ArchivedChristadelphianismRomeSweetHome wrote:where are all those "Christians" that deny the Trinity? your Christadelphian friends need some help.
We do? I honestly can't see why.
After all, most of our arguments are simply ignored; you Trinitarians just drop your previous proof text and leap to another one without any debate whatsoever.
I must say, it doesn't leave me with very much work to do.
Dont get me wrong I am not "picking" on you guys, I know what that feels like on this forum, just trying to have a decent debate thats all.
Doesn't worry me, mate - at least you're polite!
Isaiah 7:14 “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”
Immanuel literally means “God with us”.
I'll answer this with a quote from Trinitarian theologian Albert Barnes, who wrote the following his Notes on the Bible:
- Immanuel - Hebrew ‘God with us’ -
עמנואל immanu'el - from אל 'el, “God,” and עמנוּ ‛ımmanu, “with us.” The name is designed to denote that God would be with the nation as its protector, and the birth of this child would be a sign or pledge of it.
The mere circumstance that this name is given, however, does not imply anything in regard to the nature or rank of the child, for nothing was more common among the Jews than to incorporate the name, or a part of the name, of the Deity with the names which they gave to their children.
Thus, “Isaiah” denotes the salvation of Yahweh; “Jeremiah,” the exaltation or grandeur of Yahweh, each compounded of two words, in which the name Yahweh constitutes a part. Thus, also in “Elijah,” the two names of God are combined, and it means literally, “God the Yahweh.” Thus, also “Eliab,” God my father; “Eliada,” knowledge of God; “Eliakim,” the resurrection of God; “Elihu,” he is my God; “Elisha,” salvation of God.
In none of these instances is the fact, that the name of God is incorporated with the proper name of the individual, any argument in respect to his rank or character.
It is true, that Matthew Matthew 1:23 uses this name as properly expressing the rank of the Messiah; but all that can be demonstrated from the use of the name by Matthew is, that it properly designated the nature and rank of the Lord Jesus. It was a pledge, then, that God was with his people, and the name designated by the prophet had a complete fulfilment in its use as applied to the Messiah.
Whether the Messiah be regarded as himself a pledge and demonstration of the presence and protection of God, or whether the name be regarded as descriptive of his nature and dignity, yet there was an “appropriateness” in applying it to him. It was fully expressive of the event of the incarnation.
Jerome supposes that the name, Immanuel, denotes nothing more than divine aid and protection.
Others have supposed, however, that the name must denote the assumption of our nature by God in the person of the Messiah, that is, that God became man. So Theodoret, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Lactantius, Chrysostom. Calvin, Rosenmuller, and others.
The true interpretation is, that no argument to prove that can be derived from the use of the name; but when the fact of the incarnation has been demonstrated from other sources, the “name is appropriately expressive of that event.” So it seems to be used by Matthew.
It may be quite true, that no argument can be founded on the bare name, Immanuel; yet that name, “in its connection here,” may certainly be regarded as a designed prediction of the incarnation of Christ. Such a design our author allows in the prophecy generally.
And in Nehemiah 11:7 there's a guy called Ithiel, whose name means "God has arrived."
Isaiah 9:6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end....”
According to Hebraists, the titles of Messiah are more accurately rendered thus:
- Wonderful Counsellor.
- Mighty God.
- Father of Eternity.
- Prince of Peace.
The New American Bible (a Catholic translation) says:
- For a child is born to us, a son is given us; upon his shoulder dominion rests. They name him Wonder-Counselor, God-Hero, Father-Forever, Prince of Peace.[/i]
It also contains an interesting footnote:
- A child: the Immanuel of Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 8:8; cf Isaiah 11:1, 2, 9. In Christian tradition and liturgy, this passage is used to refer to Christ.
Upon his shoulder dominion rests: authority.
Wonder-Counselor: remarkable for his wisdom and prudence.
God-Hero: a warrior and a defender of his people, like God himself.
Father-Forever: ever devoted to his people.
Prince of Peace: his reign will be characterized by peace.
