+- SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum (http://www.seekgod.ca/forum)
+-- Forum: Discussion Boards (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Promises and Prophecies of the Old Testament (/forumdisplay.php?fid=54)
+--- Thread: The Messiah..born of a virgin... (/showthread.php?tid=813)
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - Deborah446 - 05-31-2011 11:05 PM
(05-24-2011 12:44 PM)sari83 Wrote:Is God constrained to a book?(05-23-2011 06:15 PM)Vic Wrote:Quote:Is God constrained to a book? I don't think so. His word is present in every part of creation, and is that which proceeds from Him.
Yes, God has given prophecies and written words to mankind, but is that His only means of speaking to us?
I can see the point you are making from the Scripture verses you have chosen below. However, consider that very some book teaches of those who were predestined to know Him.
[color=#1E90FF][b]Oh please Sarah. Your arguments are all over the place. God gave His written Word so we would have the written record of Him, His creation, His purpose for mankind, His Salvation, His Messiah, His mercy, His love.....it's about Him. Jesus opened the apostles understanding so they might understand the Scriptures and see all the prophecies concerning Christ from Genesis onward. The NT was written so we might know the Truth of the Gospel and know how to live for CHrist--the foundation layed by the apostles because of Christ and the leading of the Holy Spirit. There is no other record given. No imagination. NO new revelation--which is what you are about. No doctrine that can be called of Christ unless it can stand the test of the doctrine within that written record. That's reality Sarah--which you reject.
Here is the point I was making in the "Is God constrained to a book?" statement: You say that a person cannot and does not know God or Christ unless they believe that everything written in the bible is perfect without error, untainted, although it has been through the imperfect hands of men many times over and the book itself is a compilation of a collection of books and letters put through a canonization process by a council of men.
My question remains....Is God constrained to a book?
Helen Keller, a heroic woman who was deaf and blind, yet gave witness to the fact that she knew God even before she knew any words.
So, I certainly do believe God is migthy powerful. Creation itself bears witness of his power and magnificence.
12And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 13I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
14Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
16I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
17And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
20He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
21The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. <>
<< Revelation 22 >>
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - Rose of Shushan - 06-02-2011 10:01 PM
Quote:The verses in which betulah is clearly defined as a virgin or physical virginity should also be noted....
Deut 22:17-19
And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid (betulah); and yet these are the tokens of my daughter's virginity(betulah). And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him; And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin (betulah) of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
(KJV)
Lev 21:14
A widow, or a divorced woman, or profane, or an harlot, these shall he not take: but he shall take a virgin (betulah) of his own people to wife. (KJV)
Isa 62:5
For as a young man marrieth a virgin (betulah), so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee. (KJV)
I don't think that those verses are clear on whether virginity was meant.
The Deuteronomy verse is particularly interesting.At first glance it might seem that it is talking about virginity but when looked at further a good case can be made for the garments being those stained by menstruation.
We see that the garments have to be produced by the parents of the betulah in the case that the husband is then trying to divorce the wife
Deu 22:13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,
Deu 22:14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:
It seems the Law here gave protection to the wife should the husband try to divorce her by claiming that she was pregnant by someone else prior to marriage.
Some take the view that the garments were those stained on the wedding night but in that case the groom would have seen that also and thus the parents would not be required to produce them at a later date.
However why would the parents have the garments? It would make sense to me if these were menstruation garments and thus proof that the woman is not pregnant and had been regularly menstruating.
We see also that if the parents fail to produce the blood stained garments then the woman is to be executed.
Deu 22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
Deu 22:21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the ***** in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
The woman there is said to have played the *****.
If it was just virginity here then a woman could be executed on quite flimsy evidence since not every woman bleeds the first time after sexual relations.Thus it makes more sense to me that the case pertains to a husband accusing a woman that became pregnant while living in her fathers house. The production of the menstrual stained garments by the parents would refute that allegation. Failure to do so could then be taken as positive evidence that the woman had indeed being pregnant while still under her parents' roof as the husband alleges.
Quote:The word betulah is being used in a figurative sense in the Jeremiah verses; metaphorically designating the restoration of Israel to her former "undefiled" state.
I would instead say it's the opposite and the fact that Jeremiah refers to defiled /Israel repeatedly as a betulah may be related to the fact that betulot are already defiled by menstruation. This makes more sense to me personally than in trying to reconcile Israel being called a virgin where at that point in time she was anything but that!
Jer 3:9 And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks.
