Does Isaiah 7:14 Prophesize the Virgin Birth of Jesus?

Judged:

1

1

1

Thos wrote:

  what is that?

Judged:

1

1

1

gundee123 wrote:

<quoted text>
Something that the thread generated, I think (smile).

Judged:

2

2

1

gundee123 wrote:

Most of the people within the Christian community have been taught to believe that Isaiah 7:14 is a prophecy of Jesus, by which it is affirmed at Mat 1:23.
On the other hand, there are a growing number of people (both secular and theist) who have opined that Isaiah 7:14 “is not” a prophecy of Jesus at all.
So, my good friend, Allen Richards, and I will debate this issue. And we welcome everyone to share their perspective. However, we most respectfully request that anyone who joins in on the debate to offer evidence to support their opinion. Also, while everyone has a right to their own opinion, please show respect for those who disagree, by not resorting to personal attacks, if you would be so kind.
So, with this being understood,“What say you” about the virgin birth being historical or not (smile)?
&#8195;

Judged:

1

1

1

Allen Richards wrote:

<quoted text>
You have already arbitrarily rejected the first piece of evidence supporting the argument that Isaiah 7:1`4 is a prophecy of Jesus, Matt 1:23.
Would you care to address Matt 1:23, rather than just waving your hand and pooh poohing it away?
__________
Mat 1:21-23
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS:[Gr. Yeshua]* 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.
* Yeshua which means
3091 awshwhy ashwhy yehoshua yehoshua
yeh-ho-shoo'-ah, yeh-ho-shoo'-ah
From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (that is, Joshua), the Jewish leader:- Jehoshua, Jehoshuah, Joshua. Compare H1954, H3442.
H3442 awshy yeshua&#8219; yah-shoo'-ah
For H3091; he will save; Jeshua, the name of two Israelites, also of a place in Palestine:- Jeshua.

Judged:

2

1

1

Allen Richards wrote:

<quoted text>
You have already arbitrarily rejected the first piece of evidence supporting the argument that Isaiah 7:1`4 is a prophecy of Jesus, Matt 1:23.
Would you care to address Matt 1:23, rather than just waving your hand and pooh poohing it away?
__________
Mat 1:21-23
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS:[Gr. Yeshua]* 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.
* Yeshua which means
3091 awshwhy ashwhy yehoshu&#770;a&#8219; yehoshua&#8219;
yeh-ho-shoo'-ah, yeh-ho-shoo'-ah
From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (that is, Joshua), the Jewish leader:- Jehoshua, Jehoshuah, Joshua. Compare H1954, H3442.
H3442 awshy yeshua&#8219; yah-shoo'-ah
For H3091; he will save; Jeshua, the name of two Israelites, also of a place in Palestine:- Jeshua.

Judged:

2

2

1

T-Town Clown wrote:

<quoted text>Are you gonna kick his ass on his on thread? This guy loves a good butt beating..

Judged:

1

1

1

Allen Richards wrote:

That is the html code for an "em space." A space as wide as the letter "m". The other option is an "en space," a space as wide as the letter "n." This forum does not recognize html codes.

Judged:

2

2

2

Allen Richards wrote:

You have already arbitrarily rejected the first piece of evidence supporting the argument that Isaiah 7:1`4 is a prophecy of Jesus, Matt 1:23.

Allen Richards wrote:

Would you care to address Matt 1:23, rather than just waving your hand and pooh poohing it away?

Allen Richards wrote:

Mat 1:21-23
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS:[Gr. Yeshua]* 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.

Allen Richards wrote:

* Yeshua which means
3091 awshwhy ashwhy yehoshu&#770;a&#8219; yehoshua&#8219;
yeh-ho-shoo'-ah, yeh-ho-shoo'-ah
From H3068 and H3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (that is, Joshua), the Jewish leader:- Jehoshua, Jehoshuah, Joshua. Compare H1954, H3442.
H3442 awshy yeshua&#8219; yah-shoo'-ah
For H3091; he will save; Jeshua, the name of two Israelites, also of a place in Palestine:- Jeshua.

Judged:

2

1

1

gundee123 wrote:

<quoted text>
Arbitrarily rejected? Really! I thought that I simply highlighted that the Christians community have been taught to believe that Mat 1:23 affirms Isaiah 7:14, without agreeing or disagreeing with this affirmation, right (smile)?
<quoted text>
Of course! In fact, we can definitely start our debate with Mat 1:23, okay (smile)?
__________
<quoted text>
Okay, here we go. First, please look at Mat 1:21, where it specifically says,“... thou shalt [call his name JESUS],” right? Now let’s take a very close look at Isaiah 7:14, whereas it explicitly says,“... and shall [call his name Immanuel],” right? So, my challenge to you is to please cite where in the bible that Jesus was ever called “Immanuel,” if you would be so kind.
At any rate, Matthew (Mat 1:22) informs us that Jesus’ arrival had been foretold by one of God’s prophets, right? And I think that you will also agree that this prophet’s name was Isaiah, right? If so, then I think that we can both accept this verse as read, for it needs no further interpretation, right?
Thus, let us carefully review what Matthew says at Mat 1:23 and compare it to what is explicitly written at Isaiah 7:14 as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us”(Mat 1:23).
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Okay, now let us do a comparative look at both verses side-by-side as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel”(Mat 1:23).
“[B]ehold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Well, my first argument is,“Why does Matthew says that “the virgin shall be with child,” whereas Isaiah says that “a virgin shall conceive,” if you do not mind my asking? Or perhaps, you do not consider that there is a difference between “the virgin,” which is specific, and “a virgin” which is nonspecific.
Now, as soon as you respond to my first argument about Mat 1:23 (and after all rebuttals), my next argument will be the most accurate translation of the word “virgin” in Hebrew language, as well as in the Greek language (smile).
<quoted text>
Well, since Isaiah 7:13 explicitly said of the son, i.e.,“shall call his name Immanuel,” I would be very interested in knowing what the name “Immanuel” means in Hebrew, if you would be so kind. In other words,“Does it mean,“God with us, or does it mean “God is with us, or does it mean something altogether different,” if you do not mind my asking (smile)?

