Goshen360:


Noted....

Do you also deny the virgin birth?

frosbel:

I quoted links to any articles I posted unlike you who tried to pass them off as your own .

Did you also post articles to the copied replies and mentions? See how much of a hypocrite you are.

Can you please post the links to any comments I made without references . Obviously you cannot because you are just one of those cheap fraudulent pastors with a half baked knowledge of scripture , coming here to spout total nonsense that does not add up or make any sense.

For this Let's analyze a statement you mentioned before to expose you
His statement in Blue
My Rebuttal in Red

I put it to you that your case is weak, flawed and untenable in the light of overwhelming evidence. If as you and your cohorts say , that one cannot be saved if he/she does not believe in the virgin birth
At the time you stated this, there were no Cohorts/Cabals, also at the time you stated this, I never said "one cannot be saved if he/she does not believe in the virgin birth". This goes on to yield that this was a copied statement between two other persons who had previously been in an argument, our friend however was not smart enough to edit the argument to suit his interest.
See your yansh for floor?

it has to be in the bible somewhere, no ?
This had nothing to do with anything, if you had used your brains, you would have noticed.

You cannot form a major doctrine that is not supported by the main apostles of Christ.
This is the part that baffles me the most. Though I chose not to answer before, but what Major Doctrine are you talking about? How does the major doctrine relate to the essence from which the thread was culled. The antagonist is attacking the evidence of the virgin birth, and you're here talking about doctrine. Quit using straw man to deviate and focus on the very question formed.

And then you go on to say it was assumed ,
This was the part that really exposed how dumb you are. Like you look at the above and look for where it fits into the argument

what !!!!! What about the future believers who would come after, how could they believe in this 'truth' if there was no substantial evidence in scripture , except for a falsely interpreted scripture in Isaiah7 and 2 contradictory biographies in Matthew and Luke. Who are you kidding.
This for example
Our seemingly daft atheist is showing concern for the future of the church. Oh! how touching.
Our dumb atheist forgot, the church was one, those who accepted Christ believed in the Word of God and the accounts of Matthew and Luke was more than enough. The church focused on faith in Christ and eternal salvation which was anchored on believing in the death and resurrection of Jesus. But our Dumb witty atheist is too damn silly to understand

The funny part about all this is the below quote is what he responded to. The quote and his rebuttal are parallel line that cannot meet.

Paul (and the other epistle-writers) were writing "problem-oriented" letters - so that there was really no need to go out of the way to mention anything that he did not have pertinence for.

Post the links to my rebuttals or remain a Liar for eternity , lol.

Malvisguy had done this already, no need going through the stress of doing that again. Once is enough; I hate repetition

There is nothing christ-like about plagiarism.

You still haven't proved this, even though I've challenged you more than once. This fact seems to be substantiated of your own belief rather than concrete evidence and real facts.

Mate , you are totally confused, I thought I was debating with someone who had a strong grasp of the bible or how on earth could you have come up with this strange statement ;

"the Virgin birth was not a neccessity at that time"

You are actually making inferences based on fallacy and not fact. You cannot assume something to be true based on ambigity.

Abeg go sleep jor.

Oh! By Inference you're implying that before one must be saved, he must first believe in the virgin birth and not the resurrection of Christ?
Oh! My God, I take back my words, you're not possessed by slow ghosts, you're possessed by insane aliens who have probed you and replaced your brains with polyandrous millipede's
There's no point arguing with you on this Issue anymore, You're too slow to comprehend simple facts.

Now Let's Look at some acts of Hypocrisy, Cluelessness and Bigotry our friend Frosbel has committed.

First, we'll start at the Page 1 of this thread and move spotting and pointing out those flaws.

1. He dodged Craziebone's comment

craziebone:
are you still alive, @frosbel. Why did you decide to back down on the "who has the strongest military on Africa" thread you created?

Things like this shows it's either he has no answer or he is Just plain silly. I'd take Plain Silly anyday.

2. Macelliot rebuttals him in a contradictory statement, but he chose to turn the blind eye.

Macelliot:

Who can help me Comprehend this?

Contradiction!! Two-mouths!!
You claim you do researches. All those researches you made, who wrote them? Are they not Men idealogies just like You and I?
Go and research more, Mr. Frosbel, you are contradicting yourself.
Peace!!!

3. He tried to trick the audience into twisting my post, but the rebuttal hits him hard and he never mentions it again
His post in Blue, My Rebuttal in Red
The Twist here is he stated "Let's see what fertilization means:" and goes on to define Human Fertilization

frosbel:

Hmm, you lost me here. Which part of "make pregnant; fertilize" do you not understand, lol.
Let's see what fertilization means :
" Human fertilization is the union of a human egg and sperm, usually occurring in the ampulla of the uterine tube. The result of this union is the production of a zygote, or fertilized egg, initiating prenatal development. Scientists discovered the dynamics of human fertilization in the nineteenth century" - Wikipedia
Duh !!!!

