prophecy – La Vista Church of Christ

Out of Egypt I Have Called My Son

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 17 Nov 2025 21:59:46 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

There are different kinds of prophecies. Some are direct and some are indirect. Some are in the form of typology, and therefore, when Jesus fulfills them, it is not always obvious how it is a shadow, and then Jesus fills in the form. I want to observe some things about how Matthew sees Jesus as ”fulfilling” Hosea 11:1, even though it does not appear to be a direct prophecy about Jesus. So, Matthew 2:15 is where Matthew speaks of Jesus fulfilling the statement of Hosea 11:1: “Out of Egypt I have called My Son.”

Did Matthew Misuse a Verse from Hosea?

Critics tend to view things superficially and claim that Matthew is misusing Hosea 11:1, when the context is directly about Israel and God's deliverance from Egypt. The critic argues that New Testament writers attempted to “retrofit” Jesus onto Old Testament scriptures in dishonest ways. I want to challenge that argument. I am convinced that some critics do not wish to acknowledge the various ways Jesus fulfills both direct and indirect prophecies.

Hosea 11 Is About Two Sons, Each Called Out of Egypt

God called Israel out of Egypt because inside Israel was a greater Son destined to bless “all families of the earth” (Genesis 12:1-3; 22:18). If Israel fails, the “seed” inside Israel still has to succeed because God’s promise must succeed. So, there was Israel, and there was the coming “seed” of Judah embedded in that national son. One son fails in doing the will of God, but God won’t totally eliminate Israel because there is a successful Son that also comes out of Egypt.

The Failed Son

Israel is the son that “sacrificed to the Baals” (Hosea 11:2). They were a disappointment to God because, despite all the good things He did for them, they refused to repent and were bent on backsliding (Hosea 11:3-7). This is obviously not directly about Jesus. He did not need to repent and was never inclined to backslide from God.

God Does Not Want to Totally Destroy

How could God totally give them up when the blessing of the world was still embedded in them? He could not do to them as he had done to Admah and Zeboiim. God’s heart churned with sympathy for the world. If He totally destroyed all of Israel, how could the promised Messiah come and give a chance of salvation to those not so hardened in sin?

Hosea 11 Holds Out Hope in Judah

Even though the main part of Israel, Ephraim, encompassed God with lies and deceit, coming to the temple with hearts far from God, there was still hope in Judah, the tribe designated to bring us the Messiah (Hosea 11:12). So, Jesus is prophetically embedded in Judah. Judah was part of the Israel that God called out of Egypt. Why call the nation of Israel out of Egypt when you know they are going to fail to serve You? Because You know that the hope of the whole world is among the called out of Egypt, in that seed that would be called “Jesus” (savior). So, God was also thinking of the successful son, Jesus. He wasn’t thinking only of the failed son, Israel, but the embedded successful Son, Jesus.

But One More Comparison Needs Recognition

“By a prophet the Lord brought Israel out of Egypt” (Hosea 12:13). Moses, the type, brought the first son out of Egypt. But God had in mind bringing them out of Egypt in order to fulfill His promise to bring in Jesus, the real (antitype), who leads us all out of the antitype bondage, sin. Jesus could not remain in Egypt to fulfill His mission. The whole purpose of bringing out the son, Israel, was so that the Son, Jesus, could come into Mariah, Jerusalem, to be offered as the lamb of God (Genesis 22). He was called out of Egypt. He was not called to stay in Egypt to keep from dying. So, Jesus is the fulfillment of Hosea 11, the whole reason Israel was brought out of Egypt. What some meant for evil, God meant for good.

Jesus Had Also to Be Called Out of Egypt

Because God would not fail in “blessing all families of the earth” (Genesis 12, 22), the mission of Jesus was not to stay in Egypt for safety, but to come out of Egypt in due time to fulfill the great promises of God. Even further into the book of Hosea, God’s promise was revealed to heal the problem of backsliding Israel. Jesus was the healer of hearts and souls. Because God promised “I will heal their backsliding” (Hosea 14:4), Jesus had to come out of Egypt yet again. Matthew was not misusing Hosea 11:1. He was reminding us that the context was not just about immediate backsliding Israel, but about the Son who would come out of that son to heal and bless all families of the earth. God would not leave Him in Egypt this second time when the first time He was embedded in the reasons for bringing those stiff-necked people out of Egypt. It fulfills Hosea 11-14 to bring Jesus out of Egypt to be the Lamb of God who would die in Jerusalem for the sins of the whole world. Matthew knew this prophecy had to be fulfilled in Jesus, God’s Son, who was successful.