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - Rose of Shushan - 06-03-2011 09:06 AM
Quote: (05-25-2011 03:01 AM)Rose of Shushan Wrote: Interestingly the root of almah, elem means to be conceiled or veiled from sight.So maybe the virgin connotation arises from a virgin being one who has never been uncovered and is thus concealed.
In the Bible the term to uncover someone's nakedness meant to have sexual relations with them.
Elem (masculine root of almah), denotes a young man.
You are correct that the word elem refers to a young man however,its not the actual root itself but a word arising from the root. The word elem for young man derives,supposedly from the root alam ,which as I posted above is related to being conceiled or hidden.
Here are some verses that contain words based on the same root alam
Psa 55:1 <To the chief Musician on Neginoth, Maschil, A Psalm of David.> Give ear to my prayer, O God; and hide not thyself from my supplication.
Lev 20:4 And if the people of the land do any ways hide their eyes from the man, when he giveth of his seed unto Molech, and kill him not:
Deu 22:1 Thou shalt not see thy brother's ox or his sheep go astray, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother.
Deu 22:3 In like manner shalt thou do with his *****; and so shalt thou do with his raiment; and with all lost thing of thy brother's, which he hath lost, and thou hast found, shalt thou do likewise: thou mayest not hide thyself.
Deu 22:4 Thou shalt not see thy brother's ***** or his ox fall down by the way, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again.
Psa 90:8 Thou hast set our iniquities before thee, our secret sins in the light of thy countenance.
Isa 1:15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.
Isa 58:7 Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?
There are more but we get the idea right?
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - Vic - 06-03-2011 11:30 AM
Interesting thoughts Rose. Just to follow up what Rose has posted.
The keeping of the blood stained cloth for proof the newly married woman was a virgin was a common historical practice for many people groups. For example:
Quote:Historically, bridal virginity was prized in many cultures. A young woman was expected to maintain her chastity until she was deflowered on her wedding night. In some of these cultures, this led to the ancient custom of showing a bloodstained cloth on the wedding night as “proof”* of the bride’s virginity...Relatives of the bride and the groom actually sit outside the newlywed couple’s room on the wedding night waiting for the bloody bed sheet to be exhibited
http://www.weddingnight.com/honeymoon-traditions/0801-egypt-honeymoon.html
Just to expand a bit on what Rose was saying:
Deut 22:15 tokens of virginity>
According to John Gill's Exposition on the Entire Bible, "the sheet she lay in when she first bedded with her husband, in her parents' possession, and kept by them as a witness of her purity, should there ever be any occasion for it: and which were to be brought ....". The "token of virginity" is the evidence that the bride was a virgin, which would allegedly be the blood on the sheet from the torn hymen. Keil & Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testament refer to this as "spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night". Source(s):John Gill's Exposition on the Entire Bible, and Keil & Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testament:
"Deu 22:15-17 In such a case the parents of the young woman (הַנַּעַר for הַנַּעֲרָה, as in Gen_24:14, Gen_24:28,according to the earliest usage of the books of Moses, a virgin, then also a young woman, e.g., Rth_2:6; Rth_4:12) were to bring the matter before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum; see Deu_21:19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them. It was not necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as in customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Moslem in Egypt and Syria...It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a proof might be required."
Notice carefully that the words, woman, damsel, wife and maid are used interchangeably with the implication being she was a 'virgin'---never having had sex.
Verse 13 reads: "If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her."
go in unto her> means, to consummate the marriage by having sexual intercourse.
Hate her> means, to feel hostility, dislike or to have distaste for her.
Verse 14 reads: "And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: "
not a Maid>H 1331 >bethûlîym >1) virginity
and it very obviously means any prior unmarried girl, damsel or woman----who has never had sex. Otherwise why claim she was 'not a maid'. Surely he already knew she was female ...
Remember this is an accusation against the claim of the validity of the virginity of the "damsel" or "maid", which defnitions and meanings have been addressed repeatedly with presenting said definitions of such in prior posts. It doesn't necessarily mean the false accusation took place the same time or immediately just after their consummation.
occasions of speech> means, a reason or ground to speak against her,
evil name> means, to distort her character, and reputation
Verse 15: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:
This means, that the girl's father and mother must bring forth their tokens of evidence of their daughter's virginity, and their daughter's evidences-tokens was the marriage consummation cloth or small bedsheet if you will, spread out before the elders of the city.
What did that mean? The bedsheets would have some blood on them from the rupture of the hymen membrane that in most women forms a barrier to sexual intercourse and breaks with the first intercourse. But it is not always present.
