[b-hebrew] Almah vs. Bethulah in Isaiah 7

kgraham0938 at comcast.net kgraham0938 at comcast.net
Sat Apr 2 13:39:24 EST 2005


For the sake of not getting too far away from Hebrew.  (which I am guilty of as well).  It has been argued that Matthew's definition of fufillment does not always have to be in the sense of prophesy/fufillment but rather analogy. (i.e Matt 2:18)

Here in Matt 2:18, he makes an analogy, just like there was weeping in the days of Jeremiah, so to there is weeping during this time as well.

So, the sign was given to Ahaz, it was fufilled during his time.  Matthew uses this prophesy as an analogy of what happened in Jesus time.  Meaning just like this particular event took place during Ahaz time period as a sign, Jesus birth is happening as well.  In a nut shell.
--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 at comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 10:17:11 EST Myshalom777 at aol.com writes: 
> In a message dated 02/04/2005 16:05:34 GMT Daylight Time, 
> gfsomsel at juno.com writes: 
> Let me turn the tables on you a bit. This birth is said to be a sign to 
> Ahaz. A sign would need to be something which the one to whom it is 
> given would witness. If it is regarding the birth of Jesus Christ, an 
> event several hundred years later, how then is it a sign to Ahaz since he 
> will never witness it? Also, if it is regarding a nearer event as well 
> as a more remote event (i.e. that there was some kind of fulfilment in 
> the time it was originally given, and if it refers to a virgin birth, are 
> there then two virgin births in scripture? 
> 
> george 
> gfsomsel 
> 
> 
> It seems to me Mark Eddy gave a very good response to your point almost a 
> year ago when this topic came up on this list. Here it is again : 
> 
> ===== 
> 
> Subj:Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 7:13 ha-alma and xarah 
> Date:12/05/2004 18:23:34 GMT Daylight Time 
> From:markeddy at adams.net 
> To:b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org 
> Sent from the Internet (Details) 
> 
> 
> Isaiah does not say that the sign is "for Ahas." Ahaz refused to ask for 
> a sign.(v. 12). So instead of giving a sign of Ahaz's choosing, the Lord 
> will give a sign to the "house of David" (v. 13). In verse 11 
> Isaiah addressed Ahaz with the singular Sha(aL LKa ("Listen, you!") but 
> in verse 13 Isaiah switches to referring to the "house of David" in the 
> plural (MiKKeM, and the verb TaL(U, also LaKem in verse 14). Ahaz 
> is just the most recent part of the house of David, which has tried God's 
> patience for a long time. The sign is for the whole house of David, not 
> primarily for the king in that house at that particular time. 
> 
> Mark Eddy 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
> 
> =================== 
> 
> Celal Berker 
> www.eefc.co.uk 
> www.fiec.org.uk 
> www.hristiyan.net 
> 
> _______________ 
> 
> That strikes me as pure sophism. The sign is clearly for Ahaz. 
> 
> 1. Ahaz is instructed to ask for a sign 
> 2. He refuses (most piously, of course) 
> 3. The prophet then says that the LORD would therefore name the sign 
> 
> Then, examine the nature of the sign. 
> 1. A young woman is pregnant and is to give birth 
> 2. She will give a particular name to her child (Immanuel) 
> 3. BEFORE THE CHILD IS WEANED the Assyrians will no longer be a power. 
> 
> The sequence in which prophesy is given as well as the prophesy itself 
> demand a nearly immediate fulfilment. 
> 
> george 
> gfsomsel 
> ___________ 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list