brb

Pr0ton:
Alexis.. You accuse me of not reading Bibical history?? LOL

I think you've just made the biggest mistake by quoting OT prophecies to prove the authencity of Jesus as the Messiah I'm interestingly good at prophecies you know.

Isa 7 has nothing to say about Jesus. As I said earlier those guys twisted OT scriptures to fit their fabricated Jesus.

Isa 7:1 talks about king Rezin and king Pekah conspiring against King Ahaz, king of Judah
Isa 7:2 King Ahaz troubled
Isa 7:3-6 God sends Isaiah to gee them up and assure them that the plans of the two kings "shall not stand, and shall not come to pass" (7)
Isa 7:9-11 God tells "Ahaz, ask a sign of the LORD your God" to be assured of the promise.
Isa 7:12 Ahaz being a gentle doesn't ask.
Well then, "the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a YOUNG WOMAN shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'uel." 14
"Before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, THE LAND WHOSE TWO KINGS YOU ARE IN DREAD SHALL BE DESERED"16

That is why I said you need to read biblical history:

In Isaiah chapter 7, God demonstrates His faithfulness to a promise that He made with King David concerning the Davidic dynasty by giving the ultimate sign to the House of David. The sign would be a virgin born Son named Immanuel, God with us. If you examine this passage carefully, we will see from the historical context that Matthew is not taking verse 14 out of context in order to “proof-text” the virgin birth of Jesus. Moreover, the context is clearly pointing to the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus as the fulfillment of this passage in Isaiah 7. The Lord Jesus Christ is the sinless Immanuel and God manifest in human flesh

In the Eighth Century BC there was a king of Judah named Ahaz. He had heard about a planned coup d’etat by two other kings that wanted to overthrow him and replace him with a puppet king. Ahaz was a believer in the Lord but was living in sin, sadly it was gross sin. He had an arrogant spiritual attitude because he thought he was indispensable to the plan, program, and purposes of God. In his thinking, God needed him more than he needed to walk with God and let Him work in his life. That is a dangerous attitude to have, especially when you are dealing with the Living God.

Historical Background

The events of the reign of King Ahaz are recorded in II Kings 16 and II Chronicles 28. The summary statement of his spiritual walk with the Lord is very alarming. It states:

...and he did not do what was right in the sight of the LORD, as his father David had done. For he walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and made molded images for the Baals. He burned incense in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, and burned his children in the fire, according to the abominations of the nations whom the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel. And he sacrificed and burned incense on the high places, on the hills, and under every green tree (II Chron. 28:1b-4).

Yet apparently he had trusted the Lord at one time in his life for his eternal salvation. The Bible seems to indicate that he had a relationship with God (not a great one, but a relationship none the less). In II Kings 16:2 it says he did not walk in the sight of the LORD his God. II Chronicles 28:5 says that “the LORD his God delivered him into the hand of the king of Syria.” Even the LORD Himself said to Ahaz, “Ask a sign for yourself from the LORD your God” (Isa. 7:11). Yahweh was his God, yet Ahaz was terribly unfaithful to Him (II Chron. 28:22). King Ahaz is not a person we should hold up as a role model, except as a warning to those believers in the Lord Jesus who are unfaithful to the Lord and have gotten away from Him (I Cor. 10:6).

The event and conversations recorded in Isaiah 7 took place in the year 734/733 BC. It was a time when Ahaz was having problems with his neighbors to the north. Israel, with its capital in Samaria and ruled by Pekah, and Syria, with its capital in Damascus and ruled by Rezin, wanted Ahaz to join a coalition of nations to fight against the “super power” of the day, Assyria, ruled by Tiglath-Pileser III. Ahaz was not a godly or spiritual man, but he was politically smart. He knew that the coalition could not stand up against the mighty Assyrian army, so he declined the invitation. This brought about the second Syro-Ephraimite incursion against Judah. Syria and Ephraim joined forces again to try and overthrow King Ahaz.

In order to get Judah to join the coalition, Pekah and Rezin hatched a plot to overthrow Ahaz and put a “puppet king” on the throne that would bring Judah into the coalition. To back up their conspiracy, Syria deployed troops in Samaria. Ahaz got wind of this plot and began to “shake in his boots.” He started to make secret overtures to the Assyrian king to get Pekah and Rezin off his back (II Kings 16:7, . His trust was in Tiglath-Pileser III and not the LORD.

In this chapter, Isaiah reminded Ahaz that God had made a covenant with David and promised him that a Davidic ruler would one day sit upon the throne of David forever (II Sam. 7:12-17).

Again, please study history - I take God beg you

From what Jesus said, our knowledge is updated in knowing that Enuch and Elijah were taken, but not into heaven.
For instance, we grew up 'knowing' that pluto is a planet. Now we 'know' that it is not a planet, does it then mean that our teachers 'lied'? No, information just got clearer.

The more pertinent question should be: where were the two men taken to? We will get the answer to that soon enuf.


