Virgin Birth?

SilverSpoon said:

The LXX that we have today is not an original, nor did the original contain the books of the prophets. The original LXX was only the Torah, and the Masoretic matches the Dead Sea Scrolls much better than it does the LXX. The LXX also translates the Hebrew "narah" as Parthenos in Genesis 34:2‑3.

Click to expand...

This really doesn't address anything. Is your assertion that parthenos in the current form of the LXX is a Christian interpolation? And if that is your assertion, can you back it up?

Most importantly, Isaiah 7:14 is about someone who will save King Ahaz's kingdom, and would have to be born many centuries before Christ.

Click to expand...

Right. And Hosea 11:1 is about Israel. This has already been addressed.

"I can assure you, there is an abundance of Jesus being called Emmanuel"

But never in the birth narratives of Jesus in the gospels where you would expect it. This is also embarrassing and shows an inability to comprehend the context of this verse, it's not even messianic.

Click to expand...

Why should we expect it to be used elsewhere in the birth narratives? Is it your assertion that St. Joseph was supposed to literally name Jesus Emmanuel? Because that's not the case, obviously.

Joseph named Him Jesus, by the command of the angel Gabriel. Jesus is Emmanuel, God with us. That's not His name, but that is Who and What He was is.

This sounds like a manufactured problem. It's only embarrassing if one is dogmatically married to it being a problem.

Matthew isn't an idiot, he is trying to tell his readers something about who Jesus is.

-CryptoLutheran

SilverSpoon said:

So the Hebrew word Almah isn't young woman, Jewish scholars wouldn't agree with you on that, nor would any publicly available Hebrew dictionary. Also if you bother to read Isaiah 7 it is about someone who will save King Ahaz's kingdom, and would have to be born many centuries before Christ.

Click to expand...

1) Well, one of the original apostles who walked and talked with Jesus Himself every day for over 3 years, who was there on they day of Pentecost and helped lead thousands of souls to Jesus disagrees with you... hmmm, I wonder who I should believe.

2) You are displaying a narrow and inaccurate understanding of how prophecy works, especially OT prophecy. Isaiah 7 is completely consistent in form and style as many other Messianic prophecies. It is entirely common for OT prophecy to about the "here and now" AND point to the Messiah.

SilverSpoon said:

We all know this one :

Matthew 1 : 23 “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).

However, it is fraught with problems :

1) This prophecy from Isaiah 7, is giving assurance to King Ahaz, and is referring to something that will happen within his own lifetime, it is not at all messianic.

2) The Hebrew word (almah) mistranslated here as "virgin" should be rendered young woman.

3) Jesus is never referred to as Immanuel anywhere.

So how do Christians reconcile this?

Click to expand...

Firstly, you are looking at the word "almah". It appears in Isaiah in the Masoretic Text. The Masoretic Text did not exist until beginning around 700 AD.

Aside from that, Isaiah records a woman who has not yet born a child. She may not have born a child because she was a virgin at the time. The Christian interpretation of Isaiah does no harm to Judaism.

SilverSpoon said:

The author of Matthew never claims to do any of that, there is no evidence that is he is an apostle or ever met Jesus. The apostles were suppose to be illiterate not well versed in Alexandrian Koine Greek. Also however this anonymous person doesn't dictate the Hebrew language. The original words are clear, its young woman not virgin.

No I just reading and understand the context that you ignore. There is zero evidence of it being messianic. How would the messiah help King Ahaz restore his kingdom hundreds of years before he was ever even born?

Click to expand...

Lol, I'm curious. Have you named your new religion yet? If not may I suggest Silveranity, or perhaps Spoonism? I like Spoonism, it's catchy.

SilverSpoon said:

So you don't care that there is a false prophecy in the gospels?

Click to expand...

Impossible

SilverSpoon said:

When you have no capacity to reason resort to petty insults, classic.

Click to expand...

No insults, but when one just picks and chooses what part of the word of God they think is relevant or not it becomes a religion of self. Debating becomes silly when you just change the rules to your liking. But I promise you that I and others commenting here have far, far more experience with this than you, not that that matters when dealing with a religion of one.

SilverSpoon said:

The point is the a gospel author is claiming a messianic prophecy when Isaiah 7 makes no such claim in full context, you ignore this in favor of church driven dogma, which is highly typically. You do not and will not accept evidence even from the scripture that contradicts what you have been lead to believe.

