• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Mathew takes Isaiah Chapter 7 way out of context

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Every human being(not only women but also men) is invited to become a spiritual virgin.
That is essentially what fundamentalist Christians believe when they say that you must be "born again." The problem is the baggage that comes with each person's particular Christianity. Once we start making symbolic meanings then the literal interpretation becomes unimportant. But, the extremes of symbolic makes the Christ's message anything they want it to be, but that's a different problem.

The extremes of literalism are what I'm questioning. They tell me I must believe a certain way to be saved. They say I must take the Bible literally and in context, but no one, not even they, take it completely literal. Is their interpretation "the truth" or just their pov? Is it consistent (if it is literal) with what God revealed to the Jews? I don't see it. And, if there wasn't any problems, why wouldn't more modern Jews see the "error" of their ways and accept Jesus as their Messiah?

Why would anybody complain about a religion that is so simple--accept Jesus and go to heaven or deny him and burn forever in hell. If it's true, then believe. But, so many people don't believe. Why do so many stay with other "false" religions? Why do so many "soften" or liberalize the Christian message? Why do so many end up rejecting all religions and God because of the way Jesus is presented? There are inconsistencies worth talking about and sorting out.
 

John Martin

Active Member
Didymus wrote:
Why would anybody complain about a religion that is so simple--accept Jesus and go to heaven or deny him and burn forever in hell. If it's true, then believe. But, so many people don't believe. Why do so many stay with other "false" religions? Why do so many "soften" or liberalize the Christian message? Why do so many end up rejecting all religions and God because of the way Jesus is presented? There are inconsistencies worth talking about and sorting out.

I am very sorry. Christianity is not just believing in Jesus and going to heaven. Believing in Jesus is only first step. It is believing in the message he has given and following the path he showed and arrive at the destiny he pointed out, which is the kingdom of God. Christianity is about growing into the mind of Christ. It is growing into the kingdom of God. Jesus said, the kingdom of God is like a mustard seed.It is smallest of all seeds.When it grows it becomes so big that the birds of the air will come and make their nests in it'. We need to grow from our individual identification to the divine consciousness where there is a place for everyone and every religion(nest) in our heart. The seed of God in us should grow into the tree of God.
There are no false religions.Every religion has some truth in it even though conditioned. Jesus said, I have not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill the Law. This Law is not limited to only Torah. It is all the understanding of Truth until the time of Jesus.Jesus accepts every truth that has been arrived so far and then takes it forward. Truth is basically two fold: Love of God and love of neighbour. In Jesus Christ this truth has reached one hundred percent. The kingdom of God is one hundred percent of love of God( the Father and I are one) and it is one hundred percent love of neighboour( whatever you do to the least of my brothers and sisters that you do unto me). Christianity is growing into the love of God and love of neighbour. To believe in Christ is to believe in this possibility. Unfortunately many Christians have made Christianity just a religion of a belief. If you just believe in Christ you are saved, you go to heaven. Do not hold to on one statement of Paul and forget all the others he is telling, not taking seriously what Jesus said,repent, to grow. St.Paul also tells us to renew our mind according to the mind of Christ, according to the image and likeness of God.If anyone is in Christ he or she is a new creation. Let us not make Christianity just a religion of belief but a religion that invites to grow, to grow into unity,to break down all the barriers and create one God,one creation and one humanity.
 

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by John Martin
Every human being(not only women but also men) is invited to become a spiritual virgin.

That is essentially what fundamentalist Christians believe when they say that you must be "born again."

Hi CG D, When Jesus said, "Ye must be born again"---the context and meaning seen in John 3:1-21 are nothing like JM has been posting. His posts are with true "excerpts", but the conclusions he posts are patterned after the serpent's dialogue with Eve.

The problem is the baggage that comes with each person's particular Christianity. Once we start making symbolic meanings then the literal interpretation becomes unimportant. But, the extremes of symbolic makes the Christ's message anything they want it to be, but that's a different problem.

"Baggage?"The only truths which came with Judeo-Christinity are those given by GOD and through HIS Prophets. Those OT scriptures are what was taught and preached by Jesus and HIS Disciples until they died off.

