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