bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: alchemist on June 15, 2006, 01:11:37 PM
-
You people have had this conversation about the virgin birth more than once and I want to bring to the table the possibility of it never happening at all.Let me explain,Luke and Matthew(NOTE:Matthew and Luke probly didn't even write them) are the only ones in the bible that mention it.In mark 3:21 did his family just forget about the virgin birth and paul not once every seemed to acknowledge it.
People read the Matthew&Luke and just assume that these are true.In fact there are many parts of the bible people just assume are inspired.In the two thousand years since the birth of Jesus of Nazareth, the world of Christendom has seen incredible changes, including a split with the Eastern Orthodox Church and a Protestant Reformation, accompanied by a rejection of much core ideology. Yet throughout it all, the collection of scripture called the New Testament has remained unchanged and largely unquestioned, even though it was assembled by the same church leaders whose beliefs many now refute.I might bring up this topic in a later thread and you'll understand what I mean later but for now I'm drawing my focus on Matthew&Luke.
EDITED: Don't get me wrong I'm not saying throw out these gospels just well...one false scripture can do more harm than a true one can do good.
-
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself giveth to you a sign, Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, And is bringing forth a son, And hath called his name Immanuel, (YLT)
Mat 5:17 `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets--I did not come to throw down, but TO FULFIL; (YLT)
If you can't stand on the scriptures, how can you stand at all?
-
If Jesus was not born of a virgin, then he would be the seed of Adam and thus born a sinner like the rest of us. Who do you think got Mary pregnant with Jesus, Joseph? Or perhaps another man? If you answered ,no,no, then Mary's still a virgin. If you answer yes to any of those than you have no Scripture to back it up. So which is it. But Like I said, we are all born sinners by virtue of being born of Adam. So if Jesus was concieved the old fashioned way, then we don't have a Saviour. For He would not be spotless and without blemish and sinless.
Take care,
Sorin
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
-
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself giveth to you a sign, Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, And is bringing forth a son, And hath called his name Immanuel, (YLT)
Mat 5:17 `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets--I did not come to throw down, but TO FULFIL; (YLT)
If you can't stand on the scriptures, how can you stand at all?
The correct translation for Isa 7:14 is maiden not virgin.
Sorin about Adam well...this I will have to explain later besides the subjects probly a little to big for this place.Infact Joe if your reading this remember when I asked you about satan,eden,and adam&eve you never answered my question.do you still need more time or did you just forget?Remember me I asked you to ban me?
EDIT:Sorin I don't see your point.Right now I'm criticizing matthew and luke so besides them do YOU have any proof for or against the birth.AS far as I have seen(AND I HAVE LOOKED) there is none as if it never happened.
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
there's a lot about alchemy they say.Some say moses sister was an alchemist
-
I understand the controversy, Paul even used Mary as an allegory somewhere having the "light of the gospel". As far as I can see him using her was in relation to a woman under the law to redeem those under it.
It was said of her, "that a sword would peirce her own soul, that the thoughts of many hearts be revealed
Shes used as a picture though she was who she was after the flesh, reason for her not knowing Joseph (not to be born of flesh for our comparison)
This is why I believe (set up this way) in the law it speaks of passing the inheritance along the "male side" of things. Moses was inquired of God concerning two (daughters) which had "no brothers". God allowed that it could come unto the daughters under exception which (after the flesh) brought Mary right to be included in the geneology after the flesh (I'm thinking). Although now, these things be of no value (as the epistles write) because we are to see them after the spirit and no longer after the flesh as they were intended.
Paul doesn't mention the virgin birth, He had "the Light" of the gospel expounding the spiritual truths contained therein. Thats how I see it anyway.
See the "one" being made a "type" of "the many" in Mary?
Isaiah 62:5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
Peace
Daniel
-
I understand the controversy, Paul even used Mary as an allegory somewhere having the "light of the gospel". As far as I can see him using her was in relation to a woman under the law to redeem those under it.
It was said of her, "that a sword would peirce her own soul, that the thoughts of many hearts be revealed
Shes used as a picture though she was who she was after the flesh, reason for her not knowing Joseph (not to be born of flesh for our comparison)
This is why I believe (set up this way) in the law it speaks of passing the inheritance along the "male side" of things. Moses was inquired of God concerning two (daughters) which had "no brothers". God allowed that it could come unto the daughters under exception which (after the flesh) brought Mary right to be included in the geneology after the flesh (I'm thinking). Although now, these things be of no value (as the epistles write) because we are to see them after the spirit and no longer after the flesh as they were intended.
Paul doesn't mention the virgin birth, He had "the Light" of the gospel expounding the spiritual truths contained therein. Thats how I see it anyway.
See the "one" being made a "type" of "the many" in Mary?
Isaiah 62:5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
Peace
Daniel
I don't disagree with your opinion on paul you maybe right.Although you'd think it be mentioned somewhere else.
Youth version:
5For a young man doth marry a virgin, Thy Builders do marry thee, With the joy of a bridegroom over a bride, Rejoice over thee doth thy God.
I don't see how this applies to this topic remember virgin in old times also ment ummarried.
And further more how do you explainMark 3:21 about fis family saying he's beside himself as if nothing special ever happened in the past.
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
there's a lot about alchemy they say.Some say moses sister was an alchemist
do you know anything about clear gold? white powder? manna? :wink:
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
there's a lot about alchemy they say.Some say moses sister was an alchemist
do you know anything about clear gold? white powder? manna? :wink:
I've went pretty deap into alchemy but some stuffs kinda fuzzy since there's a lot and I haven't looked into it that much lately,but yeah I know some about that stuff and lets try and make this thread stay on topic.Don't want to slip into alchemy.
