Image from www.spiritualresearchfoundation.org
bless you and your family abundantly!
Ricky Samson
27-year Life Coach, helping others know the true God
Skype: rickysamson
social: http://tsu.co/freedomgate
——————————————
Image from www.missionsandiego.org
I was born 1948 and raised a Roman Catholic, believing in the virgin birth of a God-man, Jesus Christ, who died and rose again from the dead to pay the penalty of my sins. I graduated from the Ateneo de Manila University which was handled by the Jesuits and we venerated and prayed to Mary the “Mother of God”. To this day, I remember Ateneo’s graduation song chorus:
Image from wallpaper4god.com
Believing the Bible and becoming born again was better than being Roman Catholic because Catholics followed the words of men rather than the words of God as written in the bible. The belief that the Bible was the inerrant word of God was the “cornerstone” of my new found faith.
- I was the only one who left his job to “attend” to the administration of the church, which was growing rapidly.
- I was the one who put together the “training manuals” of the church.
- I had studied the “cell group” concept in Singapore and Korea, which became the backbone of the church, which has since grown to over 20,000 people.
Image from www.clipartof.com
My “conversion” story reminds me of a story about a prince who was walking through the forest one day and he saw something very “surprising” … The Prince saw an arrow that had hit the center of a bull’s eye painted on a tree. What accuracy, this prince thought. And then the prince saw another tree, where there was another arrow right at the center of a bull’s eye. Amazing accuracy! After several more bull’s eye on a tree, the Prince saw a fat man under one of the trees holding his bow. The Prince asked him, “are you the one who shot these arrows directly to the bull’s eye in all these trees?” The man replied “Yes I was the one who shot these arrows”. Wow! You’re really a great archer! How do you do it? What’s your secret? The man replied “If you really want to know, the secret of hitting the bull’s eye perfectly is to shoot the arrow first and then draw the bull’s eye around the arrow!”
That, in a way, is how they made me believe that I should be “born again”. They shot the arrow first then painted a story about the accuracy of the Bible because it is God’s word. If it is God’s word, then I should believe it.
In 2000, I was appointed to the position of Chairman of the Board of OMF Literature, which is the largest publisher for Christian books in the Philippines. It was here that my “perspective” began to expand and I began to ask more and more questions about the foundations of my belief. I “attended” two other Christian churches, two years each, to study their teachings and how these stacked up with what we had taught in our church.
Image from amazon.com
At that time, Philip Yancey authored two books which highly stimulated more questions.
Billy Graham said of the author: “There is no writer in the evangelical world that I admire and appreciate more.”
Amazon.com book review says: Many Christians tend to ignore the Old Testament or dismiss it as impenetrable and obscure. Philip Yancey’s combination of scholarship and insight brings new light to old material and stimulates new discussion, thought, and further study.
Amazon.com writes: Philip Yancey helps reveal what two thousand years of history covered up. What happens when a respected Christian journalist decides to put his preconceptions aside and take a long look at the Jesus described in the Gospels? How does the Jesus of the New Testament compare to the “new, rediscovered” Jesus—or even the Jesus we think we know so well? Philip Yancey offers a new and different perspective on the life of Christ and his work—his teachings, his miracles, his death and resurrection—and ultimately, who he was and why he came.
Philip Yancey’s books asks that we REMOVE OUR PRE-CONCEPTIONS and take a new OBJECTIVE look at Scripture, especially the Old Testament. He allows us to see how the bull’s eye was PAINTED AFTER THE ARROW WAS SHOT!
We have two options at this point:
1] Close our minds and stay with our preconceived doctrines, refusing any NEW LIGHT in our dark world; or
2] Take a closer, objective look at what the Scripture says and ask fundamental questions about our “beliefs” to diligently seek TRUTH.
Image from savymama.com
If you chose option 2, then go on this journey with me.
This is the first part, and there will be about three or four other parts.
- Our investigation will follow the INDUCTIVE METHOD which means we look at all the facts and THEN make a conclusion AFTER we have studied the facts.
- The opposite method is the DEDUCTIVE method where we have our preconceived conclusions already and we look for verses to support our conclusions.
Point #1 — The Background
Modern Christianity did not come out of thin air. It has its roots in Judaism, which is based on the Hebrew Scriptures called TaNaK. The concept of a “messiah” is a Jewish concept. Even the Samaritan woman (half Jew) was expecting a “messiah” to come:
25 The woman said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming” (who is called Christ). “When He comes, He will tell us all things.”
