Unfulfilled Bible Prophecies

[This Guy]

I submit that he(Caiaphas), did upon his death.

SNIPed all the stuff not dealing with this topic.

He saw Jesus coming in the clouds? Did anyone else, or were these special clouds, just for Caiaphas? What about all those others that Jesus told they would see him coming in power while they yet lived? Did they each get their own special clouds upon death?

Jesus says over and over that he will be back while those alive yet lived, and that the High Priest would see him coming in the clouds, and you decide that that means after the High Priest is dead?

I'm sorry, but your just making stuff up. Your not reading what the Bible says. You are seeing what you want to see, not what it says.

 

[Ladewig]

"till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power"

That I believe is directed to the unbelievers.
If you look at the end mark 8 they are talking to a crowd, I believe this was taken into the beginning of mark 9. Bad editing.

Arguing with you sometimes becomes surreal. We have a statement that appears seven times in three different Gospels and your response is "bad editing." Even if your assertion were correct, that explanation makes no sense. You are claiming that Jesus was telling the faithful that their belief ensures that they will not taste death and then started telling the non-believers that they would witness the second coming of Christ. But the non-believers alive at that time did not witness "the Son of man coming in his kingdom." The prophecy was unfulfilled.

Matthew 24

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Mark 9

1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Mark 13

30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Luke 21

32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

Luke 9

27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

Matthew 16

28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Matthew 26

64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

No, Edge, the simpler and more rational explanation is that you are wrong and the prophecy was not fulfilled.

 

[edge]

You guys are better detectives than that?
There are three explanations and you still don't see.
If you see stupid in this cause then there's nothing more to be said.

I did not ask what you would say though. I asked what your Bible does say. Please show me where your Bible says Jesus went up to Heaven on Sunday.

If you read the four accounts you'll see the time line.
It doesn't say went up on Sunday but it gives some details that you can put together that he did.
It's obvious to me and faith opens my eyes.

The other explanation from here
http://www.blessedcause.org/BlessedCause Exclusives/The Sign of Jonah.htm

Is good too, and so is the third explanation that Jesus was stepping out of the grave, the third day, which he did, I believe he thought that to be more important, he spoke of that happening before his death more than once.

SilentKnight says,

The argument you posted isn't that far removed.

Maybe so but then the link above has it covered.
But each to his own.

From that site.

As Scriptures indicate, Jesus became sin on the night He was betrayed, included suffering, the crucifixion, death and resurrection, totaling three days and three nights.

 

[This Guy]

Wish we had better participation from the Theist side. Edge is certainly putting effort out. I disagree with what he's saying, in most cases, but he is at least sticking it out and offering arguments.

I think I've said about all I can on the two prophecies we've covered. But, in hope that someone else might offer some other arguments in favor of the prophecies, I'm gonna start working on a list of alleged Old Testament prophecies about Jesus. Figure I'll spend a day or so on that list, then I'll present them here. That will give time for other responses to what we have so far.

If any Christians would like to present what they feel is an OT prophecy about Jesus, feel free to post it. We'll discuss it and see if it really pertains to Jesus or not. Might be a learning experience for us both

 

[This Guy]

Matthew 1

1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

2 - 15 was a lot of begetting

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.
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.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
20 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.
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

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.

If you go to the link, and do a bible search on key parts of the prophecy, the only thing close to a match is Isaiah 7:14

So, was Isaiah a prophecy, spoken by God, about Jesus? There are many that believe that.

See Here

Or Here

The fact is that the prophecy was about an event that was soon to happen. If you read the preceding, and a couple of the following chapters of Isaiah you will see that it did happen.

There is much dispute about the use of the word Virgin in the Isaiah passage. My limited research has convinced me that even those that speak Hebrew dispute if the word used meant Virgin, or Young Maiden. Some say it could be either, some say in the context used it would or could mean Virgin, others say in context it would or could mean young maiden. I don't know.

There is also some question about the phrase "shall conceive". Some say it should be past tense (has conceived), some disagree.

It would have been nice if God had inspired his writers to use less ambiguous wording.

Just to offer some proof that I'm not making these things up, here is how some of the other translations deal with these problems.

