First I am an atheist. However, why do people worship Christ and treat this person as the messiah, when the bible said the messiah would be born in the year 743 b.c. during the reign of King Ahaz?
Doesn’t this rule out this Christ person, if one is supposed to go by what is written in the x-ian bible?
Uh, not saying I don’t believe you, but can you give us a scripture reference that says this? As in Book, chapter, and verse?
Oh my God!! An error of logic in the Bible? You must be mistaken. If not, it must be a unique exception.
I don’t allow that horror book in my house, but will look up the ‘scripture’ and get back to you.
I’m not quite an athiest. I believe that there may be higher life forms that we may no better comprehend than ants really know what we are. I do not know if they relly want to be worshipped.
Calling the Bible a “horror book,” is accurate, but the Bible is an ancient text during an ancient time. Settlements got wiped out back then (as now in areas).
It was a brutal time.
The new testament is somewhat kinder than the old. This is largely because civilization had advanced, Rome being the most advanced culture of the time west of China.
Virtually every ancient text is brutal. GRimm fairy tales in their early publickations were brutal. I don’t hold that against the majority of religious folks. I do hold it against those who still feel it is relevant at this time.
I’m rambling. The Bible is history, anthropology, theology, mythology, and coming from a non-christian, a wonderful book.
I’d like to see a cite for that also. I’ve done a quick search and can’t find anything relating King Ahaz to the birth of Jesus.
You may think the Bible is a “Horror Book”, but it’s my book.
The quote is from the King James Version Is 7:14.
The author also explains how virgin got confused with young woman, that had the Hebrew meant to say virgin, it would have used bethulah, which means virgin.
Oh, I don’t have a problem with anyone else wanting to believe in that old stuff.
I will object, when I am serving someone dinner which I have bought and cooked, and the idiot prepares to say a prayer thanking god for the meal. There was no god involved, it was my effort, yet some fairy tale gets the thanks.
Believe away, if it makes you feel better.
Realize that many people beleive that the “fairy tale” is as true as you or I. Sure, I give thanks before some meals, but I ALWAYS thank the preparer. I just think that God plays an important part my everyday life, so the big G gets props too. 
But I could be wrong, but I dont think I am.
Well, in my house, I am god.
I enjoyed this book by Randy Callahan who sets out some - to me - impressive reasoning.
Never did get that bit about why on earth one should worship a Human Sacrifice.
Loathsome idea.
HEY! Don’t rank on the Bible. They couldn’t print it if it wasn’t true, just like the National Enquirer. And don’t call it a fairy tale. It’s much too Grimm for that!
Hi. Christ wasn’t Jesus’ last name. The word Christ is from the Greek for ‘anointed one’, and has the same meaning as the Hebrew word Meshiach, or Messiah. If you want to refer to Jesus derogatorily, just call him Jesus.
However, I don’t want to encourage religion bashing. It’s fine that you’re not a Christian - heck, neither am I - but respect for the beliefs of others is requested, please. It’s possible to discuss this interesting topic in an inoffensive manner.
Thanks.
Most christians believe that jesus was born in Spetember, a more opportune time, weather-wise, for the spheherds to be out in the fields, watching the flock.
They may have changed it to Dec. 24, to coincide with some Saturnalia celebration and co-opt it.
I’m all for debate, not at all for bashing.
I think you are confusing your sources here. Isaiah 7:14 is a verse used by many Christians as support for their idea that Jesus was the messiah. And yes, the word used in Hebrew is not virgin, but young woman. However, I don’t believe this is considered a messianic prophecy verse in Judaism. Mainly because they read it in context.
And many other translations of the Bible (NIV,NAS,NKJ,LB) either list the word as “young woman” or as “virgin” but with a footnote as “young maiden”.
I believe the writers of the NT were using the Greek Septugant (sp?), which lists the Isaiah verse as virgin.
Ahh, the problems with translations and building theologies off of them . . .
Both Easter and Christmas were celebrations moved around pagan holidays to not only take the focus off the pagan celebrations, but in hopes of converting the pagans as well. But the Pagans didn’t care, as long as there was a party!
umm, you know writers as intelligent & erudite as Issac Asimov have had MANY good things to say about the Bible, despite being Secular Humanists, or Atheists.
