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

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

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

Did Jesus Christ actually die?

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I know. That’s why “virgin” isn’t really a good translation.

The term betulah doesn't literally mean virgin either. AndrewGilmore.net: Did Isaiah Really Predict a Virgin Birth? Some Interesting Backstory to the Bible's Most Famous Prophecy (Part II)

Septuagint or not, why translate 'almah as virgin at all? Wouldn’t Isaiah have used a different word if he really meantvirgin?

Here’s where it gets really interesting.

We already established that 'almah literally means “young woman” with the insinuation that the woman is a virgin. Nevertheless, why didn't Isaiah use a more specific word if he really meant virgin?

The question, then, is which word would Isaiah have used? Many point to the Hebrew betulah which means “maiden, virgin.”[5] But problems arise with this word too.

Similar to 'almah, betulah is not a literal term for virgin but instead denotes age and marital status. As Dr. Michael Brown, a Ph.D in Near Eastern Languages, said, "Betulah can refer to a virgin, but more often than not it simply means a young woman or maiden. In fact, more than three out of every five times the word occurs in the Old Testament, the most widely used Jewish translation renders it 'maiden.'"[6]
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
It's free in the sense that we are not saved by being a good person, but by what Jesus Christ did for us on the cross.
Wait... so we are only saved by what “Jesus did?” That means that our belief, our faith, our baptism, have no bearing at all.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
So, it wasn’t really a virgin birth, according to the Gospels. And the “fact” that the Gospels report a “virgin birth” has nothing to do with Isaiah, since Isaiah doesn’t report a virgin birth. You need to improve your exegetical skills.

If neither betulah or almah literally mean a virgin birth, what difference does it make? Isaiah used a term that referred to virgin whether he said almah or betulah.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Oh my what an epic fail. Sorry, but you make all prophecies worthless with this sort of defense. If you can reinterpret a prophecy in such a gross manner after the fact one can justify almost any belief.

You yourself are refuting the Bible with such poor arguments.

Isaiah 7:14 says, "a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." That doesn't mean that the name of Jesus is literally Immanuel. It's similar to how the name of Jesus was really Yeshua, but English speakers call him Jesus. The name of Jesus wasn't literally Jesus, and his disciples didn't literally have English names.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Isaiah 7:14 says, "a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." That doesn't mean that the name of Jesus is literally Immanuel. It's similar to how the name of Jesus was really Yeshua, but English speakers call him Jesus. The name of Jesus wasn't literally Jesus, and his disciples didn't literally have English names.
Nope.

Maiden.

Try again.,

And yes, that does mean that his name will be Immanuel. That is what the supposed prophecy says.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
If neither betulah or almah literally mean a virgin birth, what difference does it make? Isaiah used a term that referred to virgin whether he said almah or betulah.
The Gospelers did not. The two traditions cannot be reconciled the way you want them to be.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
How is eternal separation from God excessive punishment? If someone doesn't want to know God, why would they be with God in eternity?
You are ignoring the parts of the Bible that describe Hell as ever lasting. But then all Christians have to pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe. You, for example, ignore all of the verses where Jesus says that he is not God. By the very same standards that you use to claim that Jesus says he is God he is even clearer that he is not God.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Jesus took on the punishment that we deserve for our sins.
If Jesus is God, that means that God punishes God’s Self.

Was the Prodigal punished for his sins? Was the lost sheep punished for becoming lost?

No. A punitive God simply doesn’t fit the biblical profile. Substitutionary atonement is a rotten theological concept. Are you at all familiar with the principles of constructive theology?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
You are ignoring the parts of the Bible that describe Hell as ever lasting. But then all Christians have to pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe. You, for example, ignore all of the verses where Jesus says that he is not God. By the very same standards that you use to claim that Jesus says he is God he is even clearer that he is not God.

When you commit a crime, don't you go to jail?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
If Jesus is God, that means that God punishes God’s Self.

Was the Prodigal punished for his sins? Was the lost sheep punished for becoming lost?

No. A punitive God simply doesn’t fit the biblical profile. Substitutionary atonement is a rotten theological concept. Are you at all familiar with the principles of constructive theology?

God loved his creation so much that he took on the punishment for our sins. That was the deepest expression of love that God had for his creation.
 
Top