Monday, 21 November 2011

emails to false prophets




bsalhus@gmail.com
Nov 20 (1 day ago)


to Prophecy, me

Richard thanks for the email. I believe Mark Hitchcock takes this position in his new book that I believe is called Middle East Burning. Hal Lindsey and others like myself think Isaiah 17 remains unfulfilled. I provide an exhaustive verse by verse study on all of Isaiah 17 in the commentary section of my new book. I invite you to read it.

Bill

-----Original Message----- From: Prophecy Depot
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 3:44 AM
To: bsalhus@gmail.com
Subject: FW: Prophecy Depot Website Contact RE: Comments

Forwarding.

-----Original Message-----
From: richard spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2011 3:30 AM
To: general@prophecydepot.net
Subject: Prophecy Depot Website Contact RE: Comments

Addressed to: Bill Salus (Comments)

Greetings,

isaiah 17 concerning Damascus was fulfilled in the 8th century B.C. Damascus was rebuilt about the time of the persian kings. Damascus fell because it was confederate with EPHRAIM against Judah and seeing as the Lord was to come from Judah, this confederacy had to be annulled. Damascus became like ephraim, a faded glory. There is no Ephraim today about to lose its glory with Damascus following suit. I cannot understand how you can make such a basic error

Regards,

richard spendiff
0447583596021
rspendiff@gmail.com

Richard Spendiff
11:41 AM (8 hours ago)


to bsalhus

Dear Bill,

I have pasted the contents of an email conversation i had with 11th hour website. I think it proves pretty conclusively that isaiah 17 is fulfilled.

The very first word of the prophecy declares "behold". This word is only used when something is about to happen as the commentary shows further below.The reason for the prophecy is that the Lord always tells the prophets first before He does something. He had already declared His intention in Isaiah 7 concerning Rezin some years before. Now, perhaps to also reassure the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judah, the Lord says that Damascus will be literally "turned off" (the actual meaning of the translation "cease") just as one turns off a lightbulb.
Isaiah 7 also includes the sign of Emmanuel, the virgin birth. This is the reason for the judgement from heaven upon Damascus - they were going to ally with Ephraim against Judah which would have meant no Christ if no Judah!

When the prophecy has been fulfilled in such intricate detail as history attests to I cant see why anyone would say it has not been fulfilled. Even the " heap of ruins" translation misses the mark - the keil and delitsch commentary shows that this is written such that its true meaning is nearer to " mutilated". This is the condition of Damascus after tiglath Pileser II's destruction in the 8th century B.C. The prophecy nowhere says that Damascus would "cease/be turned off" forever as is said of the desolations of babylon.

There has to be a reason for the judgement on Damascus - I have shown very clearly that it was imperilled Judah. There is also an element of irony/humour in the prophecy. Damascus is widely regarded as being the most ancient city on earth. The Lord, however, seeing it was going against His plans, says "ok, switch it off then" and probably caused Him no more trouble to do this than it troubles us to switch off a lightbulb.

In Christ

Richard Spendiff





Isa 17:1 An oracle concerning Damascus. Behold, Damascus will cease to be
a city and will become a heap of ruins.

Isa 17:3 The fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus; and the remnant of Syria will be like the glory of the children
of Israel, declares the LORD of hosts.



Tiglath-Pileser, king of Assyria (and the slaughter of Rezin) swept away Damascus from being a city that had political significance. It has
remained that way ever since, a non/bit player politically.



Verse 3 has been historically fulfilled. This is the context of Damascus’s
fall. Now are we to believe a double fulfillment? That would entail verse
3 being fulfilled all over again which evidently is not on the agenda as we are in the days of Israel’s restoration – we are not about to see
Israel’s glory fade. The reference here is very clearly talking about the
fading away of the northern kingdom of Israel some 700 years BC and saying that
Syria would become like the faded northern kingdom of Israel, as happened historically and no one would deny.
Why are we looking for a double fulfillment of this prophecy? Since
Damascus became a ruined political system permanently over 2,500 years
ago, the prophecy cannot have a double fulfillment because that would
entail Damascus becoming a great political power again which breaks the
prophecy’s first fulfillment ie; it would be mutilated/ruined forever
politically.



You can’t have your cake and eat it, as we say in the UK.

cheers


11th Hour Website rohas1@11th-hour.info via eigbox.net 
Oct 30


to me

Hello Richard,

I'm not sure exactly what on our site you are speaking to specifically, but We don't believe that this is a prophecy of "political" significance. Also I think you'd have to admit that Syria is a very significant political entity today.  When the Bible says cease, we believe it means cease. It doesn't seem logical to us that it would cease to become a city, (however you interpret that), and then it would again become a city at a later time.  Damascus in ruins is a significant statement, do you know of another prophecy in scripture like this that turned out to have only a political meaning?  I believe the so called fulfillment you speak of was not complete in its action, much like the widely proclaimed Abomination of Desolation fulfillment many speak of as having been fulfilled by Epiphanies. There is a lot he "forgot" to go on and do if he was to be the one to fulfill that prophecy.  Also I would not be able to agree with the proposition that Syria is a non bit player on the world political stage even if I thought we were talking only politically.

I'm not sure what you would think of this statement, so I'd like to say it... we have been thinking for a long time that folks are spending way too much time looking at scripture only from a political mindset.  We feel it is part of the scheme that Satan is successfully exercising on Christians today, and that is to pull them into the political arena to distract them from the truth that we are not of the world and the answers for the world are not found in the British or American governments.

