Posts by KalebOutWest

47

The First Holocaust

by nicolaou in

please, please ignore all the scientific impossibilities here, that's not what this topic is about.. let's make the assumption as many christians do that the bible is historically accurate.

the noachian flood actually happened a little less than 4,500 years ago after which eight adults stepped off the ark to repopulate the planet.. that means that approximately 60 million lives had been snuffed out, a holocaust by anyone's estimation.

as if that isn't horrific enough just think about the babies, toddlers and young children god killed.. he drowned all of them, every single one.

KalebOutWest

P.S.--I know you are not mad at God.

Or Luke or his dad.

47

The First Holocaust

by nicolaou in

please, please ignore all the scientific impossibilities here, that's not what this topic is about.. let's make the assumption as many christians do that the bible is historically accurate.

the noachian flood actually happened a little less than 4,500 years ago after which eight adults stepped off the ark to repopulate the planet.. that means that approximately 60 million lives had been snuffed out, a holocaust by anyone's estimation.

as if that isn't horrific enough just think about the babies, toddlers and young children god killed.. he drowned all of them, every single one.

KalebOutWest

I was pointing out how the stories present the god of the Bible from a straightforward reading...Stories about the noachian flood (and those stories that followed)...

First, the Noachin Deluge is the newer myth. It was composed after the Babylonian Exile, around 538 BCE, and was added to the Torah during the Persian Era. We know this because it has the editorial earmarks of Gilgamesh tablet 11. The other stories came before, they did not follow. In fact, some scholars are in agreement that the redactors of the Torah might be making fun of the Atrahasis (another older Mesoptamian flood legend) and the Gilgamesh story by showing that Yahweh hangs up his weapon at the end and won't be like the heathen gods in the other stories by his limiting his power via covenant-making, a new element not found in the other flood myths.

These are not the qualities we were taught to understand that he [God] had, nor are they the qualities that many who worship this god insist he has, or represents. Growing up, I was taught to approach these stories in a certain way, which is very different from how they read if you just... you know... read them.

As a Jew I can attest that we do not teach anywhere in our Scriptures that "God is love," like it does in 1 John chapter 4:8 & 16.

Is God just? Is God merciful? Is God omnipresent? Omniscient? In Judaism, God is often not even considered an entity let alone a deity. Humans created deities. Many Jews are atheists, agnostics or don't put belief in God central in their religious lives. (It sounds weird to Christians who measure religion by what "God" is, but yeah.) One's view of God can change from one day to the next.

The word "Israel" means "he who wrestles with God." Our nation and people is called "Israel" and not "Abraham" because we wrestle with the God-issue. We don't obey or believe blindly.

As for reading these stories, we Jews know how to read them. We understand that the first 11 chapters are filled with mythology and legends. And Genesis is part of the Mosaic Law, not the Mosaic History. It's a book teaching Jews how to perform the Law. It's stories having a bearing on how to perform the Law: the first chapter of Genesis about why it's important to observe the Sabbath, the second chapter about our need to observe the commandments, the third about what happens when you break a commandment and so on, etc. It's not really about history. It the Torah. It teaches you lessons to be a good Jew. It wasn't written to be read literally or outside the idea that it wasn't the Torah or wasn't the Mosaic Law.

I was there for a few years with my JW aunt in the Kingdom Hall and listened to how people were taught that this meant this and that meant that. So? What if you were taught that Star Wars was a real story all your life when you were raised as a Mormon? And then you grew up and learned it wasn't? Are you going to hate Luke Skywalker? Or George Lucas?

It's fiction. You had a wrong view of it. Others taught you that wrong view. There was a correct view, but you never learned it. The more you refuse to learn that there is a possible correct view, that it is fiction, the more you will just sit being angry.

You anger isn't wrong. It's just misdirected. There are people who you should be angry at.

A myth and a mythological god are not to blame, especially when the story had a completely different context than you thought it did.

(I mean, God is not even named "Jehovah." That name means nothing to us Jews. That should tell you something right there. You can't even read the story straightfoward either. It's in Hebrew. We can, and we do. You folks argue over whether or not you have a good or correct translation, and can't ever be sure if you have a correct one. We don't need a translation. That should also tell you something.)