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
there's a lot about alchemy they say.Some say moses sister was an alchemist
do you know anything about clear gold? white powder? manna? :wink:
I've went pretty deap into alchemy but some stuffs kinda fuzzy since there's a lot and I haven't looked into it that much lately,but yeah I know some about that stuff and lets try and make this thread stay on topic.Don't want to slip into alchemy.
my apologies.
carry on.
almah TWOT - 1630b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
al-maw' Noun Feminine
Definition
virgin, young woman
of marriageable age
maid or newly married ++++ There is no instance where it can be proved that this word designates a young woman who is not a virgin. (TWOT
-
its said the magi where alchemist.
there's a lot about alchemy they say.Some say moses sister was an alchemist
do you know anything about clear gold? white powder? manna? :wink:
I've went pretty deap into alchemy but some stuffs kinda fuzzy since there's a lot and I haven't looked into it that much lately,but yeah I know some about that stuff and lets try and make this thread stay on topic.Don't want to slip into alchemy.
my apologies.
carry on.
almah TWOT - 1630b
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
al-maw' Noun Feminine
Definition
virgin, young woman
of marriageable age
maid or newly married ++++ There is no instance where it can be proved that this word designates a young woman who is not a virgin. (TWOT
Bethulah and 'Almah
There are two important words in Hebrew that can be translated into English as "virgin": בתולה, bethulah, and עלמה, `almah. Isaiah uses `almah in the Masoretic Text, and so conservative Christians have tried to demonstrate that the word unambiguously means "virgin", while other scholars, Christian, Jewish and otherwise, have tried to demonstrate that the word means simply "young woman", without any necessary connotation of virginity. `Almah occurs seven times in the Hebrew Bible and usually seems to mean a young woman of marriageable age (e.g. Genesis 24:43), but is never used in the Old Testament of anyone who was not a virgin; bethulah is accepted in modern Hebrew usage as the characteristic Hebrew word for virgin. However, it is qualified by a statement ‘neither had any man known her’ in Gen. 24:16, and is used of a widow in Joel 1:8. In the Ugaritic tablets, btlt was used of the goddess Anath who was a consort of Baal; and in other records, the Aramaic counterpart of betûlah is used of a married woman.
[edit]
Parthenos
The fact that there is no Hebrew tradition of virgin birth — Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Hannah were infertile women who miraculously gave birth late in life — is consistent with the view that the Messiah would be unique, and Christian apologists argue that many first century Jews, including Jewish converts to Christianity, used the Septuagint, which explicitly uses the word παρθενος (parthenos) to mean "virgin": the root from which we derive words such as parthenogenesis.
Some scholars, however, claim that the Septuagint does not use parthenos very precisely, as it translates at least three different Hebrew words by it: bethulah, "maiden/virgin"; `almah, "maiden/virgin"; and נערה, na`arah, "maiden, young woman, servant". The meaning of the word parthenos in the Septuagint is sometimes expanded in a way not seen in the Isaiah of the (albeit centuries younger) Masoretic texts:
Genesis 24:16 And the damsel [parthenos = Hebrew na`arah] was very fair to look upon, a virgin [parthenos = Hebrew bethulah], neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
Judges 21:12 And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins [parthenous = Hebrew bethulah], that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.
Additionally, the Greek-English Lexicon edited by Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott lists other meanings for the word:
παρθενος, parthenos, I. 1. maiden, girl; virgin, opp. γυνη gynê, "woman". 2. of unmarried women who are not virgins, Iliad 2.514, etc. 3. Parthenos, hê, the Virgin Goddess, as a title of Athena at Athens. 4. the constellation Virgo. II. as adj., maiden, chaste. III. as masc., parthenos, ho, unmarried man, Apocalypse 14.4.
Finally, there is archaeological evidence that Jewish speakers of Greek used the word parthenos elastically; Jewish catacombs in Rome identify married men and women as "virgins," and some have suggested that in this case the word was used to call attention to the fact that the deceased was someone's first spouse (although it is notable that this usage is from several centuries before the translation of the Septuagint [citation needed]). Certainly, Jews stopped using the more explicit Septuagint translation as Christianity spread, and post-Christian Jewish translations into Greek use νεανις, neanis, meaning "young (juvenile) woman", rather than parthenos.
from wikipedia and if you want more,I'll get more
-
i personally dont need more. :wink:
2Cr 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
the flesh body of christ was just a house for the SPIRIT.
peace
chuckt
-
don't disagree with your opinion on paul you maybe right.Although you'd think it be mentioned somewhere else.
Youth version:
5For a young man doth marry a virgin, Thy Builders do marry thee, With the joy of a bridegroom over a bride, Rejoice over thee doth thy God.
I don't see how this applies to this topic remember virgin in old times also ment ummarried.
And further more how do you explainMark 3:21 about fis family saying he's beside himself as if nothing special ever happened in the past.
You can rather look at it as a chaste virgin to Christ, wouldnt you think? To present them as a chaste virgin to Him. Sons, joined and one with Him in Spirit and led by the Spirit.
I don't see how the last question is figured into the equation, or see it after the flesh at all. Like Paul just using her as an allegory, "made of a woman" under the law. Seems to show that even Paul disregarded the need to call her ( who symbolized the many) as "A virgin" to whom he was writing. Showing "them" that He would like (in the reality of the thing) present "them" plural of whom it spoke as a virgin. See the comparison spiritually "rolling back" into the body of Christ through the comparison?
Not sure bout the reference to Mark how you see it fit in? Help me out here.
Peace Daniel
-
don't disagree with your opinion on paul you maybe right.Although you'd think it be mentioned somewhere else.
Youth version:
5For a young man doth marry a virgin, Thy Builders do marry thee, With the joy of a bridegroom over a bride, Rejoice over thee doth thy God.
I don't see how this applies to this topic remember virgin in old times also ment ummarried.
And further more how do you explainMark 3:21 about fis family saying he's beside himself as if nothing special ever happened in the past.
You can rather look at it as a chaste virgin to Christ, wouldnt you think? To present them as a chaste virgin to Him. Sons, joined and one with Him in Spirit and led by the Spirit.
I don't see how the last question is figured into the equation, or see it after the flesh at all. Like Paul just using her as an allegory, "made of a woman" under the law. Seems to show that even Paul disregarded the need to call her ( who symbolized the many) as "A virgin" to whom he was writing. Showing "them" that He would like (in the reality of the thing) present "them" plural of whom it spoke as a virgin. See the comparison spiritually "rolling back" into the body of Christ through the comparison?
Not sure bout the reference to Mark how you see it fit in? Help me out here.
Peace Daniel
Maybe you'll understand it better with this:
Mark 3:21 (New Living Translation)
21When his family heard what was happening, they tried to take him home with them. "He's out of his mind," they said.
The point is that the virgin birth was a sign from god but here they just act like he's crazy and nothing happened that was special at all.
-
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself giveth to you a sign, Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, And is bringing forth a son, And hath called his name Immanuel, (YLT)
Mat 5:17 `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets--I did not come to throw down, but TO FULFIL; (YLT)
If you can't stand on the scriptures, how can you stand at all?
The correct translation for Isa 7:14 is maiden not virgin.