Isaiah 7 (Contemporary English Version)
14 But the LORD will still give you proof. A virgin [c] is pregnant; she will have a son and will name him Immanuel.

c:Isaiah 7:14 virgin: Or "young woman." In this context the difficult Hebrew word did not imply a virgin birth. However, in the Greek translation made about 200 (B.C. )and used by the early Christians, the word parthenos had a double meaning. While the translator took it to mean "young woman," Matthew understood it to mean "virgin" and quoted the passage (Matthew 1.23) because it was the appropriate description of Mary, the mother of Jesus.

Isaiah 7 (The Message)

So the Master is going to give you a sign anyway. Watch for this: A girl who is presently a virgin will get pregnant. She'll bear a son and name him Immanuel (God-With-Us).

Isaiah 7 (Amplified Bible)

14 Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: Behold, the young woman who is unmarried and a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel [God with us].


The reasoning given by most Christians that believe this prophecy pertains to Jesus, is that it is a double prophecy, with both an immediate and a future fulfillment. As we saw on the earlier prophecies, people have a tendency to take what the Bible says, and add or remove whatever it takes to get the meaning they already believe it to say. Some rewordings are based on interpretations that involve understanding of "hidden" meaning. And of course the reason they see the "true" meaning" of the Bible is because they have faith, and that clears their eyes to see the true message of God. I think it could be argued that in fact, their faith has blinded them to the generally simple words used in the Bible (if you avoid Daniel and Revelations ). But I suspect this will be a stumbling block between Theist and Atheist concerning the Bible forever, or at least a very long time.

There is another problem with the chapter from Matthew. It indicates that Jesus is descendant from David, a requirement to make him the Messiah. However, we are told that Mary and Joseph were only engaged, not married, and that it was a virgin conception. Jesus' bloodline could not have come from David unless Joseph had been the one to impregnate Mary. This leaves the conflicted position that Jesus was either born of a virgin, and not from the line of David, or was the true son of Joseph, and not born of a virgin. No doubt there is some hidden meaning involved here also

 

[edge]

You have already made up your mind so what's the point of it.
Virgin is mentioned 7 times and only once is it implicated in the birth of Christ in the way it is meant today.

I'll find two links for you but that may take time.

Ok here's one.

http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/geneal.htm

 

[This Guy]

You have already made up your mind so what's the point of it.
Virgin is mentioned 7 times and only once is it implicated in the birth of Christ in the way it is meant today.

I'll find two links for you but that may take time.

Ok here's one.

http://home.inreach.com/bstanley/geneal.htm

Thanks for the reply Edge. We disagree, but I think our differing points of view give any reader two views to consider when evaluating these matters, and that's a good thing.

Yes, as you, I have made up my mind. But it was made up from reading the same book that you have read.

I read your link. As with much of the stuff that disputes the clear and easily understood words of the Bible, it makes assumptions and draws conclusions with what I consider flimsy, at best, evidence. Here's a quote:

"Regarding the first condition, did Mary have brothers?
We have no record of it. The Bible does not mention brothers, but it does say she had a sister.
John 19:25, "Now there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene." It is thought that the sister of Mary was Salome, the wife of Zebedee and the mother of James and John (Matthew 20:20, Mark 15:40).
Please see "The Genealogy of the Brethren", for more. "

Just about every time I've seen a Christian reply to the charge that, based on available evidence, there is no proof that Jesus lived, or no proof of God's existence, the standard reply is "Absence of proof is not proof of absence". I offer the same reply to your link.

I have some more to say, but I have to put it off for awhile. I'll try to finish before I go to work tonight, but it may well be tomorrow sometime before I get to it.

Thanks again for your reply Edge!

 

[This Guy]

Two issues with the Isaiah 7:14 "prophecy".

If it does mean virgin, and is a double prophecy as stated, then it means that Jesus was not the first virgin birth.

Second, where in the Bible is Jesus referred to as Immanuel? The prophecy states that will be his name, but I don't recall any Bible verse that refers to Jesus as Immanuel.

Perhaps it was his middle name?

As far as I can tell, the phrase "God with us" is only used once in the whole Bible, and that is in the Matthew verse.

It's at least interesting that Matthew is the only Gospel writer that saw the birth of Jesus as fulfillment of a prophecy. You would think one of the other three writers would have at least made some mention of it.

