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.