Sorin about Adam well...this I will have to explain later besides the subjects probly a little to big for this place.Infact Joe if your reading this remember when I asked you about satan,eden,and adam&eve you never answered my question.do you still need more time or did you just forget?Remember me I asked you to ban me?
EDIT:Sorin I don't see your point.Right now I'm criticizing matthew and luke so besides them do YOU have any proof for or against the birth.AS far as I have seen(AND I HAVE LOOKED) there is none as if it never happened.
Yes, I remember you (formerly) xxxxxxx, you sent me an extremely long e-mail which I have yet to read. It is a bit presumptuous to expect someone to jump when you say jump.
You have absolutely no idea what type of things were (and are) happening in my life, it is between the Lord and I how I prioritize, I have not been directed to seek your approval or to subject myself to your will.
I hope you understand,
Joe
-
That was interestingly put, thanks for sharing that. Good stuff, never really thought to think about it that way.
Peace
Daniel :D
-
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself giveth to you a sign, Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, And is bringing forth a son, And hath called his name Immanuel, (YLT)
Mat 5:17 `Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets--I did not come to throw down, but TO FULFIL; (YLT)
If you can't stand on the scriptures, how can you stand at all?
The correct translation for Isa 7:14 is maiden not virgin.
Sorin about Adam well...this I will have to explain later besides the subjects probly a little to big for this place.Infact Joe if your reading this remember when I asked you about satan,eden,and adam&eve you never answered my question.do you still need more time or did you just forget?Remember me I asked you to ban me?
EDIT:Sorin I don't see your point.Right now I'm criticizing matthew and luke so besides them do YOU have any proof for or against the birth.AS far as I have seen(AND I HAVE LOOKED) there is none as if it never happened.
Yes, I remember you (formerly), you sent me an extremely long e-mail which I have yet to read. It is a bit presumptuous to expect someone to jump when you say jump.
You have absolutely no idea what type of things were (and are) happening in my life, it is between the Lord and I how I prioritize, I have not been directed to seek your approval or to subject myself to your will.
I hope you understand,
Joe
I just asked a question I was having a hard time with.Sorry about misunderstandings you didn't have to answer it if you didn't want to.
-
For the record my Rotherham's has Isaiah 62:5 as;
For a young man marrieth a virgin, thy sons marry thee! And the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride
Thy God rejoiceth over thee.
So does the E-sword KJV;
Isa 62:5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin1330, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
H1330
בּתוּלה
bethûlâh
beth-oo-law'
Feminine passive participle of an unused root meaning to separate; a virgin (from her privacy); sometimes (by continuation) a bride; also (figuratively) a city or state: - maid, virgin.
-
That's what Im hoping for every day, is to edit out who I was before. :)
Longhorn
-
That's what Im hoping for every day, is to edit out who I was before. :)
Longhorn
BEAUTIFULL :P
i love it!!!
-
Maybe I'm missing something, but this is what my Bible says:
Matthew 1:18-20 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But when he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her IS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
A woman giving birth isn't unusual in any way. But a virgin giving birth is unusual. Otherwise, why did god put such a detailed description of all the events surrounding Jesus birth.
I would have to call Mary, Joseph and God liars if I didn't believe in Jesus virgin birth. The scriptures are plain enough for me.
-
AMEN LONGHORN!!! With Euty on that "Beautiful".
Peace
Daniel
-
alchemist
I was reading threads when i came upon this one and put on the brakes when i got to this you stated
alchemist
Don't get me wrong I'm not saying throw out these gospels just well...one false scripture can do more harm than a true one.
Any and all scripture/s does harm according to your wisdom and intelect.
Ok then What GOOD???? in any of this are you, vainly trying to share with my brothers and sisters here, who fellowship on these harming scriptures as you put it.
" thinking themselves wise they are....."
Rodger
Sorry I missed that and wrote it wrong I'll go correct it.
-
Maybe I'm missing something, but this is what my Bible says:
Matthew 1:18-20 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, BEFORE THEY CAME TOGETHER, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But when he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her IS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
A woman giving birth isn't unusual in any way. But a virgin giving birth is unusual. Otherwise, why did god put such a detailed description of all the events surrounding Jesus birth.
I would have to call Mary, Joseph and God liars if I didn't believe in Jesus virgin birth. The scriptures are plain enough for me.
The scriptures are plain enough for those in Christendom to see, does that make them Right ?
Just a Thought to Ponder om Maybe?
-
For the record my Rotherham's has Isaiah 62:5 as;
For a young man marrieth a virgin, thy sons marry thee! And the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride
Thy God rejoiceth over thee.
So does the E-sword KJV;
Isa 62:5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin1330, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
H1330
בּתוּלה
bethûlâh
beth-oo-law'
Feminine passive participle of an unused root meaning to separate; a virgin (from her privacy); sometimes (by continuation) a bride; also (figuratively) a city or state: - maid, virgin.
there's no problem with this verse it does say virgin it's Isa.7:14 that's the problem.
-
Philippians 3: 12-16 were and still are one of my favorite passage of scripture when my journey out of Babylon began. May Christ ALWAYS be closer than a brother.
Everyone have a GREAT day in Christ.
Longhorn :)
-
Philippians 3: 12-16 were and still are one of my favorite passage of scripture when my journey out of Babylon began. May Christ ALWAYS be closer than a brother.
Everyone have a GREAT day in Christ.
Longhorn :)
12Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
15All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. 16Only let us live up to what we have already attained.
-
Hi All,
Here is another twist in regard to the virgin birth.Jhn 7:42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was?
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;[/list:u]If Joseph was not the biological father of the earth-bound Jesus, then Jesus could not be of the seed of David, and the lineage as portrayed in Luke 3:23-31 could not be true; the "as supposed" not withstanding.
Many believe instead in an inmaculate conception rather than simply Joseph being a non-enity. I am not or ever have been cathlic, but I found a very interesting article on this very subject. It is here in part:It’s important to understand what the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is and what it is not. Some people think the term refers to Christ’s conception in Mary’s womb without the intervention of a human father; but that is the Virgin Birth. Others think the Immaculate Conception means Mary was conceived "by the power of the Holy Spirit," in the way Jesus was, but that, too, is incorrect. The Immaculate Conception means that Mary, whose conception was brought about the normal way, was conceived without original sin or its stain—that’s what "immaculate" means: without stain. The essence of original sin consists in the deprivation of sanctifying grace, and its stain is a corrupt nature. Mary was preserved from these defects by God’s grace; from the first instant of her existence she was in the state of sanctifying grace and was free from the corrupt nature original sin brings.