26 Jesus said to her, “I who speak to you am He.”
[John 4:25-26/NKJV 25]
How did the “founders” of Christianity paint a perfect bull’s eye around their arrow?
- They took a Jew, Jesus, and “fit” him into the role of the Messiah of the Jews.
- They created a new book called the New Testament where they littered Scripture verses to “prove” that Jesus “fulfilled” the requirements of the Jewish Messiah.
Notice how the first book of the New Testament is Matthew. This is not the earliest book written. Earliest were —
Paul’s epistles –>50 AD;
Mark–>60 AD;
Matthew–>70 AD;
Luke–>80 AD;
John–>100 AD.
Why was Matthew put first ahead of Mark?
A good guess would be because:
1] Matthew was one of the original apostles. Mark and Luke were not among the 12 apostles. (Most Christians are even surprised at this fact.)
2] Matthew starts his gospel with a genealogy of Jesus to prove that Jesus was a direct descendant of Abraham and King David. This is a good start to link Jesus to the Jewish Patriarchs. Instead of just telling the story of Jesus, Matthew goes out of his way to show that the things that happened in Jesus’ life were but a “FULFILLMENT” of the Jewish Scriptures. Matthew therefore PAINTS a bull’s eye around the story of Jesus using the Jewish Scriptures.
However, in order for this painting to suit their needs perfectly, the writer had to use some of these Jewish Scriptures and TAKE THEM OUT OF CONTEXTto make it “fit” their story.
Here is an example about the birth of Jesus:
13 Now when they {magi} had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt,
15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, ”OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON.”
[Matthew 2:13-15/NKJV]
At first glance, this associates Jesus as fulfilling the words spoken by God through the Jewish “prophets”. It is important to point out at this stage that Matthew and ALL the New Testament writers AGREE that the words of the prophets in the Jewish Scriptures were “spoken by God.”
Where does Matthew quote this from?
“When Israel was a child, I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. [Hosea 11:1NKJV]
What does it mean that Matthew has taken this verse out of context?
First, Matthew does not quote the entire verse. If Matthew had quoted the entire verse rather than just a portion of the verse, it would be very clear to his readers that this verse was NOT REFERRING TO JESUS, but rather to Israel! If we do not quote the verse in context, we can make the Scriptures prove anything.
One of my favorite examples of taking a verse out of context is — Did you know that it is written in the Scriptures that “there is no God”? Yes it is and here is the proof:
To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David.
“There is no God.” [Psalms 14:1/ NKJV]
But if I quote the whole verse, then I get to know the real truth better:
To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David.
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.
[Psalms 14:1/ NKJV]
The Scripture does not teach that “there is no God.” It is the FOOL who says there is no God!
A small point, but notice that according to Matthew Jesus went INTO EGYPT. The prophet Hosea says Israel was called OUT of Egypt. Yes the prophet Hosea says that YHWH called Israel “My son”! In several other places, Scripture calls the nation of Israel “My Son,” “My First Born”:
22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, “Thus says the LORD [YHWH]: ‘Israel is My son, My firstborn.
23 So I say to you, let My son go that he may serve Me. But if you refuse to let him go, indeed I will kill your son, your firstborn.”[Exodus 4:22-23/NKJV].
For all the firstborn among the children of Israel are Mine, both man and beast; on the day that I struck all the firstborn in the land of Egypt I sanctified them to Myself [Numbers 8:17/NKJV]
Aside from taking verses out of context, a second technique that is used to draw a perfect bull’s eye around the arrow is this:
21 Then he arose, took the young Child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel.
22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea instead of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. And being warned by God in a dream, he turned aside into the region of Galilee.
23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, “He shall be called a Nazarene.”
[Matthew 2:21-23/NKJV]
Where is this taken from? Normally in translations with cross-reference you will see where the text is quoted from. In this case, you will not see it because this quotation is NOT FOUND IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES!
If you can’t find a verse, what do you do to paint the perfect bull’s eye? YOU INVENT ONE! Matthew in effect was lying! Inventing a “verse” out of thin air is their second technique to draw a perfect bull’s eye around their arrow.
There is a THIRD TECHNIQUE which is more difficult to detect unless you know the Hebrew language well …
For dogs have surrounded Me; The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me. They pierced My hands and My feet;
[Psalms 22:16/NKJV]
Who is this verse talking about? Whose hands and feet have been pierced? Every ”Christian” would say Jesus, of course. We have painted the bull’s eye around the arrow.