And, if this prophecy from Isaiah was a double prophecy, meaning two virgin births, who had the virgin birth in Isaiah? Why wasn't it made a big deal? Fact is (per the Bible) that Isaiah "went unto the prophetess".

Isaiah 8

3 And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.

Seems the Lord didn't want the kid named Immanuel for some reason, but Isaiah did call him Immanuel at least once:

Isaiah 8 again.

8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.

Problem is, this was clearly not a virgin birth. It is clearly obvious that Isaiah did the impregnating. This of course cast a large shadow of doubt on the word translated as "Virgin" actually meaning virgin. Or, it means that the statement by Isaiah was only about an event that would happen 700 years later. It is of course obvious that Isaiah was at least talking about a contemporary event. He likely was not talking also about an event 700 years later.

 

[edge]

The name Immanuel ("God with us") is an affirmation that we are called to be the Body of Christ. It's a reminder that God is always with us, calling us and empowering us to take part in His work in the world.

We invite everyone to seek God with us. No promises of an easy road ... just people to walk it with you.

http://www.immanuelaustin.com/


Mahershalalhashbaz: (i.e. hasten-booty speedspoil), whose name was given by divine direction to indicate that Damascus and Samaria were soon to be plundered by the king of Assyria. (Jeremiah 8)
http://www.christnotes.org/dictionary.php?dict=sbd&q=Mahershalalhashbaz



http://www.artbible.info/concordance/m/11914-1.html

4For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.

5The LORD spake also unto me again, saying,

6Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son;

7Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria, and all his glory: and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks:

This is a prophecy for that time about another kingdom that worshiped false gods', it was for them to witness.
Read verse 6, from the prophetess.
The lord is actually doing this stuff before he is Christ in the flesh, Isaiah is telling more than one story here and reaffirming what they know before the messiah is born and they knew it.
Gods telling them before the newborn cries mother father for the fist time,

“4For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.”

11For the LORD spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,
12Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid.

Jeremiah 8 Same event I believe.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=30&chapter=8&version=9

One prophesy for them and another for us.

And, if this prophecy from Isaiah was a double prophesy, meaning two virgin births, who had the virgin birth in Isaiah? Why wasn't it made a big deal? Fact is (per the Bible) that Isaiah "went unto the prophetess".

It doesn’t say she was a virgin, in plain English,

The Coming Assyrian Invasion
1Then the LORD said to me, "Take a large tablet(A) and write on it in common characters,[a] 'Belonging to Maher-shalal-hash-baz.' 2And(B) I will get reliable witnesses,(C) Uriah the priest and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah, to attest for me."

3And I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. Then the LORD said to me,(D) "Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz; 4(E) for before the boy knows how to cry 'My father' or 'My mother,' the(F) wealth of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be carried away before the king of Assyria."[/quote]

Here Isaiah is listening to God, who was speaking to him just to name the boy in remembrance of the first prophecy, “O Immanuel is the name that is referenced to God form Isaiah. ("God is with us")

8 and it will sweep on into Judah, it will overflow and pass on,(L) reaching even to the neck, and its(M) outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land,(N) O Immanuel."

9Be broken,[c] you peoples, and(O) be shattered;[d]
give ear, all you far countries;
strap on your armor and be shattered;
strap on your armor and be shattered.

10Take counsel together, but it will come to nothing;
speak a word,(P) but it will not stand,
for God(Q) is with us.[e]


Fear God, Wait for the LORD
11 For the LORD spoke thus to me with his strong hand upon me, and(R) warned me not to walk in the way of this people, saying:
12 "Do not call(S) conspiracy all that this people calls conspiracy, and(T) do not fear what they fear, nor be in dread.
13But the LORD of hosts,(U) him you shall honor as holy. Let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
14And he will become a(V) sanctuary and(W) a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
15And many(X) shall stumble on it. They shall fall and be broken; they shall be snared and taken."
16Bind up(Y) the testimony;(Z) seal the teaching[f] among my disciples.
17 I will(AA) wait for the LORD, who is(AB) hiding his face from the house of Jacob, and I will hope in him. 18(AC) Behold, I and(AD) the children whom the LORD has given me are signs and portents in Israel from the LORD of hosts, who dwells on Mount Zion.

from here,
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah 8 ;&version=47;#en-ESV-17809
This is what I get from it, I'm I'm not an expert but it seems plain enough to me.