Be mad if you want to. But I would direct my anger at the right people and do something constructive with it instead of being mad at, for example "Luke Skywalker" and "Darth Vader." They were never real to being with. And being mad at them all day ain't gonna make them "realler"

47

The First Holocaust

by nicolaou in

please, please ignore all the scientific impossibilities here, that's not what this topic is about.. let's make the assumption as many christians do that the bible is historically accurate.

the noachian flood actually happened a little less than 4,500 years ago after which eight adults stepped off the ark to repopulate the planet.. that means that approximately 60 million lives had been snuffed out, a holocaust by anyone's estimation.

as if that isn't horrific enough just think about the babies, toddlers and young children god killed.. he drowned all of them, every single one.

KalebOutWest

The flood story also brings up an interesting thought: doesn't it speak to god's failures?

When we leave the Jehovah's Witnesses, we might often focus our disappointment in "God" and do our best to criticize (in an honest and rational way) what we might see as a betrayal on behalf of the trust we once put forth.

The mythology of the Hebrew Bible is not stating what the Watchtower taught us or what you or I believed when we faithfully went to the Kingdom Hall. Ancient peoples of various cultures believed that the present world, in fact the entire universe was created from a previous existing one that had been wiped out of existence by the cosmic forces closing in on themselves and starting from scatch.

They did not believe in a vacuum of space but that the world was flat and covered with a bowl that likely held the stars and sun in place and kept the cosmic waters from falling upon us, allowing only some of them to sprinkle upon us every now and then in the form of rain or snow.

But practically each culture, not just the Jews, had this view. Since they all believed that the forces of nature were either controlled by the gods or were gods, they blamed this cataclysmic restart on their deities.

The Vikings blamed their Norse gods for flooding the previous world, starting over and creating the world we previously live in now. And North American Hopi taught that the world has had not just one restart but that we are currently living in the fifth world! (If you thought Jehovah was a failure...)

The gods that started all these horrific restarts in these stories, slaughtering millions, perhaps billions, each time in these mythologies, do you believe any of them are real? Or are you just angry at God in Genesis because you were once one of Jehovah's Witnesses?

What makes the God of the Bible more of a failure in the Noachin flood when that is clearly just the same sort of creation type of mythology? Should we blame stories that were clearly creation/origin myths, including any or all deities that are clearly the product of another culture or our misunderstandings that were not even produced by the people who wrote these myths but were introduced to us by others?

If you are going to think with a critical mind, is it logical to be angry at a mythical god in a myth based on the interpretation made by a cult that is run by unlettered and uneducated men who cannot even read the myth in its original language? Critically, where does the blame really lie? The deity? The myth? The cult? In us who believed the false teaching of the cult at one time?

The story is even considered allegorical by Orthodox Jews, and they take most of the Hebrew Bible at face value. And we angry about a flood that even Orthodox Jews said never happened? Think about that for a while. What rational mind would spend time being angry about something that never happened?

Just some things to consider. We may not have answers right away. We might not all have the same answers or agree.

One this is certain. A lot of blame should be placed at the feet of the Watcthtower leaders who offer impossible interpretations of Noah's Flood that cannot be traced to the original sources or type of writing that these type of stories are meant to reflect to ancient peoples.

47

The First Holocaust

by nicolaou in

please, please ignore all the scientific impossibilities here, that's not what this topic is about.. let's make the assumption as many christians do that the bible is historically accurate.

the noachian flood actually happened a little less than 4,500 years ago after which eight adults stepped off the ark to repopulate the planet.. that means that approximately 60 million lives had been snuffed out, a holocaust by anyone's estimation.

as if that isn't horrific enough just think about the babies, toddlers and young children god killed.. he drowned all of them, every single one.

KalebOutWest

This is ridiculous.

The story doesn't even originate with Yahweh, the God of Abraham. The original flood story comes from the Gilgamesh tradition.

It claims the flood was the result of a debate between the gods Enlil and Enki.

The Genesis story just copied that one. So if really believe there was a flood, why not pick the older story? Why not blame the gods Enlil and Enki?

See how stupid all this sounds?

45

Isaiah 40:29-31 and Being Gay

by IWant2Know in

i'm new here and i have perhaps an unusual question.

it's just something that i would like to know from ex's or formers rather than from other jehovah's witnesses.

but i would like to know what your experience and your struggle was for former jws who were gay when they were jws.

KalebOutWest

IWant2Know:

So, what about predictions such as Isaiah 11:6-9 and Isaiah 65:17-25? And Daniel 2:31-45, which I mentioned before?