I don't think we have had our cake yet brother,  But we will see, I believe, soon enough. I believe My government has been pressuring Israel to attack both Syria and Iran for many years now.

Frank  

From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:13 AM
To: rohas1@11th-hour.info
Subject: Isaiah 17-damascus


Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th

mmm. i agree that prophecies have more than one fulfillment or can be divided into time segments as when the LORD OPENED THE SCROLL IN THE TEMPLE IN HIS DAY AND STOPPED AT THE THE POINT WHERE THE DAY OF THE lord WAS TO FOLLOW THE GOOD NEWS OF SALVATION.
bUT THE RUIN OF DAMASCUS IS INTRICATELY LINKED WITH THE DIMINISHING of the glory of the northern kingdom of israel. I don't think a diminuation of current syria is linked to a similar diminuation of present day israel, ESPECIALLY as there is no longer a NORTHERN KINGDOM!!!!! iSRAEL IS ONE AS PROPHESIED (THE STICK OF JUDAH AND THE STICK OF EPHRAIM BECOME oNE IN THE LATTER DAYS).
lETS ALSO BE CLEAR THAT aSSAD HAS BEEN OPPOSING THE MUSLIM BTOTHERHOOD ALL HIS TIME. HE IS A REASONABLE FELLOW IN A difficult situation. prophecy buffs that want to see bloodshed and war but not in their back yard are basically sickos.
The Lord is the ruler of the kings of the earth - not America or any other alliance.

Psa 2:5Then he will speak to them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury, saying,
Psa 2:6"As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill."

All that is required of current rulers is a little humility - which, of course, is out of the question these days.


Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th

and the poetic aspect:-
we say oh, that fellow is ruined...
what we mean is he has made a grave error and will no longer be respected.
damascus ... comes to ruin... its poetic speech... its a heap of ruins.... done for    as was the case for 8thcentury bc syria. Which is also the case today...Assad  says if we interfere there will be a political earthquake...but we all know he is bluffing as damascus is ruined since long ago as a political power. He is just a pawn in the hands of Iran and others   .  RUINED!!!


Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th

Luk 21:12But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues and prisons, and you will be brought before kings and governors for my name's sake.
YOU INFER THAT I AM BEING LED BY SATAN BY BEING AWARE of what is going on on earth. It is as a result of my heavenly citizenship that i AM NOT BLINDED BY SATAN AS TO WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL ARENA. i DONT CARE FOR this world but I read the scripture to be as wise as a serpent as well as innocent as a dove. and the scripture records earthly rulers right to their end and its always wise to know your enemy. weapons for the left hand and for the right.
We are not going to be wafted out of trouble.. trouble is coming. Ive already had a fair dose of it and it is increasing steadily. It will probably mean death for many, I am resigned to that.


Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th


Isa 17:3
The fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus; and the remnant of Syria will be like the glory of the children of Israel, declares the LORD of hosts.
ephraim loses its fortress , damascus loses 
 its kingdom (to tiglath pileser). as prophesied by isaiah

here is some more:-

Isa 7:1In the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, son of Uzziah, king of Judah, Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah the king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to wage war against it, but could not yet mount an attack against it.
Isa 7:2When the house of David was told, "Syria is in league with Ephraim," the heart of Ahaz and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind.
Isa 7:3And the LORD said to Isaiah, "Go out to meet Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool on the highway to the Washer's Field.
Isa 7:4And say to him, 'Be careful, be quiet, do not fear, and do not let your heart be faint because of these two smoldering stumps of firebrands, at the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria and the son of Remaliah.
Isa 7:5Because Syria, with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, has devised evil against you, saying,
Isa 7:6"Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Tabeel as king in the midst of it,"
Isa 7:7thus says the Lord GOD: "'It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass.
Isa 7:8For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people.
Isa 7:9And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.'"

so you see that the confereracy of syria with ephraim against the southern kingdom of judah is what isaiah 17:2 is all about.
which just shows what a lot of tosh many bible prophecy teachers say today if they get this basic historical FACT wrong.


Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th

Syria today is a result of of the West deciding what shall be in that region..
Now you cant say the same about IRAN which had an unbroken monarchy since CYRUS of bible fame, 2500 years!
Iran -powerful.
Syria - puppet on a string (whoever wants to pull that string, currrently Iran)
Officially the French Mandate for Syria and the Lebanon[1] (also known as the French Mandate of Syria) was a League of Nations mandate founded after the First World War and the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire. During the two years that followed the end of the war in 1918, and in accordance with the Sykes-Picot Agreement that was signed between Britain and France during the war, the British held control of most Ottoman Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) and the southern part of theOttoman Syria (Palestine and Jordan), while the French controlled the rest of Ottoman Syria (modern Syria, Lebanon,Alexandretta and other portions of southeastern Turkey).
During the first years of the 1920s, the British and French control of these territories became formalized by the League of Nations' mandate system, and France was assigned the mandate of Syria on September 29, 1923, which included modernLebanon and Alexandretta (Hatay) in addition to modern Syria.
The French mandate of Syria lasted until 1943, when two independent countries emerged from the mandate period, Syria and Lebanon, in addition to Hatay which had joined Turkey in 1939. French troops left Syria and Lebanon finally in 1946.



