sincerly said:
Gnostic, what "you don't think" is because it doesn't fit with your conclusion of The Creator GOD and the Recordings concerning GOD in the Bible(Scriptures) are just myths.
The Almighty GOD of ALL things we observe laid out HIS plan of Salvation from Gen.1:1 to Rev.22:21---it includes a Massiah. If you wish not to believe the record that is your choice.
Sincerly, this isn't about treating Jesus' birth as a myth, but analysing the text (like literary analysis and literary criticism) of one source against the other sources - particularly the original sources.
In Matthew's quotes of supposed messianic prophecies, these come from other sources, from the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah and other OT writings. So when analysing Matthew's OT passages, the logical sense that you would do, is not just reading a verse of interest, but read the whole chapter to find the original context of passages.
So Matthew had quoted Isaiah at Matthew 1:23, but the original passage Isaiah 7:14 is found in Isaiah 7 (chapter, obviously). So one would sensibly read ALL OF ISAIAH 7, to find the original context of Isaiah's sign. So when I read this whole chapter, I don't see how the chapter as a whole or how the part of the chapter that have to with the sign (Isaiah 7:14-17), have anything to do with any messiah.
Verses Isaiah 7:15 and 7:16 are also part of the sign, and that they are to same child Immanuel, which would indicate Immanuel to be contemporary to Ahaz and to Isaiah (as well as to Pekah, Rezin and the King of Assyria). Isaiah 8:1-8 also confirmed to me that Immanuel to be contemporary to Isaiah, Pekah, Rezin and the King of Assyria, because Immanuel reappeared in 8:8 in relation to 8:6-7.
Can you seriously tell me that Immanuel doesn't appear in Isaiah 8:5-8? Are you that blind that you can't see the link between Immanuel and the kings (and prophet)?
Don't get me wrong, sincerly. When I read Matthew 1 & 2, as well as Luke 1 & 2, I do see and understand they are narratives of Jesus' "virgin birth", but I have hard time in accepting Matthew's quotes (Matthew 1:23, 2:15, 2:18) to be messianic prophecies.
For instance - Matthew 2:18 - Matthew had quoted ONLY HALF-A-VERSE from Hosea 11:1. Why didn't Matthew quoted the whole verse, and included the 1st line?
Hosea 11:1 said:
When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.
The whole verse of Hosea 11:1 revealed that this passage has already happened; it is clearly reminiscing the past, it is not a prophecy of the future.
In fact, the 1st four verses of Hosea 11, God is speaking of what already happened, thus he was speaking in the past tense. So I find it difficult to accept Matthew's interpretation that Hosea's was referring to Jesus being in Egypt.
This is clearly referring to Jacob, who was also called Israel. Jacob entered Egypt with his family, and it was Moses who brought Jacob's people "out of Egypt".
So Israel can also mean people, like descendants of Jacob-Israel (the 12 tribes), or it could mean the kingdom of Israel.
And when I read all of Hosea 11, I can see that pretty much most of the chapter has to do with "Israel" being the "Kingdom of Israel".
And if you even bother to read the next several verses to Hosea 11, you can clearly see that Israel is not shown in positive light. If you believe that Jesus is Israel, then wouldn't that mean Jesus was an idol-worshipper?
Hosea 11:1-2 said:
1 When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.
2 The more I called them,
the more they went from me; they kept sacrificing to the Baals,
and offering incense to idols.
Did Jesus worship Ba'al?
I have said it before, time and time again, that verse should be read with surrounding verses of the same chapter, and not just a verse (or partial verse) alone, to get the proper and original context of the verse.
You are playing a game of mix-and-match, but what I see don't match at all. Isaiah 7:14 & Genesis 3:15
don't match, and "the seed of woman", certainly wasn't referring to Mary's seed, no matter how much you like to twist Genesis 3:15.
Genesis 3:15, woman's seed was not referring to any specific person, but referring to all of Eve's children and descendants, so in essence, all of humankind.
(editor's note: the 2nd last paragraph, I have colored the word, "don't", because it was originally "do". It should be "don't mix", not "do mix". Sorry.
)