Dirty Penguin; Yes it does. It's important enough to theologians to the point of trying to determine whether the prophecy is talking about Mahershalalhashbaz or Hezikiah. [/COLOR]
The prophecy is meant for King Ahaz and the people of Judah. I've elaborated plenty to this fact with scripture and independent commentary. The child born, in my opinion, was Mahershalalhashbaz. This was the sign that (God was with the people of Judah).
Lione D' ea: (Issue: Isaiah 7:14; Isaiah 8:1-22) I see the conflict in your statement brother, to whom
rests this prophecy, really means, to Ahaz and the people of Judah or to the child Immanuel or to Hezikiah, where here in three?
You don't understand the verse. I find that most Christians don't. I'll break the verse down.
Isaiah 9:5 --> (
Yeshayahu - Chapter 9 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible)
For a child has been born to us, a son given to us
At this point the child has already been born. This isn't a future prophecy. It had already occurred (see Isaiah 8:3).
Lione D' ea: Again, did the child
already exist there when he born by the young woman at that time, do you have any specific information in Bible can we read to prove the Immanuel there appeared in that time, what is your answer?
Isaiah 9:5 --> (
Yeshayahu - Chapter 9 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible)
and the authority is upon his shoulder
He has been given authority.
Isaiah 9:5 --> (
Yeshayahu - Chapter 9 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible)
and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father
In this structure it is saying that "God" (called him, the child that was born, The Prince of Peace)
Isaiah 9:5 --> (
Yeshayahu - Chapter 9 - Tanakh Online - Torah - Bible)
called his name, "the prince of peace."
Even if we viewed the verse in KJV (LXX) format,
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
A case can be made that the "mighty God" rendered there can mean (mighty god) or (mighty power) see: Psalms 81:9, 82:1, Ezekiel 31:11 etc . There are other verses that are on point with such renderings. So just because we see the capital ("G") in the KJV in English of Isaiah 9:5 does not mean the word should have been rendered that way considering the word can be used for (God, gods, angels and men).
The rendering provided at the link(s) above flow much better when you read beyond Isaiah 9:5. The context plays a big part here.
Lione D' ea: Then let us see the Jewish Bible if that God in King James Version is on wrong:
For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty
God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace." (The complete Jewish Bible)
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty
God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (King James Version)
Lione D' ea: Almost identical to the word of
God rendered both two(2) versions, you did not answer yet the question, again If the child himself was not God, why in 9:5 of Isaiah said: "For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder, and the wondrous adviser, the mighty
God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the prince of peace." Also you quoted
"God", the questions is, did the verse tell us the born child is God or not, if not why the verse state, the mighty
God?
Originally Posted by Dirty Penguin
You're making the assumption it has to say mother. Remember, a young woman can be a wife and she can have a child. To be called (almah) doesn't mean you had to be a virgin. Even after the birth of Yeshua, Mary was still a young woman. Some estimate that she was a pre-teen/teenager of 12 or 13 when she gave birth. She was still a young woman. Moreover, it wouldn't really make any sense the say ('the mother will giver birth to a son'). The focus wasn't on the fact that she already had a son rather it was to focus on a child being born as a sign to the people of Judah.
Lione D' ea: (1) I did not any state a young-woman CANNOT be a wife and she CANNOT have a child, if you remember also, I said:Just clear, you said that this is second child, does indicate Immanuel is not the first-born, why not said in verse 14 the term Mother if she turned this second child which is Immanuel was her second-born?, (2) To be called (almah) doesn't mean you had to be a virgin., I did not state to be called almah is to had to be a virgin, because the verse tell us the young woman is Virgin, what is the proof, 9:5 of Isaiah Read your scripture, "For a child has been born to us, a son", Plural or singular, therefore my question again in Isaiah 7:14, before the young-woman conceive, is she a Virgin?
Lione D' ea: I agree because, the word
Her or she mentioned on proverbs 8:1-3 paragraph
is not human it is word, because the Her and she is
denoting in wisdom there, the word wisdom...so not because we personified the word She or Her it is a Man, that is wrong,
because it is not only apply on person, but it represent also in something like the word
Motherland, Mothership, does that mean you represent the Motherland and Mothership personified in Her and She can we conclude it is feminine, wrong, how much more the word wisdom, is wisdom is feminine, exactly not, much more the Son of God speak in verse 8:12,22 He is not Man in eternal was.
True. And we never refer to Yeshua in the feminine concerning him being the "wisdom of God". Not to mention that Proverbs 8:22, 24 and 25 appears to be talking about something that was (created).
I don't understand your English here. Can you clarify what you mean?
Lione D' ea: Let us read Proverbs 8:22,24-25 Read
"The Lord
acquired me at the beginning of His way,
before His works of old."
24
I was created when there were yet no deeps, when there were no fountains replete with water.
25.
I was created before the mountains were sunk, before the hills;(The complete Jewish Bible)
Lione D' ea: If he really
created by God according you and the scripture, why did the 8:22 said
before His works if he was first created, is there a problem in translating?
(end.)