The Scriptures were spoken by the Prophets and written by them(received from GOD) for a witness against their back-slidings.
Those Decalogues and Laws/instructions for the Israelites to guide their lives by were Written(by GOD and Moses(From GOD) and placed in or by the Ark of the Covenant.

The extremes of literalism are what I'm questioning. They tell me I must believe a certain way to be saved. They say I must take the Bible literally and in context, but no one, not even they, take it completely literal. Is their interpretation "the truth" or just their pov? Is it consistent (if it is literal) with what God revealed to the Jews? I don't see it. And, if there wasn't any problems, why wouldn't more modern Jews see the "error" of their ways and accept Jesus as their Messiah?

The Bible is made up of Narratives about people and their Creator GOD---and GOD'S plan to Redeem mankind from eternal death.(to eternal life--as originally Created or designed.)
In teaching the HIS principles to the People, GOD does use symbols and allegories which are known and understood by HIS people. Context does inform one of such .

There is a certain way to Believe in order to be saved---As GOD has indicated---NOT just as one chooses as Cain's actions showed. The Scriptures(as a whole) informs one of that method.

That way is consistant with the plan out-lined at Sinai which the Jewish leaders rejected.

The reason more refuse to accept is seen in the principles seen in the Garden of Eden---"LUST---of the flesh, of the eyes, and the pride of Life".

Why would anybody complain about a religion that is so simple--accept Jesus and go to heaven or deny him and burn forever in hell. If it's true, then believe. But, so many people don't believe. Why do so many stay with other "false" religions? Why do so many "soften" or liberalize the Christian message? Why do so many end up rejecting all religions and God because of the way Jesus is presented? There are inconsistencies worth talking about and sorting out.

The "complaint" is about not being included in the reward/eternal life. When they believe it to be a myth. Or having to refrain from indulging in an activity which the Scriptures declares to be a NO-NO.

The Counterfeits(Look-a-like) religions/beliefs have assimilated the "sheep's clothing to mask that which is false and deadly.

The "staying" and "softening" are related- replace sound doctrines with that which is pleasing to the ears. As time becomes closer to the "END", people's thinking will be as in the days of Noah---"only evil continually."-------A part of that "softening".

The "so-called" inconsistencies are excuses for inaction. A myth is nothing and has no power in any real action.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Hi Sincerly, You answered my question with:
"Baggage?"The only truths which came with Judeo-Christinity are those given by GOD and through HIS Prophets. Those OT scriptures are what was taught and preached by Jesus and HIS Disciples until they died off.

Those Decalogues and Laws/instructions for the Israelites to guide their lives by were Written(by GOD and Moses(From GOD) and placed in or by the Ark of the Covenant.

The Bible is made up of Narratives about people and their Creator GOD---and GOD'S plan to Redeem mankind from eternal death.(to eternal life--as originally Created or designed.)

There is a certain way to Believe in order to be saved---As GOD has indicated---NOT just as one chooses as Cain's actions showed. The Scriptures(as a whole) informs one of that method.

That way is consistant with the plan out-lined at Sinai which the Jewish leaders rejected.

The reason more refuse to accept is seen in the principles seen in the Garden of Eden---"LUST---of the flesh, of the eyes, and the pride of Life".
Since not all Jews believe the same thing, and since not all Christians believe the same thing, somebody is wrong. Some of them have the added baggage. From your perspective looking at Judaism--Is the Talmud baggage? Looking at Catholicism--Is purgatory and Mary worship baggage? Does the Law make sense today? Was it meant "forever"? Were the Ten Commandments meant forever? Or, to the Christian, are they unneeded baggage from an old covenant? (specifically the Sabbath). Did the Jews have anything resembling the Christian idea of "personal salvation"? Did the Jews have the same idea about heaven and hell and the devil like Christianity does? If all we had was the Hebrew Scriptures, which would include the Talmud, what would their idea of God's plan be?

