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.