Judged:

1

1

1

T-Town Clown wrote:

this is called picking the peanuts outta of the shyt...

Judged:

2

2

2

gundee123 wrote:

<quoted text>
Arbitrarily rejected? Really! I thought that I simply highlighted that the Christians community have been taught to believe that Mat 1:23 affirms Isaiah 7:14, without agreeing or disagreeing with this affirmation, right (smile)?

gundee123 wrote:

Okay, here we go. First, please look at Mat 1:21, where it specifically says,“... thou shalt [call his name JESUS],” right? Now let’s take a very close look at Isaiah 7:14, whereas it explicitly says,“... and shall [call his name Immanuel],” right? So, my challenge to you is to please cite where in the bible that Jesus was ever called “Immanuel,” if you would be so kind.

gundee123 wrote:

At any rate, Matthew (Mat 1:22) informs us that Jesus’ arrival had been foretold by one of God’s prophets, right? And I think that you will also agree that this prophet’s name was Isaiah, right? If so, then I think that we can both accept this verse as read, for it needs no further interpretation, right?

gundee123 wrote:

Thus, let us carefully review what Matthew says at Mat 1:23 and compare it to what is explicitly written at Isaiah 7:14 as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us”(Mat 1:23).
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Okay, now let us do a comparative look at both verses side-by-side as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel”(Mat 1:23).
“[B]ehold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Well, my first argument is,“Why does Matthew says that “the virgin shall be with child,” whereas Isaiah says that “a virgin shall conceive,” if you do not mind my asking? Or perhaps, you do not consider that there is a difference between “the virgin,” which is specific, and “a virgin” which is nonspecific.

Judged:

2

2

2

gundee123 wrote:

<quoted text>
Arbitrarily rejected? Really! I thought that I simply highlighted that the Christians community have been taught to believe that Mat 1:23 affirms Isaiah 7:14, without agreeing or disagreeing with this affirmation, right (smile)?

gundee123 wrote:

Okay, here we go. First, please look at Mat 1:21, where it specifically says,“... thou shalt [call his name JESUS],” right? Now let’s take a very close look at Isaiah 7:14, whereas it explicitly says,“... and shall [call his name Immanuel],” right? So, my challenge to you is to please cite where in the bible that Jesus was ever called “Immanuel,” if you would be so kind.

gundee123 wrote:

At any rate, Matthew (Mat 1:22) informs us that Jesus’ arrival had been foretold by one of God’s prophets, right? And I think that you will also agree that this prophet’s name was Isaiah, right? If so, then I think that we can both accept this verse as read, for it needs no further interpretation, right?

gundee123 wrote:

Thus, let us carefully review what Matthew says at Mat 1:23 and compare it to what is explicitly written at Isaiah 7:14 as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us”(Mat 1:23).
“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Okay, now let us do a comparative look at both verses side-by-side as follows:
“Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel”(Mat 1:23).
“[B]ehold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7:14).
Well, my first argument is,“Why does Matthew says that “the virgin shall be with child,” whereas Isaiah says that “a virgin shall conceive,” if you do not mind my asking? Or perhaps, you do not consider that there is a difference between “the virgin,” which is specific, and “a virgin” which is nonspecific.

Judged:

1

1

1

gundee123 wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow! I trust that you are not calling the bible sh**, right (smile)?

Judged:

1

1

1

Hunny Bun wrote:

Beauty vs. the Beast.
Should be interesting to watch.

Judged:

2

1

1

Allen Richards wrote:

Back to quibbling I see. That was one of the first things I learned was a big no-no in OCS when Johnson was president. The way you phrased your response indicated that you rejected Matthew. This post confirms my conclusion!

Allen Richards wrote:

There you go with another logical fallacy, argument from silence! The absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence! We do not know what pet name Mary had for Jesus. Matthew may have been reading from the Hebrew which states that the mother will call the child Immanuel.

Allen Richards wrote:

By all means lets all accept your assumptions/presuppositions without question! NOT!

Allen Richards wrote:

The Hebrew reads “halmah” The prefix “ha” is the definite article in Hebrew. In the LXX it reads “h parthenos” the eta,“h” is the definite article.(continued in next post)

Judged:

1

1

1

T-Town Clown wrote:

not at all