Richard Spendiff
Oct 30

<div id=":12d" class="T-I J-J5-Ji T-I-Js-Gs aap T-I-awG T-I-ax7 L3" title="More" tabindex="0" style="position: relative; display: inline-block; border-top-left-radius: 0px 0px; border-top-right-radius: 2px 2px; border-bottom-right-radius: 2px 2px; border-bottom-left-radius: 0px 0px; cursor: default; font-size: 11px; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; margin-right: 0px; height: 27px; line-height: 27px; min-width: 21px; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; z-index: 1; margin-left: -1px; background-color: rgb(245, 245, 245); background-image: -webkit-linear-gradient(top, rgb(245, 245, 245), rgb(241, 241, 241)); color: rgb(68, 68, 68); border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

Richard Spendiff
2:06 PM (5 hours ago)


to bsalhus

I've put together a little blogsite covering the damascus topic here:-

http://isaiahdamascus.blogspot.com/view/magazine

easier reading perhaps if one is interested in the view that Isaiah 17 is fulfilled


bsalhus@gmail.com
4:07 PM (3 hours ago)


to me

Richard thanks again for the email, and again I suggest you read my verse by verse commentary on Isaiah 17 in Revelation Road which will be out by mid-December. Those who believe Isaiah 17 has already found fulfillment do not feel compelled to warn Syrians that their capital city is about to be destroyed, because they don’t necessarily believe it will be. As for me, I choose to warn Syrians to get out of Damascus soon, and pick up a Bible on their way out of town and read Isaiah 17, along with the New Testament. What will you say if Damascus is soon incinerated?
Bill
From: Richard Spendiff
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 3:41 AM
To: bsalhus@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Prophecy Depot Website Contact RE: Comments

Richard Spendiff
Oct 30


to 11th


correction:- Iran unbroken monarchy from cyrus 500 bc or so until 1979, iranian revolution.
which really is a wake up call considering Cyrus's postion in isaiah as an anointed one!


11th Hour Website rohas1@11th-hour.info via eigbox.net 
Nov 1


to me


I still say a city is a city and Damascus has not ceased.  That fact cannot be denied.  Do you think he was being reasonable when he swore allegiance to Iran against the US and Israel when Iran's spoken mission is the destruction of Israel?  I just don't believe this prophecy is talking about status, position, influence or any other form of it.  Damascus will lie in complete ruins, and will not become a city again, not even 2000 years later. (there won't be 2000 years to wait when it happens).

You are right, and those sickos that want to see bloodshed and war but not in their back yard is the American government,  mostly on the republican side.  And sadly, unfortunately American Christians, who have now become republican cogs... from educated preachers down to impressionable children, filled with hatred and vengeance "in the name of the Lord"???

From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:25 PM
To: 11th Hour Website
Subject: Re: Isaiah 17-damascus

...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

Richard Spendiff
4:37 PM (3 hours ago)


to bsalhus

Ok Bill

the scripture does not say it will be incinerated anywhere, does it?. it says it was "mutilated" according to the careful analysis of the popular translation of " ruin" in 17:1.  as keil and delitzcsh point out.

The thing is, why destroy Damascus now? Back then the reason was clear,  Rezin and Pekah the son of remaliah intended to remove the royal line of david by putting the "son of tabeal" on the throne Isaiah 7:6. 

Now that had to be dealt with. It all makes perfect sense.

There are other prophecies about Damascus and I believe they concur with what I am saying. Syria was laid low under alexander the great:-

Zec 9:1  The burden of the word of the LORD in the land of Hadrach, and Damascus shall be the rest thereof: when the eyes of man, as of all the tribes of Israel, shall be toward the LORD. 



Zec 9:1  
Zec_9:1-17. Ninth to fourteenth chapters are prophetical.
Written long after the previous portions of the book, whence arise the various features which have been made grounds for attacking their authenticity, notwithstanding the testimony of the Septuagint and of the compilers of the Jewish canon in their favor. See on Introduction.
Alexander’s conquests in Syria (Zec_9:1-8).
God’s people safe because her king cometh lowly, but a Savior (Zec_9:9-10).
The Maccabean deliverance a type thereof (Zec_9:11-17).
in ... Hadrach — rather, concerning or against Hadrach (compare Isa_21:13). “Burden” means a prophecy BURDENED with wrath against the guilty. Maurer, not so well, explains it, What is taken up and uttered, the utterance, a solemn declaration.
Hadrach — a part of Syria, near Damascus. As the name is not mentioned in ancient histories, it probably was the less-used name of a region having two names (“Hadrach” and “Bikathaven,” Amo_1:5, Margin); hence it passed into oblivion. An ancient Rabbi Jose is, however, stated to have expressly mentioned it. An Arab, Jos. Abassi, in 1768 also declared to Michaelis that there was then a town of that name, and that it was capital of the region Hadrach. The name means “enclosed” in Syrian, that is, the west interior part of Syria, enclosed by hills, the Coelo-Syria of Strabo [Maurer]. Jerome considers Hadrach to be the metropolis of Coelo-Syria, as Damascus was of the region about that city. Hengstenberg regards Hadrach as a symbolical name of Persia, which Zechariah avoids designating by its proper name so as not to offend the government under which he lived. But the context seems to refer to the Syrian region. Gesenius thinks that the name is that of a Syrian king, which might more easily pass into oblivion than that of a region. Compare the similar “land of Sihon,” Neh_9:22.
Damascus ... rest thereof — that is, the place on which the “burden” of the Lord’s wrath shall rest. It shall permanently settle on it until Syria is utterly prostrate. Fulfilled under Alexander the Great, who overcame Syria [Curtius, Books 3 and 4].
eyes of man, as of all ... Israel ... toward the Lord — The eyes of men in general, and of all Israel in particular, through consternation at the victorious progress of Alexander, shall be directed to Jehovah. The Jews, when threatened by him because of Jaddua the high priest’s refusal to swear fealty to him, prayed earnestly to the Lord, and so were delivered (2Ch_20:12; Psa_23:2). Typical of the effect of God’s judgments hereafter on all men, and especially on the Jews in turning them to Him. Maurer, Pembellus and others, less probably translate, “The eyes of the Lord are upon man, as they are upon all Israel,” namely, to punish the ungodly and to protect His people. He, who has chastised His people, will not fail to punish men for their sins severely. The “all,” I think, implies that whereas men’s attention generally (whence “man” is the expression) was directed to Jehovah’s judgments, all Israel especially looks to Him.