Now the problem is NOT CONTEXT anymore. is a DELIBERATE MIS-TRANSLATION of the Hebrew text. The Hebrew word translated as “pierced” is: From Strong’s Concordance H738 אריה ארי ‘ărı̂y ‘aryêh ar-ee’ , ar-yay’ From H717 (in the sense of violence); a lion: – (young) lion, + pierce [from the margin]. From Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew definitions ארי / אריה ‘ărı̂y / ‘aryêh B-D-B Definition: 1) lion 1a) pictures or images of lions. The Jewish Publication Society [JPS] and the Good News Bible [GNB] do not translate the word as “pierced”:
[JPS] For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.
[GNB] An evil gang is around me; like a pack of dogs they close in on me; they tear at my hands and feet.
There are 80 instances when this Hebrew word ארי / אריה is used in Scripture — Every time it is translated by the christian translators as LION EXCEPT in this ONE verse they changed it to PIERCED. I wonder why?? In fact, in the very same Psalm 22 in verses 13 and 21, it is translated correctly as “lion” both times!
They gape at Me with their mouths, Like a raging and roaring lion.
[Psalms 22:13/NKJV]
Save Me from the lion’s mouth And from the horns of the wild oxen! You have answered Me.
[Psalms 22:21/NKJV]
So to summarize the “techniques” used by whoever is manipulating the New Testament to paint the “right” picture around Jesus:
1] Quote verses out of context.
2] Invent verses that are not in Scripture.
3] Deliberately mis-translate Hebrew words to suit their “painting” of a right picture of Jesus.
Here is a FOURTH TECHNIQUE, which is used by Paul: Say it is “according to scripture” but do not quote any verse:
1 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand,
2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4) and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.
[1 Corinthians 15:1-4/NKJV]
22 Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come —
23 that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”
[Acts 26:22-23/NKJV]
Most of us have “searched” through the Torah (Books written by Moses) and the Prophets, and we have not seen what Paul is talking about. There is no mention about a messiah who will suffer, then rise from the dead and proclaim light to the Jews and Gentiles. In fact, an objective investigation will reveal that the Scriptures do not focus on the qualities of the “messiah” and what will happen to this messiah but rather, the Scripture describes what will happen in the world when the messiah comes. We will go into a lot of detail about the messiah and the prophecies of the end times in part 3.
CHAPTER 2 – The “virgin” birth of Jesus
All scholars agree that the New Testament paints Jesus as being born of a “virgin.” This is a “staggering” truth, if it is true, and therefore one would think that it would have occupied a prominent space in the New Testament. But this “virgin birth” is only found in 2 books: Matthew and Luke.
20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins.”
22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying:
23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD, AND BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL” which is translated, “God with us.”
[Matthew 1:20-23/NKJV]
Where did Matthew get this verse from?
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign:
Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son,
and shall call His name Immanuel.
[Isaiah 7:14/NKJV]
Let us check context and history to see if this verse COULD BE REFERRING TO JESUS. Let’s read the context :
1 During the reign of Ahaz (the son of Jotham and grandson of Uzziah), Jerusalem was attacked by King Rezin of Syria and King Pekah of Israel (the son of Remaliah). But it was not taken; the city stood.
2 However, when the news came to the royal court, “Syria is allied with Israel against us!” the hearts of the king and his people trembled with fear as the trees of a forest shake in a storm.
3 Then the Lord said to Isaiah, “Go out to meet King Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub, your son. You will find him at the end of the aqueduct that leads from Gihon Spring to the upper reservoir, near the road that leads down to the bleaching field.
4 Tell him to quit worrying. Tell him he needn’t be frightened by the fierce anger of those two has-beens, Rezin and Pekah.
5 Yes, the kings of Syria and Israel are coming against you. “They say,
6 ‘ We will invade Judah and throw her people into panic. Then we’ll fight our way into Jerusalem and install the son of Tabeel as their king.’
7 “But the Lord God says: This plan will not succeed,
8 for Damascus will remain the capital of Syria alone, and King Rezin’s kingdom will not increase its boundaries. And within sixty-five years Ephraim, too, will be crushed and broken.
9 Samaria is the capital of Ephraim alone, and King Pekah’s power will not increase. You don’t believe me? If you want me to protect you, you must learn to believe what I say.”
10
Not long after this, the Lord sent this further message to King Ahaz: 11 “Ask me for a sign, Ahaz, to prove that I will indeed crush your enemies as I have said. Ask anything you like, in heaven or on earth.” 12 But the king refused. “No, ” he said, “I’ll not bother the Lord with anything like that.”