The part of Jesus saying 'the Son of man who is in heaven...'. Here Jesus is introducing us to anoda revelation (he showed many) of how u can be on earth & function from heaven.
Since u havent been taught right (obviously) u r bound to say rubbish. Einstein brought relativity and u took the update without calling him a liar o!

Alexis you didn't get my point, did you?

In the time of king Ahaz , king of Judah, two kings (king Rezin and king Petach) planned to rise against Judah. Ahaz was troubled and terrified, together with the house of David. But God, being the God of Judah, sent his prophet, Isaiah, to strengthen the mind of king Ahaz assuring him that the conspiracy of these two kings against him would not come to pass. God through Isaiah asked Ahaz to ask for a sign to be convinced that God would keep His promise. Ahaz didn't want to doubt God so he refused to ask. However, God Himself gave Ahaz a sign. The sign was that a young woman would give birth to a child whose name would be Immanuel. God didn't stop there. He further said,
"Before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, THE LAND WHOSE TWO KINGS YOU ARE IN DREAD SHALL BE DESERTED." I.E before that child would be able to differentiate good from evil, King Ahaz opponents would be deserted which didn't happen when Jesus was born(700yrs later).

Alexis... The prophecy in Isa 7:14 was for those living in the time of King Ahaz, not a 700 years later prophecy.

The prophecy can't be for Jesus because in Jesus's time king Ahaz was not alive, neither was his two opponents alive. But verse 16 has to be fulfilled. It was for king Ahaz in his time. Matthew twisted that and took it out of context. Remember Mark and John have no such story.





Sneaking to type in church till when we close.

Pr0ton:
Alexis you didn't get my point, did you?

In the time of king Ahaz , king of Judah, two kings (king Rezin and king Petach) planned to rise against Judah. Ahaz was troubled and terrified, together with the house of David. But God, being the God of Judah, sent his prophet, Isaiah, to strengthen the mind of king Ahaz assuring him that the conspiracy of these two kings against him would not come to pass. God through Isaiah asked Ahaz to ask for a sign to be convinced that God would keep His promise. Ahaz didn't want to doubt God so he refused to ask. However, God Himself gave Ahaz a sign. The sign was that a young woman would give birth to a child whose name would be Immanuel. God didn't stop there. He further said,
"Before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, THE LAND WHOSE TWO KINGS YOU ARE IN DREAD SHALL BE DESERTED." I.E before that child would be able to differentiate good from evil, King Ahaz opponents would be deserted which didn't happen when Jesus was born(700yrs later).

Let me try and give you more historical background - I will continue where I left off

The Distress in the House of David because of Rezin and Pekah – 7:1, 2

The first two verses give us the historical setting for this chapter. The events recorded take place in the “days of King Ahaz of Judah.” It was during this time that Rezin, the Syrian king whose throne was in Damascus brought his army up to Ephraim because he had an alliance with Pekah, the king of Israel. In verse one, the verb “went up” (to Jerusalem) is singular and seems to indicate that Rezin was the instigator of the plot to overthrow Ahaz and he was dragging Pekah along with him as his co-conspirator (7:1; cf. 10:27-32).

A few years earlier, Ephraim and Damascus had invaded Judah and killed 120,000 Judeans soldiers in one day because the Judeans had forsaken the LORD. Also, 200,000 women and children were taken captives to Samaria, but were later released at the urging of the prophet Oded (II Chron. 28:5-15).

Their main objective, however, was not met, so they prepared a second incursion against Judah in which to overthrow King Ahaz. Judean intelligence was aware of the Syrian troop movements and informed the House of David: “Syria’s forces are deployed in Ephraim.” This was not good news for Ahaz. He, like all the rest of Judah, was “shaking in his boots” (to use an American slang). The Judean equivalent was used by Isaiah: “The heart(s) of his [Ahaz] people were moved as the trees of the woods are moved with the wind” (7:2). One of the members of the House of David was a young teen-age boy named Hezekiah. At this time, he was probably 15 years old. As this chapter unfolds, we will see that he was the primary recipient of one of the most astounding prophecies given to the nation of Judah.

The Planned Destruction of the House of David by Rezin and Pekah – 7:3-9

The Judean intelligence service was aware of the troop movements in the north, but God’s intelligence service would reveal the true intentions of the kings of Syria and Israel.

The LORD instructed Isaiah and his son, Shear-Yashuv, to meet Ahaz at the “end of the aqueduct from the upper pool, on the highway to the Fuller’s field”1 (7:3). Ahaz was probably there because he was checking out the water system to see if any damage had been done when the city was first besieged by the Syro-Ephraimite confederacy (II Kings 16:5).

God instructed Isaiah to take his son because they were a sign to Israel and Judah (Isa. 8:18). The name Shear-Yashuv means “A remnant shall return.” This son was born after the call of Isaiah, in the year King Uzziah died (6:13). He was brought to meet Ahaz, a believer in the LORD (cf. 7:11), with the intent that this would be an encouragement for him to return to the Lord (6:10, 13).

Underlying this whole passage is the unconditional promise made by the Lord to David in the Davidic Covenant. This covenant promised David that one of his sons (or descendents) would sit upon the throne of David, in Jerusalem, forever and ever (II Sam. 7: 12-17; I Chron. 17: 11-15; I Kings 8:25; 2:3, 4; 9:5).

Ahaz was “trembling in his boots” at this point, but God instructs Isaiah to give him two positive and two negative commands in order to show him that he has nothing to fear. Isaiah says, “Take heed, and be quiet,” the two positive commands. Then he says, “do not fear or be fainthearted,” the negative commands. Then Isaiah gives the reason why he has nothing to fear and also reveals the plot of the Syro-Ephraimite confederacy. He calls Rezin and Pekah “two stubs of smoking firebrands” (7:4). In essence he is saying they are nothing but “hot air,” there is no fire in them. They are smoldering embers and their strength is gone. Perhaps Isaiah called King Ahaz’s attention to another promise of God: “Do not be afraid of sudden terror, nor of trouble from the wicked when it comes; for the LORD will be your confidence, and will keep yout foot from being caught.” Faith and fear are contrary to one another (Prov. 3:25, 26).

Isaiah then reveals the ultimate goal of the Syro-Ephraimite confederacy which was to replace King Ahaz with a puppet king, identified as one of the “sons of Tabeel.”2 This individual would then bring Judah into the coalition against Assyria.

There are far reaching implications for this plot to overthrow King Ahaz. If Pekah and Rezin successfully overthrew Ahaz and the House of David and placed one of the sons of Tabeel on the throne, the Davidic line would be wiped out and God could not fulfill His promise to David, i.e. the Lord Jesus would never have been born! But God is faithful to His promises.

You will recall the words of the angel Gabriel to Mary when he appeared to her in Nazareth: “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever and of His kingdom there will be no end” (Luke 1:30-33). If the Davidic dynasty was overthrown, and the Messianic line eliminated, God would not be faithful to His promise to David. In the “conflict of the ages” between God and Satan, Satan would be victorious because there would be no Davidic Messiah to sit on the throne of David in Jerusalem.

In verses 7-9, the LORD God gives two prophetic assurances and one warning to Ahaz. The first prophetic assurance is that this plot will not stand, nor will not come to pass (7:7). In other words, “It ain’t gawna happen, and it didn’t.” The second prophetic assurance is that within 65 years Ephraim will be broken (7:. The warning that the Lord gives to Ahaz is that if he does not trust the Lord, his kingdom shall not be established (7:9). In other words, he will be removed from the throne.

The second prophetic assurance was fulfilled during the reign of Esarhaddon, king of Assyrian (680-669 BC). Hugh Williamson’s comments on Ezra 4:2 might be helpful. He has observed: “Nowhere else in the OT are we told that Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, was responsible for settling foreigners in Israel. The major tradition, as found in 2 Kings 17, suggests a much earlier settlement by Sargon II” (1985:49). He goes on to say: “Support for its historicity comes first from Isa. 7:8, whose reference to sixty-five years may well bring us to the reign of Esarhaddon, and second from the historical texts of Esarhaddon’s reign, which testify to his successful campaign in the west and which thus suggest a plausible setting for a policy of resettlement” (1985:49, 50). The Assyrian resettlement policy would have finally broken Ephraim.

The warning that was given to Ahaz was that he would be removed from the throne if he did not trust the LORD God: “If you will not believe, surely you shall not be established” (7:9). The important word of this warning is “establish.” In the Hebrew, this warning is a word play: “eem lo ta-a-mee-noo, key lo tey-a-may-noo” It is difficult to translate this Hebrew word play into English, but the NIV made an attempt. They translated it as: “if you do not stand firm, you will not stand at all.” In essence, what this verse is saying is this: If you insist on trusting Tiglath-Pileser III and not the LORD in this situation, it will not be Rezin and Pekah that remove you from your throne, but rather the Lord will remove you as king, yet He will still be faithful to His promises to David.

The words of this warning go back to the Davidic Covenant. God promised David that his kingdom would be established forever (II Sam. 7:16; I Chron. 17:23, 24; Ps. 78:70; Ps. 89). Of David’s son, Solomon, and by implication all the other descendents, God, acting as a loving Father, would chasten them if they are disobedient to the Word of God. But His mercy would never depart from the House of David (II Sam. 7:13-15).

Ahaz did not want to trust the Lord in this situation, but rather, he bribed Tiglath-Pileser III to save him from Pekah and Rezin (II Kings 16:7, 8; II Chron. 28:16-25). The Chronicler recounts that “in the time of his distress King Ahaz became increasingly unfaithful to the LORD” (II Chron. 28:22). His trust was in Tiglath-Pileser III and not the Lord in this situation. He also thought he was indispensable for the program of God. Yet God, not Rezin and Pekah, would remove Ahaz from his throne.

This same principle is seen in the New Testament. The Apostle Paul, writing to the church at Corinth, uses athletic terminology to describe the Christian life (I Cor. 9:24-27). He states: “But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified” (9:27). Paul is not talking about loosing ones salvation because a believer in the Lord Jesus is eternally secure in Christ (John 5:24; 6:39, 40; 19:28, 29; Rom. 8:38, 39; I Tim. 1:12; I John 5:9-13). He is, however, saying that it is possible for a believer to be disqualified from the race of the Christian life and not be used of the Lord anymore. The sad results will be that the believer will be “ashamed” at the return of the Lord Jesus and “suffer lose” of rewards at the Judgment Seat of Christ (I John 2:28; II Cor. 5:10; I Cor. 3:12-15).

These words of assurance and warning should encourage the House of David. When they saw the near fulfillment come to pass in 65 years, they could be confident that the next prophetic oracle that God would give would be accomplished as well, even if it was hundreds of years later.

The Declaration to the House of David – 7:10-17

In verses 10-12, the Lord confronts Ahaz. The LORD seems to imply that Ahaz is a believer in verse 11 when he challenges him to “Ask a sign for yourself from the LORD your God”, a sign that could strengthen his faith in the Lord (cf. Isa. 38). But Ahaz responded piously, using the language of Scripture that he would not (7:12). He reasoned that if he saw the sign, he would have to respond in a positive way to the Word of God. He would have to trust the LORD and not Tiglath-Pileser III, something he did not want to do. Ahaz was using the language of faith because he knew the Word of God, but he was in rebellion to the Lord (cf. Jonah 2:1-9; 4:1-3). Ahaz had a very high opinion of himself. He thought he was indispensable to the plan of God.

In verses 13-17, the LORD comforts the House of David. Isaiah turns his attention to the House of David. Apparently he was in the royal court with members of the Davidic family. Most likely Prince Hezekiah would have been there. At this point in time, he was a teen-ager, about 15 years old. The warning had been given to Ahaz that he would be set aside (disqualified) from ruling. He would not be “established”, but the House of David was reassured that the Davidic dynasty would still be established.

Isaiah stated: “Therefore the Lord (Adoni) Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and shall call his name Immanuel” (7:14). The word “you” in verse 14 is plural. In other words, he is no longer talking to Ahaz, but the whole house of David. The sign of the virgin born son, Immanuel, was directed primarily toward Hezekiah in order to encourage him to trust the Lord. A few years later, when he came to the throne, he instituted a great revival in that first year. His trust was only in the Lord.

The Hebrew word for “virgin” in verse 14 is “almah”. This word is never used in the Hebrew Scriptures of a married woman, but is used of a young woman of marriageable age (Gen. 24:43; Ex. 2:8; Ps. 68:26; Song of Sol. 1:3; 6:8; Prov. 30:18). Within the Israelite culture, one who is a virgin at the time of marriage is understood. There is another Hebrew word, “betula” that specifically means a virgin.

Interestingly, in the third century BC, seventy Jewish scholars got together in Alexandria, Egypt, and translated the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language. The translation, called the Septuagint (LXX), was for those Jewish people living in the Diaspora, or outside the Land of Israel, who spoke only Greek. When they came to the word “almah”, they translated it with the Greek word “parthenos” which is at the root of the word “parthenogenesis” that means “development of an egg without fertilization”. These translators understood the word to mean virgin in the technical sense of the word.

In the New Testament, Dr. Luke, describes the miraculous conception of the Lord Jesus in the virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit in Luke 1:27, 34-38. Matthew also records the conception by the Holy Spirit in Matthew 1:18-25. In verse 23, Matthew follows the Septuagint when he quotes Isaiah 7:14 and uses the Greek word “parthenos”.

Some evangelical expositors have sought a dual fulfillment of this passage and try to identify Immanuel with either Hezekiah or the child of the prophetess who was Isaiah’s wife (8:3), and then also Jesus. These two suggested identifications collapse on historical and theological grounds. First, Hezekiah was already born and was one of those in the royal court hearing this prophecy. Second, Immanuel could not be the son of the prophetess because she had already given birth to Shear-Yashub (7:3), thus she was not a virgin. The name Immanuel, “God with us” indicates that the Child will be God manifested in human flesh. Two chapters later, Isaiah would call Him the “Mighty God” (Isa. 9:6). There was One, and only one Person, who could fulfill this passage and that was the Lord Jesus Christ.