All this leads into your next comment:
The "so-called" inconsistencies are excuses for inaction. A myth is nothing and has no power in any real action.
According to a fundamental protestant view, Jews and Catholics have it wrong. They have baggage. Protestants striped away the garbage and came up with a Bible-only view of what God's plan is. So, if protestants are right, both Jews and Catholics are believing something false, or essentially a myth, yet it has power. So to you and me, what they believe is wrong, but they believe it and it works for them. So that's the problem and that ties in with your next comment:
The Counterfeits(Look-a-like) religions/beliefs have assimilated the "sheep's clothing to mask that which is false and deadly.
All the other religions think their perspective is right. Many believe all the other religions are wrong. All of them can use the Bible to justify their pov. All of them can point to any other religious group and point out inconsistencies in beliefs and abuses in practice. So are you sure you are the one that is right? You always do come up with good answers, and I appreciate it, but I really, really don't want such a hard and limited view of God's plan to be true.

So let's not even worry about all the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and other Asians, let's not worry about all the Islamic people, let's just look at the Jews and the Catholics since the coming of Jesus. Where are they? Most of the Jews rejected Jesus and stayed with their beliefs. The Catholics added to the NT and the leaders kept the Bible from the common people. So for 1500 years of Christianity were any of those people saved? They had no concept of being born-again like the protestants. They prayed to Mary, went to confession and did all the things the priests and the pope told them to do. So who was the counterfeit? Who was the wolf in sheep's clothing? The protestants came along and stripped all the excess baggage that was added to the Bible, but even protestantism isn't one monolithic thing. They keep changing and adding or subtracting things.

So is the Bible myth? To me yes and for me, that does take its power away, the fundamentalist/literalist power. For other Christians, more liberal Christians, it doesn't take the power away. They find a "spiritual" meaning in the stories. Is Job a literal, historical story? Is Jonah? The Bible has stories of virgins and devils, of giants and floods which all sounds like myth to me. To you no, but to others yes, they see it as myth and yet, they still believe and get a spiritual truth from it. And, what's important, they can find "truth" in other people's beliefs. That is what I hope is the real truth. But, I'm just guessing.
 

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Hi Sincerly, You answered my question with:Since not all Jews believe the same thing, and since not all Christians believe the same thing, somebody is wrong. Some of them have the added baggage. From your perspective looking at Judaism--Is the Talmud baggage? Looking at Catholicism--Is purgatory and Mary worship baggage? Does the Law make sense today? Was it meant "forever"? Were the Ten Commandments meant forever? Or, to the Christian, are they unneeded baggage from an old covenant? (specifically the Sabbath). Did the Jews have anything resembling the Christian idea of "personal salvation"? Did the Jews have the same idea about heaven and hell and the devil like Christianity does? If all we had was the Hebrew Scriptures, which would include the Talmud, what would their idea of God's plan be?

All this leads into your next comment:
According to a fundamental protestant view, Jews and Catholics have it wrong. They have baggage. Protestants striped away the garbage and came up with a Bible-only view of what God's plan is. So, if protestants are right, both Jews and Catholics are believing something false, or essentially a myth, yet it has power. So to you and me, what they believe is wrong, but they believe it and it works for them. So that's the problem and that ties in with your next comment:
All the other religions think their perspective is right. Many believe all the other religions are wrong. All of them can use the Bible to justify their pov. All of them can point to any other religious group and point out inconsistencies in beliefs and abuses in practice. So are you sure you are the one that is right? You always do come up with good answers, and I appreciate it, but I really, really don't want such a hard and limited view of God's plan to be true.

So let's not even worry about all the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and other Asians, let's not worry about all the Islamic people, let's just look at the Jews and the Catholics since the coming of Jesus. Where are they? Most of the Jews rejected Jesus and stayed with their beliefs. The Catholics added to the NT and the leaders kept the Bible from the common people. So for 1500 years of Christianity were any of those people saved? They had no concept of being born-again like the protestants. They prayed to Mary, went to confession and did all the things the priests and the pope told them to do. So who was the counterfeit? Who was the wolf in sheep's clothing? The protestants came along and stripped all the excess baggage that was added to the Bible, but even protestantism isn't one monolithic thing. They keep changing and adding or subtracting things.

