Summations Only

This appears a very superfiscial complaint.1.) Now if YOU don't want to call Jesus "God with us" that's your choice. We Christians see that as your unbelief in the believable and even obvious. Jesus acted like God with us.2.) It is too superficial to say "they never named Jesus Immanuel".This name is a discription of how Jesus lived. It is not a matter of what was written on His municipal family records.In all history no one like Jesus more qualifies to be a candidate of "God with us." You may argue. But the western world has divided world history by a line indicating before Christ came and the remaining years which are His.All I really hear you saying is that you wish that God is not with us and never was.A few of us have thought if anyone quaified to be God among human beings or better God as a human being - it is Jesus. So effectively He is called Emmanuel - God with us.Now, folks may have some ground to say Isaiah's prophecy seems to indicate someone more immediate. I would not argue against that. But I would argue that Jesus clearly said that He was the greater one of a number of Old Testament personalities. In other words Christ is the greater David (Matt. 12:1-4), the greater Jonah (Matt.12:40,41), the greater Solomon (Matt. 12:42), and even the real temple as the house of God itself (Matt.12:6) .Christ is the antitype of a number people who were real but symbols or types of a greater One to come. This One to come would be like them, only greater.Based upon the prinicple that all the positive figures of the Old Testmanent are pointers to the greater One to come - Christ, we ascertain Christ is the greater Hezekiah too.Now an "Argument from Authority" is not necessarily a argument for something not true. It is just not as rigoruosly robust argument in man's philosophical academia.That the prophecy of the virgin bringing forth a child refers to the virgin birth of Christ is proclaimed by the apostle. That is authority enough for the Christian and settles the matter.It may not be a rigorously logical argument "Argument from Authority". But it is not necessarily wrong. And in the last analysis men must out their trust in someone. Christ's approvedness persuades that His Gospel is worthy of our trust and He was the fulfimment of the prophecy.Bottom line - we are well advized to believe Jesus is the virgin born miracle Savior and also God with us - God become a man. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Zerubbabel in the book of Zechariah was refered to as "My servant the Branch [or Shoot]" (Zechariah 3:8) . This doesn't mean that when people saw him on the street they necessarily called out "Mr. Branch, could we have a word with you?"He was the Branch or the Shoot by God's prophetic announcement.Jesus is God with us. Jesus is Immanuel. And in the end of Matthew's Gospel He says that He is "with us" all the days until the consummation of the age. "And behold, I am with you all the days until the consummation of the age." (Matt. 28:20) Sorry if God is not with you, jar. I would be lying if I said that God is not with us "club" members who have received Jesus. But God is with us. Which brings me to an important point.You apparently still have not noticed that the Bible is a book always working to bring people into contact with God subjectively. If some of us receive the subjective encounter with God we are really using the Bible as it was intended to be used.You on the other hand misuse the Bible completely. You use the Bible to fortify yourself AGAINST any subjective experience of God. You labor throughout your whole life to grasp the Bible in order to PUSH the subjective experience of God out of your life and as far away from you as possible.So you want to use the Scripture to make sure God is not with you in any possible way. Its a temporary game. And your "club" is in for a bitter disappointment. You don't have to muster up any empty apology to me.Christ is not only God with us because He has dispensed the Holy Spirit into us. Christ is Immanuel - "God with us" in light of the fact that He is become a man - So God is with us.God has put on human nature in Christ. He is with us.
So the "club," or whatever you'd like to refer to us as, experiencers whose eyes have been opened to see the truth, know the truth. It is an example of what Christ Himself taught us after His resurrection: "And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, He explained to them clearly in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." (Luke 24:27) So Jesus took the lead to your "confirmation bias". He's trustworthy. "And He said to them, O foolish and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!" (Luke 24:25) You, jar are REALLY REALLY "SLOOOOOOOOW of heart". In fact you may never make it to believe. This is still a Bible Study. If you don't want to get into the QUOTES of the Bible then you're in the wrong forum.And I will continue to quote mine. The reason you don't see me as much over on something like "Faith and Belief" is because I respect that over there it is more about philosophical argumentation.But this here is BIBLE STUDY. So we QUOTE the Bible in order to STUDY, guess what?, the Bible.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