When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.
The traditional translation, "full of grace," is better than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of "highly favored daughter." Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for "daughter"). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence. [/list:u]The entire article can be found here:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.aspThis by no means changes scripture, infact it supports scripture in the sense that virgin birth seems to be a man made doctrine.
God is the revealer of all truths: Alchemist, I think you are on to something. :)
YellowStone
-
Rotherham;
Wherefore let my Lord Himself give you a sign,
Lo! a Virgin, being with child and giving birth to a son
thou wilt call his name Immanuel.
Rotherham's sidenote to the root Hebrew word translated virgin in this verse;
"It is true that the Hebrew word here is almah and not bethula; but an examination of all the occurrences of the former shows it is synonymous with the latter and properly means virgin"
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin5959 shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
H5959
עלמה
‛almâh
al-maw'
Feminine of H5958; a lass (as veiled or private): - damsel, maid, virgin.
-
Rotherham;
Wherefore let my Lord Himself give you a sign,
Lo! a Virgin, being with child and giving birth to a son
thou wilt call his name Immanuel.
Rotherham's sidenote to the root Hebrew word translated virgin in this verse;
"It is true that the Hebrew word here is almah and not bethula; but an examination of all the occurrences of the former shows it is synonymous with the latter and properly means virgin"
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin5959 shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
H5959
עלמה
‛almâh
al-maw'
Feminine of H5958; a lass (as veiled or private): - damsel, maid, virgin.
Did you read my previous post or do you need more than that?It's all about how the word is used.
-
Yellowstone please tell me,
So then what was the sign promised by God, a non virgin woman gets pregnant?
What does not knowing a man represent? having blindfolded sex?
Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
I guess we can take our black Sharpie and blot out this verse as well.
Too much Da Vinci code goin' on arounda he're (done in the voice of Fog Horn Leghorn)
Sorry if I seem testy it has been another one of those days, time to sign off.
Take care,
Joe
-
Yellowstone please tell me,
So then what was the sign promised by God, a non virgin woman gets pregnant?
What does not knowing a man represent? having blindfolded sex?
Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
I guess we can take our black Sharpie and blot out this verse as well.
Too much Da Vinci code goin' on arounda he're (done in the voice of Fog Horn Leghorn)
Sorry if I seem testy it has been another one of those days, time to sign off.
Take care,
Joe
I'm sorry joe but maybe you need to understand what I'm saying is that (EDITED:(both)) gospel of luke&matthew are corrupt and not inspired by god.There's no doubt it has some truth in it but this applies to practicly everything.The truth is I been looking everywhere for everything and to me this is just a small topic compared to the others.
I'm probily going to get a lot of responses for saying that.
-
Yellowstone please tell me,
So then what was the sign promised by God, a non virgin woman gets pregnant?
What does not knowing a man represent? having blindfolded sex?
Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
I guess we can take our black Sharpie and blot out this verse as well.
Too much Da Vinci code goin' on arounda he're (done in the voice of Fog Horn Leghorn)
Sorry if I seem testy it has been another one of those days, time to sign off.
Take care,
Joe
No offense taken Joe :) Heck, all I was trying to prove is the futility of trying to nit-pick Scripture. I cannot fault the Scripture you quote, and neither can I explain Luke 3:23. My question is to you and anyone else who cares: What does it matter? Is this strengthing faith or weaking faith? The promise still holds true, what else matters apart from:Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this
[is] the first commandment.
Mar 12:31 And the second [is] like, [namely] this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.[/list:u]
Thanks Joe, enough said.
YellowStone
-
To everyone posting on this thread,I'm critcizing Matthew&Luke so can you not use verses from them to prove them true?
And Yellowstone,very well put.
-
What are you criticizing? I'm missing this altogether?
Peace
Daniel
-
To imply that the ENTIRE gospel of Matthew and Luke are "CORRUPT" is a fairly BOLD statement to say the least...
Longhorn
-
alchemist why don't you tell us where you get your information that Matt etc aren't the inspired word of God??
Also, what is your byline saying?
I get the feeling you are stringing us along, playing with us as it were.
-
thanks longhorn
-
What are you criticizing? I'm missing this altogether?
Peace
Daniel
Lets explain.Matthew & Luke are two gospel that have many problems to me.All four gospels are read in the bible everyday assumed just becuase it's in there it must be true, even though it was assembled by the same church leaders whose beliefs many now refute(there are other books I criticize to but right now it's all on MATT&LUKE).Now I'm also presenting the virgin birth in this as well becuase this is something they corrispond on.You can say that there are some spiritual and meaningful verses and probly verses that actualy qoute what jesus said,but so does the gospel of thomas and we don't use that just becuase of it's begining.And that's what I'm saying.
-
So on your authority the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are null and void?
You can just skate past this extremely well researched version, and its comment on word usage? (Commenting on Isaiah 7:14)
Rotherham's sidenote to the root Hebrew word translated virgin in this verse;
"It is true that the Hebrew word here is almah and not bethula; but an examination of all the occurrences of the former shows it is synonymous with the latter and properly means virgin"
I think I will stick with this (Matthew, Luke & Rotherham) for now, but thanks for your input.
Joe
-
alchemist why don't you tell us where you get your information that Matt etc aren't the inspired word of God??
Also, what is your byline saying?
I get the feeling you are stringing us along, playing with us as it were.
Gena,
He has this cloak and dagger thing going complete with ever changing and secret identities, if this is what he desires, so be it. It is just that I won't be playing secret agent dungeons and dragons any more.
Take care,
Joe
-
alchemist
Still really don't get the problem, forget I asked at all alchemist. I can be a bit dense in trying to understand where someone is coming from. . You all continue on if you'd like.
:D
Daniel
-
So on your authority the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are null and void?
You can just skate past this extremely well researched version, and its comment on word usage? (Commenting on Isaiah 7:14)
Rotherham's sidenote to the root Hebrew word translated virgin in this verse;
"It is true that the Hebrew word here is almah and not bethula; but an examination of all the occurrences of the former shows it is synonymous with the latter and properly means virgin"
I think I will stick with this (Matthew, Luke & Rotherham) for now, but thanks for your input.
Joe
The Book of Rotherham , the 5th book of the Gospels?
Joe, your sounding a little frayed around the edges. :wink:
Have a Great evening :D
-
Unless you have some concrete proof that Matthew and Luke are corrupt, I will keep on believing in a LITERAL virgin birth of Jesus. I don't think the accounts are pretty straight forward.