Here's the Rebuttal he remains silent after this. Hypocrisy at its peak

IanDiamonds:

You have acted very silly again..This I'd say is
Hypocrisy at it's peak.The bolded words has once
again' exposed your red herring. Fertilize(ation) and
Human fertilization, do they mean the same thin'. This games ya'll play by creatin' locution so you can turn the arumegnt in your favour does not work here.

4. He shows his lack of cognitive skills and he further declares it by pasting a reply that was entirely out of context.
The drama is Shown Below
His copy and paste reply

frosbel:

I put it to you that your case is weak, flawed and untenable in the light of overwhelming evidence. If as you and your cohorts say , that one cannot be saved if he/she does not believe in the virgin birth , it has to be in the bible somewhere, no ? You cannot form a major doctrine that is not supported by the main apostles of Christ.

The reply

IanDiamonds:

I don laugh tire at the bolded statement. Where did I and my cohorts (Who be the cohorts self) say that one cannot be saved if an unbeliever does not believe in the virgin birth?
This is the effect of this polytechnic institutions ya'll attend. You copied an article and you did not even care to read and edit it's content to suit your purpose, rather you'd copy and paste it as it is; showin' further that you're silly and lack proper reasoning

5. He opposes The Straw Man's Fallacy but goes on to use it. It's no big deal so far it favors him. He continued using this same straw man, but later backed out when he saw I wasn't fallin' for it.

frosbel:

Now, help me answer these questions again :

1. Who was the Father of Jesus, Holy Spirit or God the Father ?
2. Was Jesus an adopted Son to Joseph or a real blood Son ?
3. Show me in the entire old testament where mention is made of a virgin birth apart from Isaiah 7.
4. Why would a prophecy be made to a King about a specific event and be fulfilled in Isaiah 8 only to be again fulfilled hundreds of years later in a totally unrelated event.
5. If Mary thought Jesus was God and that there was a virgin birth, why did she ponder his words in her heart not knowing his mission on earth, why did his brethren not talk about it.
6. Why are the 2 biographies in Matthew and Luke contradictory.

6. He Quotes Bible passage, but tells me not to throw verses at him. Hypocrisy at it's peak

Here's an Example of where he's used bible passage, though he used several but I'm Just stating one

frosbel:

I am surprised that you are not commending me for doing the same thing that the Bereans did, which is ;
"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." - Acts 17:11
Or did you forget what Paul said here ;
"But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron" - 1 Timothy 4:1-2
Or did you forget what Paul said here ;
"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, 4and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths. " - 2 Timothy 4:4

And He tells me

frosbel:

I don't want verses thrown at me, I want logical deductions based on these verses in your own words.
Waiting..................

7. He does not give an Answer to honourhim's post and tries at best to dodge the questions thrown at him

The Question

honourhim:

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS I ASKED YOU OR FOREVER HIDE YOUR FACE IN SHAME. I quote the questions again below.

Do you even know God? Is it not a height of foolishness for one who does not believe that God can cause a virgin birth to believe that that same God could raise Jesus from the dead?
That the same God could create such a complex world?
That the same God will cause the dead to rise from their graves on the last day?
Is it not a height of foolishness for you to believe the bible at all with all the miracles and mysteries recorded in it which are beyond human understanding with such a claim on virgin birth? Honestly you are a pathetic case.
If those MOG's you mentioned are agents of satan then obviously you are the chief priest of satan.

His Response

frosbel:

Questions ?? Where are they ?
What I read is just a weak rant by a confused church goer.
Ask me the questions in a neat and orderly fashion so I can respond accordingly.

8. Malvisguy throws a Question at him asking him to narrate the story of Jesus or Yeshua. Once again he turns a blind eye.
Only in this case we all know he dosen't know

malvisguy212:

ok, I got your attention now, narrate the birth of Jesus or Yeshua, let here your own view, thank you.