No no... Heck no.  There is a difference between awareness and wholesale selling out of your "moral support" and your right, I agree completely here.  I was referring mostly to the crazed American "Bush" Christians whose eyes glare of revenge ever since 911, and they refuse to see the deceit that you and many others over there clearly see.  That part of my speech was not meant for you so please excuse that misunderstanding.

From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 5:47 PM

To: 11th Hour Website
Subject: Re: Isaiah 17-damascus

Luk 21:12


11th Hour Website rohas1@11th-hour.info via eigbox.net 
Nov 1


to me


From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 6:06 PM


To: 11th Hour Website
Subject: Re: Isaiah 17-damascus

Isa 17:3
The fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus; and the remnant of Syria will be like the glory of the children of Israel, declares the LORD of hosts.


ephraim loses its fortress , damascus loses
its kingdom (to tiglath pileser). as prophesied by isaiah


Agreed....  Now where is the will lie in ruins or the ceasing to be a city in any of this?
Some things are poetic and some are not.  We will probably have to agree to disagree on this point.


11th Hour Website rohas1@11th-hour.info via eigbox.net 
Nov 1


to me


So you agree that if Syria's planes fly against Israel that all of this goes out the window, and would prove beyond a doubt that very little of what goes on in syria has to do with western mandates?

From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 6:20 PM

To: 11th Hour Website
Subject: Re: Isaiah 17-damascus

Syria today is a result of of the West deciding what shall be in that region..


11th Hour Website rohas1@11th-hour.info via eigbox.net 
Nov 1


to me


Richard,

The revolution in 1979 was more of a wakeup call that the "7th" was passing power on to he who is "of the 7th, but he himself is the 8th"   It was a huge bellowing of American hegemony over the globe. Iran fought back and held their country, unlike almost all of Latin, and South America and most of the rest of the world, but it was a wakeup call about something much more evil than you claim, again, in my opinion.

From: Richard Spendiff [mailto:rspendiff@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 6:34 PM

To: 11th Hour Website
Subject: Re: Isaiah 17-damascus

correction:- Iran unbroken monarchy from cyrus 500 bc or so until 1979, iranian revolution.


Richard Spendiff
Nov 1


to 11th


the thing is, the prophecy does say :-
"and the remnant of Syria will be like the glory of the children of Israel
And in that day the glory of Jacob will be brought low
The fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus.

Now the things listed above actually happened in the 8th century B.C.


I have included the comments from the keil and delitsch commentary (note the red text - like a mutilated city):-
Isa 17:1-3
The first turn: "Behold, Damascus must (be taken) away out of the number of the cities, and will be a heap of fallen ruins. The cities of Aroer are forsaken, they are given up to flocks, they lie there without any one scaring them away. And the fortress of Ephraim is abolished, and the kingdom of Damascus; and it happens to those that are left of Aram as to the glory of the sons of Israel, saith Jehovah of hosts." "Behold," etc.:hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand. Damascus is removed מֵעִיר (= עִיר מִהְיוֹת, cf., 1Ki_15:13), i.e., out of the sphere of existence as a city. It becomes מְעִי, a heap of ruins. The word is used intentionally instead of עִי, to sound as much as possible like מֵעִיר: a mutilated city, so to speak. It is just the same with Israel, which has made itself an appendage of Damascus. The "cities of Aroer" (gen. appos. Ges. §114, 3) represent the land to the east of the Jordan: there the judgment upon Israel (executed by Tiglath-pileser) first began. There were two Aroers: an old Amoritish city allotted to the tribe of Reuben, viz., "Aroer on the Arnon" (Deu_2:36; Deu_3:12, etc.); and an old Ammonitish one, allotted to the tribe of Gad, viz., "Aroer before Rabbah" (Rabbath, Ammon, Jos_13:25). The ruins of the former are Arair, on the lofty northern bank of the Mugib; but the situation of the latter has not yet been determined with certainty (see Comm. on Jos_13:25). The "cities of Aroer" are these two Aroers, and the rest of the cities similar to it on the east of the Jordan; just as "the Orions" in Isa_13:10are Orion and other similar stars. We meet here again with a significant play upon the sound in the expression ‛ârē ‛Aro‛ēr (cities of Aroer): the name of Aroer was ominous, and what its name indicated would happen to the cities in its circuit. עִרְעֵר means "to lay bare," to pull down (Jer_51:58); and עַרְעָר, עַרִיִרי signifies a stark-naked condition, a state of desolation and solitude. After Isa_17:1 has threatened Damascus in particular, and Isa_17:2 has done the same to Israel,Isa_17:3 comprehends them both. Ephraim loses the fortified cities which once served it as defences, and Damascus loses its rank as a kingdom. Those that are left of Aram, who do not fall in the war, become like the proud citizens of the kingdom of Israel, i.e., they are carried away into captivity. All this was fulfilled under Tiglath-pileser. The accentuation connects אַרָם שְׁאָר (the remnant of Aram) with the first half of the verse; but the meaning remains the same, as the subject to יִהְיוּ is in any case the Aramaeans.

