1. Matt 1:23 gives us the word
"Immanuel" as a name for Jesus. Most significantly, the
Apostle Matthew gives us the meaning of this word, an
apostolic definition, if you will
----------- God with us. This single
sentence should end the controversry, but, of course, people will
choose to follow their bias.
Matthew did not come up with it
JD; he repeats the words of the prophet Isaiah (Is 7:14)
under the unction of the same Holy Spirit of course "Therefore the
Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold the young woman who is
unmarried and a virgin shall conceive and bear a
son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (God with us) (see Isa 9:6,
Jer 31:22; Mic 5:3-5; Matt 1:22,23)
Ampl
It IS the Apostle Matthew who
gives us the definition. Now, I did not mean to
imply tht he INVENTED the definition, but it is his defining to
the exclusion of all other passages of scripture that I can
see. He actually says "... which interpreted means
..." The definition is not found in Isa
9:6,7; 7:14 ir 8:8.
Yes it is, the exact same wording
is found in Isaiah 7:14. Immanuel means "God with
us"
Why are you saying
this? The DEFINITION is not found in that text and I
check the KJ just to be sure that we were not arguing from
different versions. It ain't there !!
It may not be spelled out in the
KJV but the name Immanuel means God with us
and
is there in the KJV, NASB, and
Amplified. Those are the only ones I checked and the reason
I am saying this is that you gave the impression that Matthew came
up
with this revelation by
himself.
2. Secondly, Col 1:19-20
tells us that Christ reconciled all thing UNTO HIMSELF. If
Christ were only the representative of God, there would be
no value in having drawn all thing, on the earth and in the heaves
unto Himself. This passage makes sense only as one admits to
the deity of the incarnate Christ -- we should not forget
that the act of reconciliation was performed in the body of His
flesh.
Read it again
and focus on Vs.19; Christ is reconciling all things to the Father
- this is not about HIMSELF.
Judy, do you know what it means
when a word is italicized in the KJ?
I'm not into quibbling over Gk
words JD; the meaning is more important to me and it is the
Father all things were reconciled to at this
point. This is repeated in Vs.22 "Yet now has (Christ the Messiah)
reconciled (you to God) in the body of His flesh through death, in
order to present you holy and faultless and irreproachable in His
(the Father's) presence. (And this He will do) provided that you
continue to stay with and in the faith (in Christ), well grounded
and settled and steadfast, not shifting or moving away from the
hope..."
Actually, Judy, the word "Father
does not appear in the text. The KJ people added the word to
the text. I have the gk text used by the KJ people
(Berry's interlinear) and "Father" is not there. The
only idenified deity in the text (go back to verse 15 and
read from there) is Jesus.
I wasn't reading the KJV JD, that
time I was quoting from the NASV and the Amplified says the
same thing. Jesus did not come to glorify
himself.
I am saying that the words "God"
or "Father" do not appear int he KJ greek text -- or any greek
text. "Father" is an added word.
PS: I wouldn't take Lightfoots
comments too seriously, apparently he was in cahoots with Westcott
& Hort.
Fine -- but I do take him
seriously.
If you are allowing him to add
and remove the words of scripture for you, then Oh well!! I
would say you are begging to be confused.
3. John 17:5 establishes the fact
that the Son shared the glory of the Father before the
foundations of the world, establishing His eternity as the
Son.
John also writes "in the
beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was
God - which establishes him in eternity as the
Word of God rather than an "eternal son" He wasn't the
firstborn of all creation because He is and
was
a member of the Godhead so He has
always been. He is the firstborn of the
New
Creation.