You say,

Problem is, this was clearly not a virgin birth. It is clearly obvious that Isaiah did the impregnating.

I agree with you but it is still two prophecies.
Is Isaiah the Father isn’t so clear, but perhaps?


It could well be his son, but God still in remembrance of the events, to come, tells him what to name him.

Mahershalalhashbaz: (i.e. hasten-booty speedspoil), whose name was given by divine direction to indicate that Damascus and Samaria were soon to be plundered by the king of Assyria. (Jeremiah 8:14)

The second God is with us, or God with us, Is not the stronger of the two but in 700 years or so he is, with them the Hebrews so there it is, was.

Personally I would be bummed about the name if it was mine but I can’t even pronounce it.

 

[This Guy]

Thanks for the response Edge!

The name Immanuel ("God with us") is an affirmation that we are called to be the Body of Christ. It's a reminder that God is always with us, calling us and empowering us to take part in His work in the world.

We invite everyone to seek God with us. No promises of an easy road ... just people to walk it with you.

http://www.immanuelaustin.com/

Everything back to the beginning from here appears to be talking about a Church, or group of Christians who chose Immanuel as their name. If this is meant to show that Jesus was called Immanuel, I don't believe it does so. It is certainly not a Bible quote though. Just an affirmation on the part of these people which, while sounding very nice, still doesn't provide Biblical proof that Jesus was ever called Immanuel, as far as I can see.

Mahershalalhashbaz: (i.e. hasten-booty speedspoil), whose name was given by divine direction to indicate that Damascus and Samaria were soon to be plundered by the king of Assyria. (Jeremiah 8)
http://www.christnotes.org/dictionary.php?dict=sbd&q=Mahershalalhashbaz



http://www.artbible.info/concordance/m/11914-1.html



This is a prophecy for that time about another kingdom that worshiped false gods', it was for them to witness.
Read verse 6, from the prophetess.
The lord is actually doing this stuff before he is Christ in the flesh, Isaiah is telling more than one story here and reaffirming what they know before the messiah is born and they knew it.
Gods telling them before the newborn cries mother father for the fist time,


Jeremiah 8 Same event I believe.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=30&chapter=8&version=9

One prophesy for them and another for us.



It doesn’t say she was a virgin, in plain English,

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.

Are you saying this passage does not say a virgin shall give birth? If so, I agree. I believe, based on the way the story comes out, that it means young maiden, or something along that line. But the only birth mentioned in light of this verse of Isaiah is the birth of a son born to Isaiah, from the prophetess, whom Isaiah had "went unto". I'm pretty sure that this "went unto" was making the nasty. Immediately afterward the verse says she conceived and bare him a son. Let's look at it again:

Isaiah 8

3 And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.

I think this is pretty clear, and important.

You say,

Problem is, this was clearly not a virgin birth. It is clearly obvious that Isaiah did the impregnating.

I agree with you but it is still two prophecies.
Is Isaiah the Father isn’t so clear, but perhaps?


It could well be his son, but God still in remembrance of the events, to come, tells him what to name him.

It appears extremely clear to me that the birth Isaiah was discussing was the birth of his son from the prophetess, whom he "went unto".

You appear to question if Isaiah was the Father. Can you offer any other birth that fulfills the immediate prophecy (on your assumption that there are two prophecies involved here)?

What causes you to have doubt that Isaiah was the Father of this child?

I snipped most the rest of your post to try and limit the discussion to what I consider the important points.

I understand the immediate prophecy to foretell of the coming invasion and all that stuff. That is, IMHO, of little importance when discussing the relevancy of the Isaiah passage with Mathew's reference to it. We agree there was an immediate (or near time anyway) fulfillment (though how accurate Isaiah's prophecy was might be touched on later).

At this point of the discussion I would like us to try and clear up the relevancy of the Isaiah prophecy to Matthew's use of it to show that Jesus' birth was fulfillment of an OT prophecy. If it was a double prophecy, as many Christians claim, then I say there should have been two virgin births, if the word used in the Hebrew did in fact mean virgin, or two non-virgin births, if the word used in the Hebrew did not mean virgin.