There are actually three aspects to the nature of this Child. First, He would be virgin born. Second, He would have a humble beginning. And third, He would have a sinless nature, thus divine. The first part of verse 15 states: “Curds and honey He shall eat.” These are the food of the poor, not a symbol of a royal diet (contra Young 1992:I:291). The sign to shepherds was that He would be born in poor circumstances (Luke 2:10-12), not royal surroundings. When Mary dedicated her first-born in the Temple, she offered two turtle doves, the offering of the poor (Luke 2:22-24; cf. Lev. 12:. The wise men did not arrive until a year, to a year and a half after the birth of the Lord Jesus, before they presented Jesus with gold, frankincense and myrrh.

Verse 15 goes on to say, “that He may know to refuse the evil and choose the good.” In this passage Isaiah is pointing out the sinless nature of the Child. Unlike us (and Hezekiah and Isaiah’s children), who by nature are sinful human beings that choose evil and refuse the good (Rom. 1-3), this Child will have a sinless nature as demonstrated by the fact that He chooses good and refuses evil.

Isaiah takes this prophecy and applies the time frame of the Child to the present situation. He continues: “For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good” [that is, before He was born], “the land that you dread [Samaria] will be forsaken by both her kings” (7:16). To put it another way, after the defeat of Pekah and Rezin, Immanuel would be born. How much time after, Isaiah did not know (cf. I Pet. 1:10, 11). He did not have a prophecy chart in front of him with an arrow pointing to May 14, 6 BC to mark the birth of Immanuel. Yet he believed Immanuel would one day be born.

It would be helpful to tell “the rest of the story.” Isaiah had admonished Ahaz to trust the Lord only, yet Ahaz wanted to trust Tiglath-Pileser III to take care of his foreign policy problems. Ahaz goes to Damascus to pay tribute and homage to Tiglath-Pileser III who, at this time, was not only king of Assyria, but Babylon as well (II Kings 16:9, 10). Isaiah warns Ahaz again about trusting Tiglath-Pileser III (Isa. 14:3-21) and reveals the king’s true intentions to Ahaz. The king of Assyria and Babylon wanted to “sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north” (Isa. 14:13; cf. Ps. 48:1-3). His intentions were to conquer Jerusalem! Ahaz would not believe this. In apparently what was the “straw that broke the camel’s back”, Ahaz made a plan of the altar that he saw in Damascus and sent it back to Jerusalem to be constructed. When he got back to Jerusalem, he offered sacrifices on this unbiblical altar (II Kings 16:10-18). God’s patience and long-suffering ran out and Ahaz dies soon after in 727 BC (Isa. 14:28).

Prince Hezekiah had apparently paid attention to Isaiah’s warnings as he saw what transpired in his father’s life because in the first year of King Hezekiah’s reign, there is a great revival. He reinstituted the Passover and Biblical worship in the Temple in Jerusalem and got rid of the idolatry taking place in the Kingdom of Judah (II Chron. 32:29-31; II Kings 18:2-5). Judah had been heading for destruction because of Ahaz’s idolatry, but Hezekiah brought the people back to the Lord and the Lord, in mercy, intervened. Tiglath-Pileser III was struck down in Damascus the same year that Ahaz died and judgment from God was averted on Jerusalem. The prophet Micah also predicted the impending judgment on Jerusalem but because Hezekiah brought the people back to the Lord, the Lord did not carry out His planned judgment (Micah 3:12; cf. Jer. 26:16-19).

For the first time in the book of Isaiah, the Assyrians are mentioned by name as an instrument of God’s judgment (7:17; cf. Isa. 10:5). Judgment was stayed in the first year of Hezekiah’s reign, but they would come back at least two more times during Hezekiah’s lifetime (Franz 1987). The most devastating invasion would be in the year 701 BC. At this time, most of Judah was destroyed, but Jerusalem and the House of David was spared because Hezekiah trusted the LORD.

Weah96:


Satan has access to heaven too? Hahaha. Chai, dis man too strong.

Read job 1:6

Alexis.. You could distort the book of Isaiah 7 from now till...eternity. Any one who's open-minded and reads the whole of Isaiah 7 will know that the child to be born (VS 14) is not Jesus, because during Jesus's birth there were no "two kings whose land would be deserted" before He would know "how to choose good and refuse evil" as 7:16 continues the prophecy in 7:14. It would be ridiculous to deem that these two kings were still alive after 700 years.

The fulfilment is in the next chapter(Isa where Isaiah's wife gives birth to a son, he isn't named Emmanuel tho, but God promises that "before the child could cry 'my father' and' my mother' the riches of Damascus and spoil of Samaria will be carried away before the king of Assyria" (8:4). The child was referred to as Immanuel in verse 8 anyway.

The Hebrew word used in 7:14 is almah which simply means a young woman (virgin or not). If Isaiah was REALLY referring to a virgin he would have used the MAIN Hebrew word for it, "bethulah". He didn't so it's not.

zenith4biz:

Read job 1:6

I stand corrected. He does have access to their conference room. That nigga is Jason Bourne on steroids.

I believe that the Yahweh and Lucifer are related somehow. I'd say they are lovers.

Or father and child, kinda like the movie version of Beowulf and his Dragon seed.

Pr0ton:
Alexis.. You could distort the book of Isaiah 7 from now till...eternity. Any one who's open-minded and reads the whole of Isaiah 7 will know that the child to be born (VS 14) is not Jesus, because during Jesus's birth there were no "two kings whose land would be deserted" before He would know "how to choose good and refuse evil" as 7:16 continues the prophecy in 7:14. It would be ridiculous to deem that these two kings were still alive after 700 years.

The fulfilment is in the next chapter(Isa where Isaiah's wife gives birth to a son, he isn't named Emmanuel tho, but God promises that "before the child could cry 'my father' and' my mother' the riches of Damascus and spoil of Samaria will be carried away before the king of Assyria" (8:4). The child was referred to as Immanuel in verse 8 anyway.

The Hebrew word used in 7:14 is almah which simply means a young woman (virgin or not). If Isaiah was REALLY referring to a virgin he would have used the MAIN Hebrew word for it, "bethulah". He didn't so it's not.

You are the one insisting it was not Jesus. You are also the one insisting Daniel wasn't talking about Jesus. I have given you Biblical examples but you are insisting it isn't. What else do you want me to do?

Pr0ton:
Apostle Peter claims

" He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips . "


Apocryphal, right?

Gonna leave Enoch (His own is not very convincing, I guess)

The problem ...

" Now when the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven by a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal. " 2 ^nd Kings 2:1

" And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven " 2 ^nd Kings 2:11



But the Omniscient Jesus ...

" And no man has ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven John 3:13


Apart from the lie Jesus told here, I can't imagine the absurdity in His words. He was on earth speaking with Nicodemus yet said "the Son of man who is in heaven" Maybe a confession afterall

enoch nd elijah didn't go to heaven...in enoch's case God took him....twasn't said dat God tuk im 2 heaven...4 elijah's case God tuk im sumwr else because a king sought 2 kill im..in d buk of chronicles he wrote a letter again after d king died.....

Giitheon:
enoch nd elijah didn't go to heaven...in enoch's case God took him....twasn't said dat God tuk im 2 heaven...4 elijah's case God tuk im sumwr else because a king sought 2 kill im..in d buk of chronicles he wrote a letter again after d king died.....

Bro did you read that verse very well before saying Elijah wasn't taken up to heaven

2 ^nd Kings 2:11 :

And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven

Pr0ton:


Bro did you read that verse very well before saying Elijah wasn't taken up to heaven

2 ^nd Kings 2:11 :

And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven

yea i did.....JESUS cn't certainly lie.....dats wat am certain of...

Giitheon:
yea i did.....JESUS cn't certainly lie.....dats wat am certain of...

And that's what I tag, "Persisting In Delusion"

Pr0ton:


And that's what I tag, "Persisting In Delusion"

....if i may ask sir pr0ton...wat is ur hope after death Seeing dat u dnt blive in God's Supremeness...den wat do u blive in

Giitheon:
....if i may ask sir pr0ton...wat is ur hope after death Seeing dat u dnt blive in God's Supremeness...den wat do u blive in

I expect Spider-Man to be my savior after death.

Giitheon:
....if i may ask sir pr0ton...wat is ur hope after death Seeing dat u dnt blive in God's Supremeness...den wat do u blive in

What happens to animals when they die?

I rot.

Pr0ton:


What happens to animals when they die?

I rot.

u r not an animal.....y not choose eternal life,wer u dnt rot....

jesus did not lie.we have diffrent heavens.the heaven elijah and enoch accended to is diffrent from d heaven where d almighty God resides.enock and elisha went to abraham bosson or paradise.those that died in christ resides there bt there is another heaven where d angels and God live.also in job 1::6 d bible does nt indicate that satan was in heaven.one can b on the earth and apper before GOD

yolobabe:
I only have one thing to say


What if Jesus is real??

Wat if hell and heaven is real??

Wat if God is real??




And its when u die u find out


How would u feel??............'cause u certainly won't go to heaven


John 3:3. *i tell u d truth,unless u are born again u cannot see d kingdom of God*



Sha...............no need to defend Jesus cause He doesn't need us to......believe wateva u want

he'll say "oops!" *then fall into the fiery void*

Instead of advancg contrived answers, the truth remains tht many christians cannot answer this question. Same as no christian can answer questions on all of the bible. The bible is a portable library (66 books).
But the bible principle for answering questions are established. Scriptures explains scriptures . However, the bible is clear that as christians we know in part.
Think of the revelations the body of christ has had in recent years!
The law and operations of faith (aka the faith movement). Those discoveries were made right outta d same book christians had been readg and usg for centuries,yet didnt see those truths!
Justifcation bt faith(this revelation by martin luther, emancipated the church from the strangle hold of lies and control by roman catholocism. ). Yet the truths were in d book all along. Y wasnt it seen.
Because, the liberating truths of the bible are "spiritually discerned".
That's y Jesus sent the Holy Spirit, to the church ,to among other things lead the believer into all truth.
So atheists, the "letters only killeth", you read d bible yet it does you no good,you never "get it".
It never "makes sense". Some confusion could b logically disentangled but ultimately,
we are not dealg with mental issues but spiritual things.

dayoadeolu:
jesus did not lie.we have diffrent heavens.the heaven elijah and enoch accended to is diffrent from d heaven where d almighty God resides.enock and elisha went to abraham bosson or paradise.those that died in christ resides there bt there is another heaven where d angels and God live.also in job 1::6 d bible does nt indicate that satan was in heaven.one can b on the earth and apper before GOD

Proof from the Bible that Elijah went to a heaven different from the heaven where God dwells.

Proof from the Bible that "those who die in Christ resides in a temporal heaven"

You think you can get a proof for them? Show me where they are in the Bible then

asalimpo:
Instead of advancg contrived answers, the truth remains tht many christians cannot answer this question. Same as no christian can answer questions on all of the bible. The bible is a portable library (66 books).
But the bible principle for answering questions are established. Scriptures explains scriptures . However, the bible is clear that as christians we know in part.
Think of the revelations the body of christ has had in recent years!
The law and operations of faith (aka the faith movement). Those discoveries were made right outta d same book christians had been readg and usg for centuries,yet didnt see those truths!
Justifcation bt faith(this revelation by martin luther, emancipated the church from the strangle hold of lies and control by roman catholocism. ). Yet the truths were in d book all along. Y wasnt it seen.
Because, the liberating truths of the bible are "spiritually discerned".
That's y Jesus sent the Holy Spirit, to the church ,to among other things lead the believer into all truth.
So atheists, the "letters only killeth", you read d bible yet it does you no good,you never "get it".
It never "makes sense". Some confusion could b logically disentangled but ultimately,
we are not dealg with mental issues but spiritual things.

And I wonder why God would make His book "spiritually discerned". A book that is meant to lead people to the "path of life". So your saying God makes this book beneficial only to those who have the "Holy Spirit". Then, one can infer that God doesn't want sinners to reach this "path of life" how? Because it is only those who are spiritual or who have the Holy Spirit that can discern the Bible, and we know that sinners are not spiritual and do not have this "spirit".

And the Holy Spirit? Tell me, how many did Jesus send? Christians claim to have the Holy Spirit which help them interprete Bible verses correctly, yet these Christians do not agree. They oppose one another in the interpretation of a verse in the Bible. One then wonders if it is this same "Holy Spirit" that contradicts Itself, or we just have many of It.

Your argument doesn't hold water. It's baseless and illogical.

@op. Jesus never lies.
pls read that same john 3 to the end. especially verse 12. read it over and over again.
no need of debate here.

OasisofRefuge:
@op. Jesus never lies.
pls read that same john 3 to the end. especially verse 12. read it over and over again.
no need of debate here.

What message are you trying to pass?

I invite you here

https://www.nairaland.com/1936077/guy-lied

Giitheon:
u r not an animal.....y not choose eternal life,wer u dnt rot....

What if he (@Pr0ton) doesn't want eternal life? Is it by force?

This eternal life that you people keep mentioning and aspiring for. What do you want to do with it sef ehn?. Some of you its a challenge to even go to church on Sundays, and those of you that go, its a challenge for you to stay awake and pay attention. So what do you want to do in heaven where you will be worshipping a god and bowing down to a throne 24/7? How is this version of heaven some place you even want to end up for eternity.

Even if he chooses to follow in your beliefs he would still rot the same way you will rot too. Or are trying to say you will take your human physical body with you to heaven. You don't even understand your own religion. Isn't it your soul that lives after death?. Y'all will be talking about hell and how a physical body will burn for eternity (gnashing of teeth and all that), with the little knowledge you have, does that make sense to you? How long does it take for a human body to burn to ashes? Eternity?

What do you intend to do with this eternal life? Im curious

rinrin23:


What if he (@Pr0ton) doesn't want eternal life? Is it by force?

This eternal life that you people keep mentioning and aspiring for. What do you want to do with it sef ehn?. Some of you its a challenge to even go to church on Sundays, and those of you that go, its a challenge for you to stay awake and pay attention. So what do you want to do in heaven where you will be worshipping a god and bowing down to a throne 24/7? How is this version of heaven some place you even want to end up for eternity.

Even if he chooses to follow in your beliefs he would still rot the same way you will rot too. Or are trying to say you will take your human physical body with you to heaven. You don't even understand your own religion. Isn't it your soul that lives after death?. Y'all will be talking about hell and how a physical body will burn for eternity (gnashing of teeth and all that), with the little knowledge you have, does that make sense to you? How long does it take for a human body to burn to ashes? Eternity?