1.Mary was engaged, not married, to Joseph
2.Mary and Joseph had not had sex. ( Before they came together )
3.Joseph knew he wasn't the father of the babe because he wanted to protect Mary from public disgrace. If it was his babe, he would have married her.
4.An angel told Joseph the Holy Ghost would impregnate Mary.
As I said before, I don't know what I'm missing. Even if there is another spiritual meaning, that doesn't negate the truth about the physical aspect of this scripture.
-
Interesting that John the Baptist was also of the lineage of David. His mother and father had never had a child before like Abraham and Sarah. I guess he could be called another virgin birth since he was the first and it was a miracle birth. And his mother Elizabeth was either the 2nd or 1st to receive the Holy Ghost in the NT.
It is also interesting that all men through John would believe. He said there is one that stands among you which you do not know. Was that the new man in him? In Matthew chap 3 it appears John and Jesus baptised each other. Some of this in John chap 1 and Luke chap 1 is a little puzzling. Maybe we have to get rid of that veil of flesh in order to see the hidden truth.
There are pearls hidden everywhere and we are promised that we will not find God in this life unless we seek for him with all of our heart.
ciy
-
Unless you have some concrete proof that Matthew and Luke are corrupt, I will keep on believing in a LITERAL virgin birth of Jesus. I don't think the accounts are pretty straight forward.
1.Mary was engaged, not married, to Joseph
2.Mary and Joseph had not had sex. ( Before they came together )
3.Joseph knew he wasn't the father of the babe because he wanted to protect Mary from public disgrace. If it was his babe, he would have married her.
4.An angel told Joseph the Holy Ghost would impregnate Mary.
As I said before, I don't know what I'm missing. Even if there is another spiritual meaning, that doesn't negate the truth about the physical aspect of this scripture.
Does anyone have Concrete Proof the scriptures are what they are and why we are to Believe them.
Can not offer you that, ones has to respect where Each of us are In the Understanding of the Scriptures be it literally or Spiritually.
Or else we fall out.
Ray and Mike have been a Lesson for us all.
-
Alchemist,
To dispute the virgin birth means you either do not understand what the holy spirit is or do not accept the fact that literal physical relations between a man and woman produce offspring that are sinful.
One of the prophesies concerning Jesus in the OT states he would be sinless and without guile: Isa. 53:9. The fulfillment of this statement is repeated in 1 Pet. 2:22. Are you now suggesting that 1 Pet. 2:22 should also be questioned?
The Hebrew word almah is Isa. 7:14 means "a young woman" and in the context of the Tanakh always "a young woman of unsullied reputation", which is why the Jewish translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Tanakh, prepared 200 years before Jesus' birth, rendered this word into Greek as parthenos, "virgin"; this is the word used in Matt. 1:23.
Looking at this another way, the OT speaks of Jesus as having eternal existence: Mic. 5:1(2). The fulfillment of this statement can be seen in John 1:1,14, and John 8:58, Eph. 1:3-4, Col. 1:15-19, and Rev. 1:18.
Again, the OT states Jesus would be the Son of God: Ps. 2:7, & Prov. 30:4. This fulfillment is stated in Matt. 3:17, and Luke 1:32. Are you now going to also dispute the Psalms and Proverb prophesies?
Finally, how do you conclude that the entire gospel of Luke & Matthew are corrupt and not inspired by God. Can you give some examples? I'm sure that if you searched diligently you would find there to be witnesses to back up every statement made in these two gospels.
In conclusion, it really boils down to 1 John 5:9- If we accept human witness, God's witness is stronger, because it is the witness which God has given about his Son.
Grace be with you.
-
Gone for a few minutes and I seem to be attacked all over the place.A cloak and dagger thing come on I like your post Joe.And shiboleth do you have proof that the gospel of peter or thomas are not true?And as for stringing you people along,kind of,I couldn't just come out and say everything I knew otherwise you wouldn't have listen to me.
Come on everybody(maybe everybody)when you first read what I said you thought I was crazy but as it went along it made you start to wonder didn't you?
Maybe it was a bad idea to come back here.
-
alchemist, Did you smoke alot of pot back in the 70's?
Longhorn
-
Alchemist,
To dispute the virgin birth means you either do not understand what the holy spirit is or do not accept the fact that literal physical relations between a man and woman produce offspring that are sinful.
One of the prophesies concerning Jesus in the OT states he would be sinless and without guile: Isa. 53:9. The fulfillment of this statement is repeated in 1 Pet. 2:22. Are you now suggesting that 1 Pet. 2:22 should also be questioned?
The Hebrew word almah is Isa. 7:14 means "a young woman" and in the context of the Tanakh always "a young woman of unsullied reputation", which is why the Jewish translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Tanakh, prepared 200 years before Jesus' birth, rendered this word into Greek as parthenos, "virgin"; this is the word used in Matt. 1:23.
Looking at this another way, the OT speaks of Jesus as having eternal existence: Mic. 5:1(2). The fulfillment of this statement can be seen in John 1:1,14, and John 8:58, Eph. 1:3-4, Col. 1:15-19, and Rev. 1:18.
Again, the OT states Jesus would be the Son of God: Ps. 2:7, & Prov. 30:4. This fulfillment is stated in Matt. 3:17, and Luke 1:32. Are you now going to also dispute the Psalms and Proverb prophesies?
Finally, how do you conclude that the entire gospel of Luke & Matthew are corrupt and not inspired by God. Can you give some examples? I'm sure that if you searched diligently you would find there to be witnesses to back up every statement made in these two gospels.
In conclusion, it really boils down to 1 John 5:9- If we accept human witness, God's witness is stronger, because it is the witness which God has given about his Son.
Grace be with you.
I'll try to answer them in order Isa.53:9 he was free of sin but what is being born of a virgin have to do with it,and peter is questioned but it a difficult one to figure out so I kind opf think this scripture is true but it still has nothing to do with the virgin birth.I've looked at the history of Isa 7:14 and it is more properly maiden or young woman no matter how you look at it,read the previous post I put up about it.
"Looking at this another way, the OT speaks of Jesus as having eternal existence: Mic. 5:1(2). The fulfillment of this statement can be seen in John 1:1,14, and John 8:58, Eph. 1:3-4, Col. 1:15-19, and Rev. 1:18."
You don't know whats so funny about what you just did with all of the passages you piched out in this paragraph.
Agian this has nothing to do with the virgin birth.
Yes,he was the son of god,and was moses,noah,ect. and did you know mark15:39 calls him a son of god,the is a mistranslation.
I did not say the ENTIRE gospels are corrupt if I did it was a mistake I'll correct but I did say they weren't inspired by god.Did you know they weren't written by luke or matthew and if you want refence I'll give it to you and there are parts that seem to me like it came from paganism(vai virgin birth) there isn't that much more proof I can offer but can you give me evidence that there not corrupt?
And this isn't for anything but if want it here:
1 John 5:9. Read "God, that he hath testified" instead of "God which he hath testified". L T Tr A W WH N N
1 John 5:10. Add "of God" after "hath the witness". L
1 John 5:10. Read "in him" instead of "in himself". T Tr A WH N HF
1 John 5:10. Read "he that believeth not the Son" instead of "he that believeth not God". L
-
alchemist, Did you smoke alot of pot back in the 70's?
Longhorn
Insults?Fine then,I leave this thread alone then.You people are on your on.
-
Alchemist,
I'll try to reply to your question about what does being born of a virgin have to do with being free from sin. In a nutshell, it's like being born into the New Jerusalem from above.
First off, can we agree with as offspring of Adam and Eve, we have all inherited sin? If we agree, then how is it that the Scriptures point out that Jesus was sinless and without guile if he wasn't conceived by the Holy Spirit?
So you are saying that Matthew & Luke are not inspired scriptures, and that they were not written by them? I would be interested in whom your references that prove them corrupt.
What translation are you using for 1 John 5:9-10? I'm quoting from the Complete Jewish Bible.
Mine reads:
5:9-If we accept human witness, God's witness is stronger, because it is the witness which God has given about his Son.
5:10-Those who keep trusting in the Son of God have this witness in them. Those who do not keep trusting God have made him out to be a liar, because they have not trusted in the witness which God has given about his Son.
What do you understand the spiritual virginity to mean?
And finally, having just read the Prayer Requests before I returned to this forum, I was suprised to read you, hillsbororiver, reintroducing yourself as alchemist. Are you also still one of the moderators of this web-site?
Is this whole thing some kind of joke?
May God's Grace come back to you.
-
:lol: I saw the same thing Jennifer, then I saw Joe getting fed up with Joe and thought,
"I'm just going to back off let him discuss this with himself" :lol:
Don't know whats up really :lol:
Peace
Daniel
-
And finally, having just read the Prayer Requests before I returned to this forum, I was suprised to read you, hillsbororiver, reintroducing yourself as alchemist. Are you also still one of the moderators of this web-site?
Is this whole thing some kind of joke?
May God's Grace come back to you.
Joke? No. More like a mistake on my part, I moved alchemist's post from another thread and messed it up leaving my name as the poster. I just removed it.
I take this Forum a little more serious than pulling some stunt like that and I am truly sorry if I confused anyone.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention,
Joe
-
Daniel,
Thanks for the confirmation. I hope he is only wanting us to prove him wrong in a test of our faith.
Grace be with you.
-
Joe, thanks for clearing that up, I didn't think that sounded like something you would do. But I was a bit surprised to see you take up an argument with yourself :lol:
Peace
Daniel
-
:lol: I saw the same thing Jennifer, then I saw Joe getting fed up with Joe and thought,
"I'm just going to back off let him discuss this with himself" :lol:
Don't know whats up really :lol:
Peace
Daniel
LOL, although I do get fed up with myself almost daily sometimes more, I can assure you this was not one of those times. The identity post was more the result of hurrying through something and not verifying the result.
My apologies,
Joe
-
And finally, having just read the Prayer Requests before I returned to this forum, I was suprised to read you, hillsbororiver, reintroducing yourself as alchemist. Are you also still one of the moderators of this web-site?
Is this whole thing some kind of joke?
May God's Grace come back to you.
Joke? No. More like a mistake on my part, I moved alchemist's post from another thread and messed it up leaving my name as the poster. I just removed it.
I take this Forum a little more serious than pulling some stunt like that and I am truly sorry if I confused anyone.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention,
Joe
That's what I thought you did Joe. But I wasn't quite sure. I was a bit confused to be honest with you. :lol:
Thanks for clearing that up.
Sorin
-
Joe, thanks for clearing that up, I didn't think that sounded like something you would do. But I was a bit surprised to see you take up an argument with yourself :lol:
Peace
Daniel
Ahhh Daniel, you got me, I finally snapped and went bonkers, the personality split in half, maybe next time I will come back as a Druid.
Just kidding, it truly was a stupid moderator mistake.
Joe
-
Joe, Joe, Joe, :roll:
Now I know, You, Alchemist, and Alucard, are the same person.
That explains alot! :D :D :D :D
:wink:
Craig
-
Joe, Joe, Joe, :roll:
Now I know, You, Alchemist, and Alucard, are the same person.
That explains alot! :D :D :D :D
:wink:
Craig
Maybe I should come back as Dracula. ;)
Hey, I am from Romania. :lol:
-
Joe,
Thanks for clearing things up!!!!! I was beginning to think that you had developed burn-out from too many questions being asked.
Grace be with you.
-
Yes I deserve it, a funny bunch we have here.
Oh by the way Sorin do you know anywhere in Romania where I could get one of those cloaks with the high collars for my next transformation?
Do they have anything like a Cloak's Depot or Cloak's R Us with mail order?
Your help will be greatly appreciated,
Joe (for now)
-
You can try Bran Castle in Transylvania. I'm sure they'll have plenty of cloaks and Vampire paraphernalia there. ;)
Sorin
-
Excellent
-
Hey Joe and all,
I just want clear something up. If I had any idea of the direction this thread was taking, I would have never have posted my David, Joseph Lineage comment.
Under no way, in any shape or form do I question any of the scriptures. The truth that is taught is simple and straight forward; unfortunately, many do not see or find it. However, it is my opinionthat t is not because of apparent discrepancies in the Scripture. Rather it is because God has willed that they do not see.
I do not want to sound condersending and I am somewhat ashamed of my post. :oops:
Please forgive my lack of sound reasoning.
Many Thanks,
Darren
-
No worries Brother,
Take care,
Joe
-
Yeah, no worries Bro.
Sorin
-
And further more how do you explainMark 3:21 about fis family saying he's beside himself as if nothing special ever happened in the past.