So is the Bible myth? To me yes and for me, that does take its power away, the fundamentalist/literalist power. For other Christians, more liberal Christians, it doesn't take the power away. They find a "spiritual" meaning in the stories. Is Job a literal, historical story? Is Jonah? The Bible has stories of virgins and devils, of giants and floods which all sounds like myth to me. To you no, but to others yes, they see it as myth and yet, they still believe and get a spiritual truth from it. And, what's important, they can find "truth" in other people's beliefs. That is what I hope is the real truth. But, I'm just guessing.

Hi CG D, As you have pointed out, "What is truth of the Scriptures?" That Truth is what is contained in those Scriptures given by the Creator GOD for the edification of mankind.--without the baggage(falseness)--added or subtracted(truths deleted) by the philosophy of "mankind's wisdom."

Do I need to fret concerning who will be saved---in any age of earth's history? NO! The Creator GOD of those Scriptures knows who are or are not HIS. Just as the Scriptures state---HE is Just and Merciful--Gracious to to all who have truly accepted GOD as their GOD. GOD is still in charge and HIS plans will be fininshed in the end.

Mankind(individually) has to make their "calling and election sure"(ALL have been called---but ALL do not elect to accept the invitation). 2Pet.1:10

Examples of right and wrong actions are in those Scriptures for our learning/admonition, But those who hear and believe will heed the admonition of Rev.18:4 and "Come out of her my people"---From all of the false "beliefs". Those who have concluded it is all 'just a myth" will continue in that philosophy.

Again, Pilate's question is appropriate----What shall One do with the Scriptures and Jesus? Truth or Myth?
 

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Hi Sincerly, You answered my question with:Since not all Jews believe the same thing, and since not all Christians believe the same thing, somebody is wrong. Some of them have the added baggage. From your perspective looking at Judaism--Is the Talmud baggage?

Hi CG D, This is to answer your specific questions as best I can Scripturally.
While I agree with your assessment of the "beliefs of not all Jews" or "not all Christians" that may have been your understanding, but I don't recall posting those words-----But, YES, The Scriptures are not rightly divided/interpreted by a vast majority of "professed believers". Jesus spoke of the broad road and narrow road to validate that "falseness" would be accepted over the Truth which leads to that heavenly goal true seekers aspired to reach. The OT had the same principle in Prov.14:12
"Is the Talmud baggage?" Jesus said that which was contrary to the Commandments of GOD wasn't acceptable. Mark 7:1-13; Matt.22:29; Mark 12:24, 27.

Looking at Catholicism--Is purgatory and Mary worship baggage? Does the Law make sense today? Was it meant "forever"? Were the Ten Commandments meant forever? Or, to the Christian, are they unneeded baggage from an old covenant? (specifically the Sabbath). Did the Jews have anything resembling the Christian idea of "personal salvation"? Did the Jews have the same idea about heaven and hell and the devil like Christianity does? If all we had was the Hebrew Scriptures, which would include the Talmud, what would their idea of God's plan be?

"Purgatory?"---from purge/cleanse after death. Neither The OT nor the NT has any scriptural basis for this teaching. Repentance has to be done by the individual prior to one's death. Ezek.18; 2Pet.1:10

"Mary worship"---Mary was a human Being--born of human s and while the selected Mother, by GOD, for HIS SON--Jesus, she is/was Blessed in that respect, but she was not to be worshiped.
God knew when HE explained to Adam and Eve that the "Seed---Jesus" would be born of/from a virgin. At Sinai, Ex.20:4-5, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God," GOD forbid the worship of the prophesied earthly mother of HIS SON.

According to a fundamental protestant view, Jews and Catholics have it wrong. They have baggage. Protestants striped away the garbage and came up with a Bible-only view of what God's plan is. So, if protestants are right, both Jews and Catholics are believing something false, or essentially a myth, yet it has power. So to you and me, what they believe is wrong, but they believe it and it works for them. So that's the problem and that ties in with your next comment:
All the other religions think their perspective is right. Many believe all the other religions are wrong. All of them can use the Bible to justify their pov. All of them can point to any other religious group and point out inconsistencies in beliefs and abuses in practice. So are you sure you are the one that is right? You always do come up with good answers, and I appreciate it, but I really, really don't want such a hard and limited view of God's plan to be true.