This is just thoughtful and accurate reading of the Word of God. If Damascus is about to be demolished as you say then Israel must also fade and lose it's northern defences. Pretty unlikely considering she is being restored in this present day!


Richard Spendiff
Nov 1


to 11th


<div style="PADDING-BOTTOM:5px;MARGIN:5px 15px 0px 0px
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

bsalhus@gmail.com
4:50 PM (3 hours ago)


to me

Thanks Richard, but to bring closure to this discussion, I suggest you read my writings on Isaiah 17 and Jeremiah 49 inside Revelation Road.
Keep up the good studies.
Bill
From: Richard Spendiff
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:37 AM
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

Richard Spendiff
6:27 PM (1 hour ago)


to bsalhus

thing is bill, if what you are saying doesn't happen then you are in serious error, a false prophet. Has the Lord called you or are you just someone  following a trendy line of interpretation that has been going the rounds for a few years?

Hal lindsay ,, false prophet...The list goes on.

Has the Lord called you to this.. I don't think he has and you are treading in waters you cannot fathom.

.you ignore the first word of the prophecy "behold". The most fundamental error. When the prophet spoke it was just about to happen. If you are a serious teacher, publish your findings for free on the internet. 

"do not sell the truth" well , you are certainly selling something.

What audacity to warn syrians to flee Damascus when you have no calling!

Ok Bill



hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand. Damascus is removed מֵעִיר (= עִיר מִהְיוֹת, cf., 1Ki_15:13), i.e., out of the sphere of existence as a city. It becomes מְעִי, a heap of ruins. The word is used intentionally instead of עִי, to sound as much as possible like מֵעִיר: a mutilated city, so to speak. It is just the same with Israel, which has made itself an appendage of Damascus. The "cities of Aroer" (gen. appos.Ges. §114, 3) represent the land to the east of the Jordan: there the judgment upon Israel (executed by Tiglath-pileser) first began. There were two Aroers: an old Amoritish city allotted to the tribe of Reuben, viz., "Aroer on the Arnon" (Deu_2:36; Deu_3:12, etc.); and an old Ammonitish one, allotted to the tribe of Gad, viz., "Aroer before Rabbah" (Rabbath, Ammon,Jos_13:25). The ruins of the former are Arair, on the lofty northern bank of the Mugib; but the situation of the latter has not yet been determined with certainty (see Comm. on Jos_13:25). The "cities of Aroer" are these two Aroers, and the rest of the cities similar to it on the east of the Jordan; just as "the Orions" in Isa_13:10 are Orion and other similar stars. We meet here again with a significant play upon the sound in the expression ‛ârē ‛Aro‛ēr (cities of Aroer): the name of Aroer was ominous, and what its name indicated would happen to the cities in its circuit. עִרְעֵר means "to lay bare," to pull down (Jer_51:58); and עַרְעָר, עַרִיִרי signifies a stark-naked condition, a state of desolation and solitude. After Isa_17:1 has threatened Damascus in particular, and Isa_17:2 has done the same to Israel,Isa_17:3 comprehends them both. Ephraim loses the fortified cities which once served it as defences, and Damascus loses its rank as a kingdom. Those that are left of Aram, who do not fall in the war, become like the proud citizens of the kingdom of Israel, i.e., they are carried away into captivity. All this was fulfilled under Tiglath-pileser. The accentuation connects אַרָם שְׁאָר (the remnant of Aram) with the first half of the
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

bsalhus@gmail.com
6:58 PM (56 minutes ago)


to me

Richard according to the New King James Version the Bible uses the word “behold” 586 times. Prove to me how each one of these predicts an event that must happen in the prophets lifetime. Start with Ezekiel 37:12, and if you can’t prove all of them, then our email conversation is over. We are entitled to our opinions and I respectfully disagree with yours.
Bill
From: Richard Spendiff
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:27 AM
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

Richard Spendiff
7:05 PM (49 minutes ago)


to bsalhus

The first turn: “Behold, Damascus must (be taken) away out of the number of the cities, and will be a heap of fallen ruins. The cities of Aroer are forsaken, they are given up to flocks, they lie there without any one scaring them away. And the fortress of Ephraim is abolished, and the kingdom of Damascus; and it happens to those that are left of Aram as to the glory of the sons of Israel, saith Jehovah of hosts.” “Behold,” etc.: hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand.


So , behold followed by a participle  etc.


You are not in the same league as these bible scholars, methinks.