13 Then Isaiah said: O House of David, you aren’t satisfied to exhaust my patience; you exhaust the Lord’s as well!
14 All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign—a child shall be born to a virgin! And she shall call him Immanuel (meaning, “God is with us”).
15-16 By the time this child is weaned and knows right from wrong, the two kings you fear so much—the kings of Israel and Syria*—will both be dead.*
[Isaiah 7:1-13 … In Good News Bible/GNB, New King James/NKJ, Living Bible/TLB]
1] Who are the main characters? Who is Ahaz? Who are the 2 Kings?
2] What is Chapter 7 about?
3] To whom was the “sign” to be given to?
4] What is the prophecy of YHWH about the 2 Kings who were attacking Judah?
Point #1:
It must have been a CONTEMPORARY SIGN for King Ahaz – something that would happen during the time of the reign of King Ahaz — rather than something that would happen 700 years later. Verse 15-16 says clearly that this boy will GROW UP but before he does, these enemies will be destroyed. Even before this boy is grown, the promise of YHWH associated with that sign would already be fulfilled! The focus of the “sign” was not whether it would be a virgin birth but on the fact that before the child became fully grown, the promise of YHWH would be fulfilled! The child could not have been Jesus who was born 700 years later, because Ahaz would have been dead by then…
Point #2
The Word “virgin” is a mistranslation Let’s put several translations together so we can see if there are any differences:
Isaiah 7:1-13 … In Good News Bible, New King James, Living Bible: Isaiah 7 Living Bible (TLB)
NKJV: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
GNB: Well then, the Lord himself will give you a sign: a young woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him ‘Immanuel.’
TLB: All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign— a child shall be born to a virgin!
Isaiah 7:14 [JPS] Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Note that the Good News and the Jewish Publication do not translate the word as “virgin” but as “young woman.”
Hebrew Word Study: “virgin” Strong’s H5959 עלמה ‛almâh al-maw’ Feminine of H5958; a lass (as veiled or private): translated in KJV as “damsel” , “maid” , virgin”. BDBDefinition:עלמה ‛almâh 1) virgin, young woman 1a) of marriageable age 1b) maid or newly married Part of Speech: noun feminine Hebrew word for “virgin” is “bethulah” not “almah.”
It is interesting that the Living Bible has a footnote about their translation of Isaiah 7:14:
1. Isaiah 7:14 a child shall be born to a virgin.
The controversial Hebrew word used here sometimes means “virgin” and sometimes “young woman.” Its immediate use here refers to Isaiah’s young wife and her newborn son (8:1-4). This, of course, was not a virgin birth. God’s sign was that before this child was old enough to talk (v. 4), the two invading kings would be destroyed.
However, the Gospel of Matthew (1:23) tells us that there was a further fulfillment of this prophecy, in that a virgin (Mary) conceived and bore a son, Immanuel, the Christ. We have therefore properly used this higher meaning, “virgin, ” in v. 14, as otherwise the Matthew account loses its significance.
What the translator is saying is that his translation of Isaiah 7:14 is INFLUENCED strongly by the verse in Matthew which was written thousand years later! Here is another example of a TRANSLATOR painting the bull’s eye where the arrow is! Would it not be better to translate the Hebrew word correctly as a “young woman” rather than a “virgin” since the context clearly demands it to be translated as “young woman”? Then they could put “virgin” in the footnote!
The Hebrew word is not “controversial”! It only becomes “controversial” when one tries to paint the bull’s eye over the arrow!
Point #3 – Who is this son of a “almah” in Isaiah 7:14
Refer to the son of Isaiah as per next chapter … Isaiah 8:1-4/NKJV
1 Moreover the LORD said to me, “Take a large scroll, and write on it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz.
2 And I will take for Myself faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.”
3 Then I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. Then the LORD said to me, “Call his name Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz; 4 for before the child shall have knowledge to cry ‘My father’ and ‘My mother, ‘ the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be taken away before the king of Assyria.”
a] Footnote of Living Bible agrees:
Its immediate use here refers to Isaiah’s young wife and her newborn son (8:1-4). This, of course, was not a virgin birth. God’s sign was that before this child was old enough to talk (v. 4), the two invading kings would be destroyed.
b] Vine’s Expository dictionary agrees: The child immediately in view was the son of the prophet and his wife (cf. Isa_8:3) who served as a sign to Ahaz that his enemies would be defeated by God.
c] JFB (Jamieson, Fausset, Brown) also agrees: Isaiah 8:3 prophetess — perhaps the same as the “virgin” (Isa_7:14), in the interim married as Isaiah’s second wife: this is in the primary and temporary sense. Immanuel is even in this sense distinct from Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Thus nineteen months at least intervene from the prophecy (Isa_7:14), nine before the birth of Immanuel, and ten from that time to the birth of Maher-shalal-hash-baz: adding eleven or twelve months before the latter could cry, “Father” (Isa_8:4), we have about three years in all, agreeing with Isa_7:15, Isa_7:16.
