THE BOOK
ISAIAH’S PROFOUND RECOGNITION
In this particular Discourse primarily dedicated to Isaiah’s especial gift of prophecy and, of course, with Fenton’s crucial recognitions; the revelation and correct spelling thereto of the name Imanuel, along with the sets of Prophecies we have featured, clearly reveal how Isaiah and Fenton have brought to light The Truth of Imanuel.
Tracking it all to our time now, we need to briefly revisit Isaiah 8:10. The unmistakeable connotation in it should be self-evident as to why the particular sets of Scriptures we have focussed on cannot possibly be for any other time in history than that which we in the 21st century occupy. To reinforce this particular premise, a quick recap of the relevant Bible Scripture.
“Take counsel together, and it shall come to naught; speak the word and
it shall not stand: for God is with us.” (KJV.)
Decide a united scheme, ---- discuss a plan ----
It shall not succeed for God is with us! -------- (Fenton. Underline mine.)
The irrefutable link to the particular prophecies of our current narrative is; “God is with us”. That is the meaning of the name IMANUEL -- who brought The All-Truth to earth in the 20th century, thus at the “End-time” -- exactly as Isaiah prophesied, and clearly revealed in the televised hourly news items where every new day seems to increase our “global human madness”.
IMANUEL = ‘GOD is with us’ = The SPIRIT OF TRUTH!
That stupendous reality does not, cannot, ever equate to Muhammad. That is the Truth for all time, and can never, will never, be altered. It is for the three religions of Monotheism to finally wake up, recognise, and change; but, as we have said, they won’t. For this is not their truth. Let it be your Truth, reader. For the connection to our time is, indisputably, with the name: IMANUEL.
The King James Version or a close approximation of these Scriptures is what most Bible readers are probably more familiar with. Fenton’s Bible, however, provides a different take on the same. In Section III of his THE BOOKS OF THE PROPHETS, Fenton ‘Capitalises’ his message thus:
‘DIRECT FROM THE ORIGINAL HEBREW
INTO ENGLISH, AND IN VERSE, IN
THE HEBREW METRES OF THE PROPHETS,
OR IN PROSE, AS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN’
In addition, with regard to the correctness of rendering relevant parts of the Scriptures in verse and cadence, he explains on page 413-4 of his INTRODUCTORY NOTE:
‘And another cause of his [Bishop Lowth] failure and that of all other
critics was that they sought only to find in Hebrew the inflexible
mechanism of Latin verse... It never occurred to them that the essential
movement of Hebrew verse was the echo of music and the rhythmic
motion of the dancers, who accompanied the recitations of the Nebiaim, or
popular Preachers, and also the recitations of the Services of the
Tabernacle .... As indicated by the word Nebia, which we translate
“Prophet,” while it really means a Reciter, or Singer to the Harp, Pipe, or
Tambour, the word used in the Bible Hebrew to denote a Prophet being
Khazar, a gazer, or one who foresees. Consequently, by following a wrong
path all my predecessors failed to find the object of their search.’
“But why,” I have been asked by friends to whom I have shown my results,
“should you seek to present the Holy Scriptures in a form so different to
what for two thousand years men have been accustomed to see and read
them, especially in English, when our peoples have come to look on the
old prose form as absolutely sacred?”
‘My answer is that I believe The Almighty would not have inspired His
chosen Teachers and Prophets to use verse in delivering His laws and
instructions to mankind without an adequate reason, and therefore we
have no right to fancy we can better His method by degrading it and
turning it into clumsy prose, as the European translators both ancient and
modern have done.’
Fenton sub-titles the relevant Scriptures (8: 9-10 Underline mine.) thus:
Song of Triumph, For God is with us!”
Collect together you Nations,
But you shall be broken!
Listen Lands at a distance; --
Arm yourselves, -- but you shall be broken! –
Arm yourselves, -- but you shall be broken! –
Decide a united scheme, -- discuss a plan –
It shall not succeed for God is with us!