Click to expand...

Oh, now not only you know the scriptures better than anyone, even the apostles, you also know what others have studied, what drives them, and what they believe? I think we have now identified the Messiah of your new religion.

SilverSpoon said:

Oh look a strawman, "better than anyone". How about better than most Christians who haven't read it at all?

Isaiah 7 : 13 Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. 15 He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, 16 for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. 17 The Lord will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judah—he will bring the king of Assyria.”

Now pay very close attention : "Before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste". Did Jesus do that? Did Jesus lay waste to the two kings tormenting Ahaz circa 8th century BC? All that is needed is basic literacy. "Apostles", you mean anonymous authors who never claimed to meet Jesus and despite being described as illiterate also somehow include the Alexandrian Koine Greek writing Gospel authors.

Click to expand...

Let's try this from another angle. How many souls have you lead to the Lord using this revelation? How many people healed, families restored? Any positive fruit at all? Or, by any chance have you pehaps used this revelation of yours solely to put down and belittle other Christians as blind, ignorant puppets because they don't see it your way?

SilverSpoon said:

Ah, more ignorant blibber blabber that ignores the scripture. Is it my way that it says "before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste." I'm sorry I didn't realize that Jesus was born in the 8th century BC (insert rofl emoji), unlike you enlightened ones, so very sorry.

Click to expand...

Spoken just like someone who has never led a single soul to the Lord. Now salvations, healings, family restorations and just treating fellow believers with respect is "blibber blabber that ignores scripture"? I believe you have made your fruit very clear for all to see.

SilverSpoon said:

Sorry but this apologetic does not work, for the author of Matthew clearly claims it as a fulfillment of prophecy : "All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet". Also the correct word isn't even "virgin", but "young woman".

Click to expand...

Let me ask this question: What do you think the author of Matthew means when he says "All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet"? What do you understand him to be saying?

SilverSpoon said:

Stop avoiding the scripture, was Jesus a “boy” during the reign of King Ahaz in the 8th century BC as specified by Isaiah 7:16? If so I was a baby during the reign on Nebuchadnezzar myself.

Click to expand...

I don't debate scripture with people that MAKE UP THEIR OWN RULES, that's giving what is holy to the dogs and casting your pearls before swine... it's silly, fruitless and a complete waste of time.

But I will leave you with a story this exchange has reminded me of:

There was a man who lived in our city who was well know among local pastors. He would show up from time to time to various churches, sit through the sermon then make every attempt to corner the pastor and begin peppering him/her with questions. He would present some obscure and bizarre personal theory about scripture, often challenging long standing universal understanding (like the apostleship of John or something). If challenged he would get very combative and angry, hurl insults and accusations and leave. If the pastor just smiled and nodded and let it go he would come back for awhile, each time with a new crazy theory until he became such a distraction he had to be confronted. He didn't last more than one service at our church

In talking with other pastors about him I learned more about his history. In the beginning he desperately wanted to be a minister. However, in his immaturity and pride he believed the only way he could gain people's respect was to bring "new and amazing revelations". He became enamored with finding the new great revelation hidden in scripture, because he thought it would validate him and his ministry. Problem was it never did, and it lead him in a downward spiral, continually reinforcing his immaturity in attempt to prove his maturity. Then he started confronting the pastors in town as mentioned, presumably in an desperate attempt to validate himself. When he was finally challenged, as mentioned above, he would bad mouth these pastors to anyone who would listen. Pastors and churches that were truly helping people. Leading them to the Lord, feeding and clothing the homeless, restoring marriages... it didn't matter, he they were all blinded heretics in his eyes and he wasn't afraid to say so.

The sad part of the entire ordeal is that he started out wanting to help people, continued on convicted he was the only one who could, yet never really helped a single soul. In fact, his reputation around town is one that drove people away from God because of his rudeness and behavior. I personally had to counsel several people that wanted nothing to do with God or the church because of their encounters with the man.

SilverSpoon said:

The Masoretic matches more closely the Dead Seas Scrolls than the corrupted Septuagint, hard proof that is it's the original. Isaiah 7 is not a messianic prophecy at all, that is the main point you are all missing. The implication is the author went out of their way to forge a prophecy that wasn't there.

Click to expand...

The Masoretic Text does not match more closely to the Dead Sea Scrolls.