The price of falsely accusing the 'wife, maid, damsel, woman,' of not being a virgin, meaning falsely accusing her of having sex before marriage.
Deu 22:19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.
And if proof of the tokens of virginity is not found or provided by her parents, verse 21 says she can be put to death.
______________
There's a game we used to play with our children and now play it with our grandchildren. It goes something like this, in an adult type version:
There's something the same in the following--can you find it:
Gen 24:16 And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her:
Luk 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
Luk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
espoused G3423
μνηστεύω
mnēsteuō
Thayer Definition:
1) to woo her and ask her in marriage
2) to be promised in marriage, be betrothed
Gen 24:51 Behold, Rebekah is before thee, take her, and go, and let her be thy master's son's wife, as the LORD hath spoken.
Gen 24:58 And they called Rebekah, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go.
_________________
Sarah was making the point about God being bound to the 'law of nature'. And every creature reproduces in a particular way and rabbits are with rabbits etc. However, God made procreation and reproduction based on His parameters and 'limitations' for each species, and it was never limited to one way in some instances. She also asked for another definition of the use of 'virgin' Greek parthenos...
Quote:"...Sexual reproduction typically requires the involvement of two individuals...Asexual reproduction...These organisms often do not possess different sexes, and they are capable of "splitting" themselves into two or more individuals. On the other hand, some of these species that are capable of reproducing asexually, like hydra, yeast (See Mating of yeasts] and jellyfish, may also reproduce sexually. For instance, most plants are capable of vegetative reproduction—reproduction without seeds or spores—but can also reproduce sexually. Likewise, bacteria may exchange genetic information by conjugation. Other ways of asexual reproduction include parthenogenesis, fragmentation and spore formation that involves only mitosis. Parthenogenesis (from the Greek παρθένος parthenos, "virgin", + γένεσις genesis, "creation") is the growth and development of embryo or seed without fertilization by a male. Parthenogenesis occurs naturally in some species, including lower plants (where it is called apomixis), invertebrates (e.g. water fleas, aphids, some bees and parasitic wasps), and vertebrates (e.g. some reptiles,[1] fish, and, very rarely, birds[2] and sharks[3]). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproduction
God has never been bound by the boundaries He established for His creation. Man has been limited---God has and is not. He can and does override 'the norm' many times. He created the egg and sperm and the ability and way of conception. He can override or use that process in any way He chooses. Which He did as Biblical record shows, many times. And the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary who had never had sex with any man. How the miracle was accomplished, is God's business. That's the nature of miracles---they defy 'the norm'. Our business as believers is to believe God's Word as true and walk by faith. Knowing He is more than able to protect His Word so all might know these Truth's. And truth's they are, despite what those who have an "evil heart of unbelief" might say to the contrary.
__________
much more to come in a bit to answer sari83 for the last time on this topic
Isaiah 7:14 - Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, - Steven Avery - 06-06-2011 01:49 PM
Hi Folks,
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.
Matthew 1:23
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.
Greetings ! I just skimmed this thread, and I just want to add a few thoughts and pointers.
#1 - the anti-mish argument that betulah=virgin is refuted by Talmud and midrash Hebraics. This is one of those examples where the modern anti-mish movement tries to use a darkness cover over their own historical understandings
#2 - almah as virgin in Isaiah 7:14 is a contextual (the verse does call for something unusual, a sign) and well as vocabulary definition. Often a word has semantic range, depending on the context. Thus, we may not be able to point to a single word in Bible Hebrew that unequivocally, always, definitely means only virgin. Such as word may not exist, yet almah will be the best for a single-word equivalent.
#3 - The small book by Daniel Gruber, God, the Rabbis and the Virgin Birth, is helpful in these discussions. Messianic writers can, on some topics, do some good research. Michael Brown is also occasionally helpful on Messianic prophecy topics and had a written debate years back with Gerald Sigal that was published in Messianic Times that was quite interesting.
#4 - Also the Finnish author Risto Santala. He is quoted in an errancy wiki as referencing the :
highly valued Hebrew encyclopedia of Even Shushan says the term almah "denotes a maiden or a young woman, especially before marriage". Since virginity was the condition of marriability, any girl called almah would naturally be understood to be a virgin.
Risto may have other references of note.
#5 There is an important element, often overlooked, of the connection between Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 9:6 as the same child, strongly supporting the supernatural aspect of the prophecy. One of the writers who emphasized this aspect, quite nicely, is an rcc author William Most. Notice above how strongly that connection is embedded right in Matthew 2:23.
