English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

(Isaiah 20:2)" at the same time the Lord spoke by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, 'Go, and remove the sackcloth from your body, and take your sandals off your feet.'
And he did so, walking naked and barefoot." (See the rest in the OT).
The poor man was ordered by God to go naked for 3 years, not allowed so much as a g-string, bcs he sinned. I'm asking all Christians and Jews - please follow the Bible or Torah. When you sin, go naked for 3 years. At least, the price of clothing will be reduced.

2006-08-28 09:36:04 · 5 answers · asked by hakim300 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

5 answers

Telling Jones to go naked doesn't mean Smith has to go naked.

2006-08-28 09:41:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Isa 20:2 -
By Isaiah - Margin, ‘By the hand of Isaiah.’ So the Hebrew. That is, by the instrumentality of Isaiah. He sent him to make known the fate of the Egyptians, and the folly of trusting in them on this occasion.
Go, and loose the sackcloth - For the meaning of the word “sackcloth,” see the note at Isa_3:24. It was commonly worn as an emblem of mourning. But there is reason to believe that it was worn also by the prophets, and was regarded, in some degree, as their appropriate dress. It was made usually of the coarse hair of the goat, and was worn as a zone or girdle around the loins. That this was the dress of Elijah is apparent from 2Ki_1:8 : ‘He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather;’ that is, he was clothed in a garment made of hair. The same was true of John the Baptist Mat_3:4. That the prophets wore ‘a rough garment’ is apparent also from Zec_13:4 : ‘Neither shall they (the false prophets) wear a rough garment (Hebrew, A garment of hair) to deceive;’ that is, the false prophets shall not assume the dress of the true prophets for the purpose of deluding the people, or to make them think that they are true prophets. It is evident, therefore, that this hairy garment was regarded as a dress that pertained particularly to the prophets. It is well known, also, that the ancient Greek philosophers had a special dress to distinguish them from the common people. Probably the custom of wearing “hair cloth” among the monks of later ages took its rise from this example of the prophets. His removing this garment was designed to be a sign or an emblem to show that the Egyptians should be stripped of all their possessions, and carried captive to Assyria.
Walking naked - That is, walking “without this special prophetic garment. It does not mean that he was in a state of entire nudity, for all that he was directed to do was to lay this garment - this emblem of his office - aside. The word “naked,” moreover, is used in the Scriptures, not to denote an absolute destitution of clothing, but that the “outer” garment was laid aside (see the note at Joh_21:7). Thus it is said of Saul 1Sa_19:24 that he ‘stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel, and lay down naked all that day;’ that is, he stripped off his royal robes, and was “naked or unclothed” in that respect. He removed his “special” dress as a king, or military chieftain, and appeared in the ordinary dress. It cannot be supposed that the king of Israel would be seen literally without raiment. So David is said to have danced “naked” before the ark, that is, with his royal robes laid aside. How “long” Isaiah walked in this manner has been a matter of doubt (see the note at Isa_20:3). The prophets were accustomed to use symbolic actions to denote the events which they foretold (see the note at Isa_8:18). Thus the children of Isaiah, and the names given to them, were significant of important events (Isa_8:1-3; compare Jer_18:1-6; Jer_43:8-9); in both of which places he used emblematic actions to exhibit the events concerning which he prophesied in a striking manner. Thus also the prophets are expressly called ‘signs and wonders’ Zec_3:8; Eze_12:6.

2006-08-28 16:42:19 · answer #2 · answered by BrotherMichael 6 · 1 0

He didn't tell him to remove the sackcloth -- but to put it on!
It doesn't mean naked in the "no clothing sense", but in the "bare", "scarce" sense.

cheerio

2006-08-28 16:49:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I do not think it was becouse Isiah had sinned but it was isreal thst had sinned

2006-08-28 16:42:07 · answer #4 · answered by Mim 7 · 0 0

That was the punishment for that specific person. We cannot claim, punishments, blessings or curses that arent our own.

2006-08-28 16:42:04 · answer #5 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers