The most damaging example is Isaiah 7:14 which you actually list, a bit embarrassingly. Go and read the whole chapter of Isaiah 7 and you will find that it had little to do with the messiah. It had to do with king Ahaz and the war with Syria and Persia. If you read the chapter you?ll see that it refers to in verse 16 ?for before the child knows good and evil the land whose two kings you dread (Syria and Persia) will be desserted.? So the passage itself points to a time hundreds of years before Jesus was even born!
Let me correct you my friend! There are actually two prophecies in Isaiah 7:13-17. 1) Isaiah prophesied the birth of Jesus through the virgin Mary approximately 700 years before it happened
2) Before the boy (Jesus) knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right the land of the two kings that King Ahaz dreaded would be laid to waste. Both of these prophecies were fullfilled to the letter. 60% of the passage you mentioned is about Jesus and Isaiah 7:14 is actually the most important verse in the whole chapter. 22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" which means, "God with us." Matthew was referring to the prophet Isaiah my friend.
Even more embarrassingly the word Virgin was never originally used in the passage. The original word is almah which means young woman, not virgin. The Greek version of the old testament mistranslates Almah as Parthenos (ie Virgin) And since the writers of the new testament couldn?t or didn?t go to read the old testament in the original Hebrew, they leaped upon the Septuagint?s translation and called it a prophecy.
According to the Strong's Concordance it means, "virgin, young woman 1a) of marriageable age 1b) maid or newly married." Therefore, the word "almah" does not always mean virgin.
If the Hebrews translated the word into the Greek word for virgin, then they understood what the Hebrew text meant here. Why would the Isaiah choose to use the word almah and not bethulah? Probably because Isaiah wanted to demonstrate that the virgin would also be a young woman. Is it still a prophecy? Of course. Using the word's young woman in those days would strongly suggest that she was a virgin. Now,with the promiscuity in our modern times we could say more than likely say that she would not be a virgin.
I didn?t notice your response till now, so to be thorough I will reply.
There is so much I could say. The passage seems to refer to an ancient war, not to Jesus until Christians came along and reinterpreted it.
The main thing someone like me would need for what your saying to be proof of anything would be someone in say 700 BC interpreting Isaiah 7 as a messianic prophecy. That would be helpful. An example would be Rabbi X said in 500 BC something like "Clearly Isaiah 7 means the messiah will be born of an Almah."
( Clearly it would be even better and great for your point if that Rabbi clarify that Almah means only virgin and not a newly wed with a newly child or whatever. )
Otherwise it is unclear that anyone in 700 BC would think the same thing that you do.
Can you see my point, even if you disagree?
It has been 2000 years. The prophecies that most clearly prophecies speak of the messiah, speak of conquest and power and universal peace. But Christians are still waiting for Jesus to appear from the sky in power to fulfill them. And if we don?t destroy the planet with our waste and excess, Christians will be waiting another 2000 years. And that I can guarantee!
Ooohhhh my lord,do you no how foolish that sounds. So...prophet Rubicon!! Tell me who is going to win the Super Bowl this year so I can hop on a plane to Las Vegas right now!
So um? yeah. . Uh, I suppose I was being more sarcastic. So let me restate the question:
The prophecies about a messiah coming in power and glory were regarded as being predictions long before Christianity came along. When Jesus walked the earth most Jews understood the scriptures as clearly speaking about a messiah coming in power and glory. These prophecies have never been fulfilled. Why is that?
Second, the prophecies about a suffering messiah do not seem to have been interpreted as about the messiah until after say 40 AD or so, after Christianity started. The Jewish people who knew the scriptures did not interpret anything as being about a suffering messiah. Very few if anyone expected that in 700 BC.
Or did they? Can you give me some quotes from Rabbi?s in say 600 B.C. talking about the messiah as being predicted in Isaiah 7? That would be helpful.
Anyway, my point is how long will be waiting for the messiah to really come in power and glory like the prophecies say. It?s been a thousand years. You don?t think that seems like a long time? I don?t get it. So that?s why it is hard to take your triumphant quotes seriously.
Somewhere in Mark (I?m sure you can find the quote) Jesus says, surely this generations will not pass away before you see the son of man coming in the clouds with angels. So Christians were expecting the imminent end of the world. Mark is widely regarded as one of the earliest gospels. So did Jesus really say this? Did he really mean it? Or do we have to just keep reinterpreting what the passage must have meant?
So I think the band Disturbed?s song asks a valid question. ?How long will we be waiting for your modern messiah?? Doesn?t 2000 years seem like a long time?
Can you see how this could be an issue that would cause some to doubt? So, if I state the question less sarcastically, can you see what I am getting at even if you disagree?