And “7:14” is meaningless without a “Book”, eg Genesis. Perhaps you are talking about Isaiah 7;14, ie “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”? Which is taken by many Christians to refer to JC, and by many Jews to refer to a Messiah yet-to-come. It certainly was NOT refering to King Ahaz, and it is doubtful it was refering to Ahaz’s son, Hezekiah, who was born in 745BC. Some Biblical scholars, seeking a mundane answer, beleive Isaiah was referring to his own son, yet to be born, here. However, the verse may well refer to a future Messiah. Yes, the Hebrew word used here can be translated as “young woman”, instaed of “bethulah” which literally means “virgin”, but of course a young woman can very well be a virgin, and there are some other verses which could mean exactly that. There are many other Messianic verses in Isaiah, and some believe that they perhaps only refered to Hezekiah, but the mass of Biblical experts believe they refer to an “ideal future King, a Messiah”.
Lastly, the date of 743BC is not in any Bible- think about it.
And, lastly, Lindsay, before you go attacking something like the Bible, especially here in GD/SDMB, you should really know SOMETHING about it. :rolleyes:
Sorry Daniel, but you’re wrong on this one…
Jews do not interpret this verse as referring to a messiah at all. It does not fit in with the context of the chapter.
The chapter describes how Ahaz is upset because he’s about to be attacked by two different armies. Isaiah says not to worry, everything’s going to work out OK. “Want a sign?,” says Isaiah, "behold the young woman shall…
Now, this verse obviously refers to a child that was going to be born shortly. After all, what comfort could Ahaz find in a sign that he would not see and would not be fulfilled for centuries (or millenia, if you think that Jews apply this verse to a messiah)?
Jewish commentators are split on the subject of whether this refers to Hezkiah (Ahaz’s son) or Isaiah’s own son. But Jews do not think it refers to a messiah at all.
Zev Steinhardt
Cool. It’s late at night, and i’m sitting here, brushing up on Middle Eastern Politics, circa the mid 700’s BC. What fun.
But anyway, the verse in question refers to the fact that Isaiah would be marrying one soon. By the time that child was 12, Damascus would fall to Assyria (732) and Israel would fall (722). Ahaz was trusting man rather than God, so Isaiah told him in about 735 BC, that Aram (Syria, Damascus) would fall, then Ephriam (the other 10 tribes of Israel. To add into the bargan, Egypt would fight with Assyria as well (701).
This isn’t the virgin that would later bear Christ, you are right about that. Isaiah married one, and had a son. By the time the kid was 12, two nations would have fallen, and Ahaz would realise that putting your faith in treacherous kings was a waste of time.
There isn’t enough caffiene to make this any plainer. Hope this helps.
BTW – I highly recommend a Ryrie Study Bible. Great work.
Zev: I am pretty sure that several of the Prophesies in Isaiah are thought to refer to the Jewish Messiah, such as Isa.9 & Isa. 11. Since I knew that Matthew took many of the Jewish Messianic Prophesies and showed how they refered to JC, I assumed that this was one of them. Apparently it was thought to be so by the Alexandrian Jews of the 1st century, (note the Greek translation of Isaiah has “virgin” rather than “young woman”*), and was thought by that school to be another Messianic Prophesy of Isaiah. However, remember my knowledge is mostly based upon a Christian interpretation, not a Jewish one. I will concede you as the expert here, and agree that that verse is (no longer?) thought of as a Jewish Messianic Prophesy.
The book I read is Bible Prophecy; Failure or Fulfillment, and the chapter is #5 ‘do old testament prophecies fortell the life of Jesus’.
What is with the name Jesus, isn’t that a Spanish name?
Is 7:14 ends with ‘and shall call his name Immanuel’, and Tim Callahan says there is nothing that would lead anyone to think that Isaiah was speaking of anything but his own time, and hence the messiah would be born during the reign of King Ahaz, 742 B.C.E. which is 700 years before the birth of Christ, assuming of course that there was such a person.