There is another interesting discovery when one studies the Hebrew text: Some may have noticed that the majority of translations use the definite article “THE VIRGIN”
[NKJV] Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
[MKJV] So, the Lord Himself shall give you a sign. Behold, the virgin will conceive and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel.
[LTV] So, The Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold! The virgin will conceive and will bring forth a son; and she shall call His name Immanuel.
[NIV] Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
[JPS] Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
The article, “the” [Ha Almah], indicates a definite person known to both the speaker and his hearers; so Isaiah and King Ahaz both knew who this “young woman” was. It was, as we know, the wife of Isaiah. Therefore as Isaiah 8:3 says: Then I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. It was not a virgin birth.
The translator of the Living Bible and other commentators suggest that “there was a further fulfillment of this prophecy, in that a virgin (Mary) conceived and bore a son, Immanuel, the Christ.” In other words, they see that the prophecy was fulfilled in the time of King Ahaz but they interpret the verse in Matthew as a “further fulfillment” of this prophecy. If there were a further fulfilment, then would it not be logical to conclude that since the first fulfilment is not of a “virgin,” then the further fulfilment would also not be of a “virgin.” Also if there were a “further fulfilment” then everything would be fulfilled by the time Jesus is 3 years old as was the case in the first fulfilment!
Point #4 -Who is the real “sign” being referred to in Isaiah 7:14
Isaiah and his son(s) were the SIGNS for Judah that YHWH would keep His promise to protect Judah:
[Isaiah 8:17-19/NKJV]
17 And I will wait on the LORD, Who hides His face from the house of Jacob; And I will hope in Him.
18 Here am I and the children whom the LORD has given me! We are for signs and wonders in Israel From the LORD of hosts, Who dwells in Mount Zion.
19 And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter, ” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living?
The sign was given and the 2 Kings that were trying to overcome Ahaz were killed …
2 Kings 16:1-6/NKJV
1 In the seventeenth year of Pekah the son of Remaliah, Ahaz the son of Jotham, king of Judah, began to reign.
2 Ahaz was twenty years old when he became king, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem; and he did not do what was right in the sight of the LORD his God, as his father David had done.
3 But he walked in the way of the kings of Israel; indeed he made his son pass through the fire, according to the abominations of the nations whom the LORD had cast out from before the children of Israel.
4 And he sacrificed and burned incense on the high places, on the hills, and under every green tree.
5 Then Rezin king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, came up to Jerusalem to make war; and they besieged Ahaz but could not overcome him.
6 At that time Rezin king of Syria captured Elath for Syria, and drove the men of Judah from Elath. Then the Edomites went to Elath, and dwell there to this day.
2 Kings 15:29-30 /NKJV
29 In the days of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, Abel Beth Maachah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali; and he carried them captive to Assyria.
30 Then Hoshea the son of Elah led a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and struck and killed him; so he reigned in his place in the twentieth year of Jotham the son of Uzziah.
2 Kings 16:8-9/NKJV
8 And Ahaz took the silver and gold that was found in the house of the LORD, and in the treasuries of the king’s house, and sent it as a present to the king of Assyria.
9 So the king of Assyria heeded him; for the king of Assyria went up against Damascus and took it, carried its people captive to Kir, and killed Rezin.
Point #5– A “virgin” cannot be the sign!
Think about a “sign” – What is the PROBLEM of using a “virgin” as a “sign”?
Story to make the point:
Street signs were being blown away in BF Homes Paranaque because of the storm “Ondoy”. One councilor suggested that they BURY all the signs under ground so that it would be protected from the storm — the council laughed! Why ? Signs are not signs if no one can see them.
How can you see if someone is a virgin?
What was the First SIGN in Scripture?
Genesis 1:14 /JPS And God said: ‘Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years;
What was the Second SIGN in Scripture?
Genesis 9:12-17/NKJV
12 And God said: “This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:
13 I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the earth.
Image from www.lds.org
14 It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud;
15 and I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh.