I hope you can see the wisdom in the use of Hosea 11:1. It was not a phony “retrofit” by Matthew, but an amazing eisegesis that brings out the whole of what is in this text. It is absolutely marvelous and amazing!

Are We Putting God in a Box?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 08 Nov 2025 19:34:22 +0000

by Vicky Buckwalter

Can We Put God in a Box?

There’s a phrase I’ve heard more and more often in the Lord’s Church — and honestly, I’ve even said it myself once or twice: “We can’t put God in a box.”

At other times, it sounds like this: “The Holy Spirit isn’t bound within the leather covers of the Bible.” Or maybe someone says, “God laid it on my heart,” “I had a dream,” or “I’m waiting to see where the Holy Spirit leads me today.”

Those statements sound sincere and spiritual — and they often come from hearts that genuinely want to please God. But sincerity alone isn’t the measure of truth. The question we must always come back to is this: What does God’s Word actually say about these things?

God’s Warnings About False Claims

From the very beginning, God has warned His people not to listen to those who claim to speak for Him when He has not spoken.

In Jeremiah 23:25–26, God said:

“I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in My name, saying, ‘I have dreamed, I have dreamed!’ How long will this be in the heart of the prophets who prophesy lies? Indeed, they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart.”

And in Ezekiel 13:1–3:

“Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel who prophesy out of their own heart. Say to them, ‘Hear the word of the Lord!’ Thus says the Lord God: ‘Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit and have seen nothing!’”

God’s message was unmistakable: He does not take lightly those who claim divine authority when He has not spoken. The danger isn’t just in being mistaken — it’s in misrepresenting the very voice of God.

A Lesson in Humility

Even those who were faithful and close to God understood the importance of humility when speaking about His will.

Mordecai, in the book of Esther, spoke these wise and careful words to Esther:

“Who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14).

He didn’t presume to know exactly what God was doing. He trusted that God was working — but he spoke with humility, leaving room for the mystery of God’s providence.

The apostle Paul showed that same humility. In I Corinthians 7:25, he wrote:

“Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.”

Paul didn’t claim that every thought or opinion he had was directly inspired. He understood the difference between divine revelation and godly wisdom — a distinction we should also hold fast to.

Misunderstandings About Offense and Liberty

Sometimes when someone’s spiritual claim is questioned, they respond kindly but defensively: “I’m sorry if that offends you,” or “I won’t say anything around you if it bothers you.” While those replies sound peaceable, they often reflect a misunderstanding of passages like Romans 14 and I Corinthians 8, which discuss matters of personal liberty, not doctrinal authority. These passages address issues such as food, drink, or days of observance — matters that fall within the realm of personal conscience, not sin.

Romans 14:21–23 says:

“It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended… whatever is not from faith is sin.”

And I Corinthians 8:11-12 reminds us:

“When you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.”

These verses encourage love and patience in personal matters — not silence in the face of false teaching or unbiblical claims. We’re called to be gentle and kind, but also to stand firmly within the boundaries of God’s revealed Word.

How the Spirit Truly Leads Us

Scripture clearly teaches that the Holy Spirit lives within God’s people. I Corinthians 6:19 says:

“Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?”

And Romans 8:14 reminds us:

“For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.”

However, that raises an important question: How does the Spirit guide us?

The psalmist answers beautifully:

“Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Psalms 119:105).

The Spirit leads through the Word He inspired. Every page of Scripture carries His wisdom, His truth, and His voice. The Spirit doesn’t lead us apart from the Word — He leads us, by faith, through it. That’s how we know His guidance is sure and unchanging.

The Word and the Living Christ

John’s Gospel helps us see why this is so important. Jesus and His Word cannot be separated because the Word is a reflection of who He is.

John 1:1–4 says:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

And John 1:14 adds:

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”

When we open Scripture, we’re not just reading words on a page — we’re hearing the living voice of Jesus, the Word made flesh. To hear and follow the Word is to hear and follow Christ Himself.

The writer of Hebrews confirms this truth:

“God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2).

