Did They Write About Jesus in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms?

Ladies and Gentlemen,We have clearly made our point to Faith, who does not wish to concede that "almah" as used in Isaiah 7:14 does not mean a pre-sexual woman.So, as I stated in Message 220, whether "almah" means pre-sexual or not is a moot point if Faith or any other Christian cannot show the following:1. If "almah" means pre-sexual, then explain why it did not mean pre-sexual for the woman in the time of Ahaz and we didn't have two virgin births.2. If (as you have stated before) the verse containing "almah" was not for Ahaz at all, then how does the prophecy make sense for Ahaz without that verse? Also what signifies that the line was not for Ahaz?3. Please explain how the rest of the prophecy, as I asked in Message 200 was fulfilled by Jesus in his early boyhood.4. If (as you stated in Message 221) that this is a case of a double fulfillment prophecy, then you need to explain how it was also filled completely by Jesus, and what signifies that it is to be filled again.4. To date neither you nor any other Christian has shown me that God intended prophecies to have double fulfillment.So I'm waving the white flag and asking that we cease with the Virgin Battle and see if Faith or another Christian (who believes in double fulfillments) can show that God intended double fulfillments and that Jesus fulfilled the rest of the prophecy written in the time of Ahaz.We don't have many posts left before the shutdown mark of 300. Please make your posts count.Thanks
PurpleDawn

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

I don't think the intent of Isaiah 7:14 was to describe a woman who was to become pregnant without human sperm.If Christians believe that this is the intent, then there were two "virgin" births, otherwise they need to explain why the word has one meaning for Ahaz and a different future meaning.They have yet to provide evidence of God's support for this double meaning rational or double fulfillment.That is what I want them to explain. If you've noticed, they would rather argue word meanings until their fingers ache and avoid the real issue.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Those commentaries do not show evidence that God expects people to find double meanings in some prophecies and not in others.They do not explain how God expects people to understand our favorite verse in Isaiah as one thing for the time of Ahaz and another centuries later.IOW, what is the clue that the verses are to be understood differently?God does not say or infer that portions of prophecies will have a double meaning centuries away from the original.You haven't shown me otherwise.All you've shown me is what Christianity claims.
I am asking Christianity to back up that claim.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

What SOME Christians claim.

---

I'm not talking about individuals, but Christianity in general.So are you saying there are sects of Christianity today that teach that the prophecy in Isaiah 7 does not speak of Jesus?

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

Does it add any weight, support or additional content to Jesus' message? Nope!

---

Not really the crux of this thread.We aren't discussing the supposed teachings of Jesus.We are discussing OT support for the messiah as the unknown author of Luke claims.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

As I showed in Message 239, the Greeks did not translate the Hebrew into the word virgin. You keep using the word virgin like it has only had the meaning of presexual. It didn't and in our dictionaries today still doesn't. Virgin EtymologyToday we use the word in that fashion when concerning men and women. You are the one applying a modern meaning to a very old word in a dead language.From all the posts concerning the "virgin" debate, the three disputed words (in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin) all roughly mean the same thing as I showed in Message 239.We have a lot more words to choose from today than they did centuries ago.Gay went from "full of joy or mirth" to a male homosexual.
Etymology of GayBottom line is that you need to show in the context of the writing itself that a meaning of presexual is intended by Isaiah, otherwise all your word meanings are just academic.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Please address Message 286As you have stated many times, none of the words means exclusively presexual. Therefore only the context can determine the intent of the author.Please explain how the prophecy in Isaiah speaks of a presexual woman who is to conceive without human sperm.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Obviously Faith is not going to discuss our serious points.So while we are waiting, I have another question for you.Do you know when the Torah or entire Tanach was translated into English?Was it ever translated into Latin?I'm guessing that Faith would not accept the translation by the Jewish Publication Society. What Faith fails to realize is that the modern translations have changed because the meaning of the word "virgin" has a different usage today than its earlier meaning.I tried to show that in Message 286 but Faith has yet to address that post.Even the KJV revised words over time due to changes in culture and word usage. Book of Isaiah KJV revisionsThis message has been edited by purpledawn, 05-02-2005 06:44 PM

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France