16 The rainbow shall be in the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.”
17 And God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth.”
Sun, Moon, Stars, Rainbows, are not MIRACLES, they are natural but ‘a sign’ from YHWH. Virgin birth can be a “miracle” but it cannot be a sign because it cannot be seen by men!
Point #6 – Mary never called Jesus Immanuel!
The name Immanuel is not really used for Isaiah’s son but it was rather used for JUDAH!
Isaiah 8:5-10/JPS
5 And the LORD spoke unto me yet again, saying:
6 Forasmuch as this people hath refused the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoiceth with Rezin and Remaliah’s son;
7 Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the River, mighty and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory; and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks;
8 And he shall sweep through Judah overflowing as he passeth through he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.
9 Make an uproar, O ye peoples, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.
10 Take counsel together, and it shall be brought to nought; speak the word, and it shall not stand; for God is with us.
Note that in Isaiah 7:14, it is the “almah” [young woman] that will call her son Immanuel. I n Matthew, it is “THEY” will call him Immanuel. Nowhere is Jesus called Immanuel by Mary.
Why did Matthew try to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin? Only 2 out of 4 gospels mention it.
Point #7 – There is an incompatibility between a virgin birth and the messiah coming from the lineage of King David.
Here is a thought from John D. Keyser:
“Roman Catholicism has taught the doctrine of perpetual virginity — that Mary lived, gave birth to the Messiah, and remained a virgin throughout her entire life. Islam also teaches that Mary was a virgin when she conceived the Messiah. Some of the early leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — by far the largest of the Mormon denominations — taught that YEHOVAH God has a physical body, and that He came down to earth, engaged in sexual intercourse with Mary, and conceived the Messiah. However, this was never made an official church teaching and is rarely heard of today, with the exception of statements by anti-Mormon groups who often claim that YEHOVAH God engaging in sexual intercourse with Mary is current LDS Church teaching. However, there is an incompatibility between belief in the virgin birth and the messiahship of Yeshua:
1) The virgin birth says the actual father of Yeshua was the holy spirit.
2) Numerous places in the Hebrew Scriptures state that the coming messiah was to be of the House of David.
Therefore:
1) If Yeshua is the Messiah, then he could not have been born of a virgin; he would have had to have a father who was of the House of David, and
2) If Yeshua was born of a virgin, then he could not have been the messiah, because his father — the holy spirit — was not a human descendant of the House of David.
Most modern educated theologians have generally rejected the virgin birth. They regard it as a religious myth that was added to Christian belief in the late first century A.D. and was triggered by a Greek mistranslation of the book of Isaiah from the original Hebrew. Its purpose was to make Christianity more competitive with contemporary pagan religions in the Mediterranean region, most of whom featured their founder having been born of a virgin. Without the claim of a virgin birth, many believe it to be unclear whether “Christianity” could have survived.”
Point #8 – What is clear is that history reveals that virtually all pagan religions had a “virgin” birth as a key part of their beliefs.
We can therefore theorize that Because the Jews were rejecting Jesus, Matthew was forced to do this. The founders of “christianity” were forced to go to the Gentiles.
It is interesting that Paul, who wrote the majority of the New Testament, and whose writings came ahead of Matthew and Luke, NEVER even mentions the virgin birth!
But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, Paul could have easily said virgin here but he said “a woman.
[Galatians 4:4 NKJV]
It is logical that Gentiles would only embrace a “new” religion if it resembled their religion where their Gods were born of a virgin … so to be “competitive,” a virgin birth concept was also created for christianity.
In summary, when all the “facts of history” are laid together to form a “whole picture” , I (Ricky Samson) get to conclude that all of these religions were indeed very similar.
Appendix “A” shows a long list of different religions which had a “virgin” birth as their cornerstone belief. It also shows that most of the storyline of the birth of Yeshua were a direct lift from Buddhist writings.
The ONLY EXCEPTION to this “virgin birth” concept was the Jewish Scripture.
The Jewish scripture do not propagate a belief in a “mother and son” who came out of a Union with the spirit of God.
These scriptures focus only on one person – YHWH – and we are asked to Love YHWH and to Trust in YHWH with all our heart, soul, strength. In fact, the Torah CONDEMNS the co-habitation of spirit beings (angels) with human women:
1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives, whomsoever they chose.
3 And the LORD said: ‘My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.’
4 The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.
5 And the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
[Genesis 6:1-5/JPS]
As an aside, ask yourself: Who wrote the book of Matthew? Luke? If you answer Matthew or Luke, where is this based upon? It is not stated in the gospels who wrote these books. Like the book of Hebrews we do not know who the human authors were. It is simply based on Roman Catholic tradition!