The same word (translated as virgin) can not mean both virgin and non-virgin at the same time. Isaiah's son was born to a non-virgin. IF this prophecy also pertains to the birth of Jesus then either Jesus was not born of a virgin, or the OT prophecy failed to be fulfilled as stated. Unless you can show another birth that fits the immediate fulfillment of the Isaiah prophecy.

Personally I would be bummed about the name if it was mine but I can’t even pronounce it.

hehe me too. But pity his poor school teachers that had to try and call his name each morning for roll call! Mahersha..Mahershalal...Mahershalalhashbaz!

 

[edge]

I feel like they do so in better words that mine.

Isaiah 7.14 is NOT A PASSAGE I would adduce to PROVE either the super naturalness of the Bible (from fulfilled prophecy) NOR the messiahship of Jesus. The data it gives us is too easily 'suspended' on the basis of general exegetical considerations, some of which Jim will articulate below. To at least my Western mind, the connection does 'jump out at me' like perhaps Micah 5. 2 or Zech 11.


(i.e. the virginity aspect of the word is not important), even though the lexical data is supportive of the 'alma as virgin' position:

"We conclude, then, that applied to a female, the term [almah] refers to one who has not yet borne a child and as an abstraction refers to the adolescent expectation of motherhood. This would be captured in Eng. by a combination of the terms “nubility” and “fertility”—a woman so described is full of childbearing potential. When applied to a male it [elem] describes a virile young man, (or, more neutrally, “a strapping young man”) and as an abstraction refers to youthful virility. None of the overlapping near synonyms refer as explicitly to childbearing interests and status. The passage that is least compliant with this profile is Exod 2:8, for neither this nor any other specific nuance serves any purpose to the narrator.



"The most significant theological issues surrounding this term center on its use in Isa 7:14. The citation of this verse in Matt 1:23 and the nature of the doctrinal affirmation at stake have greatly hindered objective lexical analysis through the centuries. It must be immediately recognized that though Matthew cites Isa 7:14 in support of the virgin birth of Christ, he does not depend on the meaning of hm;l][' to establish that doctrine. Likewise parqevno" , as with hm;l][', does not refer specifically to a virgin.



"It is evident that the primary meaning of the word has to do with sexual maturity and, by extension, the age of the young woman, not with sexual experience or the lack of it. That the word may be used of a virgin is evident: it is not used, however, to define her virginity, but to define her capacity for marriage. So . . . it may also refer to a married young woman (until the birth of her first child) (Bratcher, 98).



"That the G parqevno" used by Matthew and by the LXX in Isa 7:14 can mean virgin and that an hm;l][' can be a virgin are sufficient for the fulfillment to be identified. The OT need not anticipate in its prophecy every specific element that finds fulfillment in the NT. One only needs to analyze Matthew's quotations of the OT in 2:15, 18, 23 to confirm the loose association that is often sufficient for the identification of fulfillment to be made…The fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy in the time of Ahaz concerned the birth of an individual who may not have had a recognizable role to play in the events of his time, but whose name represented the hope of deliverance. That hope was realized in a fuller way in the coming of Jesus, born of a virgin, God with us in incarnate form. This is in every sense a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, but that does not require that Isaiah anticipated the nature of the fulfillment.



"Consequently, our lexical study need not be hampered by theological mandates. We are not obliged to find the meaning “virgin” in the lexical profile of him;l][' in order to justify the NT or our theological creeds.

Link about virgins and all the different meanings.
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/fabprof2.html

In answer your previous question.
Elisabeth was Mary’s sister. Since John the Baptist is her son and cousin to Jesus.
There was a divine intervention to give birth to a profit most high, John.
She was barren and that caused lots of problems and anger from her husband, Zechariah, Who was given the prophesy and since he believed it to be impossible was stifled in speech, he couldn’t speak till the baby was born, it is believed at this time he wrote, he was a high priest.

11Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. 12When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. 13But the angel said to him: "Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John.

35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37 For nothing is impossible with God."

Mary Visits Elizabeth
39At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah's home and greeted Elizabeth. 41When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. 42In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! 43 But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!"
11Then an angel of the Lord appeared to him, standing at the right side of the altar of incense. 12When Zechariah saw him, he was startled and was gripped with fear. 13But the angel said to him: "Do not be afraid, Zechariah; your prayer has been heard. Your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you are to give him the name John.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=1&version=31



Now when the lord spoke to Isaiah in 7 he clarifies it in 8 since he Isaiah may think it’s his son but it’s not, and then is told by the name given ,
Mahershalalhashbaz: (i.e. hasten-booty speedspoil), whose name was given by divine direction to indicate that Damascus and Samaria were soon to be plundered by the king of Assyria. (Jeremiah 8)
http://www.christnotes.org/dictionar...rshalalhashbaz

Which was for their time.