=============
Hope that helps. To me, there really is not much to debate here, it is clear that virgin is proper, however I understand that it is a fascinating topic to study.
Now, I am interested in the "why" issue, for which I recommend Arthur Custance.
One could also raise the issue of why there is a lack in the Hebraics (Targum, Talmud, Midrash, Rabbinics) of referencing supporting the virgin birth of Messiah in comparison to those writings referencing e.g. the Messiah as the suffering servant. That is one of those "it is as it is" issues. If some one asked whether the Hebrews of 1st century Israel expected the Messiah to be virgin born, the answer would probably have to be "unclear, uncertain, mixed", as the Matthew prophecy reference, while strong evidence, could be midrash (in the postive sense of the word) rather than directly based on an existing reference.
Similarly the parthenos translation in the Greek OT, while good evidence, can be overstated as well. e.g. Parthenos has its own semantic range and we do not have a Greek OT Isaiah actually dated before Jesus. So we are largely going by Justin Martyr to Trypho and Origen to Celsus for detail analysis. Again, good evidence, not perfect and fool-proof.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - YYZ Skinhead - 06-06-2011 07:00 PM
Quote:Other ways of asexual reproduction include parthenogenesis, fragmentation and spore formation that involves only mitosis. Parthenogenesis (from the Greek παρθένος parthenos, "virgin", + γένεσις genesis, "creation") is the growth and development of embryo or seed without fertilization by a male. Parthenogenesis occurs naturally in some species, including lower plants (where it is called apomixis), invertebrates (e.g. water fleas, aphids, some bees and parasitic wasps), and vertebrates (e.g. some reptiles,[1] fish,and, very rarely, birds[2] and sharks[3]). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproduction#Asexual_reproduction
Give the "birds" reference article link a very wide berth if you like eating eggs and want to continue eating them.
(Isn't parthenogenesis a cool word?)
RE: Isaiah 7:14 - Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, - Vic - 06-07-2011 10:58 AM
(06-06-2011 01:49 PM)Steven Avery Wrote: Hi Folks,
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.
Matthew 1:23
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.
Greetings ! I just skimmed this thread, and I just want to add a few thoughts and pointers.
#1 - the anti-mish argument that betulah=virgin is refuted by Talmud and midrash Hebraics. This is one of those examples where the modern anti-mish movement tries to use a darkness cover over their own historical understandings
#2 - almah as virgin in Isaiah 7:14 is a contextual (the verse does call for something unusual, a sign) and well as vocabulary definition. Often a word has semantic range, depending on the context. Thus, we may not be able to point to a single word in Bible Hebrew that unequivocally, always, definitely means only virgin. Such as word may not exist, yet almah will be the best for a single-word equivalent.
#3 - The small book by Daniel Gruber, God, the Rabbis and the Virgin Birth, is helpful in these discussions. Messianic writers can, on some topics, do some good research. Michael Brown is also occasionally helpful on Messianic prophecy topics and had a written debate years back with Gerald Sigal that was published in Messianic Times that was quite interesting.
#4 - Also the Finnish author Risto Santala. He is quoted in an errancy wiki as referencing the :
highly valued Hebrew encyclopedia of Even Shushan says the term almah "denotes a maiden or a young woman, especially before marriage". Since virginity was the condition of marriability, any girl called almah would naturally be understood to be a virgin.
Risto may have other references of note.
#5 There is an important element, often overlooked, of the connection between Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 9:6 as the same child, strongly supporting the supernatural aspect of the prophecy. One of the writers who emphasized this aspect, quite nicely, is an rcc author William Most. Notice above how strongly that connection is embedded right in Matthew 2:23.
=============
Hope that helps. To me, there really is not much to debate here, it is clear that virgin is proper, however I understand that it is a fascinating topic to study.
Now, I am interested in the "why" issue, for which I recommend Arthur Custance.
One could also raise the issue of why there is a lack in the Hebraics (Targum, Talmud, Midrash, Rabbinics) of referencing supporting the virgin birth of Messiah in comparison to those writings referencing e.g. the Messiah as the suffering servant. That is one of those "it is as it is" issues. If some one asked whether the Hebrews of 1st century Israel expected the Messiah to be virgin born, the answer would probably have to be "unclear, uncertain, mixed", as the Matthew prophecy reference, while strong evidence, could be midrash (in the postive sense of the word) rather than directly based on an existing reference.