In times past, God spoke through dreams and prophets, but now He speaks through His Son — and the Son speaks to us today through the written Word, preserved by the Holy Spirit.

Respecting the Boundaries God Has Set

So, can we “put God in a box”? Of course not. God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and beyond anything we could contain or define. But here’s the key: God Himself has set boundaries around how He reveals His will. We have no authority to go beyond those limits. To claim a message, dream, or feeling as divine when God has not spoken is to step outside the bounds He established. We don’t honor God by claiming to speak where He hasn’t spoken — we honor Him by humbly submitting to what He has revealed.

The Holy Spirit still speaks today — not through new revelations, feelings, or dreams, but through His inspired Word. That’s where His light shines, steady and sure, guiding every step we take.

So instead of trying to “take God out of the box,” let’s simply open the one He’s already given us — His living, powerful Word. That’s where we meet Him, hear Him, and learn to walk in His truth.

The Prophetic Word Made More Sure

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 01 Nov 2025 14:38:06 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

Peter said that he and the other apostles (James and John) were "eyewitnesses" to Jesus' transfiguration (II Peter 1:16-18). But, in addition, "we have the prophetic word made more sure" (II Peter 1:19).

The case is very strong, bolstered by eyewitness testimony; however, the fact that their testimony aligns so perfectly with what had been prophesied about the Messiah makes for an even stronger case. The Old Testament in the hands of unbelieving Jews today is but a book with empty, unfulfilled predictions. Thus, the liberalism among college professors resorts to trying to make the Bible a totally human product. In the hands of Modern Jewish “scholars,” it has no life. It has no credibility. The same book in the hands of the apostles is “made more sure.” Why? Because they showed us that it was all about Jesus and the blessings He would bring. It pictured Him in types, shadows, and prophesies that no man could or would have invented.

The Old Testament is a powerful additional witness to Jesus. The Bible is alive and amazing to those of us who see the light. Only Jesus fits the prophecies, and therefore, the case for Christ is powerful. Continue to look at the prophecies until the light shines through into your heart. Keep studying until you see the "marvelous light."

Was Jesus “Retrofitted” onto the Prophecies of the Old Testament?

Jeffrey Hamilton — Mon, 01 Sep 2025 16:25:14 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

If the gospel writers just made the story of Jesus fit the Old Testament, what were the secular historical accounts doing?

Tacitus (c. 56–120 CE), the Roman historian, in his final work Annals (written around 115 CE), wrote about Emperor Nero's persecution of Christians following the Great Fire of Rome in 64 CE. In one passage, he explains that the name "Christian" was derived from "Christus," who "suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus". This is also the claim of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Scholars generally accept this reference as authentic and consider it a valuable independent Roman source confirming Jesus's crucifixion. Did Tacitus “retrofit” that Jesus fit the crucifixion image of Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53? Of course not! The claim that Christians made Jesus “retrofit” the prophecies of crucifixion is absurd, and only advanced to try to offset the power of the evidence of God-given wisdom, which demonstrates that God is real, outside of time, space, and matter, and outside of the materialistic studies of the scientific method but powerfully demonstrated in the testimony of the prophetic word made more sure.

Lucian of Samosata, a second-century Greek satirist, mocked Christians for worshiping a "crucified sophist" from Palestine. While criticizing Peregrinus for adopting and then abandoning the Christian faith, Lucian includes his observations of the Christians themselves. He describes them as "misguided creatures" who worship "the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world" (found in his work "The Passing of Peregrinus". Most scholars date the work to around 165–170 CE). This confirms that belief in Jesus's crucifixion was a central aspect of Christian identity and was known among pagan writers. Again, there was no “retrofitting” Jesus into the scripture descriptions of His death. They are just stating what happened. So, even when the enemies of Christ and Christians tried to undermine them, they admit that the fact of the crucifixion of Jesus was well known in the first and second centuries.

A reference in the Babylonian Talmud from the sixth century CE mentions a "Yeshu" who was "hanged on the eve of Passover" (Tractate Sanhedrin 43a). While it portrays Jesus in a hostile manner, some scholars believe it corroborates aspects of the gospel narrative. So, enemies corroborate what the four Gospel writers present as facts. Even the timing of Jesus’ crucifixion is not something the disciples made up to “retrofit” Jesus to the Passover; rather, the Old Testament Passover was already in place, and Jesus fit the deliverance from bondage theme because that was the God-given purpose for sending Him. Neither the disciples of Jesus nor the Jews’ Babylonian Talmud were written to “retrofit” Jesus in connection to the Passover. It is simply what happened, and the observation is just drawing necessary inferences from the facts.