Assignment:
So as we close this first part, it is my prayer that all of us will examine the verses cited above and meditate on them. Ask yourself these questions:
1] Is Matthew quoting Scripture verses accurately? If not, then what would be the reason for this?
2] If Matthew is going out of his way to QUOTE Scriptures to make sure that his readers believe that the events in Jesus’ life are a “fulfillment of scripture,” then what should we think of the Scriptures?
3] Can we agree with Matthew that what the Prophets wrote were “spoken” by God?
If yes, then why do we call Scriptures “Old Testament” in the first place? Can God’s words be “old” in the sense of it no longer being in effect? Jesus says in Matthew 5:17-19/NKJV:
17 Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.
18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
4] We can also ask the question Philip Yancey asked, what bible did Jesus read?
I have asked this question to many christians and they do not have an answer. The truth is Jesus, and all the people in the first century ONLY READ THE SCRIPTURES WHAT WE NOW CALL THE “OLD TESTAMENT.” The New Testament was not yet written at that time. There is not even a hint from Jesus or his apostles that a “new Testament” was going to come.
5] Can we agree that the Hebrew Scriptures should be the STANDARD by which we evaluate what is TRUTH?
In the book of Acts, which is the history of the church after the death of Jesus, it is clear that the ordinary believers at that time followed the lead of the Apostles and used the Hebrew Scriptures as their standard for checking the truth. Acts 17:10-11 NKJV:
10 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.
Acts 17:11GNB
11 The people there were more open-minded than the people in Thessalonica. They listened to the message with great eagerness, and every day they studied the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was really true.
The word Scriptures in the above verse can only mean The Hebrew Scriptures since the New Testament were not yet written at that time.
The Hebrew Scripture, especially the Torah, are the real foundations of truth and that is why meditating on them day and night is the formula YHWH gives for us to be successful in any endeavor.
What wisdom do we have if we dismiss the Hebrew Scriptures as “old” and no longer in effect? Maybe that is one of the reasons we have so many problems.
Joshua 1:7-8 /NKJV
7 Only be strong and very courageous, that you may observe to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may prosper wherever you go.
8 This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success.
Psalms 1:1-3/NKJV
1 Blessed is the man Who walks not in the counsel of the ungodly, Nor stands in the path of sinners, Nor sits in the seat of the scornful;
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD, And in His law he meditates day and night.
3 He shall be like a tree Planted by the rivers of water, That brings forth its fruit in its season, Whose leaf also shall not wither; And whatever he does shall prosper.
I pray YHWH will open the eyes of our hearts that we may see the TRUTH of YHWH and it will set us free! If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Coach Ricky Samson email — help.others.ras@gmail.com
——————————–
APPENDIX “A” — From Google:
There is very, very little that is “original” in Christianity. There were many older religions that had virgin births, wise men, crucifixions, miracles, resurrections and the like, long before Christianity came along.
Image from www.stephenjardent.com “Christ the copcat, Mithras retold?”
Take Mithraism for example. It was a religion followed by the Romans just before Christianity came along and it contained the following:
Virgin Birth. Born in either a stable or a cave.
Visited by wise men bringing Frankincense, gold and myhrr.
Twelve Disciples.
Last Supper
Died on a cross and ressurected.
Followers ate the “flesh” and drank the “blood” of Mithras.
Mithras day was celebrated on the 25th of December and that’s now the day that we celebrate Christmas.
Even though the Bible does not tell us that Christ was born on December 25.
And that’s just one religion and just a small sample of the similarities it contains!!! Christianity also borrowed from a number of other religions as well.
The Siamese (Taiwan), had a God and saviour who was Virgin Born whom they called Codom.
In this very ancient story, the beautiful Virgin had been informed in advance that she was to become the mother of a great messenger of God, and one day while in her usual period of meditation and prayer, she was impregnated by divine sun beams.
When the boy was born, he grew up in a remarkable manner, became a protégé of wisdom and performed miracles.
When the first Jesuit priest visited china, they wrote in their reports at finding a heathen religion of that country, of a story of a redeeming saviour who was born of a Virgin and divinely conceived.
The God was said to have been born 3468 B.C (before Christ), his name was Lao-Tsze and was said to have been born of a virgin black in complexion and as beautiful as a Jasper.
