Wrong. Isaiah tells Ahaz that his wife is presently with child. The verb is in the present tense in Isaiah 7.14, not the future tense. Matthew is the one who changes the word to future tense and uses the Greek version of Isaiah to use the word virgin. That's two word changes that Matthew makes, making a new story for Jesus by Misappropriating Isaiah's words to Ahaz, about Isaiah's son, Immanuel. In Tanak, when someone is given a name, the meaning of the name is explained in nearby texts. This is where Christians haven't thought through their claim well enough, you see, the explanation for Immanuel is *not “Because the Lord will become a human being”. What is actually written to explain the name Immanuel? You have to READ. Isaiah 8.10 Take counsel together, but it will come to nothing; speak a word, but it will not stand, for Immanuel (God is with us). But wait, it does say in Isaiah 8 that YHVH will become something... A human being? You need to *read: Isaiah 8.14 And *he *will *become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the of Jerusalem. And then Isaiah tells Ahaz what the sign is... or more accurately WHO the sign is: Isaiah 8.18 Behold, I and the children whom the Lord has given me are signs and portents in Israel from the Lord of hosts, who dwells on Mount Zion. Mystery solved. 1. The sign is the child of Isaiah 2. There is only one woman, and she is already pregnant with Isaiah's child, Immanuel. 3. The sign is the boy, and his name tells the significance of this story. The events will unfold QUICKLY (that's the literal meaning of one of his names in Chapter 8). Unfortunately for Christians who hope Matthew's appropriation of this story in Isaiah is founded upon actual clues in the text, it is not. The truth is, Jews know Hebrew, and they are not lying when they tell you Isaiah never mentioned anything that resembles Jesus of the Greek NT. The truth is, whoever added the Greek quote of Isaiah 7.14 into Matthew chapter 1, abused the power of the pen.
Hello,, when the Divine Messiah appeared, Matthew simply quoted from the Septuagint Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures… what’s wrong with that in your opinion ??
@maxprescott9371 The story in Isaiah 7 AND 8 is not about a messiah or a virgin. Did you actually read my comment?! I explained that. Matthew commits textual fraud. Isaiah 7 isn't prophecy about any messiah. Also, in the Hebrew Bible, men are not divine. That's Greek mythology, which is why Matthew uses the GREEK version of Isaiah 7. Your detective skills are turned off, or you would rather believe in Jesus over accepting the facts of the written words of Isaiah. The young woman is Isaiah's wife and Immanuel is his son, not Jesus.
@ Hi,, appreciate your return comment,,, BUT,,, I Disagree with you. My Detective Skills are Tuned ON 💡Think about what you are saying ,, you are saying that the Greek Septuagint is mythological, and thus All of those 70 Jevvish scholars were Idolators ,,, in your view ! am I understanding you correctly?? I accept Isaiah, the great messianic prophet and well as ALL of Divine Scripture,, which leads me to The Divine Messiah,, The LORD Jesus Christ… Son of God , Son of Man, Son of David ✨✝️❣️
@@Joqub also “ Jevvs know Hebrew” as You said ,, please could you tell me which version of the Hebarew Scriptures you are referring to that you use,, thanks
@maxprescott9371 Nothing in my comment says Isaiah in Greek is mythology. Matthew uses Isaiah 7 as a prophecy for the claim of “Jesus was born from a virgin”. This, by Matthew, is manipulative. Isaiah 7-8 is not prophecy about a messiah. Have you read Isaiah 7-8 from start to finish? Isaiah tells you the boy is his child and that child is the sign to Ahaz. See Isaiah 8.18. the boy has two names. His second name is in chapter 8.
Wrong. Isaiah tells Ahaz that his wife is presently with child. The verb is in the present tense in Isaiah 7.14, not the future tense. Matthew is the one who changes the word to future tense and uses the Greek version of Isaiah to use the word virgin. That's two word changes that Matthew makes, making a new story for Jesus by Misappropriating Isaiah's words to Ahaz, about Isaiah's son, Immanuel.
In Tanak, when someone is given a name, the meaning of the name is explained in nearby texts. This is where Christians haven't thought through their claim well enough, you see, the explanation for Immanuel is *not “Because the Lord will become a human being”. What is actually written to explain the name Immanuel? You have to READ. Isaiah 8.10 Take counsel together, but it will come to nothing;
speak a word, but it will not stand,
for Immanuel (God is with us).
But wait, it does say in Isaiah 8 that YHVH will become something... A human being? You need to *read:
Isaiah 8.14
And *he *will *become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the of Jerusalem.
And then Isaiah tells Ahaz what the sign is... or more accurately WHO the sign is:
Isaiah 8.18
Behold, I and the children whom the Lord has given me are signs and portents in Israel from the Lord of hosts, who dwells on Mount Zion.
Mystery solved.
1. The sign is the child of Isaiah
2. There is only one woman, and she is already pregnant with Isaiah's child, Immanuel.
3. The sign is the boy, and his name tells the significance of this story. The events will unfold QUICKLY (that's the literal meaning of one of his names in Chapter 8).
Unfortunately for Christians who hope Matthew's appropriation of this story in Isaiah is founded upon actual clues in the text, it is not.
The truth is, Jews know Hebrew, and they are not lying when they tell you Isaiah never mentioned anything that resembles Jesus of the Greek NT. The truth is, whoever added the Greek quote of Isaiah 7.14 into Matthew chapter 1, abused the power of the pen.
Hello,, when the Divine Messiah appeared, Matthew simply quoted from the Septuagint Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures… what’s wrong with that in your opinion ??
@maxprescott9371 The story in Isaiah 7 AND 8 is not about a messiah or a virgin. Did you actually read my comment?! I explained that. Matthew commits textual fraud. Isaiah 7 isn't prophecy about any messiah.
Also, in the Hebrew Bible, men are not divine. That's Greek mythology, which is why Matthew uses the GREEK version of Isaiah 7. Your detective skills are turned off, or you would rather believe in Jesus over accepting the facts of the written words of Isaiah. The young woman is Isaiah's wife and Immanuel is his son, not Jesus.
@ Hi,, appreciate your return comment,,, BUT,,, I Disagree with you. My Detective Skills are Tuned ON 💡Think about what you are saying ,, you are saying that the Greek Septuagint is mythological, and thus All of those 70 Jevvish scholars were Idolators ,,, in your view ! am I understanding you correctly??
I accept Isaiah, the great messianic prophet and well as ALL of Divine Scripture,, which leads me to The Divine Messiah,, The LORD Jesus Christ… Son of God , Son of Man, Son of David ✨✝️❣️
@@Joqub also “ Jevvs know Hebrew” as You said ,, please could you tell me which version of the Hebarew Scriptures you are referring to that you use,, thanks
@maxprescott9371 Nothing in my comment says Isaiah in Greek is mythology. Matthew uses Isaiah 7 as a prophecy for the claim of “Jesus was born from a virgin”. This, by Matthew, is manipulative.
Isaiah 7-8 is not prophecy about a messiah. Have you read Isaiah 7-8 from start to finish? Isaiah tells you the boy is his child and that child is the sign to Ahaz. See Isaiah 8.18. the boy has two names. His second name is in chapter 8.