Pliny the Younger noted how the early disciples of Jesus vowed to one another a high moral standard of commitment. Pliny's investigations revealed Christians vowed not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, falsify their word, or break a trust. Pliny the Younger describes Christians vowing to "not to falsify their word" in his famous letter to the Emperor Trajan, usually cataloged as Epistle 10.96. Yet, it seems strange that modern biblical critics are so quick to assert that their whole basis of their moral commitment not to falsify their word was based on lies. In looking inside the testimony of the apostles of Jesus, there was instruction to lie not to one another, stating that all liars will have their part in the lake of fire, and yet we are ridiculed for believing that the apostles did not die to tell the biggest lie of all history, and for what? While the motives of the early disciple were noted as high even by outsiders, it does seem that the modern skeptic’s motive to assign lies to the early disciples is not based in high standards of objectivity and honesty, but solely in an agenda to erase the credibility of both the witnesses who followed Jesus as well as the enemies of Jesus who corroborated the same basic facts. They have to assign negative motives to all historians who disagree with their agenda.

Bruised

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 31 Aug 2025 02:51:59 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel" (Genesis 3:15).

The very first prophecy of “the seed of the woman” bruising the head of the Serpent and being in turn “bruised” on His heel is interesting. The serpent had used the woman (Eve) to bring sin into play, resulting in death entering the human experience and ruining the paradise relationship with God. In response, God planned to use another woman to bring on a major injury to that entity called the Serpent or Satan. The woman God used as an instrument of blessing, reversing the curse of sin, was Mary, and she had never known a man, keeping her virginity while God implanted a seed that could deliver a major blow to Satan. In the process, the Seed of the woman would be injured. This aligns with the purpose of Jesus. Jesus came to deliver us from the power of the devil, from sin and death, and do something that the Serpent of Old could not overcome, a blessing for us that brought pain to Jesus, but a greater limitation of Satan’s power over us.

It is also interesting that while the normal predictions predicted the seed line came through men like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, and David, that Mary came through them, but the Savior came through a woman who never knew a man until after Jesus was born.

Jesus was the seed of a woman and of God. The whole mission of Jesus was to provide a blow to Satan’s power over us, but He would suffer Himself in the process. This nugget is further explained by the same Spirit in the New Testament because the same Spirit guided Moses to give the imagery in a summary in Genesis 3:15 and then reveal its fulfillment in Jesus by the New Testament writers, whom He “guided into all truth” (John 16:13).

The witnesses and disciples of Jesus were not “retrofitting” Jesus onto the Old Testament scriptures. They were bringing to the surface what was already embedded as shadow forms of Jesus. This is the wisdom of God, stereopainting Jesus into the scriptures of old so that we can be awed at God’s wisdom. The Spirit of Christ was in Moses, testifying “beforehand” the suffering of Christ. That is proof of superhuman wisdom and foreknowledge. I am continually amazed at the demonstration of God’s wisdom in embedding the picture of Jesus in the Jewish part of the Bible.

Skeptic: Blunders About Jesus and Bethlehem

Jeffrey Hamilton — Fri, 22 Aug 2025 01:58:20 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

"Further, other claimed 'fulfilled prophecies' falter under scrutiny: Micah 5:2 ("born in Bethlehem") addresses a contemporary Davidic ruler from the 8th century BCE, whereas Matthew appears to adapt the narrative to make Jesus’ origin fit this prophecy, despite other Gospel accounts indicating his roots in Nazareth."

The prophecy of Micah 5:2 reads as follows: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.”

‭ ‬‬The skeptic said that “other Gospel accounts” indicate Jesus’ roots in Nazareth. It seems evident to me that this particular skeptic conveniently forgot that the same writers who mentioned Jesus was born in Bethlehem also agreed that later he was raised in Nazareth. So, this was a glaring mistake on his part. Jesus was not made to fit the prophecy by some twisting of Micah 5:2, but rather Micah 5:2 told something that could only be fulfilled by someone who lived before He was born. Jesus was “from of old, from everlasting” and was born in the flesh in Bethlehem. There is no way to twist this verse and make it fit someone else. The skeptic offered no other candidate and couldn't.