9. He post a link claiming to be the source of my rebuttals against his person. Going through the webpage behind the link shows nothing of such. In Essence he Lied; though I've challenged him to show me I copied from that page with proof, as usual, he's turned a blind eye

His Claim.

frosbel:

You are a dishonest fellow, why not paste the link to the article from where you got this comment. Stop plagiarising friend.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aiia/virginbirth.html

My Response NB: Ya'll can go through the link to confirm

IanDiamonds:

You're extremely silly if you think I'd restrict myself to a single source of information. And thanks for the link you posted I'll be sure to read on what they have there. I would have listed sources, but the last time I did, I got banned.
*Modified*
I've gone through the link you posted and I can't find anythin' related to my posts. Do you smoke weed? Or is atheism driving you nuts. Please do see a doctor quicly you need medication

This acts of his person just like other atheist are things ya'll should take note of. They are liars and at most Hypocrites.
Beware of these nitwits

^^^^^^

After reading your latest comments it is obvious you are not in a position to take me on in this debate. Your latest comment is more like the rants of a desperate loser than a cohesive and coordinated rebuttal to what was originally supposed to be a good debate.

I laff laugh at you church people because you are unable to think out of the box. You have been programmed by religion to think and behave in a certain way and this is the situation I was in for 20 years until I 'rebelled' against the lies and fraud being paraded as the gospel.

Sorry, I cannot indulge you further until you calm down, collect your thoughts together and let us start a point by point debate on this topic.

Further hyperventilated rants without addressing the topic will be ignored.

Speak later Pal.

[quote author=Joshthefirst post=28863534]Good Old Frosbel now denies the virgin birth. Lol.

I used to say you were like a malformed baby boy. Having so many problems but still alive.
Now I realize that you are inching very close to death. If you are not dead already. For you deny the fact that Jesus is THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. You therefore deny your salvation and have condemned yourself.

You ilk is the problem of Churchianity today, arrogant, judgemental empty windbags with nothing to offer anyone except for religious indoctrination and programmed fabrications.

I am not one of your deceived sheep you can intimidate with illogical statements which have more bearing on your ego and religious pride than it has to the bible.

I will be talking to you at 90 Years of age, mark my word, pray to God that he has mercy on you to live that long.

Oh! Frosbel! Who did this to you?
What made you this gullible and foolish to ignore the veracity of the word of God and daily fight against the very God you claim to serve...or have you been like this since? Have you always been a crafty serpent in our midst? Waiting to gain gullible trust and turn peoples hearts against truth?

Do you know what the Word of God is ? Do you even know what the Gospel is ? I very much doubt it, you have been practising religion for many years while falsely thinking you are serving God. Think again Pal.

Truth cannot be stopped. People like me are still alive you know. Too bad.
Truths victory is already won. Victory resounding through the age

And People like me are still alive to tear down your myths and fables and free the sheep you have been robbing and stealing from for decades.

Speak later Mister.

frosbel:
^^^^^^

After reading your latest comments it is obvious you are not in a position to take me on in this debate. Your latest comment is more like the rants of a desperate loser than a cohesive and coordinated rebuttal to what was originally supposed to be a good debate.

I laff laugh at you church people because you are unable to think out of the box. You have been programmed by religion to think and behave in a certain way and this is the situation I was in for 20 years until I 'rebelled' against the lies and fraud being paraded as the gospel.

Sorry, I cannot indulge you further until you calm down, collect your thoughts together and let us start a point by point debate on this topic.

Further hyperventilated rants without addressing the topic will be ignored.

Speak later Pal.

The usual escape pod? Keep wallowing in your illusion of self deceit. Remember, the devil is sitting on you.

IanDiamonds:


The usual escape pod? Keep wallowing in your illusion of self deceit. Remember, the devil is sitting on you.

Yea that's his usual style of hiding from his shame. He is like the proverbial mad man that sees sane people around him as abnormal while he is the one that is normal.

IanDiamonds:


The usual escape pod? Keep wallowing in your illusion of self deceit. Remember, the devil is sitting on you.

Okay let me mellow the tempo a little and let us start from scratch....... ( Your mates honourhim & Joshthefirst can help you if they want )

Now let us start from the ONLY scripture in the old testament that mentions an inkling of a virgin birth. I use the new revised version which correctly translates the word 'virgin' into young woman and not a literal virgin.

" Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman[e] is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel "

עֶלֶם
- virgin, young woman
- of marriageable age
- maid or newly married

Scholars have agreed that in this context the word Virgin means young woman.

Now lets move to the next line of argument ;

Context is important and should not be ignored, so let's have a quick review.

"In the days of Ahaz son of Jotham son of Uzziah, king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and King Pekah son of Remaliah of Israel went up to attack Jerusalem, but could not mount an attack against it." - Isaiah 7:1

Context : There was an imminent threat to Judah from an alliance between Syria and Israel and King Ahaz was shaken by this news, he was worried that he might lose his kingdom to the kings of these 2 nations. See below ;
" the heart of Ahaz and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind." - Isaiah 7:2b.

So to further encourage Ahaz and assure him of victory, God gave him this sign and promise, a promise which was related to a specific event at a specific point in history, not 700 years later.

So God asked Ahaz for a sign, thus :

" Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, saying, Ask a sign of the Lord your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven. 12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test." - Isaiah 7:10-12

And what sign was given to Ahaz ?? Read on.....

" Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman[e] is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel." - Isaiah 7:14

Who was he referring to here ? JESUS CHRIST ? I THINK NOT. Read the underlined , present tense 'IS' , which means the woman was already with CHILD, this was not an event for a future date.


Thinking hat on people....................

Except of course Jesus fulfils the following conditions in the following verses .

" He shall eat curds and honey by the time he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted." - Isaiah 7:15-16]

1. Did Jesus eat curds and honey
2. Did Jesus not have a sinless nature ? So how did he know how to choose between evil and good ?


Summary : It is evident that Matthew misquoted this verse to fabricate a virgin birth, in fact many bible scholars agree with this stance.

The bible also admonishes us to never confirm a matter as fact unless it is established by 2 or 3 witnesses. So can you show me the other 2 related prophecies about the so called virgin birth in the old testament

Nowhere in the whole of scripture is Jesus called EMMANUEL and by the time of JESUS the nations of Assyria and Israel had ceased to exist.


I wait for your first rebuttal...................

Frosbel is an attention seeking atheist on NL who need to be ignored. Engaging him in a long argumnent is a futile exercise.

I made my first obeservation concerning his atheistic leaning in 2012, he is gradually opening up on his REAL belief.

true2god:
Frosbel is an attention seeking atheist on NL who need to be ignored. Engaging him in a long argumnent is a futile exercise.

I made my first obeservation concerning his atheistic leaning in 2012, he is gradually opening up on his REAL belief.

you make yourself a liar by calling me an atheist and then refuse to help me understand the inconsistencies of the virgin birth.

Are you not another blind follower of religion ??

frosbel:


you make yourself a liar by calling me an atheist and then refuse to help me understand the inconsistencies of the virgin birth.

Are you not another blind follower of religion ??

You are getting very predictable and also irredeemable. I have no time to explain anything, cos I knw that your next question\thread would be, 'How do you proove that God really exist?'.

I can't exert my energy\brain\time on you because you are on NL, as an atheist, attempting to draw people from God and to equally seek undue attention.

I pray God to forgive you.

true2god:
You are getting very predictable and also irredeemable. I have no time to explain anything, cos I knw that your next question\thread would be, 'How do you proove that God really exist?'.

I can't exert my energy\brain\time on you because you are on NL, as an atheist, attempting to draw people from God and to equally seek undue attention.

I pray God to forgive you.

My friend, you cannot debate on this point because you have no point and would rather remain brainwashed than learn the TRUTH.

*Laughing out loud*

Joshthefirst:
Do you also deny the virgin birth?

They are actually birds of the same feather, you will wait till eternity before you get a response from this dolt who also propagates sexual immorality before marriage.

frosbel:
[size=5pt]Okay let me mellow the tempo a little and let us start from scratch....... ( Your mates honourhim & Joshthefirst can help you if they want )[/size]

Now let us start from the ONLY scripture in the old testament that mentions an inkling of a virgin birth. I use the new revised version which correctly translates the word 'virgin' into young woman and not a literal virgin.

" Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman[e] is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel "

עֶלֶם
- virgin, young woman
- of marriageable age
- maid or newly married

Scholars have agreed that in this context the word Virgin means young woman.

Now lets move to the next line of argument ;

Context is important and should not be ignored, so let's have a quick review.

"In the days of Ahaz son of Jotham son of Uzziah, king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and King Pekah son of Remaliah of Israel went up to attack Jerusalem, but could not mount an attack against it." - Isaiah 7:1

Context : There was an imminent threat to Judah from an alliance between Syria and Israel and King Ahaz was shaken by this news, he was worried that he might lose his kingdom to the kings of these 2 nations. See below ;
" the heart of Ahaz and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind." - Isaiah 7:2b.

So to further encourage Ahaz and assure him of victory, God gave him this sign and promise, a promise which was related to a specific event at a specific point in history, not 700 years later.

So God asked Ahaz for a sign, thus :

" Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, saying, Ask a sign of the Lord your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven. 12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test." - Isaiah 7:10-12

And what sign was given to Ahaz ?? Read on.....

" Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman[e] is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel." - Isaiah 7:14

Who was he referring to here ? JESUS CHRIST ? I THINK NOT. Read the underlined , present tense 'IS' , which means the woman was already with CHILD, this was not an event for a future date.


Thinking hat on people....................

Except of course Jesus fulfils the following conditions in the following verses .

" He shall eat curds and honey by the time he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted." - Isaiah 7:15-16

1. Did Jesus eat curds and honey
2. Did Jesus not have a sinless nature ? So how did he know how to choose between evil and good ?

Summary : It is evident that Matthew misquoted this verse to fabricate a virgin birth, in fact many bible scholars agree with this stance.

The bible also admonishes us to never confirm a matter as fact unless it is established by 2 or 3 witnesses.
So can you show me the other 2 related prophecies about the so called virgin birth in the old testament

Nowhere in the whole of scripture is Jesus called EMMANUEL and by the time of JESUS the nations of Assyria and Israel had ceased to exist.


I wait for your first rebuttal...................

frosbel, my buddy :-)
With all these rookie gaffe galore, dont fall for my hand ooo
You going on like a learner or a beginner
Wasnt it you who typed "... Context is important and should not be ignored..." in your post, or was that the handiwork of a ghost writer?
Why not adhere to your "rule" then?
Oh I see, "rules" are meant to be broken, or its a case of one rule for one, and one rule for another LOL

Anyway, must say, doing a scholarly on "virgin birth" is a bit johnny-come-lately for you and misconstruing it as a "young woman" is very convenient & full of mischief.

OK, that said, here is kicking off:
First, why did you leave out Isaiah 7:3 (i.e. the one about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son)
Second, you do know you that Isaiah 7:13-17 is a combo prophecy (i.e. notice I stretched or widened it at the seams of your Isaiah 7:15-16)
One about the child Jesus and the other about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son
Third, Ahaz was seeing a vision, so he would see in the present, the virgin has taking in
(i.e. she is with a child, in the belly, already with a child, unborn or yet born)or
Fourth, the "He shall eat curds and honey by the time he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good" bit, is not for about Jesus, but rather was about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son, and that prophecy came to pass
(i.e. truth to the Lord's word by the time of JESUS the nations of Assyria and Israel had ceased to exist)
If that custom of "eating curds and honey" continued or survived, its possible Jesus could have eaten curds and honey but as mentioned earlier, the fact & truth of that verse and that particular bit of the prophecy in it wasnt about Jesus, it was for or about Isaiah's son

Jesus is God the Son. EMMANUEL or Immanuel means "God with you".
It has always been a statement prior or until when it was prophesied by Isaiah that Jesus when born be named EMMANUEL or Immanuel
The bible is littered with verses of God been with person(s) and people (e.g. with Adam or in Eden etcetera) there are also verses of Him reaffirming He will be with people (e.g. with the Israelites in the wilderness en-route to Canaan etcetera)
but here in Isaiah 7:14, is God again emphatically saying that He is in the midst, He is making another appearance. God is with us.

NB: Dont just stick to one bible translation like the "new revised version" you admitted using

[quote author=BabaGnoni post=28889287]
frosbel, my buddy :-)
Dont fall for my hand ooo
You going on like a learner or a beginner

We are all learning, a good thing if you ask me..

Wasnt it you who typed "... Context is important and should not be ignored..." in your post, or was that the handiwork of a ghost writer?
Why not adhere to your "rule" then?
Oh I see, "rules" are meant to be broken, or its a case of one rule for one, and one rule for another LOL

Anyway, must say, doing a scholarly on "virgin birth" is a bit johnny-come-lately for you and misconstruing it as a "young woman" is very convenient & full of mischief.

Not it is not.

Almah (עלמה, plural: alamot עלמות) is a Hebrew word meaning a young woman of childbearing age who has not yet had a child, and who may be an unmarried virgin or a married young woman.[1] The term occurs nine times in the Hebrew Bible – see usage below - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almah

almah: a young woman, a virgin
Original Word: עַלְמָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: almah
Phonetic Spelling: (al-maw')
Short Definition: maidens

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5959.htm

OK, that said, here is kicking off:
First, why did you leave out Isaiah 7:3 (i.e. the one about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son)

Hmm, because as you may have noticed, I only posted areas relevant to the argument, besides what does Isaiah's son Shear-Jashub have to do with this ? Surely you are not insinuating that Shear-Jashub was the promised child ??

Well, I have news for you in fulfilment of this prophecy , Isaiah 8, lets go there.....

Then I made love to the prophetess, and she conceived and gave birth to a son. And the Lord said to me, “Name him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. For before the boy knows how to say ‘My father’ or ‘My mother,’ the wealth of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off by the king of Assyria.” - Isaiah 8:3-4

In other words the prophecy was about Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz who was unborn at the time and not Shear-Jashub who was already a young boy......think.

Second, you do know you that Isaiah 7:13-17 (i.e. notice I have widened it from your Isaiah 7:15-16) is a combo prophecy
One about the child Jesus and the other about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son

Here again you have confused yourself terribly by suggesting that a young boy who already existed when the prophecy was made was the child referred to as the promised child through the supposed virgin. Brother you have missed road here really badly.

