sadik falls seven times and gets up.

Derm and mental health - with Cutaneous Miscellaneous! -Melasma treatments - with Dr. Carson Jessop! -Congenital nevi in infants -HS increased risk of VTE -Join Luke's CME experience on Jak inhibitors! rushu.gathered.com/invite/ELe31Enb69Register for the U of U Practical Derm course!medicine.utah.edu/dermatology/educ…nities/practicalLearn more about the U of U Dermatology ECHO model!physicians.utah.edu/echo/dermatology-primarycareWant to donate to the cause? Do so here!
Donate to the podcast: uofuhealth.org/dermasphere
Check out our video content on YouTube:
www.youtube.com/@dermaspherepodcast
and VuMedi!: www.vumedi.com/channel/dermasphere/
The University of Utah's Dermatology
ECHO: ⁠physicians.utah.edu/echo/dermatology-primarycare -
⁠ Connect with us!
- Web: ⁠dermaspherepodcast.com/⁠ - Twitter: @DermaspherePC
- Instagram: dermaspherepodcast
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/DermaspherePodcast/
- Check out Luke and Michelle's other podcast,
SkinCast! ⁠healthcare.utah.edu/dermatology/skincast/⁠ Luke and Michelle report no significant conflicts of interest… BUT check out our
friends at:
- ⁠Kikoxp.com ⁠(a social platform for doctors to share knowledge)
- ⁠www.levelex.com/games/top-derm⁠ (A free dermatology game to learn
more dermatology!

WEEK ELEVEN: WEEKLY READING Page 103 Vayigash “and he drew near” Torah: Genesis 44:18-47:27 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 64-69 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 19-24 Scripture Memory: Matthew 1:21 “She will bear a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins (emphasis mine).” Matthew 4:19 “And He said to them, ‘Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.’” Matthew 5:16 “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”

WEEK ELEVEN: WEEKLY READING Page 103 Vayigash “and he drew near” Torah: Genesis 44:18-47:27 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 64-69 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 19-24 Scripture Memory: Matthew 1:21 “She will bear a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins (emphasis mine).” Matthew 4:19 “And He said to them, ‘Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men.’” Matthew 5:16 “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”

The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program (NEVI) is a $5 billion initiative aimed at developing EV charging infrastructure across all 50 states and Puerto Rico. However, recent executive orders have put the program and its funding on hold.   To dig into what this all means, Roberto Baldwin, Sustainability Editor, SAE Sustainable Mobility Solutions, recently sat down with Andrew Wishnia, Senior Vice President at Boundary Stone Partners, to discuss what NEVI is all about and what the future holds for this EV charging infrastructure initiative.   For more information on the evolution of sustainability, head on over to sustainablecareers.sae.org. There, you can check out our drive of the new 2025 Ioniq 5, the first non-Telsa EV to hit the road with SAE J3400 (a.k.a., NACS).   We'd love to hear from you. Share your comments, questions and ideas for future topics and guests to podcast@sae.org. Don't forget to take a moment to follow SAE Tomorrow Today—a podcast where we discuss emerging technology and trends in mobility with the leaders, innovators and strategists making it all happen—and give us a review on your preferred podcasting platform.   Follow SAE on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Follow host Grayson Brulte on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.