It tends to be like this, when the quotation supports the skeptic's unbelief, why it is quoting. When the quotation supports the Christians belief in the plain teaching of the Bible, then it is "quote mining." If the skeptic's complaint is that the entire seventh chapter of Isaiah does not seem to be about Jesus Christ, I can sympathize somewhat. But I do not offer full sympathy.You see God had told the Jews that He would dispense the truth to them line upon line and here and there a little - "Whom will he teach knowledge? And whom will he instruct with the report? ... For his words are line upon line, line upon linel Here a little, there a little ... But they would not hear. Therefore Jehovah's word to them will be: Rule upon rule, rule upon rule; Line upon line, Line upon line; Here a little, there a little. That they may ggo and stumble backword and be broken, snared, and taken." (See Isaiah 28:10-13) God warns that as a discipline He will impart truth to the nation as pieces of a puzzle - here a little and there a little.This is a way under the providence of the Spirit of God. You not only have the overwhealming testimony of Jesus. But you have the confirming lines here and there - accumulating and not always so clearly laid out in one place.Had we only this jigsaw puzzle manner in which God speaks, we might be justified to disbelieve in the Son of God. However, accompanying this mysterious procedure we have the bright shinning life of Jesus against which you really have no vald argument.So, while may be few have come to know Christ based solely on Isaiah 7:14 ( I know of no case ), the followers of Jesus certainly welcome the passage as a prophetic confirmation. I think this is a logical fallacy of "Absence of proof is proof of absence." It is entirely possible that plenty of people called Jesus Immanuel and there is just no written record of it.Being without a record of Him being called Emmanuel is not your proof that He was never called such.And I still stand by what I wrote before. The prophecy that He will be called Immanuel is not a teaching that someone who does NOT believe in Christ will be forced to call Him Emmanuel.Where I meet we do call Christ Immanuel. We especially refer to Him as Immanuel when we are praying for Israel. We lift up our voices in prayer and speak of "the land of Immanuel." So I know you are wrong that Christ was never called such. It is true that the passage has limited application to Christ. I don't argue against that because God did say "here a little, there a little; Line upon line, line upon line." So we lovers of God were given a "heads up" that the truth would sometimes be imparted to man in this way. The problem here is that it is the New Testament Apostolic writer of one of the Gospels, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that tells us that that is the meaning of the passage.We do not regard Matthew's Gospel as an error prone faulty commentary on the book of Isaiah. We regard Matthew as the oracles of God, inspired Scripture, in exactly the same manner as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, the prophets ... etc.I am not sure if you regard ANY book of the Bible as the inspired word of God. Matthew is a book on the same level of authority as Genesis or Exodus.We absolutely submit to the apostolic utterance - "Now all this has happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, "Behold, the virgin shall be with chold and shall bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel" (Which is translated God with us). And when Joseph awoke from his sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him." (Matt. 1:22-23) Now this interpretation was apparently given supernaturally by an angel to Joseph as he slept. I would not be surprised at all if it was also expounded by Christ.Now had you or Ringo been Joseph, you may have argued with the angel and demanded that he stop "quote mining" from the prophets. I can hear you now -"No, no. That passage about the virgin has already been fulfilled. And it has nothing to do with my wife having a baby. Sorry. You'll have to come up with something better than that."Thank God Joseph awoke and did not question as far as we know. Yet it says that he obeyed the command and "...he did not know her until she bore a son. And he called His name Jesus." Joseph