Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The virgin birth in Isaiah 7

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dave3712
    replied
    Originally posted by Elia View Post
    Bs'd

    So this prophecy has no bearing what so ever on the messiah, and NOWHERE in this prophecy is spoken about a virgin.

    These are only misconceptions of the NT.

    However, the NT brings this prophecy to Achaz as a messianic prophecy, see Matthew 1 "21: she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." 22: All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: 23: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel".

    So what the NT does here, is take a text which does not speak about the messiah, rip it out of context, mistranslates it, (is says "young woman", and not "virgin") and then present it to us as a messianic prophecy.

    So one of the foundations of the Christian religion, the virgin birth, is based upon a mistranslated text which is ripped out of context and does NOT speak about the messiah.

    First, we should agree that the history you just explained so well is suspect of a dual meaning since it is found in the Bible, the words we read coming to us from God and not some college of the Humanities.
    We are supposed to ponder the meaning of these things we read and there relationship to the guidance and edification implied.

    So, it is not too far fetched that the prophets, even in the New Testament, should find application for these ideas in their own reflection upon events that had come to pass.

    Secondly, the Hebrew word, Immanuel, means "God is with us".
    In Matthew, the prophecy then can be understood to say, "his name SHALL be called 'God has been with us.'"That NT prophecy did come true, also.

    In 325AD, at Nicea, the Trinity asserted a "new name for God", (Rev 3:12).
    Christ has reigned ever since as God.

    Third, the "virgin" birth can be better understood today as an Act-of-God.
    Jesus is a new species of mankind, different from men of the past.
    He is a new creature in God's kingdom.
    He is what has been called a Homoiousian he is a Homoiousian sapiens.
    Jesus is an evolutionary product, which is the first born of whom we shall all mimic as son-of-god in the future to come.

    The genetic mutations that advance these new species of life forms occur inside the womb.
    They are not fathered by men of the previous stock, but truly, virgin births of new species unlike their fathers, and the product of an Act of God, himself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Buckeroo
    replied
    The Prophecy of Isaiah

    Originally posted by Elia View Post
    Bs'd

    The prophecy of Isaiah 7:

    1: In the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, son of Uzzi'ah, king of Judah, Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remali'ah the king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to wage war against it, but they could not conquer it. 2: When the house of David was told, "Syria is in league with E'phraim," his heart and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind. 3: And the LORD said to Isaiah, "Go forth to meet Ahaz, you and She'ar-jash'ub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool on the highway to the Fuller's Field, 4: and say to him, `Take heed, 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 Remali'ah. 5: Because Syria, with E'phraim and the son of Remali'ah, has devised evil against you, saying, 6: "Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Ta'be-el as king in the midst of it," 7: thus says the Lord GOD: It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass.
    8: For the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. (Within sixty-five years E'phraim will be broken to pieces so that it will no longer be a people.) 9: And the head of E'phraim is Sama'ria, and the head of Sama'ria is the son of Remali'ah. If you will not believe, surely you shall not be established.'" 10: Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz,
    11: "Ask a sign of the LORD your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven." 12: But Ahaz said, "I will not ask, and I will not put the LORD to the test." 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? 14: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'u-el. 15: He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16: For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted."

    We see here in Isaiah 7, that king Achaz, the king of Judah, is afraid of 2 neighboring kings.
    It is important to know that after the death of king Solomo the kingdom of Israel split up into two parts; into the kingdom of Judah, and the kingdom of Israel.
    The kingdom om Judah was made up of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and a part of the Levites. The kingdom of Israel was made up of the other ten tribes.
    Achaz was king over Judah, and in this prophecy the king of Israel is Pekah, the son of Remaliah.
    And Pekah had made a covenant with the king of Syria, called Resin, to attack together the kingdom of Judah.
    This news caused king Achaz considerable stress, because he had a dark suspicion that things could very well turn out not so very rosy for him.
    Therefore God sent Isaiah to Achaz, in order to tell him that things would work out just fine for him. God tells Achaz that he will give him a sign. Here is the sign: "14: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'u-el. 15: He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16: For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted."

    God says that before the child of the young woman who is pregnant will grow up, the land of the two kings, Resin of Syria, and Pekah of Israel, will be deserted, that is devoid of people. Those two nations will be led into exile.
    So this is a sign for king Achaz, who lived about 700 years before JC.