CG D, I have only pointed out the truths which the Scriptures have given to all readers. The same truths which GOD spoke and wrote atop Mt. Sinai are the Same truths/Principles which Jesus declared came from the Father who sent HIM.
The Protestants didn't set out to produce a different "GOD given truth", but to correct the errors which had entered into the true church which was a continuation of the same teachings given at Sinai---BY GOD. (Dan.7:25; 2Thess.2:3-4)
Heb.4:2, "For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard [it].
Wasn't it a lack of FAITH in the Ability of GOD that the Israelites time after time after time sought the gods of other nations to sustain them. Wasn't that Ahaz's problem---in turning to Assyria?

GOD'S Plan is in love and long-suffering as is seen in all the books of the Bible. Man's inhumanity to man is the outcome from man's arrogant/willful/defiant bull-headedness portrayed over the ages.
ALL GOD has required is that one---Deut,10:12-13, "And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul, To keep the commandments of the LORD, and his statutes, which I command thee this day for thy good?"
Or as Micah 6:8 states, "He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"

Scripturally, Is GOD'S Plan really to "hard and limited in view"?

So let's not even worry about all the Chinese, Japanese, Indians and other Asians, let's not worry about all the Islamic people, let's just look at the Jews and the Catholics since the coming of Jesus. Where are they? Most of the Jews rejected Jesus and stayed with their beliefs. The Catholics added to the NT and the leaders kept the Bible from the common people. So for 1500 years of Christianity were any of those people saved? They had no concept of being born-again like the protestants. They prayed to Mary, went to confession and did all the things the priests and the pope told them to do. So who was the counterfeit? Who was the wolf in sheep's clothing? The protestants came along and stripped all the excess baggage that was added to the Bible, but even protestantism isn't one monolithic thing. They keep changing and adding or subtracting things.

James(4:17) wrote this, "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin. "
God knows who are HIS and those who claim to be, but are only giving lip-service. Then there are those who do not acknowledge HIM at all.
Paul in Romans 2:14, says of those who are ignorant of GOD'S Instructions by oral or written knowledge, but in their own understanding are aware of the principles contained in those GOD given precepts their doing them is just as valid as having awareness of the Tablets of stone.

Didn't Jesus say that "him that loses his life for my sake shall save it". And that if one denies Jesus, Jesus would deny him?

The counterfeit was the ecclesiastical power that still sits in the temple of GOD showing that he is GOD.(vicar of)-----and did "think to change times and laws" of GOD.
That is the wolf in sheep clothes as well. Unfortunately, the protestants didn't strip all the erroneous baggage from the "Church" and they retained some of the erroneous teachings for themselves and some added their own erroneous "baggage".

So is the Bible myth? To me yes and for me, that does take its power away, the fundamentalist/literalist power. For other Christians, more liberal Christians, it doesn't take the power away. They find a "spiritual" meaning in the stories. Is Job a literal, historical story? Is Jonah? The Bible has stories of virgins and devils, of giants and floods which all sounds like myth to me. To you no, but to others yes, they see it as myth and yet, they still believe and get a spiritual truth from it. And, what's important, they can find "truth" in other people's beliefs. That is what I hope is the real truth. But, I'm just guessing.

The Scriptures declare their truth. Your choice to believe it a myth is your choice. "Liberal Christians" will have the opportunity to defend their view when the "time comes".
Yes, I find the Prophet Jonah as real and do not doubt the Creator GOD'S ability to transport Jonah close to Ninaveh.
And JOB corrected some early wrong thinking at that time concerning GOD and the Adversary first seen in Eden.

CG D, In Gen.1:9, GOD gathered the waters into one place and dry land appeared. What's so difficult to believe that GOD could not "flood " the land again? HE spoke and it was done.
Since GOD made Woman out of created Man, what is so difficult to believe that a woman could have one of her "seed"/Ova be impregnated by GOD(The Holy Spirit) to produce the promised "Messiah"?