made sure that she remained a virgin for the miracle to take place. Interestingly, it says he called the child Jesus. I don't think he was doing that in disobedience. "And she will bear a son, and you shall call His name Jesus ..." (v.21) So Mary and Joseph shall call His name first of all - Jesus. However, He will also be called Immanuel. In fact Jesus was called many things. And Jesus is still called many titles - Prince of Peace, Prince of Life, Friend of Sinners, Good Shepherd, Great Physician, the Door, the Lord of Sabbath, the Amen, our Elder Brother, the Lamb of God, The First and the Last, Wonderful Counselor, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Rose of Sharon, the Lilly of the Valley, etc. So lovers of Jesus have called the Son of God many things including Emmanuel and much more. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Your argument appears more silly to me. Christ is reigning forever. That is eternity. How do you know that through the everlasting ages He will never be universally sung as Emmanuel ?You don't know. But you assume He is not God. Face it. Your complaint is totally based on unbelief.Actually your claim that Christ was never called Emmanuel is really unfalsifiable. When He is called that it is heard by those who use the title and by God. The prophecy only said He will be called Emmanuel and not that you will always thus hear it.And if you don't want to hear it and tend to stay away from those who would be likely to call Him that, that's no argument for you.Since 1974 I have been in a number of meetings in which Christ was refered to as Emmanuel. If you stayed away from those meetings, that's no proof for your view.There is a classic hymn which has been sung for probably over a centry - "Hark the Herald Angels Sing." That song sung by millions has a line in it refering to "Jesus Our Emmanuel"If you don't like to sing that song, that's no proof of your opinion that He was not called Emmanuel.Verse two of that hymn reads: "Christ, by highest heav'n adored,
Christ , the everlasting Lord:
Late in time behold Him come,
Offspring of a virgin's womb.
Veiled in flesh the Godhead see,
Hail th' incarnate Deity!
Pleased as man with man to dwell,
Jesus our Immanuel." Now that is a popular Christmas charol which one source says first appeared in 1739. Even though many of us do not celebrate Christmas, we do sing the hymn. And I am pretty sure millions around the English speaking world sing it at least once a year. And then you could add the people who sing it in translation to some other world language.So right there you have millions around the world refering to Jesus as "our Immanuel" and subsequently fulfillment of the prophecy. You can call Christ Biff Rocco if you wish. The problem is that there is no PROPHECY stating that He will be called Biff Rocco. But there IS one predicting His being called Immanuel.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I disagree. The concept of Jesus being God incarnate starts with the man Jesus and how He LIVED, how He acted, how He spoke and rose from the dead.His personality initiated the belief in us that He is God with us. So the beginning of the so called circle is the testimony born by the man from Nazarath - Jesus.It should be obvious that MOST (if not all) of the believers FIRST believed His person. Then after His resurrection He opened their minds to understand that the law and prophets and psalms had spoke of Him.But whether believing before His acts (as one priest and prophetess or John the Baptist or Joseph and Mary) or those believing after His 3 year ministry including His death and resurrection, both groups believed because of revelation from God. John 6:44 - " No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up in the last day." Millions of us refer to Jesus as Emmanuel when we sing the second verse of the hymn "Hark the Herald Angels Sing" which first appeared in 1739.And how do you know that after you have gone off to your reward, whatever it may be, that in eternity He will not be praised as Emmanuel here on earth and among the galaxies for eternal ages?So you have no case. "To the increase of His government and to His peace there is no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom." (Isa. 9:7) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