If, lo alenu, a tragedy occurs and everyone who hears about it thinks "How could such a thing happen? The people affected are so righteous. How could they be suffering like this now? Isn't Hashem merciful? How could all of this suffering be considered mercy?" This is one of the most difficult questions in emunah to deal with. Emunah means to believe, even though we don't comprehend. We never change our emunah because of something that appears to contradict it. The Rambam wrote, in his Igeret Mussar, to his son, "כאשר תמצאו כתוב עמוק ומאמר נבוך – if you ever come upon something written that is very deep and obscure, whether it's something in the Torah, Nevi'im or Sifreh Chachamim – אשר לא תבינוהו – which is not understandable – ונראה כסותר פינות התורה – and it appears to be contradicting fundamental principles of Torah – אל תזוז מאמונתכם – do not budge from your emunah – עמדו בחזקתכם – hold on to what you have been accustomed to believe – והפחיתות ההוא חשבוהו בכם – and the fact that you don't understand what it's saying is just a result of your human deficiency – הניחוהו בקרן זוית – put it on the side for now and don't change your emunah because of a question." This is how we are supposed to think. If something happens in the world that doesn't seem to conform to what we know about Hashem. In the future, Hashem is going to give a big class on everything that ever took place in this world and, at that time, everything will make perfect sense, and we will see clearly how merciful and righteous Hashem always was. Now is when we have the opportunity to believe even if we can't see it. There is so much out there that we can't comprehend – Gan Eden, Olam Haba. When a tzaddik leaves the world, he has the most wonderful experience moving on to a much better place. We don't see what's going on on the other side. A Rabbi was once speaking to an audience about tragedy and he spoke about the real purpose of life and this world, namely to earn the merit to enjoy with Hashem for all of eternity. After the class, a young widow approached and said, "I believe everything you said, Rabbi, and I know my husband couldn't be happier now where he is in the Olam HaEmet. But what about me? How am I supposed to go on, raising little children by myself? The pain I'm going through is too great to bear. I can't imagine being able to live another day like this." The Rabbi felt this young woman's pain and tried to empathize. He then said he knows a man personally who experienced a similar tragedy and lost his young wife suddenly. He was left with little children to take care of all by himself. At that time he was saying the same words: He can't imagine to go on in the position he's in. How could he continue with the pain? How could he possibly raise those children without his wife? About a year later, this man got up to speak in front of hundreds of people at an Azkara for his wife. He said there, he wants to publically give hakarat hatov to Hashem for the help He has provided him with during that first difficult year. He said although he was not able to work that much because he was tending to his children, he had one of the best years financially that he ever had. He thought that the day to day life was going to be impossible, but he said Hashem gave him strength to persevere. Baruch Hashem his children are happy and well taken care of. And he has received an outpouring of love from so many friends and relatives. Even during the darkest times, when it is so hard to see Hashem, He is there holding a person's hand every step of the way, kavayachol saying, "I wish you could understand why this had to happen. One day you will, but for now, don't worry, I will be here for you. I will give you the strength that you never thought you could have." In this world, our emunah is tested, but if we hold on tight and trust in Hashem we will reap the greatest rewards.

WEEK TEN: WEEKLY READING PAGE 102 Miketz “at the end of” Torah: Genesis 41:1-44:17 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 7-12 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 58-63 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 13-18 Scripture Memory: Lamentation 3:22-24 “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed; His compassions do not fail. 23They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness. 24‘The Lord is my portion,’ says my soul, ‘therefore I will hope in Him.’”

WEEK TEN: WEEKLY READING PAGE 102 Miketz “at the end of” Torah: Genesis 41:1-44:17 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 7-12 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 58-63 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 13-18 Scripture Memory: Lamentation 3:22-24 “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed; His compassions do not fail. 23They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness. 24‘The Lord is my portion,’ says my soul, ‘therefore I will hope in Him.’”

Galina Brežneva oli Nõukogude Liidu juhi Leonid Brežnevi tütar, kes kasvas üles privilegeeritud tingimustes, olles tuntud oma ekstravagantse eluviisi ning kapriisse iseloomu poolest.

WEEK NINE: WEEKLY READING Vayeshev “and he dwelt” Torah: Genesis 37:1–40:23 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 52-57 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 7-12 Scripture Memory: Isaiah 53:3-6 “He was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from him; he was despised, and we did not esteem him. 4Surely he has borne our grief and carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed. 6All of us like sheep have gone astray; each of us has turned to his own way, but the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

WEEK NINE: WEEKLY READING Vayeshev “and he dwelt” Torah: Genesis 37:1–40:23 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: 1 Samuel 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 52-57 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Luke 7-12 Scripture Memory: Isaiah 53:3-6 “He was despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from him; he was despised, and we did not esteem him. 4Surely he has borne our grief and carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed. 6All of us like sheep have gone astray; each of us has turned to his own way, but the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Harav Benzion Mellman shares a vort from Moreinu Harav Kulefsky zt”l, explaining why Achashveirosh's giving of his ring to Haman had a greater effect than the 48 Nevi'im and 7 Neviyos, and that the main avodah of Purim is emunah.