Similarly the parthenos translation in the Greek OT, while good evidence, can be overstated as well. e.g. Parthenos has its own semantic range and we do not have a Greek OT Isaiah actually dated before Jesus. So we are largely going by Justin Martyr to Trypho and Origen to Celsus for detail analysis. Again, good evidence, not perfect and fool-proof.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
To me also, there is no debate on the issue. I am not sure what you mean by the 1st century beliefs concerning the expectation of the virgin birth. To me, it boils down to believing God's promises, and certainly just a 'normal' married or unmarried woman getting pregnant could not be construed as an 'unusual thing'. Although the miracle of any birth is a reality. But, conceiving in a virgin--who knew not a man...now that's a miracle.
For those who reject the correlation of Isa 7:14 to the events as described in Matthew and Luke, including the written record of the angel visitations to both Mary and Joseph, showing the truth of the miracle of what was to take place with Mary--that it was from the Holy Spirit and not that Mary had been unfaithful or had relations with Joseph, must all be taken as believing the Word of God stands true. Those in discussion here that reject the virgin birth, reject the written record of that event, and the very belief that God's Word is true and He inspired it's writing and protected it. They reject that truth and they reject the divinity of Christ.
These and the other messianic prophecy verses throughout the Scripture are no problem for those who believe God's Word. But once one topples validity of the written record in the NT which correlates to the OT, or vice versa, then it topples who Christ is and the Scriptures as being true and fulfilled in Him. And then they have no foundation upon which to stand.
first century messianic expectations - Steven Avery - 06-08-2011 12:22 AM
Hi Folks,
Vic Wrote:I am not sure what you mean by the 1st century beliefs concerning the expectation of the virgin birth.
Basically, was the man on the street who knew his Tanach expecting Messiah to be born of a virgin ? Before the event. I do not think we can make definitive statements that the true Bible understanding was commonly understood.
We can read the Targum Jonathan and see the Jewish expectations around Isaiah 53, basically the same as the disciples of the Lord Jesus, the establishing of a glorious kingdom. (Not so much an emphasis on the suffering of Messiah.) Also we can see similar in Midrash. On the virgin birth we don't have the same type of auxiliary commentary about the Isaiah verse, although there may be hints in that direction.
This is simply an attempt to look at "1st century Messianic expectations" (before the life of the Lord Jesus) as its own genre, which can be done at the same time that we fully understand the Isaiah and Matthew and Luke verses.
An attempt for historical perspective.
Hope that helps.
===================
New note:
Parthenogenesis can not be involved in the virgin birth, since that produces a female offspring. This is covered in the Arthur Custance (1910–1985) material, The Virgin Birth and the Incarnation, and The Seed of the Woman, which is on the net.
===================
What I wrote above regarding the connection of Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 9:6, being the same child, is an important element, however my mention of Matthew was a bit out of place, he simply quotes Isaiah 7:14. It is fair to say that Emmanuel is akin to Isaiah 9:6:
Isaiah 9:6
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.
however there is no direct combining of the verses in Matthew.
===================
Shalom,
Steven Avery
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - Vic - 06-08-2011 09:42 AM
Thanks Steven, for the clarification. That helps.
To me the everyday person must have been more than willing to believe it, maybe, because of Luke 2. The angel didn't go to the religious scholars, but to poor shepherds to reveal the prophesied Saviour.And I agree the validation and correlation to the Isaiah 9:6 is hand in hand with Isaiah 7:14.
Luk 2:4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:
Luk 2:5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
Luk 2:6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered.
Luk 2:7 And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
Luk 2:8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
Luk 2:9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
Luk 2:10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
Luk 2:11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
Luk 2:12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
Luk 2:13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
Luk 2:14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.
Luk 2:15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.
Luk 2:16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.
Luk 2:17 And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.
Luk 2:18 And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.
Luk 2:19 But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.
Luk 2:20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.
Luk 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
Luk 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.
Luk 2:26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.
Luk 2:27 And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law,
Luk 2:28 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said,
Luk 2:29 Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word:
Luk 2:30 For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,
Luk 2:31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people;
Luk 2:32 A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.
Luk 2:34 And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against;
Luk 2:35 (Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.
Luk 2:38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.
And I agree also on the parthenogenesis---I was merely showing it's use as 'virgin', because even it's use for virgin was being disputed. I don't believe that's what took place, either.
RE: The Messiah..born of a virgin... - YYZ Skinhead - 06-08-2011 11:17 AM
Isn't there a verse in the Gospels that parallels Isaiah 9:6? At least the "unto us a Child is born" part.