No there isn't. You have provided nothing that shows this. All you have are things taken out of context and shoe horned into your beliefs.

---

" ... and they shall call His name Emmanuel." In context, and a prediction.

I focus my attention on the prophecy that we know about. What you can cook up off the cuff with cleverness, is of no concern to me. You do not know the word of God or the ways of God well.If you read the book of Daniel you will see that Daniel studied the prophecies of Jeremiah concerning the 70 year captivity. He did not simply passively wait. He cooperated with God in powerful and regular prayer.Often God and man work together in a smooth coordination - a coordinated cooperation. If your idea is that all fulfillment of prophecy is accompanied by 100% passivity on man's part, you have not noticed many things in the Bible.Now, granted, sometime man's initiative is not according to God's way. But other times the prophecy is accompanied by coordination and cooperation on behalf of a trusting and believing people of God.Read Exodus again. The Hebrews had to cooperate in faith with Moses to have the prophecy fulfilled that they would come out of Egypt. Okay, it says "the virgin will ... call his name Immanuel." (Jeremiah 7:14)Yes, there is the little difference in Matthew's references - "Behold, the virgin shall be with child ... they shall call His name Emmanuel." (Matt. 1:23) I don't think this is a show stopper. I think it exposes that some people are experts at missing the point. Probably, Mary was the first in a number to call her son that. She may have called Him that before He was born. There is no record in the New Testament of her calling Him thus. I am sure that before Wesley wrote that hymn lovers of Christ had long before refered to Him as Immanuel. The key word here is "lovers". In the intimacy of love you may call your dear spouse things which others do not hear. You hear. She or he hears. And God hears. Maybe some children in the household hear.Why should I depend on those who have no love for Jesus to complain that "He was never called Emmanuel !!" ? Get around those who loved Him over the last 20 centries. I know you would hear Him be called ALL that the Bible uses to designate Him, and some. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

You have that backwards again. It's true that prophecy would be worthless if people did nothing as a result but the point of (most) prohecy is to get people to prevent the fulfilment. They're supposed to stop what they're doing or God won't protect them from the Assyrians, for example.
  —ringo

---

This seems to assume that "most prophecy" is prediction of negative things. Prophecy is not always warning of impending punishment.In the case that it is concerning punishment, those who stop sinning may postpost the punishment to another generation. They have the good fortune of not suffering the punishment. After they have passed away, it comes on a subsequent unrepentant generation.In the case that they do not repent, the punishment might come in their generation.God can spare a people by postponing the negative prophecy as a result of thier repentance.On a more positive note we have the example of Joseph's dreams in the book of Genesis. He rose to reign over his father and brothers because of his godly integrity and steadfast faith in his God.Do not think that Joseph had no other choices before him after he had been sold into Egyptian slavery.So I don't view God's prophecy as the same as abject fatalism. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I CAN do a lot of things. My concern is not with what I CAN do. My concern is what I know has taken place.Christ has certainly been called Emmanuel.Is this your major objection to wanting to believe that Jesus is the Messiah ? Is it in your top three reasons for not believing in Jesus the Messiah ?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Let's take the example of Jesus fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah 61:1-2. In this case Christ was in perfect synchronization with the prophecy. His doing and the prediction rendevous precisely.

quote:

---

And He [Jesus] came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up, and according to His custom He entered on the Sabbath day into the synogogue and stood up to read.

​

And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me to announce the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to proclaim releasee to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, to send away in release those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable your of the Lord ...

​

And when He rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant, He sat down. And the eyes of all in the synogogue were fixed on Him. And He began to say, Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.

​

And all bore witness to Him and marveled at the words of grace proceeding out of His mouth, and they said, Is not this Joseph's son? (Luke 4:16-22)
  —Luke