In this episode of In-Between Charges, we welcome back Ryan Fisher, Head of Charging Infrastructure at BloombergNEF, for an insightful discussion on the evolving EV charging landscape. With automakers increasingly stepping into the charging business, we explore how their strategies are shifting—balancing investment in infrastructure with the need for profitability. Ryan shares his take on why major players like IONNA and Ionity are forming joint ventures, how automakers are leveraging charging networks to enhance brand loyalty, and whether the business model can ever be as lucrative as selling vehicles.Beyond industry strategies, we also dive into the growing impact of policy changes on the EV ecosystem. From shifting fuel economy standards in the U.S. to evolving CO₂ regulations in Europe, Ryan explains how government intervention is shaping investment decisions. He also unpacks the recent volatility in EV adoption forecasts, the implications of paused NEVI funding, and why some markets are seeing surging charging costs while others remain competitive. With policy uncertainty looming, is the industry at an inflection point?Finally, we tackle the economic realities of charging infrastructure—where margins remain tight despite growing demand. Ryan sheds light on the challenges facing hardware manufacturers, the potential role of carbon credits in sustaining networks, and whether automakers will remain invested in charging long-term or eventually offload their networks. With insights from BloombergNEF's latest research and real-world case studies, this episode is a must-listen for anyone following the future of EV charging, policy, and electrification.Happy charging!

Only addition of the 55 Prophets was Megilla, reason we don't say Hallel on Purim, sources for 5/7 Nevi'os

WEEK SEVEN: WEEKLY READING Page 101 Vayetze “And he went out” Torah: Genesis 28:10-32:3 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Judges 16-21 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 39-44 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Mark 10-15 Scripture Memory: Proverbs 3:9-10 “Honor the Lord with your substance, and with the firstfruits of all your increase; then will your barns be filled with plenty, and your vats will overflow with new wine.” Malachi 3:10-12 “Bring all the tithes into the store house, that there may be food in My house, and test Me now in this, says the Lord of Hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you a blessing, that there will not be room enough to receive it. 11I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, so that it will not destroy the fruit of your ground, and the vines in your field will not fail to bear fruit, says the Lord of Hosts. 12Then all the nations will call you blessed, for you will be a delightful land, says the Lord of Hosts.

WEEK SEVEN: WEEKLY READING Page 101 Vayetze “And he went out” Torah: Genesis 28:10-32:3 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Judges 16-21 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 39-44 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Mark 10-15 Scripture Memory: Proverbs 3:9-10 “Honor the Lord with your substance, and with the firstfruits of all your increase; then will your barns be filled with plenty, and your vats will overflow with new wine.” Malachi 3:10-12 “Bring all the tithes into the store house, that there may be food in My house, and test Me now in this, says the Lord of Hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you a blessing, that there will not be room enough to receive it. 11I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, so that it will not destroy the fruit of your ground, and the vines in your field will not fail to bear fruit, says the Lord of Hosts. 12Then all the nations will call you blessed, for you will be a delightful land, says the Lord of Hosts.

In this episode: ⦁ CEO Seth Cutler visits as Ionna officially launches ⦁ NEVI, the federal charger funding program, gets halted ⦁ Mercedes gains access to Tesla Superchargers ⦁ Kyle tells us about Chinese Tesla Model Y competitor, the Onvo L60 from Nio ⦁ and of course, much, much more

- Two Chinese OEMs Adopt DeepSeek AI - BYD Challenges Tesla FSD - Xpeng To Make Its Own Chips - Trump Axes NEVI Program - Tesla Adds $5,000 To Model X Price - Tesla China Sales Down in January  - Mazda's Net Profit Drops 45% - Porsche Adds More ICE Cars to Lineup - Lear To Lay Off 15,0000 - Linamar Sells Gigacasting Factory - Alpine A110 Muscles Up

- Two Chinese OEMs Adopt DeepSeek AI - BYD Challenges Tesla FSD - Xpeng To Make Its Own Chips - Trump Axes NEVI Program - Tesla Adds $5,000 To Model X Price - Tesla China Sales Down in January  - Mazda's Net Profit Drops 45% - Porsche Adds More ICE Cars to Lineup - Lear To Lay Off 15,0000 - Linamar Sells Gigacasting Factory - Alpine A110 Muscles Up

The future of EV charging infrastructure just hit a major roadblock. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has suspended all state-approved NEVI plans, putting billions in funding on hold and leaving projects in limbo. But what does this really mean for the EV industry, charging infrastructure rollout, and businesses that were counting on these funds?In this episode of Turn Down for Watt, we sit down with Chris Kaiser from Sona Energy and John Carson from Armagh Capital to break down the FHWA's decision, its impact on NEVI-funded projects, and what comes next. We'll discuss:⚡ What the FHWA guidance freeze means for already awarded but not-yet-obligated projects⚡ How states and businesses are responding to the uncertainty⚡ Potential policy shifts and legal challenges ahead⚡ What stakeholders can do now to protect their projects and investmentsIf you're in the EV industry, this is an episode you can't afford to miss. Tune in as we unpack the policy shake-up that could redefine the future of EV charging in America.