"devil" is the hairy goat which was offered for a sin offering. Or a hairy man(Esau)

"Giants" these are seen in the time of David as well---the last five may have been killed in battle with the Israelites. But why find unbelief with "Giants" of the Scriptures and not with the "pygmies" of today?.

CG D, call it myth if it pleases you, but all the truths of GOD were carried into all the world with the scattering of the people from the Tower of Babel. Those truths were corrupted by the people to fit with their man made gods and the man endowed powers ascribed to their gods.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Thanks for the green. On the question of who took who out of context. Even if the woman was a virgin and never had sex with a man and conceived and gave birth to a son, the context of Isaiah chapter seven goes on to talk about the boy, what he will do and what will happen when he gets older. In context, how does that describe the Messiah or Jesus? Plus, it would make a woman in Isaiah's time a first virgin before Mary. So logically that can't be right. So logically, the woman in Isaiah's time wasn't a virgin, the verses are not about the Messiah, but, were about the child and what would happen to the two kings.

On your point about the people not knowing about the virgin birth until the gospels got written brings up a good question: When did the virgin birth story start getting told? It didn't come out until after Jesus was gone to heaven? Why didn't Mark, John, Paul or Peter talk about it? But since Greek and Romans had stories of their gods having sex with humans, why couldn't a "myth" be fabricated to create the "legend" of Jesus the God/man? That would be pretty impressive. Look at what it does today, it is still impressive. But, did it really happen? Can we know how people thought in those days? Did they make up stories to embellish the truth about their history? We still make legends out of our heroes by bending the truth a little.

That in no wise can be drawn back to a context concurrent with other things going on in Isa 7 except for saying that an event will happen before the child has fully grown. However before can mean a long time or a short time and God isn't time constrained the way we are. Both events are present time for God even though they are different times for us.

Was Syria forsaken and given into the hands of Assyria before Jesus was born? I believe it was.

There is no evidence that any woman in Isaiah's time fulfilled this prophecy.

Logically a virgin birth occurs when God wants it to occur.

Logically the birth is not a concurrent event and God never says that it is.

That is correct however I believe it emerged after the Paraclete came.

They were not doing research but Luke was interviewing eyewitnesses and much of what Luke reports could only have come from Mary. No one else could have known such personal things about her. As for Matthew, he doesn't say who toldhim what. There is no doubt he was not there when Jesus was born or conceived.

There is no evidence to support the concept of outside influences.

The only way to know is to ask God who does know. I have Jesus in me and He has been totally on board with the virgin birth and the prophecy of it.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Hi Muffled.

Can I ask you which English translation of the bible that you used on regular basis? And which one do you use for Isaiah 7?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
muffled said:
Was Syria forsaken and given into the hands of Assyria before Jesus was born? I believe it was.

Which would mean that Jesus couldn't be the child of the sign - Immanuel, because Assyria took Aram after the child was born, not centuries after.

Muffled said:
There is no evidence that any woman in Isaiah's time fulfilled this prophecy.

Isaiah 8:1-8.

Isaiah's wife, apparently she was a prophetess (8:3).

Just as Immanuel of 7:14 was connected to the Two Kings and Assyria (7:15-17), so was Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:2-4, 8:6-8).
 

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by muffled
Was Syria forsaken and given into the hands of Assyria before Jesus was born? I believe it was.



Which would mean that Jesus couldn't be the child of the sign - Immanuel, because Assyria took Aram after the child was born, not centuries after.
Isaiah 8:1-8.
Isaiah's wife, apparently she was a prophetess (8:3).

Hi Gnostic, Yes, Syria/Aram was. Israel---the kingdom(Israel) to the North had previously strayed from the Lord GOD and was joined to Syria. GOD used Assyria to prevent the setting up of a "king by them". GOD had prophesied that which would "come to pass" centuries before and reminded Ahaz in the "sign" of 7:14.