The skeptic admits it was written in the 8th century BC but overlooks the prophecy that the house of God would change from being a war learning people to a people that would come from all nations and “learn war no more” when the Law of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem (Micah 4:2-3). It would now become a peaceful house. So, that never happened in the 8th century BC, but it did happen in connection with Jesus. His house is not a war-learning house. It is a house of peace for all nations. Furthermore, Jesus is the only one born in Bethlehem who is also “from of old, from everlasting” and brought about a kingdom and a house of teaching that teaches peace, not the ways of war. Jesus is the only one who fits the prophecy. He does not “retrofit” something that has already been fulfilled by someone else. He is the only one who fulfills this prophecy.

Matthew was made more credible, not less credible, when he pointed to Micah 5:2 and showed the circumstances under which Jesus was born there. But he also went on to point out that Jesus moved around and then settled in “Nazareth” (Matthew 2:23). Luke also said Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Luke 2) and later returned to Nazareth (Luke 2:39-40). So, are we to believe that all the history read and tested by Christians from the first century to now got it wrong, and now this skeptic comes to the rescue with new unknown before truth? I register my strongest doubts.

The Bible not only claims to be the word of God but demonstrates it is the word of God by registering prophecy that no man could predict and force into fulfillment. People need to get their heads into the book and stop listening to liberals who make such imaginative efforts to explain away clear prophecy. We have “the prophetic word made more sure,” and we would do well to give respectful attention to it (II Peter 1:16-21). It is a light that shines in a dark world of hopelessness!

Skeptic: Reexamining Isaiah and Other Biblical Texts

Jeffrey Hamilton — Tue, 19 Aug 2025 15:28:14 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

Quote:

"Likewise, Isaiah is not a solitary author crafting messianic predictions. It is a composite work, consisting of First Isaiah (8th century BCE), Deutero-Isaiah (6th century BCE), and Trito-Isaiah (5th century BCE), each shaped by the political landscape of Assyrian and Babylonian influence. The “Suffering Servant” passages in Isaiah 52–53 are frequently interpreted by Jewish scholars and some secular experts as a poetic representation of Israel as a nation undergoing distress and ultimate redemption, rather than as a veiled reference to Jesus."

Reply:

Liberal “scholarship” is based on unbelief toward Jesus, and the unbelief toward Him was misguided due to hoping the Messiah would be a political/military leader to drive out the Romans from the land of Israel. Since Jesus would not be made that kind of king (See John 6:15), some Jews refused to believe He was the Messiah. The problem was not really with Jesus, but with the misunderstanding of what kind of kingdom the Messiah would establish.

The connection to David, their greatest king, sparked their desire for the Son of David to rule a kingdom of the same kind as David had before. However, they forget that Isaiah 2:1-4 had indicated that it would be much different. David “learned war” and the skill of military swordsmanship, but Isaiah said that God’s house would involve “all nations” flowing to “learn” God’s ways, and turning “swords to plowshares” and “learning war no more.” That is a peaceful house of a different nature.

Further, David’s Son, who turned out to be Jesus, was to be a “priest forever” after the order of Melchizedek (Psalms 110). So, the priesthood of the Levites that David knew would be “changed” (Hebrews 7:11-12) to a new priest of a different order, and “My people shall be volunteers in the day of power.” In other words, even the nature of Israel would be changed. No longer having the Levitical priesthood and no longer having a military, the very nature of Israel would be much different.

The “Prince of Peace” would be governing with an increase of peace (Isaiah 9:6-7). It would still be “upon the throne of David” and “over His (Messiah’s) kingdom." But the nature of it was qualitatively different. David had a throne of respect for God, and that is the throne Jesus took. The throne of respect for God was the throne David and Jesus shared. One was earthly and became centered in earthly Jerusalem, and the other would “go forth from Jerusalem” and encompass all nations. Therefore, the effort to remove Jesus from Isaiah drives the determined outlook and interpretation.

Isaiah still wrote about future things that did not happen in his lifetime, and he wrote about Jesus in remarkable ways that confirm Jesus' existence and affirm that Isaiah could only have been aided by God. No matter how hard liberal “scholars” try to get Jesus’ picture out of Isaiah, the more obvious it is that they are twisting the scriptures to their own destruction. A Child would be born, and He would be called Mighty God (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus was that Child. He would be called “Prince of peace.” Jesus was the Child who increased and still increases his “government and peace” (Isaiah 9:7). No other child came to match the description Isaiah set down in scripture. Jesus is still increasing, while any candidate for this description someone wishes to substitute in Jesus’ place has long been forgotten.