Daniel had certain strengths over Chagi, Zechariah, and Malachi and vice versa, order of precedences of Torah, Avoda, Megilla, Meis Mitzva

sources for exclusive distinction in dates of Purim of unwalled and wallet cities, debate if walled is defined from days of Yehoshua or Shushan with sources, inclusion in walled cities, establishment of "menatzpech" letter's at end of words, establishment of Targumim of Torah and Nevi'im

Torah: Genesis 23:1-25:18 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Judges 1-8 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 25-31 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 25-28; Mark 1-2 Scripture Memory: Psalm 119:9 “How shall a young man keep his way pure? By keeping it according to Your word... 11 Your word I have hidden in my heart, that I might not sin against You."

Torah: Genesis 23:1-25:18 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Judges 1-8 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 25-31 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 25-28; Mark 1-2 Scripture Memory: Psalm 119:9 “How shall a young man keep his way pure? By keeping it according to Your word... 11 Your word I have hidden in my heart, that I might not sin against You."

WEEK FOUR: WEEKLY READING Vayera “And He appeared” Torah: Genesis 18:1-22:24 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 19-24 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 19-24 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 19-24 Scripture Memory: Psalm 23:1-6 “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. 2He makes me lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside still waters .3He restores my soul; He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake. 4Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. 5You prepare 99 Scott & Sandy Boyd a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup runs over. 6Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.”

WEEK FOUR: WEEKLY READING Vayera “And He appeared” Torah: Genesis 18:1-22:24 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 19-24 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 19-24 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 19-24 Scripture Memory: Psalm 23:1-6 “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. 2He makes me lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside still waters .3He restores my soul; He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake. 4Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. 5You prepare 99 Scott & Sandy Boyd a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup runs over. 6Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever.”

WEEK THREE: WEEKLY READING Lech Lecha “Go forth, yourself” Torah: Genesis 12:1–17:27 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 13-18 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 13-18 Scripture Memory: Joshua 1:8 “This Book of the Law must not depart from your mouth. Meditate on it day and night so that you may act carefully according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way successful, and you will be wise."

WEEK THREE: WEEKLY READING Lech Lecha “Go forth, yourself” Torah: Genesis 12:1–17:27 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 13-18 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 13-18 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 13-18 Scripture Memory: Joshua 1:8 “This Book of the Law must not depart from your mouth. Meditate on it day and night so that you may act carefully according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way successful, and you will be wise."

What’s Next Book Page 98 WEEK TWO: WEEKLY READING Noach “Noah” Torah: Genesis 7-12 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 7-12 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalms 7-12 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 7-12 Scripture Memory: Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He spoken, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?”

What’s Next Book Page 98 WEEK TWO: WEEKLY READING Noach “Noah” Torah: Genesis 7-12 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 7-12 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalms 7-12 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 7-12 Scripture Memory: Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He spoken, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?”

WHAT'S NEXT WEEK ONE: WEEKLY READING Page 97 Bereshit “In the Beginning” Torah: Genesis 1:1-6:8 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 1-6 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 1-6 Scripture Memory: Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Leviticus 19:11 “You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another."

WHAT'S NEXT WEEK ONE: WEEKLY READING Page 97 Bereshit “In the Beginning” Torah: Genesis 1:1-6:8 Ketuvim: Writings-Narrative: Joshua 1-6 Nevi’im: Prophets/Poetic: Psalm 1-6 Brit Chadashah: New Testament: Matthew 1-6 Scripture Memory: Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Leviticus 19:11 “You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another."

FIRE - Financial independence - retire early. discussion on this philosophy and the idea of 4% withdrawal rate from your portfolio.NEVI - National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure. More EV chargers and some math on how they make money.NightShares - Another idea based on Cherry picking data. Does it work?Sicily - Our one week vacation in this part of Italy.