Catholic, and mainstream Protestants, as well as Jews don't view them as "predictions" in the same sense as Jehovah's Witnesses and many Fundamentalists. A prediction is what a medium or soothsayer does, such as forecasting or foretelling the future, like a palm reader or spiritualist claims to do in a crystal ball.

The prophets did not predict the future, per se, as least not the way Jews, Catholics, and mainstream Protestants believe and some Fundamentalists hold.

The reason Jehovah's Witnesses believe this is that JWs teach that Jehovah is an entity or being that exists on the same temporal plain of existence that humans do, thus experiencing time from the same frame of reference that we do with one difference: that God can foretell or foresee the future (and past). Christians and Jews teach that the God of Abraham is Ineffable and therefore does not exist on our temporal plain. God created the temporal plain, including the phenomenon of time. Therefore God is not affected by time. The beginning, the middle, and the end of time are all available to God at once, like all the letters in a word. God is like the reader, outside a word, and we are like the ink on a page that make up the individual markings of each stroke of each letter on a page. God is not affected by time whatsoever.

For Jehovah's WItnesses, God must "foresee" and "foretell" the future and must keep time, partially because the theology of Jehovah's Witnesses is based on "timekeeping" and "the end of times." If this understanding fails, so does their teaching that their religion is the only true one. Their leaders have spent over a century trying to teach they only they can understand the "predictions" of the "prophets."

But if there are predictions, then explain to me the 30 pieces of silver prophecy in reference to Jesus before I explain the others.

Don't worry. You can't. You know why, because it isn't a prediction.

In reality, the writers of the New Testament, who were Jews, used a type of Jewish exegesis known as "midrash" to interpret Scripture to explain what the prophets meant in fulfillment about Jesus. "Midrash" is not a claim that a prophet or an oracle can foretell the future, but that a Jewish writer is using a play on words, claiming that the Holy Spirit put something deep into holy writ that had an application that was not apparent to the original composer of the text.

Take for instance this "prophecy" about Jesus being betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. At Matthew 27:3-10, it is claimed that Judas betraying Jesus for 30 pieces of silver and then Judas killing himself fulfills a prophecy written by Jeremiah. This is combination of three texts, neither of which are foretelling events, none speaking about the Jewish Messiah, and then only the first of the two which were written by Jeremiah.

The first is an obscure text about a potter from Jeremiah 18:2-3, then one about buying a field at 32:6-9; and then finally a text from Zechariah 11:12-13 and 30 where Zechariah receives 30 pieces of silver for his labor. The author of Matthew uses the technique of "midrash" to stitch them together to produce the "prophecy" of Jeremiah's oracle about the Messiah being betrayed for 30 pieces of silver, even though such an oracle or prophecy about the Messiah never occurs in the book of Jeremiah. The author of Matthew can say that, however, under the rules of midrash--because a prophecy is not about predicting the future.

I'll bet you could not have done that if I had not told you that, now could you.

As for each text you have given me:

Isaiah 11:6-9--Isaiah is indeed talking about the ideal king in Davidic king and restoration under him for all Israel's benefit, but it should be noted that the oracle does not have any particular historical person or time period in mind.

Isaiah 65:17-25 is part of an apocalypse and not a prophecy, written by Deutero-Isaiah or maybe even Third or Fourth Isaiah. It is speaking of the conditions experienced by the Jews after they returned from exile to Babylon. Apocalypse speaks of the present in future terms, as if it has yet to be fulfilled, using symbols. The book of Daniel, as apocalypse, does this throughout its "visions," for example.

And none of the texts from Daniel are prophetic. The book is an "apocalypse," not a prophecy. In fact, "Daniel" is not even a real person. That is why when you open a Jewish Bible, the Book of Daniel does not appear in the "Prophets" section but in the "Writings" section.

The Book of Daniel was written by the Maccabees during their persecution and subsequent revolt under the Hasmoneons, with events ending in the celebrations of the very first Chanukah. "Daniel" is a folk hero--like America's Paul Bunyan. Daniel gives warnings and messages to Nebuchadnezzar, even though the Jews have been back from the exiles for generations now. They are facing a new threat from the Hellenists who want to stop Jewish worship. Using apocalyptic language that sound like oracles and visions, the Maccabees encourage their fellow Jews with folktales of Daniel overcoming the heathens and their gods, showing how they will defeat the Hellenists and restore the Temple and pure worship in their own day if they keep up the fight (which they did).

None of these are predictions.

And the son of man verses in Daniel 7:13-14?