Do you have a scholars understanding of hebrew. I think not. Yet you purport to advise thousands on their destiny.
Get real.

 tell me, on what day did the almighty appoint yiu as a prophet to the nations?

Ok Bill



Richard Spendiff
Nov 1


to 11th


the thing is, the prophecy does say :-
"and the remnant of Syria will be like the glory of the children of Israel
And in that day the glory of Jacob will be brought low
The fortress will disappear from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus.

Now the things listed above actually happened in the 8th century B.C.


I have included the comments from the keil and delitsch commentary (note the red text - like a mutilated city):-
Isa 17:1-3
The first turn: "Behold, Damascus must (be taken) away out of the number of the cities, and will be a heap of fallen ruins. The cities of Aroer are forsaken, they are given up to flocks, they lie there without any one scaring them away. And the fortress of Ephraim is abolished, and the kingdom of Damascus; and it happens to those that are left of Aram as to the glory of the sons of Israel, saith Jehovah of hosts." "Behold," etc.:hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand. Damascus is removed מֵעִיר (= עִיר מִהְיוֹת, cf., 1Ki_15:13), i.e., out of the sphere of existence as a city. It becomes מְעִי, a heap of ruins. The word is used intentionally instead ofעִי, to sound as much as possible like מֵעִיר: a mutilated city, so to speak. It is just the same with Israel, which has made itself an appendage of Damascus. The "cities of Aroer" (gen. appos.Ges. §114, 3) represent the land to the east of the
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

bsalhus@gmail.com
7:28 PM (25 minutes ago)


to me

Richard – I wish I had more time to communicate with you, but this will have to let be my last reply. It is disheartening that you insult a fellow believer, which I am, and presume that you are also, because you hold a different view of a prophecy. I would suggest you let the Lord clean His own house in these matters.
Bill
From: Richard Spendiff
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 11:05 AM
...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

Richard Spendiff
7:35 PM (19 minutes ago)


to bsalhus

There is one feature of Hebrew syntax that may provide us with clues about how to translate this phrase. A relatively common construction uses the same particle hinneh followed by a participle to communicate action that is about to happen. It is called the "participle of the imminent future." This construction is normally translated as "[subject] is about to [verb]" or "[subject] is going to [verb]."  For example, Genesis 6:13 and 6:17:


from

http://www.crivoice.org/isa7-14.html



Yep  but dont think you are in the clear.I have never SOLD the truth, an abomination in my eyes.

You are selling things you have no comprehension of in the last days.

You are not a scholar, or appointed by the Lord.You are just a trendy american on the bandwagon.

Pack it in before the Lord packs you in. Have you actually asked the Lord whether what you are teaching is true?


Setting the scene of Isaiah 17


This is from fausset's dictionary:-


Benhadad his son continued to exercise a lordship over Israel (2Ki_13:3-7; 2Ki_13:22) at first; but Joash, Jehoahaz' son, beat him thrice, according to Elisha's dying prophecy (2Ki_13:14-19), for "the Lord had compassion on His people ... because of His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, neither east He them from His presence us yet" (2Ki_13:23). Jeroboam II, Joash's son, further "recovered Damascus and Hamath, which belonged to Judah, for Israel ... according to the word of the Lord ... by Jonah the prophet" (2Ki_14:23-28), 836 B.C. Rezin of Damascus, a century later, in a respite from the Assyrian invasions, allied himself to Pekah of Israel against Judah, with a view to depose Ahaz and set up one designated "the son of Tabeal." (See AHAZ.) The successive invasions of Pul and Tiglath Pileser suggested the thought of combining Syria, Israel, and Judah as a joint power against Assyria. Ahaz' leaning to Assyria made him obnoxious to Syria and Israel.
But, as their counsel was contrary to God's counsel that David's royal line should continue until Immanuel, it came to nought (2Ki_15:19; 2Ki_15:29; 2Ki_15:57; 2Ki_16:5; Isa_7:1-6). Elath on the shore of the Red Sea, in Edom, built by Azariah of Judah on territory alleged to be Syrian, was "recovered" by Rezin. Whereupon Ahaz begged Assyria's alliance; and the very policy of Damascus and Israel against Assyria, namely, to absorb Judah, was the very means of causing their own complete absorption by Assyria (2Ki_16:6-9; 2Ki_16:17; Isa_7:14-25; Isa_8:6-10; Isa_10:9). The people of Damascus were carried captive to Kir, as Amos (Amo_1:5) foretold, the region from which they originally came, associated with Elam (Isa_22:6), probably in Lower Mesopotamia = Kish or Cush, i.e. eastern Ethiopia, the Cissia of Herodotus (G. Rawlinson).
Isaiah (Isa_17:1) and Amos (Amo_1:4) had prophesied that Damascus should be "taken away from being a city, and should be a ruinous heap," that Jehovah should "send a fire into the house of Hazael, which should devour the palaces of Benhadad"; and Jeremiah (Jer_49:24-25) that "Damascus is waxed feeble .... How is the city of praise not left, the city of my joy!" By the time of the Mede-Persian supremacy Damascus had not only been rebuilt, but was the most famous city in Syria (Strabo, 16:2,19). In Paul's time (2Co_11:32) it was part of (See ARETAS' (see) kingdom. It is still a city of 150,000 inhabitants, of whom about 130,000 are Mahometans, 15,000 Christians, and about 5,000 Jews. Damascus was the center through which the trade of Tyre passed on its way to Assyria, Palmyra, Babylon, and the East.

taken away (but not forever) for a reason


Damascus "is taken away" from being a city is literally "to turn off" from being a city. Later it was rebuilt, it was turned on again if you like (in the time of Cyrus).



Isa 17:1

The burdenH4853 of Damascus.H1834 Behold,H2009 DamascusH1834 is taken awayH5493 from being a city,H4480 H5892 and it shall beH1961 a ruinousH4654heap.H4596
H5493

שׂוּר סוּר

sûr śûr

soor,

soor

A primitive root; to turn off (literally or figuratively): - be [-head], bring, call back, decline, depart, eschew, get [you], go (aside), X grievous, lay away (by), leave undone, be past, pluck away, put (away, down), rebel, remove (to and fro), revolt, X be sour, take (away, off), turn (aside, away, in), withdraw, be without.





Compare this with the prophecy about babylon..

Jer 51:61  And Jeremiah said to Seraiah: "When you come to Babylon, see that you read all these words, 
Jer 51:62  and say, 'O LORD, you have said concerning this place that you will cut it off, so that nothing shall dwell in it, neither man nor beast, and it shall be desolate forever.' 


What many modern prophecy students miss is the reason for the judgement of Damascus. It was part of the judgement to protect Judah from the confederacy of Syria and Ephraim which would have resulted in no Christ, born of the virgin, as in isaiah 7, if the royal line of david was imperrilled. Rezin and Pekah (the son of Remaliah) intended to depose Ahaz and set up " the son of tabeal" in his place.
Once the confederacy had passed:-
Isa 7:8 "And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people." and Isa 17:3 "The fortress also shall cease from Ephraim"
Damascus would once again be a (rebuilt) city in the time of the anointed Cyrus.

Isa 7:3  And the LORD said to Isaiah, "Go out to meet Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool on the highway to the Washer's Field. 
Isa 7:4  And say to him, 'Be careful, be quiet, do not fear, and do not let your heart be faint because of these two smoldering stumps of firebrands, at the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria and the son of Remaliah. 
Isa 7:5  Because Syria, with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, has devised evil against you, saying, 
Isa 7:6  "Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Tabeel as king in the midst of it," 
Isa 7:7  thus says the Lord GOD: "'It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass. 
Isa 7:8  For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. And within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered from being a people. 
Isa 7:9  And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you are not firm in faith, you will not be firm at all.'" 
Isa 7:10  Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, 
Isa 7:11  "Ask a sign of the LORD your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven." 
Isa 7:12  But Ahaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not put the LORD to the test." 
Isa 7:13  And he said, "Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also? 
Isa 7:14  Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 
Isa 7:15  He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. 
Isa 7:16  For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be deserted.






ruin...(mutilation)


Many now say that Damascus was never destroyed but have they actually studied the scripture in detail. The translations all seem to miss the exact meaning of the condition coming to Damascus ..."Mutilation"! See the highlighted text below (again from the excellent K&D commentary).

Isa 17:1-3
The first turn: “Behold, Damascus must (be taken) away out of the number of the cities, and will be a heap of fallen ruins. The cities of Aroer are forsaken, they are given up to flocks, they lie there without any one scaring them away. And the fortress of Ephraim is abolished, and the kingdom of Damascus; and it happens to those that are left of Aram as to the glory of the sons of Israel, saith Jehovah of hosts.” “Behold,” etc.: hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand. Damascus is removed מֵעִיר (= עִיר מִהְיוֹת, cf., 1Ki_15:13), i.e., out of the sphere of existence as a city. It becomes מְעִי, a heap of ruins. The word is used intentionally instead of עִי, to sound as much as possible like מֵעִיר: a mutilated city, so to speak. It is just the same with Israel, which has made itself an appendage of Damascus. The “cities of Aroer” (gen. appos. Ges. §114, 3) represent the land to the east of the Jordan: there the judgment upon Israel (executed by Tiglath-pileser) first began. There were two Aroers: an old Amoritish city allotted to the tribe of Reuben, viz., “Aroer on the Arnon” (Deu_2:36; Deu_3:12, etc.); and an old Ammonitish one, allotted to the tribe of Gad, viz., “Aroer before Rabbah” (Rabbath, Ammon, Jos_13:25). The ruins of the former are Arair, on the lofty northern bank of the Mugib; but the situation of the latter has not yet been determined with certainty (see Comm. on Jos_13:25). The “cities of Aroer” are these two Aroers, and the rest of the cities similar to it on the east of the Jordan; just as “the Orions” in Isa_13:10 are Orion and other similar stars. We meet here again with a significant play upon the sound in the expression ‛ârē ‛Aro‛ēr (cities of Aroer): the name of Aroer was ominous, and what its name indicated would happen to the cities in its circuit. עִרְעֵר means “to lay bare,” to pull down (Jer_51:58); and עַרְעָר, עַרִיִרי signifies a stark-naked condition, a state of desolation and solitude. After Isa_17:1 has threatened Damascus in particular, and Isa_17:2 has done the same to Israel, Isa_17:3 comprehends them both. Ephraim loses the fortified cities which once served it as defences, and Damascus loses its rank as a kingdom. Those that are left of Aram, who do not fall in the war, become like the proud citizens of the kingdom of Israel, i.e., they are carried away into captivity. All this was fulfilled under Tiglath-pileser. The accentuation connects אַרָם שְׁאָר (the remnant of Aram) with the first half of the verse; but the meaning remains the same, as the subject to יִהְיוּ is in any case the Aramaeans.