As we have said, ordinarily, we would apply Isaiah’s warnings to the people of his day -– and that would certainly and obviously be the case perhaps most of the time. However, the very nature of genuine prophecy means that it is never constrained by ‘physical time’ to just one single era of the human journey. Prophecy means exactly that, an ability or gift or “Spiritual Calling” to “see”, to “prophesy” –- for his time or for any other era that he was permitted to “see” --- and thereby proclaim for the people associated with the particular “vision” in the moment.
Towards the beginning of this Work we examined the possible meaning of the term, “Spirit of Truth”, of course without a conclusion that suits all factions/religions that engage with this ‘notion’. We have now, however, assessed this whole concept from a different and certainly more logical and historically-meaningful perspective, for, as we have now determined, inevitably the answer must, and will, lie in what The Spirit OF Truth actually is.
So, in terms of the Scriptural prophecy stated by Jesus as recorded in the Book of John –- for which Koran translators give clear credence -– the key phrases need to be really examined with a high degree of just plain simple logic. Reader: Forget religions and crass religiosity, just examine the wording: That is what we do, and that is what we have done in this case too.
To briefly summarise: The personal pronoun, He, quite bluntly indicates an actual person, who Islam believes was incarnated in the person of the Prophet, Muhammad. Christendom generally equates The Spirit of Truth with The Holy Spirit -- a Part of The Trinity -- but not necessarily considered an actual person. How does the academic world interpret this conundrum?
“Holy Spirit”; also called Paraclete or Holy Ghost: In Christian belief it is the third
person of The Trinity. Christian writers have seen in the Hebrew Scriptures an
anticipation of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The Hebrew word, ruah (usually
translated “spirit”) is often found in texts referring to the free and unhindered
activity of God, either in creating or in revitalizing creation, especially in
connection with the prophetic word or messianic expectation, There was,
however, no explicit belief in a separate divine person in biblical Judaism. In fact,
the New Testament is not entirely clear in this regard. One suggestion of such
belief is the promise of another helper, or intercessor (Paraclete), that is found in
the Gospel According to John.
The definition that the Holy Spirit was a distinct divine Person equal in substance
to the Father and the Son and not subordinate to them came at the Council of
Constantinople in AD 381, following challenges to its divinity. The Eastern and
Western churches have since viewed the Holy Spirit as the bond, the fellowship,
or the mutual charity between Father and Son: they are absolutely united in the
Spirit. The relationship of the Holy Spirit to the other Persons of the Trinity has
been described in the West as proceeding from both the Father and the Son,
whereas in the East it has been held that the procession is from the father
through the Son.”
Holy Spirit in Christianity.
Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of Truth, the Paraclete and the Holy spirit. The New
Testament details a close relationship between the Holy Spirit and Jesus.
(Encyclopaedia Britannica.)
There we have perhaps a standard academic explanation of the Holy Spirit. However, genuine seekers of truth in the monotheistic religions of today would surely realise that being here on earth gifted with conscious life should presuppose that somewhere on the planet is a real and actual knowledge-foundation that cuts through and across the present constricting model of theory, supposition, guesswork, assumption and even ego in the fields of endeavour struggling with the so-called “great questions to life”.
For such a knowledge-platform would see the revelation of ‘constant-upon-constant’ emerging; a process of beneficence that is only a utopian dream, unrealised in the present global religious and even scientific paradigm. Thus, an All-Truth; a surgical All-Truth to precisely excise all untruth from the face of the earth, so that genuine freedom from dogma of all kinds can emerge and flourish.
The statement: “He Himself will honour Me ...” whilst perfectly clear to this writer that Another, the Other, would come to earth as The Spirit of Truth, is certainly not shared by all in Christendom. A common belief as to the nature of The Spirit of Truth in this case is centred on the Day of Outpouring when the Disciples received power from on high to ‘speak in tongues’ and to ‘heal’. Yet that episode, even though powering the amazing ministry of the Disciples, did not lead them into any kind of All-Truth. Paul’s recognition and pronouncement about the event some time later, clearly shows that he understood the nature of it.
He knew that it did not signal the Coming of the Spirit of Truth at that time, but understood that the prophecy of Jesus meant a much later time in the future, i.e., “For we know in part only. But when that is complete arrives, the part will be done away.” The next Discourse will considerably add to and clarify Paul’s sure recognition of that fact.