davido wrote:ד כִּי-כֹה אָמַר יְהוָה, לַסָּרִיסִים אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁמְרוּ אֶת-שַׁבְּתוֹתַי, וּבָחֲרוּ, בַּאֲשֶׁר חָפָצְתִּי; וּמַחֲזִיקִים, בִּבְרִיתִי. 4 For thus saith the LORD concerning the eunuchs that keep My sabbaths, and choose the things that please Me, and hold fast by My covenant:
ה וְנָתַתִּי לָהֶם בְּבֵיתִי וּבְחוֹמֹתַי, יָד וָשֵׁם--טוֹב, מִבָּנִים וּמִבָּנוֹת: שֵׁם עוֹלָם אֶתֶּן-לוֹ, אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִכָּרֵת. {ס} 5
Even unto them will I give in My house and within My walls a monument and a memorial better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting memorial, that shall not be cut off. {S}
Isaiah 56 Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
56 Thus said Jehovah: `Keep ye judgment, and do righteousness, For near [is] My salvation to come, And My righteousness to be revealed.'
2 O the happiness of a man who doth this, And of a son of man who keepeth hold on it, Keeping the sabbath from polluting it, And keeping his hand from doing any evil.
3 Nor speak let a son of the stranger, Who is joined unto Jehovah, saying: `Jehovah doth certainly separate me from His people.' Nor say let the eunuch, `Lo, I am a tree dried up,'
4 For thus said Jehovah of the eunuchs, Who do keep My sabbaths, And have fixed on that which I desired, And are keeping hold on My covenant:
5 I have given to them in My house, And within My walls a station and a name, Better than sons and than daughters, A name age-during I give to him That is not cut off.
A house in the bible represents a mans immediate family. God is going to give the eunuchs a "house". as in wife, children.
There will no one GIVEN in marriage is Jesus's words that primarily addresses the custom of the day for a father to not give his daughter in marriage or to do so.
This then in answer to the Pharisees nullifies the GIVING by a father of a daughter into marriage and to have them remain virgins.
This then is done away with... that is the GIVING or with holding of a daughter to marriage.
Thus as evidenced by Isaish 56 from the original tongue, in regards to Usiah, we may have the valid argument
that Uriah would have been more than compensated with another not lacking, perhaps better than his Bathshedia and
children as well. We have among us many professing pagan views that the bible do not proclaim,but according to Isaish 56
the eunichs having been prevented bearing seed would then have been given the capacity to have a 'tree', a house as well as a name.
In the reference to name it was that one had to have the Jesish lineage from Abraham to have a name, thus non Jews did not have a name,
but here God prolaims the eunichs shall have a name giving all the advantages to the eunichs as would be so with Uriah.
Dake only mentions the name being given but lacks the 'house' that is the wife and children of which a tree is the linage from the man.
There is so much paganism proclaimed along with the scripture, but accurately God then will give a house, a tree to those that had
been eunichs and Urriah in the like sense having been terminated would then have the same loving kindness given him.
Huh?????? Perhaps I'm built to low to the ground and this went over my head but what are you saying? Please explain.