The Church Fathers, using the "midrash" that Jesus and the apostles used as recorded in the New Testament, applied this to Jesus. Again, this is an apocalypse, not a book by a real prophet or even by a person named Daniel. The folk hero by that name did not exist and is not listed as one of the prophets of Israel in the Talmud.

And what do Jews believe Genesis 3:15ff means? Exactly what it reads. That women and snakes would not get along, etc. The story is not considered necessarily a literal story either. Remember this is the Torah, a book of Law, not history like Jehovah's Witnesses believe. So any narrative in its has some relation to the Mosaic Law itself.

The Torah ends with the story of Moses east of the Jordan not being able to enter the Promised Land. It is generally agreed that this was added as narrative during the exile to explain that the Jews, being "east" of the Promised Land, were still hoping to return. The narrative of the Garden of Eden is based on the type of enclosed garden of the king of Babylon that had a guard with a sword and kept people out. It had, on its outside, cherubim, for the decor. Adam and Eve in the narrative represent the Jews who, though in the "image of God," break covenant (represented by stealing from one of the trees) and then covering themselves up afterwards (believing they are naked or no longer in God's image). They are sent out of the paradise and left "east of Eden," or in Babylon.

The Torah begins like it ends, with characters on the "east" of paradise or the Promised Land. In both instances Moses and Adam & Eve represent the position the Jews are in, wanting to return. If the people observer the Torah, the just might.

Of insterest, the Tree of Life represents enterance to the Most Holy or the Temple itself. Christianity saw it as the Cross. The author of the Gospel of Luke uses the Greek equivalent for cross (starous--there really wasn't an equivalent because the "cross" was a new Roman invention that did not exist when the Greek language was around, thus the new Latin word "crux") but after Jesus is resurrected in Acts he starts using the word for tree instead (xylon) such as in Peter's speech on Pentecost.

Now let me ask you for a change:

I am Jewish by birth. I have a Catholic parent and a Jewish one. I went to Catholic catechism and Hebrew school. I learned Koine Greek, ecclesiatical Latin, and Biblical/liturgical Hebrew. I got raised for a few years by a JW relation when my parents divorced but left when I grew up. What religion am I today?

Now that you have read my replies, what are your counter arguments? If you have none what are you doing about it?

If you have them, what are they?

Who cares what I believe? How cares about what you believe? What are you doing with your life now that is helping others more than you? Finding answers for you is good--but it's a selfish thing to an extent. To a cetain point you have to stop asking and start doing. Jehovah's Witnesses are a selfish religion that teach to ask, ask, and learn, learn, for yourself, self, self, self. What do you do that forgets about you for a change? (Don't answer me on this last one. Answer yourself and then go do it)

543

Encouraging scriptures for the day

by Kosonen in

jw
friends

hello my friends,.

here are some encouraging scriptures for the day:.

revelation 21:2 i also saw the holy city, new jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from god and prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.. hebrews 11:10 for he (abraham) was awaiting the city having real foundations, whose designer and builder is god.. revelation 21:24 and the nations will walk by means of its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it.. revelation 22:1 and he showed me a river of water of life, clear as crystal, flowing out from the throne of god and of the lamb 2 down the middle of its main street (of the holy city).

KalebOutWest

Vinene,

In Kosonen's defense, I don't think there is an attempt in his discussions to make a difference between "exegesis" and "eisegesis." I have spoken with him and his belief system is admittedly based on what he could personally develop from when he stood his ground against the JWs for what he believed was false doctrine. He is giving, what is known theologically as a "testimonial," even though this would also not be something he might be considering when he is writing these things.

His current belief system is still somewhat (though not completely) built upon the system of thelogy the Watchtower once had in place about 20 years ago. Even then, as they stand today, Jehovah's Witnesses do not embrace theological methodologies, as they have no learned or seminarian trained academics on the Governing Body (or ever had). So no one, from top to bottom in that religion knows what "exegesis" or "eisegesis" is or how to employ either. In order to actually do so (while not requiring a seminarian) does at least require exposure to this form of thought which is outside the scope of the Watchtower religion.

It's like asking a JW or exJW about liturgy. Though it is very old and is used universally throughout Judaism, Catholicism, the Lutheran and Angelican Church and more, Witnesses can't describe it at all. It is vital to know about it if you are going to discuss the history of Bible canonization (another thing JWs cannot do--because they don't even understand "liturgy"). Why not? The Watchtower religion is not a liturgical one, so you cannot expect a Witness to be able to talk things liturgical.