Behold...


There are those who say that Isaiah 17 concerning Damascus has not been fulfilled. What does the very first word of the prophecy say?..... "Behold"!!

"Behold" is only used in scripture with the participle when it refers to something very near at hand. Why would the prophet use this word if it referred to an event 2700 years in the future.

From the truly excellent Keil & Delitzsch bible commentary:-

Isa 17:1-3
The first turn: “Behold, Damascus must (be taken) away out of the number of the cities, and will be a heap of fallen ruins. The cities of Aroer are forsaken, they are given up to flocks, they lie there without any one scaring them away. And the fortress of Ephraim is abolished, and the kingdom of Damascus; and it happens to those that are left of Aram as to the glory of the sons of Israel, saith Jehovah of hosts.” “Behold,” etc.: hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand. Damascus is removed מֵעִיר (= עִיר מִהְיוֹת, cf., 1Ki_15:13), i.e., out of the sphere of existence as a city. It becomes מְעִי, a heap of ruins. The word is used intentionally instead of עִי, to sound as much as possible like מֵעִיר: a mutilated city, so to speak. It is just the same with Israel, which has made itself an appendage of Damascus. The “cities of Aroer” (gen. appos. Ges. §114, 3) represent the land to the east of the Jordan: there the judgment upon Israel (executed by Tiglath-pileser) first began. There were two Aroers: an old Amoritish city allotted to the tribe of Reuben, viz., “Aroer on the Arnon” (Deu_2:36; Deu_3:12, etc.); and an old Ammonitish one, allotted to the tribe of Gad, viz., “Aroer before Rabbah” (Rabbath, Ammon, Jos_13:25). The ruins of the former are Arair, on the lofty northern bank of the Mugib; but the situation of the latter has not yet been determined with certainty (see Comm. on Jos_13:25). The “cities of Aroer” are these two Aroers, and the rest of the cities similar to it on the east of the Jordan; just as “the Orions” in Isa_13:10 are Orion and other similar stars. We meet here again with a significant play upon the sound in the expression ‛ârē ‛Aro‛ēr (cities of Aroer): the name of Aroer was ominous, and what its name indicated would happen to the cities in its circuit. עִרְעֵר means “to lay bare,” to pull down (Jer_51:58); and עַרְעָר, עַרִיִרי signifies a stark-naked condition, a state of desolation and solitude. After Isa_17:1 has threatened Damascus in particular, and Isa_17:2 has done the same to Israel, Isa_17:3 comprehends them both. Ephraim loses the fortified cities which once served it as defences, and Damascus loses its rank as a kingdom. Those that are left of Aram, who do not fall in the war, become like the proud citizens of the kingdom of Israel, i.e., they are carried away into captivity. All this was fulfilled under Tiglath-pileser. The accentuation connects אַרָם שְׁאָר (the remnant of Aram) with the first half of the verse; but the meaning remains the same, as the subject to יִהְיוּ is in any case the Aramaeans.

Synopsis of this blog


Isa 17:1  The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap. 
Isa 17:2  The cities of Aroer are forsaken; they shall be for flocks, which shall lie down, and none shall make them afraid. 
Isa 17:3  The fortress also shall cease from Ephraim, and the kingdom from Damascus; and the remnant of Aram shall be as the glory of the children of Israel, saith the LORD of hosts. 
Isa 17:4  And it shall come to pass in that day, that the glory of Jacob shall be made thin, and the fatness of his flesh shall wax lean. 

The very first word of the prophecy declares "behold". This word is only used when something is about to happen as the  keil & delitsch commentary shows below:-
“Behold,” etc.: hinnēh followed by a participle indicates here, as it does everywhere else, something very near at hand.
The reason for the prophecy is that the Lord always tells the prophets first before He does something. He had already declared His intention in Isaiah 7 concerning Rezin some years before. Now, perhaps to also reassure the inhabitants of Jerusalem and Judah, the Lord says that Damascus will be literally "turned off" (the actual meaning of the translation "cease") just as one turns off a lightbulb.
Isaiah 7 also includes the sign of Emmanuel, the virgin birth. This is the reason for the judgement from heaven upon Damascus - they were going to ally with Ephraim against Judah which would have meant no Christ if no Judah!

When the prophecy has been fulfilled in such intricate detail as history attests to I cant see why anyone would say it has not been fulfilled. Even the " heap of ruins" translation misses the mark - the keil and delitsch commentary shows that this is written such that its true meaning is nearer to " mutilated". This is the condition of Damascus after tiglath Pileser II's destruction in the 8th century B.C. The prophecy nowhere says that Damascus would "cease/be turned off" forever as is said of the desolations of babylon.

There has to be a reason for the judgement on Damascus -  the reason is, simply, it was threatening the line of David from whom would come Emmanuel, the saviour. Rezin and Pekah (the son of Remaliah) intended to replace Ahaz of the line of David with the "son of Tabeal".  There is also an element of irony/humour in the prophecy. Damascus is widely regarded as being the most ancient city on earth. The Lord, however, seeing it was going against His plans, says "ok, switch it off then" and probably caused Him no more trouble to do this than it troubles us to switch off a lightbulb.