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.