Trying to twist the description of the “Servant” of Isaiah 52-53 “as a poetic representation of Israel as a nation undergoing distress and ultimate redemption, rather than as a veiled reference to Jesus,” shows a desperation to distract from the obvious connection to Jesus. Isaiah, in the text, says “We (group from the Jewish nation) hid as it were our faces from him (person, not nation)." Who did a bulk of the nation turn their faces from? They turned from God’s Servant (Jesus).

If this passage were ever to be so interpreted, it was only after they did the wrong thing in rejecting Jesus. In other words, Isaiah 52-53 was never interpreted as “a nation undergoing distress and ultimate redemption” until after they had rejected Jesus and needed a way to reinterpret Isaiah 52-53 so they could cover up their colossal error in rejecting Jesus. The Ethiopian Eunuch did not know it was about national distress. He knew it had to be about a man (Isaiah? Or “some other man?” -Acts 8:32-34). He became convinced it was indeed talking about Jesus, and he converted from blinded Judaism to be a servant of Jesus Christ. It was only in later years that Jews who rejected Jesus needed a handy way to reinterpret the passage.

Peter was correct in confronting the Jews in Jerusalem. He referenced Psalms 118:22 and told them they fulfilled it by their rejection of Jesus. The Psalmist anticipated that a stone “rejected by you builders, has become the chief cornerstone” to others. Peter said that Jesus is the rejected stone, and the teachers in Israel were the builders who rejected Him. Even though they rejected Him, He still became the chief cornerstone for many others. The rejection of Jesus was foretold by Isaiah, who said, “We hid as it were our faces from Him.”

Some think that Matthew misused Isaiah 7:14 and misapplied it to a “virgin” who would have a son. The “sign” would be a “young maiden” having a son and calling his name “Immanuel, which is interpreted to mean 'God with us'.” The word young maiden does not forbid a virgin to be such a young maiden. What needs to be observed is that the nature of some prophecies is directly about one thing, but the similarity serves as a type or shadow of the greater thing in Christ. Typology is the study of shadows, dark forms that outline the image of the Messiah.

A son born to a young maiden and people thinking God was with them may be an immediate sign, but it was given to illustrate the greater sign. Hence, the virgin Mary giving birth was a greater sign, and the thought of “God with us” became even more pronounced in Jesus than in any character in the past. The past character that was the immediate sign in Israel was only a dark form of the greater sign God would show in Jesus.

This is not an unusual use of prophecy, nor is it a misuse of prophecy. One immediate thing merely foreshadows the greater thing. This is the way of some prophecy. A short-term prophecy often foreshadows a greater thing that will unfold further down the road. Now, not all prophecy is like that, but some prophecies are. Hosea 11:1 is like that. It is immediately about Israel coming out of Egypt, but since Jesus too came out of Egypt when the time was right, then “out of Egypt have I called my son” becomes secondarily fulfilled by a greater event. So, Jesus fulfills indirect prophecies (prophecies that were not specifically about Him, but he fulfills in a secondary way of similarity) and Jesus fulfills direct prophecies (prophecies that were directly about Him). Genesis 22:14 is directly about Jesus. The “seed of the woman” that would bruise Satan’s head (Genesis 3:15) was directly about Jesus. The Servant that would be “wounded for our transgressions” and “after his soul was made an offering for sin His days would be prolonged” is directly about Jesus. The offering of Abraham’s only son was a foreshadowing, an image of God's ultimate offering of His only Son. Genesis 22 contains some typology, foreshadowing of Jesus, and direct prophecy of Jesus. When you begin to see the nature of prophecy, that it is not always direct, sometimes is typology fulfilled in Jesus, and other prophecies are directly about Jesus, you begin to realize that God put Jesus’ shadow all through the Old Scriptures so the shadow can be followed right up the image (Jesus) that cast the shadow all over the Old Testament (Tanakh). When you combine all the indirect prophecies with the direct ones, you see that Jesus was absolutely correct when He said, “If you had believed Moses, you would believe Me, for Moses wrote about Me” (John 5:44).