Regardless of what we might think about K's personal interpretation of Scripture, we cannot fault him for things or topics he knows nothing of. He was merely not exposed to them.

At least he is and was courageous enough to speak up for what he believes in and therefore told the Organization he was not going to budge from his position. This is something the Governing Body can't do. They keep "moving the goal post."

45

Isaiah 40:29-31 and Being Gay

by IWant2Know in

i'm new here and i have perhaps an unusual question.

it's just something that i would like to know from ex's or formers rather than from other jehovah's witnesses.

but i would like to know what your experience and your struggle was for former jws who were gay when they were jws.

KalebOutWest

IWant2Know--

Actually, except for most Fundamentalist Christians and some groups like the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses, the rest of Christianity and all Jews acknowledge that there are no foretelling of events by the prophets in the Scripture, such as predictions.

Jehovah's Witnesses often use the following to explain what a true prophet can do in refrence to foretell the future:

When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.--Deuteronomy 18:22.

But in reality, it is not speaking about predicting the future. Take for instance the prophet Jonah, whose message to Ninevah from God did not come true at all:

"Forty days more and Nineveh shall be overthrown!"--Jonah 3:4.

Did that make Jonah a false prophet? According to the way Jehovah's Witnesses define prophecy and prophets and Deuteronomy 18:22, the answer is "yes." "Uh, no, uh, what?"

But the word "prophet" in Hebrew means "spokesman" and not a foreseer of events. In fact it if forbidden by the Mosaic Law for a Jew to attempt to forecast the future by any means.--Lev 19:32, Deut 18:9-12.

There are no "prophecies" in this sense, whatsoever, about anything, anywhere in the Bible, let alone about the Messiah.

The Jewish concept of the Messiah came about after the last of the books of the Prophets was written, after the Maccabean Revolt which ended in 160 BCE, the events which gave Judaism the first Chanukah celebration. These events led to the Jews crowning a member of the Maccabees as king of the Jews.

But the family line of Judas Maccabeus was not in the line of David or of the tribe of Judah, but of the tribe of Levi. And the Maccabees became oppressive. They aligned with Rome and married into a family known as the Herods which took over from the Maccabees.

Due to the oppression, the Jews began to study the Jewish texts and realized that the prophets and the Psalms mentioned that God had promised that a son of David was supposed to be anointed as their king, not someone in the line of Levi. So they began to pray for God to redeem them from the hands of the Herods and the Romans, to bring the promised Son of David, the promised anointed (in Hebrew, Masiach or Messiah).

A theology began to be built around many of these texts, though none of them are "prophecies." There are NO texts in the Bible that say: "There shall come a Messiah..." or "The Messiah shall come that will do this and that..." The first time the Jews used such expressions as a concept were in the Gamara, then in the Mishnah, which came to be transfered into writings of the Talmud.

The fullest concepts of the Messiah were developed by the early Christians themselves, not the Jews, which is why the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah. The theology of the Messiah is found still developing in the writings of the Church Fathers.

Simultaneously at the time, the Jews began developing their own theology to counter what the Messiah should and should not do.

The use of Genesis 3:15 in reference to Jesus does not come from the Jews but the Church Fathers, in the writing of St. Irenaeus entitled, "Against Heresies" in which he states not that Jesus is predicted by the verse but that it is a divine illustrative drama in which God takes on human nature in Jesus by means of Mary to battle Satan the Devil.

For more information on that, you will want to look up that writing in the Church Fathers.

74

Doctrines and Bible Interpretations

by IWant2Know in

i would like to know if ex's and formers who are not church christians, believe that many of jws' doctrines and bible interpretations are correct, or do you feel that they aren't?

.

KalebOutWest

IWant2Know wrote:

...she had a picture of a young girl in her avatar probably in her early twenties, although by now she would be much older looking if she used a current picture.

I hope you do not think I am being rude at all. I just find your repeated questioning totally illogical.

I keep telling you I have no idea what you are talking about. Repeating your question, no matter how much detail you offer, will not help. That's why I have written the types of replies I have, but to no avail. I guess you don't understand what I am saying.

I can't see through your eyes. I don't know what you are talking about. I do not have the answer. I won't have the answer. You can ask all the day long, I myself will likely never have the answer. You cannot force people to see the same experiences you have witnessed. It is not possible.

The more you ask a blind person if they saw what happened doesn't make them able to tell you what they saw any better.