The Egyptian Myths About two thousand years before the Christian era Mut-em-ua, the virgin Queen of Egypt, was said to have given birth to the Pharaoh Amenkept (or Amenophis) III, who built the temple of Luxor, on the walls of which were represented:
1)The Annunciation: the god Taht announcing to the virgin Queen that she is about to become a mother.
2)The Immaculate Conception: the god Kneph (the holy spirit) mystically impregnating the virgin by holding a cross, the symbol of life, to her mouth.
3)The Birth of the Man-god.
4)The Adoration of the newly born infant by gods and men, including three kings (or Magi?), who are offering him gifts.
In this sculpture the cross again appears as a symbol.
In another Egyptian temple, one dedicated to Hathor, at Denderah, one of the chambers was called “The Hall of the Child in his Cradle”; and in a painting which was once on the walls of that temple, and is now in Paris, we can see represented the Holy Virgin Mother with her Divine Child in her arms. The temple and the painting are undoubtedly pre-Christian.
Image from blogsdelagente.com
Therefore, we find that long before the Christian era there were already pictured — in pagan places of worship — virgin mothers and their divine children, and that such pictures included scenes of an Annunciation, an Incarnation, and a Birth and Adoration, just as the Gospels written in the second century A.D. describe them, and that these events were in some way connected with the God Taht, who was identified by Gnostics with the Logos.
And, besides these myths about Mut-em-ua and Hathor, many other origins of a virgin birth story can be traced in Egypt.
Another Egyptian god, Ra (the Sun), was said to have been born of a virgin mother, Net (or Neith), and to have had no father.
Horus was said to be the parthenogenetic child of the Virgin Mother, Isis.
In the catacombs of Rome black statues of this Egyptian divine Mother and Infant still survive from the early Christian worship of the Virgin and Child to which they were converted.
In these the Virgin Mary is represented as a black negress, and often with the face veiled in the true Isis fashion.
When Christianity absorbed the pagan myths and rites it also adopted the pagan statues, and renamed them as saints, or even as apostles.
Statues of the goddess Isis with the child Horus in her arms were common in Egypt, and were exported to all neighboring and to many remote countries, where they are still to be found with new names attached to them — Christian (Roman Catholicism) in Europe, Buddhist in Turkestan, Taoist in China and Japan. Figures of the virgin Isis do duty as representations of Mary, of Hariti, of Kuan-Yin, of Kwannon, and of other virgin mothers of gods.
And these were not the only pre-Christian statues and engravings of divine mothers and children. Such figures were stamped on very ancient Athenian coins.
Among the oldest relics of Carthage, of Cyprus, and of Assyria figures of a divine mother and her babe-god are found. Such figures were known under a great variety of names to the followers of various sects; the mothers as Venus, Juno, Mother-Earth, Fortune, etc., and the children as Hercules, Dionysos, Jove, Wealth, etc.
Events Surrounding the Messiah’s Birth in Matthew and Luke:
● The “multitude of the heavenly host” who, according only to Luke, sang before the shepherds as they watched their flocks by night while the Messiah was being born, are paralleled in Buddhist scriptures by a heavenly host who worship the Buddha in heaven immediately before his descent into his mother’s womb.
● The miraculous birth is pre-announced both to Maya and to her husband, King Suddhodana, who parts from her for thirty-two months, so that she should live immaculately during the whole of that time.
● Maya, “in order that the (Buddhist) scriptures might be fulfilled, ” was on a journey when the birth took place as, according to Luke, was Mary when the Messiah was born. Some of the Apocryphal Gospels give fuller details than the Canonical of the wonders attending the birth of the Messiah. In these – as also in the account given in the Koran – the resemblances to the Buddhist legends are even more remarkable than those to be found, as we have already seen, in the Gospels according to Matthew and to Luke. The latter has, however, another story which corresponds closely with the earlier Buddhist legends about Gautama.
● The devout Simeon who is filled with the holy ghost and recognizes the child Yeshua as the Messiah (Luke 2:25-35) is a duplicate of the Holy Brahmin Asita, who recognizes the child Gautama as the Buddha. He, Simeon, speaks of the Messiah as “a light to lighten the Gentiles” (verse 32), using the same metaphor as is used in the gatha with which, later on in the story, the young Gautama is greeted by the rishis: “In the darkness of the world a light has appeared to lighten all who are in ignorance.”
● And Matthew’s story of Herod being told that one who would be “King of the Jews” had been born, and of the consequent massacre of the innocents, also corresponds with Buddhist legend.
Image from www.yahweh.com