Likewise, Isaiah and all the prophets and psalmists “wrote about Jesus” (Luke 24:25-27,45-48). The embedded shadows of Jesus show the wisdom of God, and the direct prophecies combine to let us know that these scriptures were not the product of mere human wisdom. “Open our eyes that we may see wondrous things from Your law” (Psalms 119:18).

Jesus and Psalms 110

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sat, 05 Apr 2025 14:32:12 +0000

by Terry Wane Benton

Jesus is very definitely the figure described and intended by the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 1 is making the argument that Jesus is “so much better than the angels” (Hebrews 1:4) and has “a more excellent name than they.” The Holy Spirit applied Psalms 2:7, 45:6-7, and 110:1f to Jesus. Psalms 110 carries several necessary implications that point to Jesus.

Jesus is Lord over David as David speaks of “the Lord said to My Lord” and the Holy Spirit identifies Jesus as that Lord in the Book of Hebrews.
David’s Lord (Jesus) would have enemies, but He would win and they would lose. They would be made His footstool.
Jesus would be at God’s right hand as Lord and High Priest. He would be a permanent “priest forever” after a different order (Melchizedek).
This implied a change of priesthood was coming, one different from the one the Jews had under Aaron (Levitical). Hebrews 7:11f expounds on this implication.
This also implies that a change of the Law was coming. The law of Moses called for Levitical priests, but this Psalm implies a change of the Law that would forever give us a priest who did not come from the tribe of Levi.
This also implies that a greater law and covenant would come through Jesus.
“My people (the church of Christ) shall be volunteers” when David’s Lord takes this position of priest forever. In Israel, you were circumcised involuntarily into the covenant without even knowing God or His Levitical priests. In the Psalms 110 declaration, the people learn of this great priest and His provisions and desire to volunteer themselves into His service. You see this begin to come into play after Jesus conquered death by His personal resurrection, and offered “remission of sins” (what priests do in behalf of people) with 3000 volunteers coming into His service on that great day of Pentecost when Jesus was now seated at the right hand of God (Acts 1-2).

Thus, Psalms 110 is a key predictive Psalm that was put in place by the Holy Spirit and demonstrated the divine wisdom and plan that is marvelously fulfilled only in Jesus Christ of Nazareth!

Isaiah 53

Jeffrey Hamilton — Wed, 02 Apr 2025 15:21:45 +0000

by David Gibson

Isaiah 53 is considered the greatest Old Testament prophecy of Christ. How could Isaiah accurately predict Jesus’ death in such detail seven centuries in advance? Only by the power of the Holy Spirit (I Peter 1:10-12; II Peter 1:20-21).

Two Facts About Jesus

Being innocent, He did not deserve the cruelty He suffered (Isaiah 53:9).
He is supremely worthy of the exaltation He received (Isaiah 53:10-12).

Two Facts About Us

Being guilty, we deserved the punishment He suffered on our behalf (Isaiah 53:5, 6, 8 ).
We are unworthy of the salvation He provided (II Corinthians 5:21; I Peter 2:24-25).

Both Jesus and we are undeserving, but in dramatically different ways. Jesus was undeserving of the punishment He received on our behalf, and we are undeserving of the great salvation we receive through His death for us.

So, How Shall We Respond to All This?

Many respond with disbelief (Isaiah 53:1; John 12:37-41). For a totally different response, see Acts 8:26-39, where Isaiah 53 played a pivotal role in a man’s conversion.

Have you looked at Isaiah 53 lately?

God’s Servant

Jeffrey Hamilton — Sun, 09 Mar 2025 23:32:27 +0000

https://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Gods-Servant.mp3

Download Audio

by Jeffrey W. Hamilton

Text: Isaiah 49:1-9

I. Several passages in the latter part of Isaiah discuss the role that a person, referred to as “My Servant,” would accomplish on behalf of God.

A. As we read through the passages, we need to keep in mind that Isaiah was written before the Babylonian captivity – over 700 years before Jesus walked on this earth.