45

Isaiah 40:29-31 and Being Gay

by IWant2Know in

i'm new here and i have perhaps an unusual question.

it's just something that i would like to know from ex's or formers rather than from other jehovah's witnesses.

but i would like to know what your experience and your struggle was for former jws who were gay when they were jws.

KalebOutWest

Kosonen,

I for one think that is a very courageous conscientious stand you have taken.

It must be especially difficult to hear after all these years members of the Governing Body use phrases like: "We just don't know," and "We can't be dogmatic" at the recent Annual Meeting.

After more than 100 years of claiming they did in fact know "the Truth" about everything from God and of being very dogmatic about it, and shunning people over their claims, I cannot imagine if this new approach of theirs is even settling in yet for you--especially since they have yet to share these words with the entire Organization or world yet.

I stayed away until recently and then started to look for the Witnesses again out of curiousity--and boom! I was shocked (and found myself laughing in some instances) to see they were still around, even though it was nothing like the religion I knew back when I was there.

If I had cherished those beliefs, I would be heartbroken and somewhat confused to see what I honored and believed to disappear day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year. It's all going away.

The religion I know and it's teachings are gone. How are you coping since you could never go back? There is nothing to be faithful to as they are not even faithful to themselves or those that came before them.

45

Isaiah 40:29-31 and Being Gay

by IWant2Know in

i'm new here and i have perhaps an unusual question.

it's just something that i would like to know from ex's or formers rather than from other jehovah's witnesses.

but i would like to know what your experience and your struggle was for former jws who were gay when they were jws.

KalebOutWest

IWant2Know wrote:

Well, it sounds like Isaiah 40:29-31 didn't help him since I'm pretty such most JWs have tried to apply those verses to themselves.

Those verses are not actually applicable to this situation or even about individual application, as Jehovah's Witnesses believe.

Isaiah chapter 40 starts what is known as "The Book of Consolation," otherwise known as Second Isaiah or Deutero-Isaiah. Over a century had passed since the prophet Isaiah who penned the first section of the book had passed. Cyrus the Great had come on the scene and liberated the people from exile to Babylon. While the Jewish hope of the Messiah was not fully formed yet, what they did understand about the "anointed one" to come was being focused upon this particular Persian ruler as a possible savior of the Jewish people since he allowed them not only to return to their homeland but gave them freedom to worship as they pleased.

The text you cite is speaking of the liberation of the children of Israel, returning to and rebuilding the homeland, reconstructing the sanctury of YHWH with God giving the exiles full attention and new strength to do the work. In chapter 40, Second Isaiah applies full credit to YHWH over any king or prince of the nations, including Cyrus.

This new school of prophets, in the name of Isaiah, write that God will make sure this strength to return and rebuild will be given to the Jews in those words of chapter 40:29-31:

He gives strength to the weary and new vigor to those who are powerless,
Even though young men faint and grow weary and youths stumble and fall,
those who place their hope in the Lord will regain their strength.
They will soar as with eagles' wings,
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not become faint.

It is a poetic oracle describing the people walking back to the Promised Land from Babylon or Sepharad (some of the Jews had been exiled to the Iberian peninsula), even though at the time of the composition many had already returned. The oracle is actually describing the liberation of the people, what it had been like, and attributed God's hand to Cyrus' work.

But the text does not mean that young men today can literally hope in God to gain strength so they do not stumble, as in the case of "falling into sin." The "stumble and fall" that is being described is not sinning but comparing the strength of "Jacob/Israel" of verse 27 to being stronger than young men that don't have the power to cross the desert like Israel does. Recall that Jacob was able to leave his mother and father behind to find his wives and return, crossing a desert--a trip that Esau, a stronger man, did not take to find his brides. God gave Israel that power. Esau, a more physically powerful man, was actually too weak to do what Israel accomplished. The verse in Isaiah is basically stating that like Jacob, the nation of Israel was given strength from God, not from Cyrus, to return to the Promised Land and rebuild, something that even young men could not do on their own, even if they tried.

Or in other words, the power did not come from Cyrus.

To use this same text as an encourgement for young people facing "sins" is not only taking it out of context but shows a deep lack of Biblical history and an inability to just read the context.

The context is about the Creator being the real Savior, the true Liberator, greater than any power found among the nations--it is not about how youths can find help when faced with sexual temptations.--Note especially 40:12, 13, 15, 23, 27-31.

The same section does give credit to Cyrus, but not by name, since Second Isaiah is here speaking of God as the true Redeemer of Israel.--See chapter 41:2.