What do you intend to do with this eternal life? Im curious

humans.....we always feel we kw too much...even d bible says d foolishness of God is greater dan d wisdom of men.......yea bro lyk u said...its a choice,wada or nt to choose eternal life...bt God said'i will dat u choose eternal life'.....its a simple tin...GOD's plans 4 eternal life is nt d bowing down 24/7 idea dat u brought...he will mk everytin as it ws bck den in eden...dat ws his initial plan b4 sin intruded.......i am certain dat i serve a God dat never lies...as he said nd never done? Nay!...wat he say he wil do..dat he'll do...so its simple..tk it,or leave it....d funny tin is dat dis eternal life isn't so diffclt 2 blive.....its jst d fact dat we want 2 enjoy life nd frivolities dat cums wit it....a man dat once did so wrote a report abt it...he said..."vanity upon vanity all is vanity".....

rinrin23:


What if he (@Pr0ton) doesn't want eternal life? Is it by force?

This eternal life that you people keep mentioning and aspiring for. What do you want to do with it sef ehn?. Some of you its a challenge to even go to church on Sundays, and those of you that go, its a challenge for you to stay awake and pay attention. So what do you want to do in heaven where you will be worshipping a god and bowing down to a throne 24/7? How is this version of heaven some place you even want to end up for eternity.

Even if he chooses to follow in your beliefs he would still rot the same way you will rot too. Or are trying to say you will take your human physical body with you to heaven. You don't even understand your own religion. Isn't it your soul that lives after death?. Y'all will be talking about hell and how a physical body will burn for eternity (gnashing of teeth and all that), with the little knowledge you have, does that make sense to you? How long does it take for a human body to burn to ashes? Eternity?

What do you intend to do with this eternal life? Im curious

Kumbaya forever! Yeye!!! They can't even do 1 week worship session straight sincerely, and they wanna spend eternity chanting hallelujah? I tire o!

Pr0ton:
Apostle Peter claims

" He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips . "


Apocryphal, right?

Gonna leave Enoch (His own is not very convincing, I guess)

The problem ...

" Now when the LORD was about to take Elijah up to heaven by a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal. " 2 ^nd Kings 2:1

" And as they still went on and talked, behold, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven " 2 ^nd Kings 2:11



But the Omniscient Jesus ...

" And no man has ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven John 3:13


Apart from the lie Jesus told here, I can't imagine the absurdity in His words. He was on earth speaking with Nicodemus yet said "the Son of man who is in heaven" Maybe a confession afterall

Jesus was simply illustrating to Nicodemus the veracity of His words. Read the previous verses, He said to Nicodemus I tell you of earthly things and you find them hard what if I tell you of heavenly things? No other person has come back from heaven only Himself who was in Heaven and is here now. He was not implying that nobody has gone to heaven, He was implying that no one had come from there to tell of things there.

When examining scriptures you will be in error if you take a scripture out of context.

LordReed:


Jesus was simply illustrating to Nicodemus the veracity of His words. Read the previous verses, He said to Nicodemus I tell you of earthly things and you find them hard what if I tell you of heavenly things? No other person has come back from heaven only Himself who was in Heaven and is here now. He was not implying that nobody has gone to heaven, He was implying that no one had come from there to tell of things there.

When examining scriptures you will be in error if you take a scripture out of context.

Really? Read the verse again and stop changing the words...

"No man has ascended up up to heaven..."

He tells us plainly here that no one has ascended/gone up to heaven. He doesn't stop there. He then tries to tell you who has ever ascended up to heaven, and he says, "but he who came down from heaven". Since He was born by the Holy Sprit, who impregnated Mary, and not by man, He therefore was divine (came down from heaven): Jesus

Pr0ton:


Really? Read the verse again and stop changing the words...

"No man has ascended up up to heaven..."

He tells us plainly here that no one has ascended/gone up to heaven. He doesn't stop there. He then tries to tell you who has ever ascended up to heaven, and he says, "but he who came down from heaven". Since He was born by the Holy Sprit, who impregnated Mary, and not by man, He therefore was divine (came down from heaven): Jesus

Have you ever heard of paraphrasing? Yeah that was what I was doing. Let's see the real text to satisfy you.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? 10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? 11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: (KJV)

Like I said don't take a scripture out of context it makes for errors. Jesus was talking to Nicodemus and trying to show him that what He was saying was the truth because He was from Heaven. If strictly speaking He meant "Son of man which is in heaven" then why does He proceed to say "the Son of man be lifted up" like Moses lifting up the serpent? Was it in Heaven Moses lifted the serpent?

^^^^^^^^^
LordReed...


There is still no answer in your post.

Jesus was talking to Nicodemus and trying to show him that what he was saying was the truth because He as from heaven

Of what use is this answer to my objection please?

And your second assertion shows that you and Jesus don't understand yourself. Even, some new translation, like the RSV, omitted the "son of man who is in heaven". If we are to follow those new translation then we can infer that Jesus was just making an analogy in verse 14, and also gives more fault to Jesus's allegation about who has ever ascended up to heaven.