Isaiah's wife was the mother of the "child" who with Isaiah was the "sign" of the Assyrian conquest until Nebuchadnezzar carried the Israelites into Babylonian captivity for 70 years.
Isa.55:11 tells of that ability of GOD. "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it. So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it. "

And Jer.16:5, 9-18 adds this information. "And it shall come to pass, when thou shalt shew this people all these words, and they shall say unto thee, Wherefore hath the LORD pronounced all this great evil against us? or what [is] our iniquity? or what [is] our sin that we have committed against the LORD our God? And it shall come to pass, when thou shalt shew this people all these words, and they shall say unto thee, Wherefore hath the LORD pronounced all this great evil against us? or what [is] our iniquity? or what [is] our sin that we have committed against the LORD our God? Then shalt thou say unto them, Because your fathers have forsaken me, saith the LORD, and have walked after other gods, and have served them, and h ave worshipped them, and have forsaken me, and have not kept my law; Then shalt thou say unto them, Because your fathers have forsaken me, saith the LORD, and have walked after other gods, and have served them, and have worshipped them, and have forsaken me, and have not kept my law And ye have done worse than your fathers; for, behold, ye walk every one after the imagination of his evil heart, that they may not hearken unto me: And ye have done worse than your fathers; for, behold, ye walk every one after the imagination of his evil heart, that they may not hearken unto me:; Therefore will I cast you out of this land into a land that ye know not, [neither] ye nor your fathers; and there shall ye serve other gods day and night; where I will not shew you favour. Therefore will I cast you out of this land into a land that ye know not, [neither] ye nor your fathers; and there shall ye serve other gods day and night; where I will not shew you favour. "

Yes, GOD does bring to pass that which HE says,----you can believe and propagate myths, but GOD's Words are sure and Matthew acknowledged the Truth of HIS fulfillment.

Just as Immanuel of 7:14 was connected to the Two Kings and Assyria (7:15-17), so was Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:2-4, 8:6-8).

The "GOD with us" isn't the same as "In making speed to the spoil he hasteneth the prey"--- said of Assyria in spoiling Judea/Jerusalem. Nor of Ahaz's erroneous belief that disobedience will turn out right.
 

roger1440

I do stuff
That is essentially what fundamentalist Christians believe when they say that you must be "born again."


John 3:3 says, “Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." In the original Greek, the word used for “again” is “anōthen”. It is best translated into English as “from above” not the word “again”. In John 3:31 the same word “anōthen” is used. Please note, in this verse the English translation is the word “above”. “The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all.” What Jesus is saying here is that heaven is above. We all know God is in heaven. Therefore we should be like God. In what matter should we be like God? Simple, Jesus is just rewording Leviticus 11:44-45. “I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy. Do not make yourselves unclean by any creature that moves along the ground. 45 I am the Lord, who brought you up out of Egypt to be your God; therefore be holy, because I am holy

Peter had said the same thing. “Therefore, prepare your minds for action; be self-controlled; set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed. As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."(1 Peter 1:13-16)
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Isaiah says nothng about a "virgin birth".

It is mistranslated. It refers to a young woman.

Yeshayahu - Chapter 7 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible

14. Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.
Two things have to happen for the Christian that wants to use Isaiah 7:14. The girl has to get herself pregnant without sexual intercourse and, second, the "is with child" has to change so that the event didn't happen in Isaiah's time but in Jesus' time. In context a young girl with child works as a sign. For the Christian they have to be creative in making this one verse prophetic and then disregard the context. For the Jew it seems crazy to think that for 700 years you had a prophecy about the Messiah being born of a virgin, in Bethlehem, then going to Egypt, while boys two years old and younger were being killed by Herod's men and then, when it all happened, according to "prophecy," you didn't believe he was the true Messiah? How would that make any sense? Or, Matthew cherry-picked verses and created "prophesies"? Thanks for your input. CG
 

gnostic

The Lost One
I have started a new thread on Isaiah 7:14 - ha‘almah harah: "a young woman is pregnant".

This new topic deal with "harad" than "almah", where I compared other OT references of "harad", whether it should be translated "with a child" or "is pregnant" (both present tense), or KJV "shall conceive" (future tense).
 
Last edited:

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by gnostic
I have started a new thread on Isaiah 7:14 - ha‘almah harah: "a young woman is pregnant".