The promised son's name was Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz not Shear-Jashub as you erroneously implied.

Third, Ahaz was seeing a vision, so he would see in the present, the virgin has taking in
(i.e. she is with a child, in the belly, already with a child, unborn or yet born)

Plausible as per the prophecy fulfilment in Isaiah 8 but still does not explain why the sign was given specifically to King Ahaz as a confirmation that God will defeat his enemies. Tell me , what has the sign got to with an unrelated event 700 years later ??

Let us go to another prophecy i

Fourth, the "He shall eat curds and honey by the time he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good" bit, is not for or about Jesus, but rather was about the boy Shear-Jashub, Isaiah's son, and that prophecy came to pass
(i.e. truth to the Lord's word by the time of JESUS the nations of Assyria and Israel had ceased to exist)
Jesus is God the Son. EMMANUEL or Immanuel means "God with you".

Hmm, so you say it is combo prophecy when it suits you and when it does not suit you it is not a combo prophecy, lol. And here again you deceive your readers by mentioning a son Shear-Jashub who was already a young boy at the time of prophecy.

It has always been a statement prior or until when it was prophesied by Isaiah that Jesus when born be named EMMANUEL or Immanuel

Where are the other 2 or 3 witnesses ? Apart from this verse in scripture where else is Emmanuel mentioned ?

The bible is littered with verses of God been with person(s) and people (e.g. with Adam or in Eden etcetera) there are also verses of Him reaffirming He will be with people (e.g. with the Israelites in the wilderness en-route to Canaan etcetera)
but here in Isaiah 7:14, is God again emphatically saying that He is in the midst, He is making another appearance. God is with us.
NB: Dont just stick to one bible translation like the "new revised version" you admitted using

You are really going off on one without slowing down to read your statements and make some sense of them before posting.

God has been with people, families and nations all through history as an affirmation that he values and honours their righteousness and will defeat their enemies and protect them in times of distress or need. This verse in Isaiah 7 is just another one of those periods when God was reaffirming his presence with King Ahaz and Judah during a time of distress.

That's it for now, I must go to bed.......

frosbel:
We are all learning, a good thing if you ask me.. smiley
^^^
Arent we all, so I am glad to know and hear you say "we are all learning..."

frosbel:

^^^
That was about not following your rule of reading text with context

frosbel:
Not it is not.

Almah (עלמה, plural: alamot עלמות) is a Hebrew word meaning a young woman of childbearing age who has not yet had a child, and who may be an unmarried virgin or a married young woman.[1] The term occurs nine times in the Hebrew Bible – see usage below - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almah

almah: a young woman, a virgin
Original Word: עַלְמָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: almah
Phonetic Spelling: (al-maw')
Short Definition: maidens

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/5959.htm
^^^
You prefer the "a young woman" bit and shove back the "a virgin" Yeah?
As said those bits on Almah are old news.
Interesting LOL

frosbel:
Hmm, because as you may have noticed, I only posted areas relevant to the argument, besides what does Isaiah's son Shear-Jashub have to do with this ? Surely you are not insinuating that Shear-Jashub was the promised child ??

Well, I have news for you in fulfilment of this prophecy , Isaiah 8, lets go there.....

Then I made love to the prophetess, and she conceived and gave birth to a son. And the Lord said to me, “Name him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. For before the boy knows how to say ‘My father’ or ‘My mother,’ the wealth of Damascus and the plunder of Samaria will be carried off by the king of Assyria.” - Isaiah 8:3-4

In other words the prophecy was about Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz who was unborn at the time and not Shear-Jashub who was already a young boy......think.

Here again you have confused yourself terribly by suggesting that a young boy who already existed when the prophecy was made was the child referred to as the promised child through the supposed virgin. Brother you have missed road here really badly.

The promised son's name was Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz not Shear-Jashub as you erroneously implied.

Plausible as per the prophecy fulfilment in Isaiah 8 but still does not explain why the sign was given specifically to King Ahaz as a confirmation that God will defeat his enemies. Tell me, what has the sign got to with an unrelated event 700 years later ??