B. Remember this as we consider the details of these prophecies.

II. Isaiah 42:1-4

A. It is not the mighty rulers and kings whom God upholds, chooses, delights in, or puts His spirit upon.

B. God has selected a servant.

1. When Jesus was baptized, God proclaimed his pleasure - Matthew 3:17

2. Later in Jesus’ ministry, God continued his support - Matthew 17:5

C. God sent the Spirit upon Jesus - John 1:32-34

1. Jesus confirmed what was witnessed - Luke 4:18-19

D. After healing a man on the Sabbath, the Pharisees plotted to kill Jesus - Matthew 12:14-21

1. Jesus withdrew rather than confront the Pharisees at this time.

2. Many followed and were healed.

3. Despite his popularity, Jesus asked for anonymity.

4. Jesus was not looking to rule the people but to serve them. He did not come in the form of a conqueror.

E. Jesus had compassion on the people - Matthew 9:36

1. He did not crush men who stood in his way, nor did he quench the zeal of those around him - Matthew 11:28-30

2. What a contrast to the rulers of Jesus’ day and even to this today

a. Matthew 23:2-4 - They burden those they rule.

F. He would face difficulties that would not overcome him - Isaiah 42:4

G. His mission was to reach the Gentiles with justice - Isaiah 42:4,6

1. In Matthew 12:21 - It said the Gentiles (the coastlands) would find hope in Jesus

2. As prophecied to Abraham, all nations would be blessed through the Messiah - Genesis 22:18

III. Isaiah 49:1-10

A. These verses are presented from the view of God’s servant.

B. As in the previous, the Gentiles are called to listen - Isaiah 49:1, 6

C. To simply restore Israel was too small of a task for this servant

1. A portion of Israel would be restored (saved) - Romans 11:1-7

2. He was to be a light to the nations

a. It started as a light to Israel - Matthew 4:12-17

b. But it was a light that shone to all men - John 1:4-5, 9

D. Notice in Isaiah 49:8 that the servant would be given as a covenant for the people - Matthew 26:26-29

1. This implied the establishment of a new covenant - Hebrews 9:16

2. The Old Covenant was established with the death of animals - Hebrews 9:19-20

3. The New Covenant was established by Christ’s own blood - Hebrews 10:9-10

E. Again we are given hints that the Servant’s way would not be easy

1. Isaiah 49:4, 7 - He labored apparently for nothing. He was despised and abhorred.

2. When Jesus cast out demons, the people in the region asked him to move on - Matthew 8:28-34

3. While he taught, the religious leaders scoffed at him - Luke 16:14

4. He was taunted even as he was being killed - Mark 15:29-32

F. All would be done at a favorable time - Isaiah 49:8

1. At the fullness of time, God sent his son - Galatians 4:3-5

2. God knew exactly what He was doing. The perfect time was selected. Now is the time for salvation - II Corinthians 6:1-2

IV. Isaiah 50:4-10

A. All servants of God have faced difficulties in accomplishing their mission. God’s special servant would be no different.

B. He would face difficulties, but he would not be deterred.

1. He would not run like Jonah - Jonah 1:3

2. He would remain obedient - Hebrews 5:7-9

3. It was Jesus who taught us to rejoice in persecution - Matthew 5:10-12

C. The persecution was not just in words, but in physical beatings - Matthew 26:67-68; 27:26-31

D. Endurance was given to God’s servant because God was with him.

1. Ultimately he was vindicated when God raised him from the dead - Romans 1:3-4

V. The longest discussion of God’s servant appears in Isaiah 52:13-53:12

A. The number of details concerning the life of Christ and his death is staggering.

B. God’s servant is a study in contrasts

1. He would be highly exalted - Isaiah 52:13

2. And yet despised - Isaiah 53:3

3. He would astonish the people - Isaiah 52:14; Matthew 7:28-29

4. Yet his appearance would be marred - Isaiah 52:14; 53:2-5; Psalm 22:6-8

5. His words would stop the mouths of kings - Isaiah 52:15; Matthew 22:46

6. But he would not speak in his own defense - Isaiah 53:7; John 19:6-11

7. He would be cut off - Isaiah 53:8

8. Yet he would live long and see his offspring - Isaiah 53:10; Romans 6:9-10; Romans 8:29; Ephesians 1:5

9. He would be great, but numbered with the transgressors - Isaiah 53:12; Mark 15:27-28; Philippians 2:7-9

VI. Jesus was God’s servant, who came to serve and though his service has come to rule

A. He came that you and I might gain the riches of salvation - II Corinthians 8:9

B. Will you not accept Jesus this day as your Savior and obey God’s Servant?