Prophecy of Messiah: Isaiah 7

Hi Ray,The subject of 'true' Christian admins is not on topic here. Let me inform you of one of the more recent Admin's - Christian is also known as AdminChristian, and is, as far as I know, a YEC.The issues you raise here about 'true' Christians has been addressed in depth, so perhaps you can take that to Message 1.My interpretation of jar's comment is not disrespectful enough to warrant Admin attention. Willful ignorance is not really that bad and if anyone considers the statement offensive I advise they step away from this kind of debate.After all, the Holy Bible makes accusations of willful ignorance, and I don't think there is a case to be made by the YECers here that the Holy Bible is disrespectful.

---

I'm not an idiot YEC - your counterpart. Could you tell the debate how much of your Darwinian worldview is responsible for this very predictable and unsupported opinion ?AdminMod:I think you should admit yourself to a hospital. Your face looks in dire need of some type of injection.Ray

This is not the place for it, if you really want to discuss it, take it to the link in my signature. If it is not about Isaiah 7 or related passages, it's off topic. I repeat, do not reply to this message, take any comments to the moderation thread in my sig. Thank you for your consideration.(incidentally, it's only ketchup, so no need to panic )This message has been edited by AdminModulous, Sun, 12-March-2006 12:44 AM

---

For fairness and balance here, I believe Faith has a valid point in that a reread of the history of this thread will show that there has been corroborating Biblical text to support the creationist position here. For example, Matthew has been shown as one fundamentalist argument to corroborate the Isaiah reference to Jesus. There is a legitimate debate going here and certainly the fundamentalist position here has not been based on wilfull ignorance as you are alleging.Unless any of us can produce imperical evidence to show that our position is the only possible or logical one, to say the the counterpart is wilfully ignorant is not the way to keep the peace in these debates and is, imo and apparantly by member Faith as in violation of Forum Guidelines, item 10a, (Always treat other members with respect...).Having said the above, though I've addressed this in at least one other thread in the past, there is evidence in the context of Isaiah 7 and 8 that can be considered supportive to either side of the debate here, depending on ideology and mindset. Perhaps I have been remiss in failing to address this in this thread relative to my own arguments. After removing my admin cap I'll take care of this.
Let's work hard to keep the peace here, friends! Abe: to add AdminBuzsaw statusThis message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-11-2006 08:57 PM

I will be happy to once again show that it is only through Wilfull Ignorance that Isaiah 7 can be taken to refer to Jesus. All it takes is a reading of what is there.When during Jesus life did the King of Assyria invade Israel.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'm sure that with equal justification someone could show that your opinions can only be the result of self-righteous depravity.

Give it a try. This thread is about Isaiah, 7 & 8. Let's step through it and see if you can support your assertion.Perhaps you can show where during Jesus young life or when in Jesus life he is too young to know right from wrong? I'm sorry, but like most of the Messianic prophecies, Isaiah too requires an act of Wilfull Ignorance to be validated.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Jar: I have stated that I would myself address this. I have had to attend to some other things and share the computer with my wife, unable to attend to it yet. In the meantime, I would appreciate that you honor Forum Guidelines showing respect to other members. Wilfull ignorance is implying just that, when in fact your counterparts are obviously sincerely attempting to refute your arguments. That may be poorly effected attempts to refute in your view, but certainly not wilfull ignorance. If you wish to take this up in the moderation thread we can discuss it there. In the meantime we need to cool the tension here.Faith: Not good to respond in kind to disrespect. This simply adds fuel to the tension. Admonishment to counterparts is certainly acceptable but not worded disrespectfully, regardless of how disrespectful one considers the counterpart to be.Edited to fix typoThis message has been edited by AdminBuzsaw, 03-11-2006 11:12 PM

if someone is going to claim that Isaiah refers to Jesus. When during Jesus life did the King of Assyria shave the Hebrews heads, the hair of their legs and take off their beards?There is simply no way that anyone who reads Isaiah can see Isaiah 7 refering to Jesus without ignoring all of the rest of the story.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi again, Jar. I need to hit hay soon, but here's my analysis of Isaiah 7:
1. Ahaz, king of Judah is threatened by a hostile confederacy of Syria and Ephriam. Ahaz is worried.2. God assures Ahaz that he will deal with the problem, offering him his choice of some sign for assurance of this.3. Ahaz declines the offering of the sign.4. God appears to be displeased with this reaction of Ahaz. So he says then he would show the house of David a sign relative to a future day. The sign is regarding this word which is used often in texts implicative of virgin and which is attested by the NT writer Matthew as reference to Jesus. Note the child's name in Isaiah 7:14 is Immanuel which means God with us and as per Matthew, Jesus, God's son fits that description by his being incarnated by God.5. God reveals to the prophet Isaiah that this birth is a future event, the repeated phrase in that day clearly indicative of this. A careful reading of these in that day verses of chapter 7 clearly imply a future event substantially removed from the day the prophecy was given.6. This son will not be born until the lands of these enemies of the House of David will be brought down and become places of shepherds and desolated. The son will know to do the good and refuse the evil, clearly again implying the christ/messiah, Jesus.7. Chapter 8 begins with another child given another name which is to be soon born and will not be old enough to call his mother and dad before Samaria is brought down.8. This is overshadowed by an addendum, if you will to the Isaiah 7 prophecy of the future of Judah leading up to chapter 9 verses six and seven in another famous messianic prophetic statement further describing the Imanuel, messianic child of Isaiah 7:14.
Isaiah 9:6,7: Jar, my friend, you needn't agree with the above, nor with the other things being debated contrary to your views on this but willful ignorance it is not. Okay, bud?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW

"In that day" is indicative of a general period of time relative to the messianic era. Often these OT messianic prophecies include the end time of the 2nd advent of Jesus when he rules and reigns in his millenial kingdom, the church age, being a silent mystery to the prophets. In fact the church age is referred to as a mystery being finished in Revelation 10, I believe verse 7 as told by the prophets as it states something like that without taking time to look it up.The Bible, like your science is a lifetime study book which can require extensive cross reference et al, leaving different scholars with different insight. As my pastor says in some of our discussions, "iron sharpens iron" as we hash over these things.

so not fulfilled (yet) then?

---

Sadly, I must say that I think it's quite a stretch to say that Isaiah ch. 7 is a prophecy of Jesus Christ. Still, I suppose it's not an impossible one. It just seems that the context of Isaiah 7 points to a relatively short time between the prophecy and its fulfillment.Does anyone know for sure if the Greek word parthenos, which some here say the rabbis or scholars who put together the Septuagint used for Hebrew almah, really means "virgin"? Can it also mean "young woman" (for example, like the German word Jungfrau, which literally means "young woman" but is often--always?--translated "virgin")?

Just what good is a sign to King Ahaz if it is 600 years in the future.If you read what the prophecy actually is, before the child is able to know good and evil (in other words, he is a toddler able to talk), the king of assyira will lose a couple of cities. The enemy of Juddah is clearly pointed out to be the King of Assyria.

Well, there are some examples where Pathenos is not refering to a virgin.In Genesis 34, Dinah was refered to as 'parthenos' after she was raped.There is also the use of Parthnos by Homer. He used Parthnos to refer to
Astyoche, the honored maiden, who had already born a child.IN Aristophanes Clouds 530, a "parthenos" was refered to someone who had exposed her child on a mountain top.Pindar, in Pythian (3.34) used parthenos for a woman who had slept with a number of men.