Hmm, so you say it is combo prophecy when it suits you and when it does not suit you it is not a combo prophecy, lol. And here again you deceive your readers by mentioning a son Shear-Jashub who was already a young boy at the time of prophecy.
^^^
I said and maintain its a combo prophecy (i.e. about the birth of Jesus and Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub
I too, I was in bed way past my bed time typing this, not sure how I'll cope not sleeping already

No I am not and/or was not insinuating that Shear-Jashub was the promised child
The promised child is Jesus
You are totally off the mark and incorrect, the other prophecy is not about the unborn Maher-shalal-hash-baz but about this boy Shear-Jashub and the two kings Ahaz was afraid of
Why was Isaiah asked to bring the boy Shear-Jashub along to the "meeting"
Do you think it was to keep Isaiah company?
No. It was because the boy had a role to play in the prophecy.
The promised child is the former part of the prophecy, this is a combo/double prophecy.
The latter part of the prophecy is the one involving the boy, Shear-Jashub and the two kings

The prophecy with Shear-Jashub was a sign to king Ahaz, whilst the prophecy about/with Jesus was a sign to the house of David (i.e. notice "Hear now, you house of David!" from Isaiah 7 verse 13)

frosbel:
Where are the other 2 or 3 witnesses ?
Apart from this verse in scripture where else is Emmanuel mentioned ?
^^^
Emmanuel is mentioned In Isaiah 8:8

and sweep into Judah until it is chin deep.
It will spread its wings, submerging your land from one end to the other, O Immanuel.
- Isaiah 8:8 NLT

frosbel:
You are really going off on one without slowing down to read your statements and make some sense of them before posting.

God has been with people, families and nations all through history as an affirmation that he values and honours their righteousness and will defeat their enemies and protect them in times of distress or need. This verse in Isaiah 7 is just another one of those periods when God was reaffirming his presence with King Ahaz and Judah during a time of distress.
^^^
Unless you want to be spoon fed, it's all sense.
Chewable, chopped up meat that was and not some muscle or tough meat
You should have cut your teeth on this long time ago

What part dont you understand in that until Jesus was named Emmanuel, Emmanuel, previously was a statement of words
Maybe you prefer drinking full-cream milk out of the carton (i.e. if not lactose intolerant)

"Reaffirming his presence with King Ahaz" you said. Pfft.
As for King Ahaz, you do know he was somewhat a baddie, and threw it back in God's face.
He sold out, sucking up to the king of Assyria, offering the king gifts, instead of having faith in God

frosbel:
That's it for now, I must go to bed.......
^^^
Though I am already in bed, I still will say, am right behind you.
I too after this post will be trying to induce myself to fall off to sleep now

Deafening silence.
What's happened to the bee in OP's or this thread's bonnet.

BabaGnoni:
Deafening silence.
What's happened to the bee in OP's or this thread's bonnet.

lol, I dey work oo.


But let me give you some homework.

Go and figure out who this child of promise was ; Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub or Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz just to avoid further embarrassment after I post my next rebuttal.

frosbel:
lol I dey work oo.

But let me give you some homework.
Go and figure out who this child of promise was;
Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub or Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz
just to avoid further embarrassment after I post my next rebuttal.

Jokester... wishful thinking...
♪ ♫ Ke-re-ke-ke, Ji Ke-ke. YAA! ♫ ♪
- Fela "Abami Eda" Anikulapo Kuti

honourhim:


The guy is really messing himself up here. What a pity.

frosbel has messed up big time, it's only the Lord that can put him together again.

Goshen360:


Noted....

Good. Do you also support your partner in crime?

johnw74:


Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
A young woman giving birth would not be a sign from God, but a virgin giving birth would be a sign from God.

If the word "virgin" in the verse above merely means a "young maiden" as frosbel would like to argue, then it would not be a sign, would it?

OLAADEGBU:


frosbel has messed up big time, it's only the Lord that can put him together again.

Whatever !

frosbel:



[img]http://www.signnetwork.com/decals/Decals/CARTOONS/Cartoon_Characters/images/Whatever!.jpg[/img]

Your case is even worse than humpty dumpty.

OLAADEGBU:


Your case is even worse than humpty dumpty.

Go and bow down before your pastor and wish him a good Christmas.

frosbel:

Whatever !

OLAADEGBU:
Your case is even worse than humpty dumpty.

frosbel:
Go and bow down before your pastor and wish him a good Christmas.

frosbel all these infantile cartoons and/or jokes renders not taking you not seriously

BabaGnoni:






frosbel all these infantile cartoons and/or jokes renders not taking you not seriously

But let me give you some homework.

Go and figure out who this child of promise was ; Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub or Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz just to avoid further embarrassment after I post my next rebuttal.

frosbel:
But let me give you some homework.

Go and figure out who this child of promise was ; Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub or Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz just to avoid further embarrassment after I post my next rebuttal.