---

The volitional act of Jesus and the fulfillment of the prophecy corresponded together perfectly. He was really the Word which became flesh.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Could you consider that it might be an example, in this regard ?We do not see Mary addressing her child as Emmanuel. Nowhere is it recorded that the word "Emmanuel" came out of her mouth in refenrence to her child.But, she did become a disciple of this one (Acts 1:14). She most likely contributed to some of the memories about her experience, which were used by the Gospel writers.Ie. "But Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart." (Luke 2:19) I think it reasonable to assume Luke knew that, because Mary had communicated many of her recollections and memories to the evangelist in the writing of the gospel.Being a disciple of Jesus, she more than considered this child to be just Jesus of Nazareth among us. She considered Him to be God with us. I mean she was a typical Christian disciple. And Thomas confessed that Jesus was his Lord and his God. (John 20:28) - "Thomas answered and said to Him, My Lord and my God! Jesus said to him, Because you have seen Me, you have believed. " Thomas was not corrected or rebuked for refering to Jesus as his God. The other typical disciples were there and took this as basic teaching from their Master. Mary likely also believed Jesus was also her Lord and God.In view of this, would you consider it reasonable to believe that Mary the mother of Jesus, believed that her child was God with us - Emmanuel ?Do you think Mary would have streneously objected to songs about Jesus calling Him Emmanuel ?My opinion, is that while I can concede no record of Jesus being addressed as Emmanuel, He was to them Emmanuel - "God with us".Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

So you're saying that Jesus deliberately concocted a phony fulfilment.

---

I do believe that Jesus deliberately did something to fulfill and confirm the prophecy. I don't think there was anything "phony" about.What it spoke of Him, He began to actually DO. Had He not followed through, then we might consider His action phony. As it stands, He was realistic.

quote:

---

That's like me "prophesying" that your house will be vandalized and then throwing a brick through the window to fulfill the "prophecy".
Ideally, a prophecy should be fulfilled by somebody who's never heard of the prophecy - a double-blind system.

---

We have examples of BOTH in the Bible. You see, often, just when you think you have God all neatly confined to your box like limitations, He acts in a surprising manner.The stipulation that you are demanding, is ALSO evidenced in Scripture. But we ALSO have instances like man COOPERATING with God for the fulfillment of His plans.Perhaps this disturbs you. But it is quite marvelous that man and God should coordinate together in such a way of mutual operation.Both kinds of fulfillment of prophecy are evidenced in the Bible.
We just have to be enlarged in capacity to appreciate God's varied ways of working.

Thank you for the long quotation.As I said before, I sympathize with your thought, but only so much. My sympathy with your complaint is not without bounds.Sure, some of the "fulfilled prophecies" look like certain words are isolated to make a case. I agree that that is the appearance of some of the passages.And as I also previously said, God gave His people a heads up. He told them that in their self pride and stubburness, He would sometimes deliver truth to them in a kind of pieces of the puzzle manner - Here a little, over there a little, line upon line, precept upon precept.God has His ways. And sometimes He works so that man has nothing left to boast in in himself. He will sometimes cause you to feel like a trusting child.I perfectly understand your problem. But the Bible says that God spoke to us in the prophets in not just one way, but in MANY ways. "God, having spoken of old in many portions and in many ways to the fathers in the prophets, Has at the last of these days spoken to us in the Son ..." (Hebrews 1:1) I would be suspicious if you believe in the Son of God but can brag and boast about your smarts and intelligence. Is your pride still so intact? Is your self reliance still strutting around and boasting?But if God has opened your spiritual eyes and you are left humble - trusting, you may consider that God has really given you something - "The hungry He has filled with good things, and the rich He has sent away empty." (Luke 1:53) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

So now I will consider the rest of the passage:

quote:

---

4 And they shall rebuild the old ruins,
They shall raise up the former desolations,
And they shall repair the ruined cities,
The desolations of many generations.

---

Certainly this corresponds to the millennial kingdom, the restoration of the broken down tabernacle of David. How can I possibly doubt that Christ's second coming will be accompanied by these things ?Of course they will accompany Him establishing His kingdom reigning from Jerusalem in the millennial kingdom.

quote:

---

5 Strangers shall stand and feed your flocks,
And the sons of the foreigner
Shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers.
6 But you shall be named the priests of the Lord,
They shall call you the servants of our God.
You shall eat the riches of the Gentiles,
And in their glory you shall boast.

---

Passages like this accompany the teaching of a millinnial kingdom in several places. Christ is also the center of these blessings. He taught so. His already fulfillment of many prophecies give us confidence that He will follow through on these as well.

quote:

---

7 Instead of your shame you shall have double honor,
And instead of confusion they shall rejoice in their portion.
Therefore in their land they shall possess double;
Everlasting joy shall be theirs.