The Steinsaltz Nevi'im is the long-awaited English version of Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz's pioneering translation and commentary. Like his monumental translation and commentary of the entire Talmud, the new Steinsaltz Nevi'im includes a treasure trove of information to make the text clear, fascinating, and relevant to users of all backgrounds. This volume features several innovative elements including: Accessible English translation that reflects Rabbi Steinsaltz's understanding of the text. Color photos that identify biblical objects and illustrate complicated concepts. Notes and photos of modern archaeological and scientific findings. Maps, illustrations, and charts to clarify locations and concepts.  Join us as we speak with Rabbi Meni Even-Israel about his father's published work on the Former and Latter Prophets. Rabbi Meni Even-Israel serves as the Executive Director of the Steinsaltz Center, which oversees the teachings and publications of Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz, and has recently put out the app, Steinsaltz Daily Study. Michael Morales is Professor of Biblical Studies at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and the author of The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus(Peeters, 2012), Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of Leviticus(IVP Academic, 2015), and Exodus Old and New: A Biblical Theology of Redemption (IVP Academic, 2020), and a recent 2 volume commentary on Numbers. He can be reached at mmorales@gpts.edu Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

Shoot us a Text.We're coming to you live from Bozard Ford Lincoln as we're finishing up our More Than Cars shoot. Today, we're talking about how Nissan is trying to reassure its dealers that the sky isn't falling, how the US added 12,000+ new EV chargers in Q3, and how Google's Veo, a generative AI video model, beat OpenAI's Sora to market.Show Notes with links:Nissan Motor Co. is under pressure as financial challenges force the automaker to cut jobs and slow production. Activist investors and speculation about its future as an independent company are adding to the turmoil.U.S. dealers received a memo from Nissan Americas Chair Jeremie Papin outlining turnaround priorities: product competitiveness, business stabilization, and growth.Nissan has slashed its full-year income outlook by 70%, cut $2.6 billion in expenses, and laid off 9,000 workers globally, including 500 U.S. salaried employees.Market share has plummeted, dropping 25% over five years to just 5.6% in the U.S., with dealership profitability hitting a 15-year low.Production reductions include a 17% U.S. output cut, fewer assembly shifts, and an anticipated 100,000-vehicle drop in fiscal year production.Papin reassured dealers of Nissan's liquidity, stating, “Our $9 billion in net cash allows us to prioritize future investments in research and development.”The US added 12,000 new EV charging ports in the past three months, bringing the total to nearly 204,000 marking a doubling of chargers since late 2020, pre-Biden administration and NEVI Program launch.NEVI (National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) Formula Program contributed 126 ports across 31 stations in nine states this quarter, an 83% increase in open NEVI ports since Q3.Coverage of DC fast chargers on major corridors grew from 38% in 2020 to 59.1% in 2024; expected to reach 70% by late 2025.41 states have announced charging projects under NEVI, with 35 awarding agreements for over 3,560 fast charging ports across 890+ locations.Rhode Island became the first fully built-out NEVI state, while states like Kentucky, Hawaii, and Maine opened new stations, advancing access nationwide.The program has allocated nearly $2.4 billion in funding across two rounds to all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. $586 million has been set aside for a third round of funding for fiscal year 2025.​​Google's Veo, a generative AI video model, is now available via Vertex AI, beating OpenAI's Sora to market. Veo offers powerful tools for businesses to enhance content creation pipelines.Veo generates realistic 1080p videos over a minute long from text or image prompts.Text-to-image tools also roll out to all Vertex AI users next week, with features for brand-specific editing.SynthID watermarking prevents misinformation and copyright issues, rivaling Adobe's tools.Google reports that 86% of AI-using businesses are seeing revenue boostsHosts: Paul J Daly and Kyle MountsierGet the Daily Push Back email at https://www.asotu.com/ JOIN the conversation on LinkedIn at: https://www.linkedin.com/company/asotu/ Read our most recent email at: https://www.asotu.com/media/push-back-email

Drs. Avni Finn and Sarwar Zahid join the podcast to preview the November 2024 edition of Retinal Physician, found online at http://www.retinalphysician.com.Relevant Financial Disclosures: NoneYou can claim CME credits for prior episodes via the AAO website. Visit https://www.aao.org/browse-multimedia?filter=Audi

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).

Monica and Mike positive spin hangovers! They also talk about drunk cooking and dads on Facebook.