You say family, but the Greek is closer to "those near Him". I have seen that in the ISV, but I do not think "family" is the generally accepted translation for this verse. Several NT versions use "friends" for this verse, but that too is an interpretation not a translation. Since Greek has good words for "family" and "friends", why take this for anything other than what is says, those near him?
-
Testimony of two or three witness here :wink:
I will third the " no worries" Yellowstone :D
Peace
Daniel
-
Thanks Joe, Sorin and Daniel :)
I needed that!
YellowStone
-
Joe, Joe, Joe, :roll:
Now I know, You, Alchemist, and Alucard, are the same person.
That explains alot! :D :D :D :D
:wink:
Craig
Yep....I figured that out from his first post on the thread.
-
I know I said I'd leave this forum alone but aparently since the first wasn't enough I'd that I'd add a little bit more to Isaiah and that's it.
In the past two millennia, there has been considerable controversy among Christians and their opponents about the plain translation and the precise meaning of a small section of Isaiah. For many scholars, the crux of the matter is the translation of the word : עלמה, `almah which has been translated as young woman and as virgin.
In the King James Bible, a traditional Protestant translation, the verses in question run like this:
7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
Other newer translations translate it similarly: The New King James version says
Behold, the virgin shall conceive ...
The English Standard Version says:
Behold, the virgin shall conceive...
The Contemporary English Version says:
A virgin is pregnant...
Young's Literal Translation says:
Lo, the Virgin is conceiving, ...
Many modern translations concede that the word in the Hebrew does not mean "virgin". The Revised Standard Version says:
Behold a young woman shall conceive...
The New Jerusalem Bible says:
the young woman is with child
The Revised English Bible says:
A young woman is with child
The Good News Bible says:
a young woman who is pregnant
The New Revised Standard Version says:
the young woman is with child
This demonstrates that many Christian scholars, both Protestant and Catholic, prefer the traditional translation of the Hebrew in the context of Isaiah 7:14, while many others do not.
Skeptics argue that this is not a very clear prophecy of the birth of Jesus Christ. For example, (1) what does the "butter and honey" refer to? (One possible response to the "butter and honey" problem: it is a reference to one who, metaphorically, "has eaten good meat his entire life in order to spit out the bad meat if it ever touched his lips". Note that the "butter and honey" reference is immediately followed by the comment on an ability to choose between good and evil; this may suggest that they are related.) (2) Why is Christ, who was sinless from birth in the traditional Christian understanding, described as having to learn to refuse the evil and choose the good? and (3) This passage within the latter translations states clearly that the "young woman" within this prophecy is already pregnant with a child. This makes this prophecy about the coming Messiah Jesus very difficult to explain as the prophecy would have already been fulfilled during Isaiah's time. Some Christian aplogists have attempted to explain this problem of temporal context as: a) the latter translations are in error, and b) the latter translations are correct, but that the prophecy has a "double-application" for both Isaiah's time and the first century.
Skeptics raise even greater questions about the translation of the first verse in this passage:
7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, עלמה (a `almah) shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Christian apologists respond that the passage is a double reference— a sign both to Ahaz that the alliance against him would be destroyed, and to the house of David as a whole that was threatened with extinction. This is shown by the Hebrew which uses "singular you" for the former and "plural you' for the latter. With the former, Isaiah reassures Ahaz that the alliance would be destroyed before his own son Shear Jashub, who was present (v. 3), would "learn to refuse the evil and choose the good".
Ahaz, the wavering King of Israel is given a sign that the Lord is in charge and will help Israel. The sign is that an almah will give birth to a son who will still be very young when Israel's current enemies will be destroyed. Christians often see a prophecy of Jesus in this passage and insist that almah is "virgin". Jewish readers disagree and assert that the passage refers only to the events in the time of Isaiah and Ahaz. (See the Isaiah 7:14 Controversy Below). With no certain resolution, popular versions of the Bible can be found supporting either view. With some noteable exceptions, most major versions of the Bible that include the New Testament translate Isaiah 7:14 with the word virgin and those that only include the Old Testament use young woman or maiden.
Judaism reads the verse in Isaiah 7:14 as:
"Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman [ha-almah] shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanu-el". [1]
Judaism affirms that [ha-almah] ("young woman") does not refer to a virgin and that had the Torah intended to refer to such, the specific Hebrew word for virgin [bethulah] would have been used.
Context of Isaiah 7:14 according to Judaism
Ahaz king of Jerusalem was besieged. Through Isaiah, God sends a message. Ahaz is reluctant to accept it, but is told he will get a sign. So Isaiah 7:10-17 states:
And the LORD spoke again unto Ahaz, saying:
11 יא שְׁאַל-לְךָ אוֹת, מֵעִם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ; הַעְמֵק שְׁאָלָה, אוֹ הַגְבֵּהַּ לְמָעְלָה.
'Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God: ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.'
12 יב וַיֹּאמֶר, אָחָז: לֹא-אֶשְׁאַל וְלֹא-אֲנַסֶּה, אֶת-יְהוָה.
But Ahaz said: 'I will not ask, neither will I try the LORD.'
13 יג וַיֹּאמֶר, שִׁמְעוּ-נָא בֵּית דָּוִד: הַמְעַט מִכֶּם הַלְאוֹת אֲנָשִׁים, כִּי תַלְאוּ גַּם אֶת-אֱלֹהָי.
And he said: 'Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that ye will weary my God also?
יד לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא, לָכֶם--אוֹת: הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה, הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן, וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ, עִמָּנוּ אֵל. 14
Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
15 טו חֶמְאָה וּדְבַשׁ, יֹאכֵל--לְדַעְתּוֹ מָאוֹס בָּרָע, וּבָחוֹר בַּטּוֹב.
Curd and honey shall he eat, when he knoweth to refuse the evil, and choose the good.
16 טז כִּי בְּטֶרֶם יֵדַע הַנַּעַר, מָאֹס בָּרָע--וּבָחֹר בַּטּוֹב: תֵּעָזֵב הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה קָץ, מִפְּנֵי שְׁנֵי מְלָכֶיהָ.
Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou hast a horror of shall be forsaken.
יז יָבִיא יְהוָה עָלֶיךָ, וְעַל-עַמְּךָ וְעַל-בֵּית אָבִיךָ, יָמִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא-בָאוּ, לְמִיּוֹם סוּר-אֶפְרַיִם מֵעַל יְהוּדָה: אֵת, מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר. {פ} 17
The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria'.[2]
Thus Jews believe that God will send a "sign" in the days of Ahaz who lived many centuries before Jesus. Moreover, they claim that there is no indication that Immanuel will be the Messiah, whatever the timing of his birth. The Jewish tradition has accordingly never considered Isaiah 7:14 as a messianic prophecy. Modern Jewish scholars argue that this is a Christian innovation, unwarranted by the text.