---

You can't see that that has Jesus written all over it ?

quote:

---

8 For I, the Lord, love justice;
I hate robbery for burnt offering;

---

We know He hates robbery. But since Christ's offering Himself on the cross we see that God prefers this final consummate offering to all the bulls and goats.In comparison, the reality of God incarnate as the offering, makes that symbolic offerings even hateful in comparison.I don't know why you cannot see Jesus the Son of God written all over these words as well.

quote:

---

I will direct their work in truth,
And will make with them an everlasting covenant.
9 Their descendants shall be known among the Gentiles,
And their offspring among the people.
All who see them shall acknowledge them,
That they are the posterity whom the Lord has blessed.

---

I definitely count Jesus Christ as the center of all these Messianic prophecies. He has demonstrated the approvedness which inspires hope. As He has done faithfully, He will again continue to do.As He rose from the dead, He cannot fail to complete the other aspects of His work.

quote:

---

10 I will greatly rejoice in the Lord,
My soul shall be joyful in my God;
For He has clothed me with the garments of salvation,

---

All this is display of human virtues apply to Jesus too. He is God and man mingled. So those human attributes He certainly shares with us. At the same time He is God who manifests divine attributes. Revelation 19:5 - "And a voice came out of the throne saying, Praise our God, all His slaves and those who fear Him, the small and the great." This could be the throne of the God - Man coming out of the throne of God. He is refering to His human part which is akin with us - "Praise OUR God ...".Remember in resurrection this man said " ... go to My brothers and say to them, I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." (John 20:17) These verses may refer to the Son of God as He is God yet shares also our humanity.

quote:

---

He has covered me with the robe of righteousness,
As a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments,
And as a bride adorns herself with her jewels.
11 For as the earth brings forth its bud,
As the garden causes the things that are sown in it to spring forth,
So the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations.

---

Nothing here excludes the utterances from refering to the Son of God. And the reference to righteousness springing up indicates this is all a matter of divine life growing.And that is what Christ is all about. That is dispensing divine and eternal life into man that His impartation may spring up in the saved being righteous too as a matter of union with the Father.Extending the quotation has not done any damage as I can see to the prophecy being about Jesus.

Let's be serious now. I am not the only one here who has DECIDED on what they WANT to believe.For the years I have participated in this Forum what makes you think you have displayed some pristine objectivity as if you have no vested interest ?Besides, when it comes to the reality of God Himself, circularity is ultimately unavoidable. "Thus says Jehovah the King of Israel ... I am the First and I am the Last, And apart from Me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6) " ... and He placed His right hand on me, saying, Do not fear, I am the First and the Last ..." (Rev. 1:17) "And He said to me, they have come to pass. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. " (Rev. 21:6) Since God is the ground of being and the ultimate meaning of being - He is the Beginning of reality and the consummate End of it also - the First and the Last.Some circularity is unavoidable. For reality has its source in God and ends in God too eventually.

quote:

---

Well, that's what this thread is for. Roll 'em out. Instead of wasting everybody's time with prophecies that aren't prophecies and prophecies that Jesus deliberately fulfilled, let's get to the good ones. Give us an example of an actual prohecy about the Messiah that was actually fulfilled by Jesus without him having to do anything.

---

I am not wasting my time. I am not wasting the time of some truth seekers by exposing some weak reasons to reject Christ as "God with us".As for your additional request. If I did, I am pretty sure you would "roll out" your objections to believing in the Son of God on those grounds just as much.Sure you would. You probably have your objections all lined up and ready to go.I think your zero sum game is to team up with your other regular career skeptics and try your best to eliminate all and any reasons for taking Christ at His word. Why posture some phony objectivity?I have no problem with Jesus being with us is "God with us." Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.