Even more encouraging are the footnotes in the New English Translation - an evangelical publication.
In reference to "Wonderful Counsellor":
- Some have seen two titles here (“Wonderful” and “Counselor”). However, the pattern of the following three titles (each contains two elements) and the use of the roots alp and Juy together in Isa 25:1 (cf. ma hnwma qwjrm twxu alp tycu yk) and 28:29 (cf. hxu aylph) suggest otherwise.
The term Juwy could be taken as appositional (genitive or otherwise) of species (“a wonder, i.e., a wonder as a counselor”) or as a substantival participle for which alp provides the direct object (“one who counsels wonders”). Juwy is used as a royal title elsewhere (cf. Mic 4:9). Here it probably refers to the king’s ability to devise military strategy, as suggested by the context (cf. vv. 3-4 and the following title rwbg la[/i).
In Isa. 11:2 (also a description of this king) hxu[/font] is linked with hrwbg (the latter being typically used of military might, cf. BDB 150). Note also hmjlml hrwbgw hxu in Isa 36:5. alp is typically used of God (cf. however Lam 1:9).
Does this suggest the deity of the messianic ruler? The NT certainly teaches he is God, but did Isaiah necessarily have this in mind over 700 years before his birth?
Since Isa 11:2 points out that this king will receive the spirit of the Lord, which will enable him to counsel, it is possible to argue that the king’s counsel is “extraordinary” because it finds its source in the divine spirit. Thus this title does not necessarily suggest that the ruler is deity.
Sorry, the Hebrew doesn't carry over properly on this forum...
In reference to el gibbor:
- ...probably an attributive adjective (“mighty God”), though one might translate “God is a warrior” or “God is mighty.” Since this title is apparently used later (10:21, but cf. Hos. 3:5) for God, some have understood it as pointing to the king’s deity.
Others argue that the title portrays the king as God’s representative on the battlefield, whom God empowers in a supernatural way (see Hayes and Irvine, Isaiah, 181-82). The latter sense seems more likely in the original context of the prophecy.
Having read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king’s deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God’s representative on earth.
Ancient Near Eastern art and literature picture gods training kings for battle, bestowing special weapons, and intervening in battle. According to Egyptian propaganda, the Hittites described Rameses II as follows: “No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique.” (See M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:67)
Isa. 9:6 probably envisions a similar kind of response when friends and foes alike look at the Davidic king in full battle regalia. When the king’s enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself.
In reference to "Everlasting Father":
- This title must not be taken in an anachronistic Trinitarian sense. (To do so would be theologically problematic, for the “Son” is the messianic king and is distinct in his person from God the “Father.”) Rather, in its original context the title pictures the king as the protector of his people. For a similar use of “father” see Isa 22:21 and Job 29:16.
This figurative, idiomatic use of “father” is not limited to the Bible. In a Phoenician inscription (ca. 850-800 b.c.) the ruler Kilamuwa declares: “To some I was a father, to others I was a mother.” In another inscription (ca. 800 b.c.) the ruler Azitawadda boasts that the god Baal made him “a father and a mother” to his people. (See J. Pritchard, ANET, 499-500.)
The use of “everlasting” might suggest the deity of the king, but Isaiah and his audience may have understood the term as royal hyperbole emphasizing the king’s long reign or enduring dynasty (for examples of such hyperbolic language used of the Davidic king, see 1 Kgs 1:31; Pss 21:4-6; 61:6-7; 72:5, 17).
The New Testament indicates that the hyperbolic language (as in the case of the title “Mighty God”) is literally realized in the ultimate fulfillment of the prophecy, for Jesus will rule eternally.
Romans 9:6 “Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen”
Click here.
Could you explain the above?
Done and dusted. 8)
Philippians 2:5-8 “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.”
Click here.
Colossians 1:15-16 “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible....”
Click here.
I will leave you with this;
Colossians 2:8-10 “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power.”
Thanks, I'll keep an eye out for those traditions of men!
Oh yeah, and... click here. 8)
| View Parent Message View dfilename Return Home |