The virgin birth prophecy: out of context

Eryk

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 29, 2005
5,113
2,377
58
Maryland
✟109,945.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
incorrectly translated Septuagint
Jewish translators who chose the word parthenos centuries before Christ can hardly be accused of Christian bias. They thought this was the best word in Greek. Philo and Josephus considered this translation on equal standing with the Hebrew and it was only abandoned by Jewish readers when it became popular with a rival religion. If you're slamming this translation that doesn't really mean anything because you're on a tear against everything in Judeo-Christianity.

And this nullifies the prophecy as far as Christ is concerned unless you feel that the vague word was deliberately chosen so that one meaning of the term would apply to one prophecy and another meaning would apply to another prophecy.
It is perfectly legitimate to apply this verse to Jesus by analogy, a partial similarity. These analogies make the Bible a very dynamic text. This is not to downplay the significance of the sign for the original audience and its fulfillment in their lifetimes. What Isaiah may have known concerning a later messianic fulfillment of his words is speculation. But the same God-with-them in their time also incarnated as Jesus to be with us more fully, and the text has more meaning.
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Jewish translators who chose the word parthenos centuries before Christ can hardly be accused of Christian bias. They thought this was the best word in Greek. Philo and Josephus considered this translation on equal standing with the Hebrew and it was only abandoned by Jewish readers when it became popular with a rival religion. If you're slamming this translation that doesn't really mean anything because you're on a tear against everything in Judeo-Christianity.

I don't know who or what you are addressing with that.

It is perfectly legitimate to apply this verse to Jesus by analogy, a partial similarity. These analogies make the Bible a very dynamic text. This is not to downplay the significance of the sign for the original audience and its fulfillment in their lifetimes. What Isaiah may have known concerning a later messianic fulfillment of his words is speculation. But the same God-with-them in their time also incarnated as Jesus to be with us more fully, and the text has more meaning.

So in other words, it's ok to yank it out of context?
 
Upvote 0

Eryk

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 29, 2005
5,113
2,377
58
Maryland
✟109,945.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
So in other words, it's ok to yank it out of context?
It belongs in its own context - events that occurred in the lifetimes of the original hearers. But this is a message of hope, which is future-oriented, and Israel's hope was not limited to their concerns about foreign armies at the present time. The hope in the message points through and beyond that, in what it says about God: he is with us, through history, into the future, when he will dwell with us. Human thought is more encompassing than headline news.
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I don't accept this. I think Isaiah 7-9 refers to Jesus.



I don't accept this.



Well it's a good question. I don't exactly know why Ahaz felt the need to feign piety. But I still think this is the best explanation. Certainly better than the explanation that he was truly pious.



Yes. The prophecy had immediate meaning for the current time - Syria and Israel would fall. But it also had meaning for time to come - a child would be born who would inherit Ahaz's mess and rule with faithfulness and equity. His kingdom would have no end.

And what is "obviously" the intent of the passage is the very question that's being debated right now. To say that your view is the obvious view is to beg the question.



Outside of the gospel accounts I don't know of evidence of the virgin birth. But I do take the gospel accounts to be corroborating evidence. The prophesy has, as far as I can see, two purposes. (1) It comforts God's people in the immediate setting by assuring them that Judah would survive the current crisis. And (2) it gives God's people a vision of future hope for a coming king who would rule in victory.

Your position is nonsensical.

You reject (1) wherein it is said that Isaiah 7 is a double prophecy. You indicate no problem with the paragraph other than that you "think Isaiah 7-9 refers to Jesus."

But then later you say, "Yes. The prophecy had immediate meaning for the current time - Syria and Israel would fall. But it also had meaning for time to come - a child would be born who would inherit Ahaz's mess and rule with faithfulness and equity. His kingdom would have no end." In other words, you're saying it's a double prophecy.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Your position is nonsensical.

You reject (1) wherein it is said that Isaiah 7 is a double prophecy. You indicate no problem with the paragraph other than that you "think Isaiah 7-9 refers to Jesus."

But then later you say, "Yes. The prophecy had immediate meaning for the current time - Syria and Israel would fall. But it also had meaning for time to come - a child would be born who would inherit Ahaz's mess and rule with faithfulness and equity. His kingdom would have no end." In other words, you're saying it's a double prophecy.

If you want to call it a double prophesy on these grounds then go ahead. But I wouldn't use those words. I'm not saying that the same words have double meaning. I'm saying that there are elements in the same prophesy (the whole section of 7-9) that refer to the immediate setting and other elements that refer to time to come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If you want to call it a double prophesy on these grounds then go ahead. But I wouldn't use those words. I'm not saying that the same words have double meaning. I'm saying that there are elements in the same prophesy (the whole section of 7-9) that refer to the immediate setting and other elements that refer to time to come.

Not a double prophecy despite your claim that elements of the prophecy describe two different things separated by five centuries?

Also, if verses 15 and 16 don't apply to the contemporary part of the prophecy, what does?
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Not a double prophecy despite your claim that elements of the prophecy describe two different things separated by five centuries?

Also, if verses 15 and 16 don't apply to the contemporary part of the prophecy, what does?

Both of those do refer to the immediate setting. They are saying that Israel and Syria will fall. They also talk about Immanuel to come so they also point forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,122
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,854.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Not a double prophecy despite your claim that elements of the prophecy describe two different things separated by five centuries?

Also, if verses 15 and 16 don't apply to the contemporary part of the prophecy, what does?

Oh, what a tangled web God does weave, ay NV? :rolleyes: It's almost like..............God doesn't want people to really understand what they're dealing with, until they are really dealing with it (as in, no one would begin to understand how Jesus fulfills prophecy until Jesus actually showed up in the real world.....)