Hebrew translation
Meaning of “almah’�
The word almah is not used in Hebrew to refer to a virgin. The word for virgin is [betulah]. [3]
Jewish tradition states that the "young woman" was in fact Isaiah’s wife and the birth of the child is recorded later in Isaiah 8:3.
As an example of how '[almah] is used, in Proverbs 30:18-20:
18 There are three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not:
19 יט דֶּרֶךְ הַנֶּשֶׁר, בַּשָּׁמַיִם-- דֶּרֶךְ נָחָשׁ, עֲלֵי-צוּר;
דֶּרֶךְ-אֳנִיָּה בְלֶב-יָם-- וְדֶרֶךְ גֶּבֶר בְּעַלְמָה
The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock;
the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a young woman.
20 כ כֵּן, דֶּרֶךְ אִשָּׁה-- מְנָאָפֶת
אָכְלָה, וּמָחֲתָה פִיהָ; וְאָמְרָה, לֹא-פָעַלְתִּי אָוֶן
So is the way of an adulterous woman;
she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith: 'I have done no wickedness.'[4]
In this context it is argued, "the way of a man with a young woman," [alamah] does not appear to have the connotations of a "virgin."
The article in “ha-almah’�
The word “ha� is generally translated as the definite article “the�. Some interpreters (e.g. the authors of the New English Translation) however believe that its use here means that the young woman was present to the conversation, and thus render “ha-almah’� as “this young woman�. That is taken to refer to either a member of the royal family or the “prophetess� mentioned in Isaiah 8.
Adjective “harah הָרָה â€? and time of pregnancy
The adjective “harah הָרָה â€? is used predicatively. From the narrator’s perspective, Jewish scholars argue that this generally means a past, or present, or imminent future pregnancy.[5] With that in mind, the translation of Isaiah 7:14 may also be rendered as either “the [or this] young woman is pregnantâ€? or “the [or this] young woman will soon be pregnantâ€?.
The Christian interpretation of Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14 is based on the following scriptures in the Christian New Testament where the conception and birth of Jesus Christ are described:
(Matthew 1:20–23 KJV) But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. (21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. (22) Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, (23) Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Based on these scriptures many Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Immanuel prophesied of in Isaiah 7:14 and that He is "God with us". Many also believe that Jesus was born by means of a Virgin Birth and through the power of the Holy Spirit rather than through normal conception by man.
On translating the Greek Textus Receptus of Matthew 1:23, there is little problem in translating the Greek word "parthenos" as "virgin" which is the usual Greek word for virgin:
(Matthew 1:23 Greek Textus Receptus) ιδου η παρθενος εν γαστρι εξει και τεξεται υιον και καλεσουσιν το ονομα αυτου εμμανουηλ ο εστιν μεθερμηνευομενον μεθ ημων ο θεος
It is from the transliteration of the Greek text that the spelling Emmanuel was introduced for the Hebrew name Immanuel.
Upon examination of the Greek Septuagint text at Isaiah 7:14 one can also find the word 'parthenos"("virgin") rather than the usual Greek word "neanis" for "young woman" strongly indicating that a Virgin Birth is prophesied of.
However, the use of the Hebrew word "almah" in the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew Bible has stirred controversy among a number of scholars and in fact has produced what is known as The Almah Controversy. This has resulted in variations between Bible translations,with some translations using "young woman" as does the New English Translation or NET Bible:
Isaiah 7:14 “For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. Look, this young woman is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him Immanuel.�
And a number of translations using the word "virgin" as does the King James Bible:
Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."
It is also used as first name among Christians. Examples are Immanuel Kant, Victor Emmanuel of Italy. In Greece the name Manolis is considered a nickname for Emmanuel.
-
Bobby, a big Amen!
Joe
-
the more I read the more the Spirit revealed that all this is useless.
Amen Bobby, You can see it coming can't you? :lol:
The doubtful disputations and the wrestling over words lead to the ruin the hearer.
Unbelievebly this is called spiritual knowledge when its "the letter of the word". The sumersauts involved in these things never cease to amaze me. :lol:
I had to shut off the computer and go to bed early in order to remove the temptation to respond. :lol:
Good word Bobby
Peace
Daniel
-
Bobby, a big Amen!
Joe
double AMEN here.
not sure what alchy's intentions are?
to prove what???
again i see:
2Cr 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
grace to all
chuckt
-
HI all-----------
Mar 3:21 And when his friends heard of it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself.
some times folks say things that just aren't true
they SAID He was beside himself.Why would they say that?Why would a person's friends and family say such a thing about another person? Could it have been that His friends were trying to protect Him from the wrath of the Jews?His friends knew He wasn't crazy,but if it kept Him from being stoned.....
A teenager is arrested by the police,the guy is struggling and the cops are fixin to pull guns out----out of nowhere some of the guys friends and family run up and grab this kid and yell to the cops----"don't hurt him he is crazy,is off his meds etc etc.The kid wasn't crazy,But if it kept him from being shot .........
Am I the only one who sees this like this?
Much love--------knuckle
-
You mean like this knuckle? :lol:
Mathew 17:15 Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.
Peace
Daniel
-
Romaji Lyrics
keshite RIRAITO shite
kudaranai chou gensou
wasurarenu sonzai kan o
kishikaisei
RIRAITO shite
imi no nai mousou mo
kimi o nasu dendouryoku
zenshin zenrei o kure yo
English Translation:
Erase and rewrite
The pointless ultra-fantasy
Revive
The unforgettable sense of being
Rewrite
The meaningless imagination
The driving force that creates you
Give it your whole body and soul
Just curious, but how do you relate to this, alchemist?
-
Romaji Lyrics
keshite RIRAITO shite
kudaranai chou gensou
wasurarenu sonzai kan o
kishikaisei
RIRAITO shite
imi no nai mousou mo
kimi o nasu dendouryoku
zenshin zenrei o kure yo
English Translation:
Erase and rewrite
The pointless ultra-fantasy
Revive
The unforgettable sense of being
Rewrite
The meaningless imagination
The driving force that creates you
Give it your whole body and soul
Just curious, but how do you relate to this, alchemist?
Just random words,it was different before I may change it again for the heck of it.