This new topic deal with "harad" than "almah", where I compared other OT references of "harad", whether it should be translated "with a child" or "is pregnant" (both present tense), or KJV "shall conceive" (future tense).


Can't wait to see the responses.

I read the responses and except for a new title as Solomon said---"there's nothing new under the sun". And it still continues to be "vanity".
The same accusations that the Creator GOD of all things is a myth and the Book about THE Creator GOD is a myth.

However, I'll address my continued responses on that site.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Originally Posted by gnostic
I have started a new thread on Isaiah 7:14 - ha‘almah harah: "a young woman is pregnant".

I read the responses and except for a new title as Solomon said---"there's nothing new under the sun". And it still continues to be "vanity".
The same accusations that the Creator GOD of all things is a myth and the Book about THE Creator GOD is a myth.

However, I'll address my continued responses on that site.
Christianity makes several claims based on words in the NT. Some of those claims are wrong. Some Christians say Jesus is God others don't based on words found in the Bible. Do you speak in tongues? Some Christians do, some don't based on words in the NT. Some people call themselves Christian but change a word or two around to make it mean something different. It is not vanity. It is doubting and questioning mainstream Christianity--did they do any manipulating? Of course the believers themselves might be the nicest people in the world, but there are nice people in all religions. Yet, fundy Christians say they are following a lie. What is the lie? Words in a Holy book, maybe even the Bible, but misinterpreted or manipulated to say something different. Other religions have done it. Other "Christian" denominations have done it. Why not yours? How do I know your version of Christianity is the true one? Because of how you interpret the words? The words can and are interpreted and changed by religious people all the time. Did Matthew? To you no, to me yes.
 

sincerly

Well-Known Member
Christianity makes several claims based on words in the NT. Some of those claims are wrong. Some Christians say Jesus is God others don't based on words found in the Bible. Do you speak in tongues? Some Christians do, some don't based on words in the NT. Some people call themselves Christian but change a word or two around to make it mean something different. It is not vanity. It is doubting and questioning mainstream Christianity--did they do any manipulating? Of course the believers themselves might be the nicest people in the world, but there are nice people in all religions. Yet, fundy Christians say they are following a lie. What is the lie? Words in a Holy book, maybe even the Bible, but misinterpreted or manipulated to say something different. Other religions have done it. Other "Christian" denominations have done it. Why not yours? How do I know your version of Christianity is the true one? Because of how you interpret the words? The words can and are interpreted and changed by religious people all the time. Did Matthew? To you no, to me yes.

Hi CG D, To Eve the Serpent didn't appear to have any characteristics or philosophies which were to be afraid of as presented---all she saw and heard sounded "logical, for her best good now and in the future". Was it? Not from the continued context. Did the Creator GOD express the correct relationship to trust/Believe/Obey? Again, according to the context--YES.
According to the context of those entire Scriptures, one sees that it isn't other human beings/idols of one's conjecture--- who one is to base their choice of Gods or teachings upon, but only on the right relationship to that Creator who did the creating and in a right relationship to the other created beings.

How did Jesus answer the disciples of John the Baptist----Are you the ONE? Or do we look for another? What do you see? Wasn't it, am I "doing" that which has been written concerning me?

Since there is a Creator GOD, Or a myth as some choose to believe, all will make that decision/witness---Believe or Disbelieve. And so, you have chosen. And the Believers will submit to HIS Will.
 
Last edited:

Muffled

Jesus in me
Hi Muffled.

Can I ask you which English translation of the bible that you used on regular basis? And which one do you use for Isaiah 7?

I use the New American Standard but for on-line references I use The American Standard becasue I can get it on my computer for free.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Which would mean that Jesus couldn't be the child of the sign - Immanuel, because Assyria took Aram after the child was born, not centuries after.

Isaiah 8:1-8.

Isaiah's wife, apparently she was a prophetess (8:3).

Just as Immanuel of 7:14 was connected to the Two Kings and Assyria (7:15-17), so was Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:2-4, 8:6-8).

Are you saying that centuries after is not after? I believe that would be illogical.

I beleive I'm connected to both of them by reading their names. Does that mean I am Immanuel (I am in fact but not because of my reading) or Maher...
 
Top