2PhiloVoid
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
@Nihilist Virus it seems like your arguments against me are winding down. Can we agree that Matthew's interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 is at least possible? This does not mean that Matthew's interpretation is correct or even plausible. But if it is at least possible then we can see how Matthew did not "rip a verse out of context" or was intentionally dishonest as you've claimed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
@Nihilist Virus it seems like your arguments against me are winding down. Can we agree that Matthew's interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 is at least possible? This does not mean that Matthew's interpretation is correct or even plausible. But if it is at least possible then we can see how Matthew did not "rip a verse out of context" or was intentionally dishonest as you've claimed.

It's communication that is winding down. I can't make sense of your position.

Like nearly all topics I've received no satisfactory answer here that resolves the issue. If everyone was simply honest like JackRT then at least you guys would have that going for you.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
It's communication that is winding down. I can't make sense of your position.

Like nearly all topics I've received no satisfactory answer here that resolves the issue. If everyone was simply honest like JackRT then at least you guys would have that going for you.

Well it sounds like the problem is simply that you don't understand what's going on in Isaiah and in Matthew. Since this is the case I would recommend further study before picking the discussion up again. There are several good academic commentaries on Isaiah and Matthew that I could recommend if needed.
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Well it sounds like the problem is simply that you don't understand what's going on in Isaiah and in Matthew. Since this is the case I would recommend further study before picking the discussion up again. There are several good academic commentaries on Isaiah and Matthew that I could recommend if needed.

The problem is not on my end.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Your answer is at odds with everyone here. Essentially, every atheist and Muslim would agree with me and no Christian would agree with you. Are you a betting man?

I don't see how my answer is at odds with everyone. Although I've articulated my views and arguments fairly clearly it doesn't seem that you understand my view. When you tried to summarize my views you got them wrong. Also you've failed to address many points that I've brought up in rebuttal to you by completely ignoring them. And now you say that my views are at odds with all other Christian posters - which they are not. So I must conclude that you either do not understand my view or you are deliberately pretending that it's incoherent so that you don't have to face the fact that it's an adequate answer to your dilemma you think you've set up.

Furthermore my views are not controversial within Christian academic study. Any major conservative, academic commentary would give you exactly what I'm giving you. So to say that no Christian would agree with me further demonstrates your lack of familiarity with academic discussion surrounding Isaiah 7-9. It just doesn't seem like you've done your homework.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Eryk

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 29, 2005
5,113
2,377
58
Maryland
✟109,945.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Like nearly all topics I've received no satisfactory answer here that resolves the issue.
You didn't get the answer you wanted.
If everyone was simply honest like JackRT then at least you guys would have that going for you.
Isaiah 7 speaks to events in its own era and it foreshadows Jesus. Honestly. You have repiled to this over and over by saying that this interpretation rips Isaiah out of context. But the scripture is left in context, and it says more, because it contains a prefigurative symbol. We're at a stalemate because you believe that no prefiguring exists in the text. How do you know this? An ad hoc rule that you just made up stating that the referent must corrspond to the symbol in every detail. The god of exegesis just banned analogies, stop the presses everyone. I guess this means no more literature classes. Nice going, Mr. Dumb Down America.

Typically, discussions like these result in people on both sides becoming more attached to their beliefs. So there is no point in your frustration with people who won't change their minds. Me, I just like discussions. What other people do with the information is none of my business.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,243
✟48,077.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
The fact that you haven't even mentioned Hezekiah is also telling. Most liberal (and some conservative) scholars take Isaiah 7:14 to be a reference to Hezekiah. This further demonstrates your lack of familiarity with scholarly discussion of the issues in Isaiah 7-9. Like I said: do some homework and pick up the discussion again after that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,122
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,854.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It's communication that is winding down. I can't make sense of your position.

Like nearly all topics I've received no satisfactory answer here that resolves the issue. If everyone was simply honest like JackRT then at least you guys would have that going for you.

... I'm being honest with you when I say that I see biblical prophecy as an ongoing collection of underlying patterns (sometimes repeating) which collectively express God's Will. I'm also being honest when I say you might want to study the nature of hermeneutics a little more closely as it pertains to the N.T. use of the O.T. ... :cool: And that's not a put down, but just a matter of fact.

2PhiloVoid
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I don't see how my answer is at odds with everyone. Although I've articulated my views and arguments fairly clearly it doesn't seem that you understand my view. When you tried to summarize my views you got them wrong. Also you've failed to address many points that I've brought up in rebuttal to you by completely ignoring them. And now you say that my views are at odds with all other Christian posters - which they are not. So I must conclude that you either do not understand my view or you are deliberately pretending that it's incoherent so that you don't have to face the fact that it's an adequate answer to your dilemma you think you've set up.

Furthermore my views are not controversial within Christian academic study. Any major conservative, academic commentary would give you exactly what I'm giving you. So to say that no Christian would agree with me further demonstrates your lack of familiarity with academic discussion surrounding Isaiah 7-9. It just doesn't seem like you've done your homework.

Every other Christian here says it's a double prophecy.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The fact that you haven't even mentioned Hezekiah is also telling. Most liberal (and some conservative) scholars take Isaiah 7:14 to be a reference to Hezekiah. This further demonstrates your lack of familiarity with scholarly discussion of the issues in Isaiah 7-9. Like I said: do some homework and pick up the discussion again after that.

No, like I said in the OP it is a reference to Isaiah's son in chapter 8.
 
Upvote 0