^^^
OK frosbel, I did promise to follow up on this thread and possibly do so during the festive break, which is why this and why I am now here.
Also so that you can't say or wouldn't be able to say "I dey work oo"
You shouldn't/wouldnt have any excuse not to face this thread squarely and iron it out once and for all

Now, all this that you are swimming. Chai diaris godu ooo

Listen frosbel, "Moti we okun, mo ti we osa" literaly means "I've swam the Atlantic Ocean, I swam the Lagoon"
so besides my earlier gesticulation to you with Fela "Abami Eda" Anikulapo Kuti's - Teacher Don't Teach Me Nonsense
please don't try to teach me, your Grandma to suck eggs

In fact, I suffer ITK - I Too Know or OTTs - Over The Top gladly,
which is why I am repeating a few things I earlier said that went over your head or that you selectively unacknowledged/deliberately ignored

The questions posed to you (e.g. Why was Isaiah asked to bring the boy Shear-Jashub along to the "meeting" etc) too came back unanswered

- EXCERPT-

I said and maintain its a combo prophecy (i.e. about the birth of Jesus and Isaiah's son, Shear-Jashub
I too, I was in bed way past my bed time typing this, not sure how I'll cope not sleeping already

No I am not and/or was not insinuating that Shear-Jashub was the promised child
The promised child is Jesus
You are totally off the mark and incorrect, the other prophecy is not about the unborn Maher-shalal-hash-baz but about this boy Shear-Jashub and the two kings Ahaz was afraid of

Why was Isaiah asked to bring the boy Shear-Jashub along to the "meeting"
Do you think it was to keep Isaiah company?
No. It was because the boy had a role to play in the prophecy.
The promised child is the former part of the prophecy, this is a combo/double prophecy.
The latter part of the prophecy is the one involving the boy, Shear-Jashub and the two kings

The prophecy with Shear-Jashub was a sign to king Ahaz, whilst the prophecy about/with Jesus was a sign to the house of David
(i.e. notice "Hear now, you house of David!" from Isaiah 7 verse 13)

https://www.nairaland.com/2042507/why-deny-virgin-birth-jesus/3#28889845

- /EXCERPT -

Importantly frosbel, you are grasping at straws and barking up the wrong tree frosbel
- I cant wait to read your "wuru-wuru" with Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and witness the turning of the embarrassment table

You need to calm down and study/research over the use of the Hebrew singular and plural form of "you" in that Isaiah 7:10-14 passage

The use of the Hebrew singular and plural form of "you" in the passage confirms and informs us who Isaiah is talking to
(e.g. when it was Ahaz or when it was the house of David)
and also confirms and informs us, what he, Isaiah, was talking about (e.g. sign of the birth of Jesus or fate of Ahaz & the Assyrian Kings)

frosbel, you are not Yooba, but you understand it, even very well or more than most Yoobas themselves, all because you grew up & lived in Lagos and importantly you are familiar with Yoruba idioms, if do the same with Hebrew idioms, the pennies will drop

frosbel:


My dear, I keep asking myself what have I gotten myself into. For many years I believed in a set of dogmas and 'orthodox' doctrines , and despite the sometimes nagging questions on some of the church doctrines, falling out of line was no option as surely these great priests, popes and pastors knew better than I did.

It was only after leaving the system that I began to research ( over 3-4 years ) all my previous beliefs and found that 80% were based on fiction, superstition, pagan fables and outright lies.

Welcome to Trinity ( Pagan ), Hell Fire ( Pagan ), Virgin Birth ( Pagan ) and Tithes ( Fraud ).

My friend, JESUS is the CHRIST but he was a MAN not a GOD , take off your religious dogmatic glasses and like the bereans begin to study and show yourself approved of God, rightly diving the word of God. Stop following the herd, come back to the narrow way.

What is Christ to start with?

If a young woman or a maiden (as u claim) conceives n gives birth, what makes it a sign? It is no longer a sign but a normal occurrence but if a young woman conceives and gives birth without meeting a man that to me makes it a sign. We cannot understand the mysteries of the scriptures without the help of the Holy Spirit...may God help us

JUBILEE2000:
If a young woman or a maiden (as u claim) conceives n gives birth, what makes it a sign?
It is no longer a sign but a normal occurrence but if a young woman conceives and gives birth without meeting a man that to me makes it a sign. We cannot understand the mysteries of the scriptures without the help of the Holy Spirit...may God help us

^^^
You dont understand, frosbel thinks a hymen reconstruction surgery took place after the birth of Shear-Jashub
(i.e. before the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz)
This is apart from the obvious truth & fact that Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz which is in Chapter 8, has no mention or place in this particular prophecy
- separate prophecies, separate times of giving etcetera

"And I draw near unto the prophetess, and she conceiveth, and beareth a son;
and Jehovah saith unto me, 'Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz, ..."
- Isaiah 8:3

PS: I cant wait to read frosbel's "wuru-wuru to the answer" with Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz
and witness the turning of the proverbial embarrassment table