    And the Bible tells us that this prophecy came true: "27: In the fifty-second year of Azari'ah king of Judah Pekah the son of Remali'ah began to reign over Israel in Sama'ria, and reigned twenty years. 28: And he did what was evil in the sight of the LORD; he did not depart from the sins of Jerobo'am the son of Nebat, which he made Israel to sin. 29: In the days of Pekah king of Israel Tig'lath-pile'ser king of Assyria came and captured I'jon, A'bel-beth-ma'acah, Jan-o'ah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naph'tali; and he carried the people captive to Assyria. 30: Then Hoshe'a the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remali'ah, and struck him down, and slew him, and reigned in his stead, in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzzi'ah."
    II Kings 15.

    We see here that the population of Israel indeed went into exile, and that the land of king Pekah was deserted.

    And here is what happened to Resin, the king of Syria:
    "6: At that time the king of Edom recovered Elath for Edom, and drove the men of Judah from Elath; and the E'domites came to Elath, where they dwell to this day. 7: So Ahaz sent messengers to Tig'lath-pile'ser king of Assyria, saying, "I am your servant and your son. Come up, and rescue me from the hand of the king of Syria and from the hand of the king of Israel, who are attacking me." 8: Ahaz also took the silver and gold that was found in the house of the LORD and in the treasures of the king's house, and sent a present to the king of Assyria. 9: And the king of Assyria hearkened to him; the king of Assyria marched up against Damascus, and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir, and he killed Rezin."
    II Kings 16.

    So here we see that also the inhabitants of the land of King Resin went into exile, and also his land was deserted, in the days of Achaz.

    So God gave a sign to Achaz.

    In the days of Achaz.

    About 700 years before JC.

    So this prophecy has no bearing what so ever on the messiah, and NOWHERE in this prophecy is spoken about a virgin.

    These are only misconceptions of the NT.

    However, the NT brings this prophecy to Achaz as a messianic prophecy, see Matthew 1 "21: she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." 22: All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: 23: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel".

    So what the NT does here, is take a text which does not speak about the messiah, rip it out of context, mistranslates it, (is says "young woman", and not "virgin") and then present it to us as a messianic prophecy.

    So one of the foundations of the Christian religion, the virgin birth, is based upon a mistranslated text which is ripped out of context and does NOT speak about the messiah.


    Eliyahu light unto the nations


    "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4

    "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Micah 4:5

    This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.

    "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of God from Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Micah 4:2
    I really do not understand what you are getting at?? Also the Word said that Mary she shall be called Blessed in all the world,so what is it you are saying? Thank You! Blessings and Peace!

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by freelight View Post
    Not sure if this addresses the subject of the virgin birth in any way



    pj


    NO! -- It doesn't!!

    Paul -- 033012

    Leave a comment:


  • freelight
    replied
    Originally posted by Letsargue View Post
    WELL if you're right, - and, if I have a LOT of authority, I can say that it's this way, - "Give me your money", and that's what the fools are doing!!! -- God ONLY SAYS what He says. Some people might change it because it doesn't fit their foolishness, but you say we must live with the smarter than God people!! - I'll JUST stick with what's written and what IT SAYS!!

    Paul -- 033012
    Not sure if this addresses the subject of the virgin birth in any way



    pj

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by freelight View Post
    Depends on how passages are interpreted and in what context. Intellectual honesty dictates the text be thoroughly researched in every possible way to render the best translation.


    pj


    WELL if you're right, - and, if I have a LOT of authority, I can say that it's this way, - "Give me your money", and that's what the fools are doing!!! -- God ONLY SAYS what He says. Some people might change it because it doesn't fit their foolishness, but you say we must live with the smarter than God people!! - I'll JUST stick with what's written and what IT SAYS!!

    Paul -- 033012

    Leave a comment:


  • freelight
    replied
    Originally posted by Letsargue View Post
    Doesn't the Word of God play the total role of what's what in TRUTH. - Nothing short of Jesus can speak for God to us, not some smart guy!!!