As far as him being the Father of the child it is possible and the fact that he may have been the king or the ruler, which would make it possible for the prophetess to be the queen.


I get that from here,
10Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying,

Ahsa / Isaiah, since he is the writer or director of the writings and god is speaking to, Isaiah; he seems to be giving a clue, or his writers let it slip by with out the pen name, but I’m not sure. I will have to check on that.

By giving that son that name from God and not Emanuel it is made clear that the role of his son, (if that is the case, “his son”), is for fulfillment of events to come in a matter of a couple of years.
God with us in incarnate form. This is in every sense a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, but that does not require that Isaiah anticipated the nature of the fulfillment.

Matthew 2
14When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:
15And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.


18In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.
19But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,
20Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life.
21And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.
22But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:
23And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=2&version=9

4 Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
6Then said I, Ah, Lord GOD! behold, I cannot speak: for I am a child.
7But the LORD said unto me, Say not, I am a child: for thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak.
8Be not afraid of their faces: for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the LORD.
9Then the LORD put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth.
35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[c] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month. 37For nothing is impossible with God."


43But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. 45Blessed is she who has believed that what the Lord has said to her will be accomplished!"

hehe me too. But pity his poor school teachers that had to try and call his name each morning for roll call! Mahersha..Mahershalal...Mahershalalhashbaz!

It was like having three words blended for a name so he probably had three nick names.

They still do that over there I’m sure.
It reminds me of the movie The Fifth Element when she (the messiah), says her name and
And the character Corbin, gives he the nickname layloo.
It must have contained half the alphabet before he did that.
The D.J. character was hilarious in that film.
It makes one wonder where we are going.

Here’s the one thing I do know as a believer you just understand it and it isn’t so confusing, kind off like seeing past what would bring doubt as doubt is irrelevant, then there are those little snippets of visuals that kind of help.
It isn’t imagination it like memory being past along.

 

[This Guy]

Thanks for the response Edge.

"Consequently, our lexical study need not be hampered by theological mandates. We are not obliged to find the meaning “virgin” in the lexical profile of him;l][' in order to justify the NT or our theological creeds.

Sounds like, from your quote and the information at the link, that theist feel they have no obligation to make any concrete connection between a "prophecy" and what the Bible says.

I find this bit interesting:

I accepted this passage as being Messianic initially on the testimony of Matthew. I consider him to be a MUCH BETTER JUDGE of the prophetic 'status' of an OT passage than I, due to his cultural continuity with the OT, his closeness to the 'sources' of that understanding, his special 'status' in Jesus' establishment of the early church--that of an major recorder, and his superior knowledge of the languages (relative to mine). If he understands 'almah' as 'virgin', I am not sure I have a better base of data from which to 'argue him down'.

The bolded part gave me a chuckle. The writer of Matthew is the same writer that has Jesus doing trick riding into Jerusalem because he didn't understand the use of "and" in Jewish writings to mean "even".

Zechariah 9

9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Matthew 21

1 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples,
2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose them, and bring them unto me.
3 And if any man say ought unto you, ye shall say, The Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.
4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,
5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.
6 And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them,
7 And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.

I've looked at several apologetic sites, and performed a google search or two, but I've yet to see this addressed. If you have a source that attempts to provide an answer, I'd love to see it.

Point is that the writer of Matthew did not in fact appear to have a good understanding of the Jewish language. It appears that he read/used the Septuagint for his Old Testament source, and did so poorly.

I'm a bit rushed for time right now, so I'm going to hold off on further comment until I have time to digest all that you provided. My quick response is that we may have to agree to disagree again, but I do want to give a bit more study to what you've provided before I say that

Thanks again for the input!

 

[edge]

No problemo, time is tight right now for me too.

 

[This Guy]

Just when you thought it was safe

I'm Baaaaaack!

Edge you still around, and have any interest in continuing this thread?

Sorry for the long absence. I'll just say I was busy.