sincerly
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by sincerly
Your "interpretation" being "almost exactly the same of any Jew at RF" doesn't give it validating authority either.
Isaiah's sign(7:14) to Ahaz didn't have a mother's name because it was years into the future.
An Angel spoke to Joseph. Jesus in Matt.28:20 said, "Go and teach(to observe)all things whatsoever I have commanded you;" That witnessing included the things which Luke recorded Jesus as fulfilling that was concerning HIM in those Scriptures contained in "the law of Moses, in the Prophets, and in the psalms."( that would include the Writings of Isaiah.)
Your doubting questions above are "strawmen made" because Matthew Levi was an eyewitness apostle of Jesus for 3 1/2 years of Jesus ministry.
The topic involves Matthew's acknowledging of Mary and Jesus fulfilling Isa.7:14 prophecy first seen in Gen.3:15 with the birth on the one who would Save mankind and eliminate sin and evil from the Redeemed of mankind and the earth made new.
The הָרָה֙ or hrh, relies upon the context for understanding and Ahaz isn't trusting in GOD's protection, but that of Assyria. The Prophetess's son by Isaiah (8:16) is the one who will /did witness the destructive conquest by Assyria. That is attested to by 8.
Your "interpretation" being "almost exactly the same of any Jew at RF" doesn't give it validating authority either.
Nor do your claim to Isaiah's sign being that of Mary and Jesus. Matthew's claim in Matthew 1:22-23 is also not authority, too. It is forced and superficial link.
Nothing in Matthew say that Jesus told them what to write; I don't think Jesus even knew what Matthew would write, some 30-plus years, after Jesus' death and resurrection.
Isaiah's sign(7:14) to Ahaz didn't have a mother's name because it was years into the future.
An Angel spoke to Joseph. Jesus in Matt.28:20 said, "Go and teach(to observe)all things whatsoever I have commanded you;" That witnessing included the things which Luke recorded Jesus as fulfilling that was concerning HIM in those Scriptures contained in "the law of Moses, in the Prophets, and in the psalms."( that would include the Writings of Isaiah.)
And if Matthew was truly the apostle and the author of this gospel, why write the gospel decades later? Why wait, so long to write the gospel, especially when Matthew was supposedly eyewitness to Jesus' ministry?
But I don't really care about any of these issues, because this topic wasn't really about Jesus or Matthew's gospel.
Your doubting questions above are "strawmen made" because Matthew Levi was an eyewitness apostle of Jesus for 3 1/2 years of Jesus ministry.
The topic involves Matthew's acknowledging of Mary and Jesus fulfilling Isa.7:14 prophecy first seen in Gen.3:15 with the birth on the one who would Save mankind and eliminate sin and evil from the Redeemed of mankind and the earth made new.
This topic was always about the language, grammar and context of Isaiah's use of the word הָרָה֙ or harah, and comparing this against other instances of harah ("pregnant" or "with child"), or against that of הָרִ֖ית or hariyt ("will conceive").
My interpretation is similar to the Jews here, because I had simply read Isaiah 7, from start to end, and understood what Isaiah is writing about.
You should try that, one day, learn to read Isaiah 7, from one to the other, and perhaps one day you will be smart to understand what Isaiah is really saying.
Again, you are demonstrating your ignorance.
The הָרָה֙ or hrh, relies upon the context for understanding and Ahaz isn't trusting in GOD's protection, but that of Assyria. The Prophetess's son by Isaiah (8:16) is the one who will /did witness the destructive conquest by Assyria. That is attested to by 8.