    Paul -- 033012
    Depends on how passages are interpreted and in what context. Intellectual honesty dictates the text be thoroughly researched in every possible way to render the best translation.


    pj

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by freelight View Post
    That's one point of view - here we are discussing the 'virgin birth' particularly, and the belief-system associated with its 'assumption', which is found only in Matthew's narrative. Whether Jesus was a prophet, priest, apostle, king, messiah, wisdom-teacher, etc....depends on what role's one sees him playing.


    pj


    Doesn't the Word of God play the total role of what's what in TRUTH. - Nothing short of Jesus can speak for God to us, not some smart guy!!!

    Paul -- 033012

    Leave a comment:


  • freelight
    replied
    role play

    Originally posted by Letsargue View Post
    There is nothing that entered into the choosing of Mary other than Mary was the “espoused” WIFE of Joseph; - the TRUE KING OF ISRAEL. – Both the Priests and the King of Israel at the time of Christ were all false. --- John the Baptist was the TRUE High Priest and when John was killed, Jesus was the next in line to be High Priest!! ----- CHECK THAT OUT, I AM NOT WRONG HERE. – All these other geniuses are without the knowledge of the Truth!!

    Paul – 033012
    That's one point of view - here we are discussing the 'virgin birth' particularly, and the belief-system associated with its 'assumption', which is found only in Matthew's narrative. Whether Jesus was a prophet, priest, apostle, king, messiah, wisdom-teacher, etc....depends on what role's one sees him playing.


    pj

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by freelight View Post
    A wonderful concept, but have you done your homework on the words used in the passage, their meaning in context? My last post with links is one place to start.

    Mary may have been chosen because she was 'chaste/pure'(virgin-like), but there is no reason to assume she had to be a virgin to bring forth Jesus, - consider that if God could miraculously impregnate a women without the help of a man, he could just as well cause Jesus to come forth thru seemingly ordinary human male/female relations, and Jesus could still be a special soul incarnating in our world of a divine and human mixture, further 'anointed' for a special mission. The Jewish Messiah is an anointed human.

    Additional theological con-fusions of Jesus being 'God' and 'Man' simultaneously were developments debated over and finally 'formalized' in creeds (made 'orthodox') during the first 7 centuries, at least the initial heat of controversies concerning Jesus' nature.




    pj



    There is nothing that entered into the choosing of Mary other than Mary was the “espoused” WIFE of Joseph; - the TRUE KING OF ISRAEL. – Both the Priests and the King of Israel at the time of Christ were all false. --- John the Baptist was the TRUE High Priest and when John was killed, Jesus was the next in line to be High Priest!! ----- CHECK THAT OUT, I AM NOT WRONG HERE. – All these other geniuses are without the knowledge of the Truth!!

    Paul – 033012

    Leave a comment:


  • freelight
    replied
    a womb to bring forth a child.......

    Originally posted by Letsargue View Post

    Jesus was born of a virgin,.....
    A wonderful concept, but have you done your homework on the words used in the passage, their meaning in context? My last post with links is one place to start.

    Mary may have been chosen because she was 'chaste/pure'(virgin-like), but there is no reason to assume she had to be a virgin to bring forth Jesus, - consider that if God could miraculously impregnate a women without the help of a man, he could just as well cause Jesus to come forth thru seemingly ordinary human male/female relations, and Jesus could still be a special soul incarnating in our world of a divine and human mixture, further 'anointed' for a special mission. The Jewish Messiah is an anointed human.

    Additional theological con-fusions of Jesus being 'God' and 'Man' simultaneously were developments debated over and finally 'formalized' in creeds (made 'orthodox') during the first 7 centuries, at least the initial heat of controversies concerning Jesus' nature.




    pj

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by Elia View Post
    Bs'd

    The proofs are abundant that Isaiah said "young woman", and not "virgin".

    And of course, a "virgin birth" is not a sign. Because, how can anybody know the woman really is virgin?

    Did the whole village come to peek between the legs of the woman to see if she really was a virgin?

    Do we just have to take the word of the woman for it, that she is a virgin? Then we are going to have a whole lot more "virgin births".

    The supposed "virgin birth" is not a sign.


    The sign in Isaiah 7 is that before the son who was going to be delivered by the girl who was pregnant would grow up, the land of the two kings of whom Achaz was very afraid, would be deserted, their inhabitants led into exile.

    THAT was the sign, and nothing else.

    And that sign came true, in the days of Isaiah and Achaz, about 700 years before JC.


    Eliyahu light unto the nations


    "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4

    "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Micah 4:5

    Jesus was born of a virgin, and that is the "BODY OF CHRIST" THE CHURCH!!!

    The Church was considered A “VIRGIN”, “BECAUSE” She is a YOUNG LADY ESPOUSED TO THE LORD!!!!! – The Church is not an old woman who is not a virgin!! – READ THE BOOK!!!

    Paul – 033012

    Leave a comment:


  • freelight
    replied
    Is. 7:14

    Originally posted by Nick M View Post

    It isn't a sign to say a young woman will give birth. It is a sign to say a virgin will give birth. It is normal that a young woman would give birth. That isn't any kind of sign. Isaiah said a "virgin". The Holy Spirit chooses his words very carefully. It is only perverts that want to mess it up so they can shake their fist at God.
    Understanding the Jewish view and traditional interpretation of the verse in question is helpful, in contrast to later Christian interpretations and assumptions.

    Uri Yoseph Ph.D for the Messiah Truth Project does a comprehensive review of Is. 7:14 from both Jewish and Christian perspectives Here and Here.

    ~*~*~

    A proper education on such matters makes for a more informed, wise and intelligent decision in matters of knowledge, affecting translations and applications of faith.

    Since the Christological debates over Jesus nature (human/divine ratio?) raged, so much was being invested to prove Jesus 'divinity', and with creative license scribes took their liberties in the writing of the NT in using certain OT passages as messianic proof-texts for Jesus.

    Outside traditional Jewish/Christian views, there are other perspectives on the value, symbology or validity of a 'virgin birth', beyond mythology.


    pj

    Leave a comment:


  • Elia
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick M View Post
    It isn't a sign to say a young woman will give birth. It is a sign to say a virgin will give birth. It is normal that a young woman would give birth. That isn't any kind of sign. Isaiah said a "virgin". The Holy Spirit chooses his words very carefully. It is only perverts that want to mess it up so they can shake their fist at God.
    Bs'd

    The proofs are abundant that Isaiah said "young woman", and not "virgin".

    And of course, a "virgin birth" is not a sign. Because, how can anybody know the woman really is virgin?

    Did the whole village come to peek between the legs of the woman to see if she really was a virgin?

    Do we just have to take the word of the woman for it, that she is a virgin? Then we are going to have a whole lot more "virgin births".

    The supposed "virgin birth" is not a sign.


    The sign in Isaiah 7 is that before the son who was going to be delivered by the girl who was pregnant would grow up, the land of the two kings of whom Achaz was very afraid, would be deserted, their inhabitants led into exile.

    THAT was the sign, and nothing else.

    And that sign came true, in the days of Isaiah and Achaz, about 700 years before JC.


    Eliyahu light unto the nations


    "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4

    "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Micah 4:5

    Leave a comment:


  • Letsargue
    replied
    Originally posted by Elia View Post
    Bs'd

    No Christian any comment on this one?

    Everybody agrees I'm right and the gospel is wrong?



    Eliyahu light unto the nations


    "Hear Israel, Y-H-W-H is our God, Y-H-W-H is ONE!" Deut 6:4

    "All the peoples walk each in the name of his god, but as for us; we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God forever and ever!" Micah 4:5

    This message is sent to you from Mount Zion, Jerusalem, Israel.

    "From Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of Y-H-W-H from Jerusalem." Isaiah 2:3, Micah 4:2



    Y-H-W-H! ------- We are English, using the ENGLISH VERSIONS! – His name was called Savior / JESUS by the Creator and himself the Creator. - Jesus is the Savior / God is the Savior of the world! – God’s Body is called JESUS / SAVIOR the “Christ” Anointed by the Holy Ghost, who HE IS, and makes up the THREE, and who is God, the Jesus / Savior / CHRIST! . --- GOD is the SAVIOR / JESUS / the CHRIST!

    Paul – 050911

    Leave a comment:


  • Jacob
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick M View Post
    It isn't a sign to say a young woman will give birth. It is a sign to say a virgin will give birth. It is normal that a young woman would give birth. That isn't any kind of sign. Isaiah said a "virgin". The Holy Spirit chooses his words very carefully. It is only perverts that want to mess it up so they can shake their fist at God.
    Notice the word "before". Isn't the sign evident there?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X