Were the Ebionites the original Christians?

>It means sometyhing that is completely different to the text, and you have to ignore significant portions of it to make it make sense!

Christians, everyone. Only to them can you rationalize away a masculine construction for this woman's pregnancy, the fact that it happened before Isiaah uttered the prophecy, or the fact that he's named Immanuel, or the fact that Immanuel doens't actually do anything, but rather before he's old enough to tell good from evil, the kings that Hezekiah is afraid of will be overthrown.

CLEARLY DIS IS ABOUT DA JEBUS!

Once again, a basic understanding of Hebrew demonstrates you wrong. Genesis, 3:15

>וְאֵיבָה אָשִׁית, בֵּינְךָ וּבֵין הָאִשָּׁה, וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ, וּבֵין זַרְעָהּ: הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ, וְאַתָּה תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב
Would you look at that! You have two different conjugations with that root of זרע, one for the (male) serpent, and the other for the woman! It's almost like the KJV guys shit themselves again translating it, and that masculine nouns get masculine conjugations, and feminine ones get feminine conjugations.

Bringing it back to Isaiah, we have the masculine הָרָה, with a separating "and" with the prefix to the next word וְיֹלֶדֶת. She has been impregnated, she will give birth. Ta da!

>That's odd, because 70 Jewish scholars translated that verse to the Greek word for virgin.

youtube.com/watch?v=SVAJj1hVcNQ

Probably. All contemporary scholarship about the very early Church indicates that their practices and beliefs would have basically been the same as the Ebionites.

Why would you reply to it? You realize this makes YOU the dope, right? He has severe mental retardation, what's your excuse?

Yes

I paid attention to the text.

Unto us a child is born.

Statement 1.

Unto us a Son is given.

Statement 2.

Yes, Mary the virgin did give birth to the Jewish Messiah, Yehoshua.

And once again your "basic knowledge" of Hebrew has failed you.

>Here's a youtube to distract you from the clear point that the Jews knew a virgin would give birth, and so chose the Greek word for virgin, and not the Greek word for young woman.

Gee, almost as though the bible were true.

Why would you go to the Septuagint anyway? You realize we have the original Hebrew text, right?

Because 70 Jewish scholars translated the word to "virgin" over a hundred years before Jesus was born.

*drop mic*

Yes, and almah can have two meanings, that are usually the same. Young maid/virgin.

They didn't have a whore culture. A woman raped or promiscuous did not get married. They died, spinsters.

So a young woman (Isaiah's wife) would be a virgin during her betrothal to Isaiah, as Mary would be a virgin during her betrothal to Joseph.

Why do you think that's an answer? Do you know how many scholars labored over the King James Version? So should we go to that to settle questions in Matthew over the original Greek?

Isaiah's 7'th chapter says neither of those things. You are referring to 2 chapters later, referring to a completely different child, לֶא יוֹעֵץ, אֵל גִּבּוֹר, אֲבִי-עַד, שַׂר-שָׁלוֹם

>Yes, Mary the virgin did give birth to the Jewish Messiah, Yehoshua.
Nope. See, there are a number of prophecies about the Messiah, one of which by the way indicates that he would be a prophet (Deuteronomy 18:15), which is inconsistent with being god, another Christian claim. Once again, basic reading comprehension saves the day.

By the way, I take it you're conceding all the points you didn't bother to defend, like how Isaiah 7:14 is clearly not referring to Jesus or anyone outside of Isaiah's lifetime? Or how it is in fact grammatically incorrect to read the passage the way you are, which would imply that mary was indeed having sex?

Lie by the Jew: No Jew believed the virgin would give birth to the messiah.

Disproven by: 70 Jewish scholars who all translated Almah to parthenos, virgin, almost 200 years prior to the event.

Conclusion: Jews lie.

Jews don't even consider Isaiah 7:14 to be a messianic prophecy you retard. Do you have ANY idea what you're talking about?

Jews lie, so believe what these Jews said?

Jesus was a prophet, spoke from God, and made prophecies about the future.

2000 years and you can't figure out who the messiah is. It's like you're not trying.

Dual prophecy: Isaiah now, for the King's answer; Jesus later, for the world's answer.

Again, it's like you're not even trying. And no, when the power of God is involved, a woman does not have to have sexual intercourse with a man to become pregnant.

WHICH OF COURSE IS THE ENTIRE SIGN TO THE WORLD.

Emmanuel, God with us.

And my verse to you, again, with me laughing:

Revelation 3:9
Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you.

The Jews who did became Christians, so your answer is a half lie.

And nobody in the Kingdom of God cares what unrepentant Jews think.

Nope. Don't believe what this Jew is saying. For this and other reasons.

>Dual prophecy: Isaiah now, for the King's answer; Jesus later, for the world's answer.

So who was the first virgin? The second in your "dual prophecy" is Mary, so who was the first virgin birth? I thought the virgin birth was a big deal, but Jesus wasn't even the first one?

>Jesus was a prophet
A prophet is a human who speaks for God. God is not a prophet to himself. If you want to claim that Jesus is God, then he is not a prophet and therefore not the Messiah.

>Dual prophecy: Isaiah now, for the King's answer; Jesus later, for the world's answer.
Jesus was not named Immanuel, he was not conceived circa 700 B.C., nor were kings Razin or Pekah defeated before he knew how to choose good over evil. The prophecy cannot in any way be said to apply to Jesus, short of butchering the text.

>And no, when the power of God is involved, a woman does not have to have sexual intercourse with a man to become pregnant.
SO again, you are butchering the text to make it say what you want it to say. If it was simply about her becoming pregnant, it would read differently.

>WHICH OF COURSE IS THE ENTIRE SIGN TO THE WORLD.

Wrong, again, easily demonstrated if you bothered to READ the bible. Go ahead to 7:16, and there is your sign. Note how the kid is not actually doing anything.

Nope, Paul got laughed out of Israel and went on to preach to a bunch of Greek guys who didn't know better. 2,000 years later and you retards are STILL falling for his bullshit.

The first Almah was Isaiah's wife.

Isaiah 8
Behold, I and the children whom the Lord has given me are for signs and wonders in Israel from the Lord of hosts, who dwells on Mount Zion.

One of Isaiah's sons was named "A remnant will return."

Before the Babylonian exile.

Jesus is as much God as though not man, and as much man as though not God.

Everything he said, the Father YHWH told him to say. Everything he did, the Father YHWH told him to do.

He made several prophecies; one to the thief on the cross, and one about the impending and utter destruction of the temple that would happen in 70 AD.

Yehoshua is God's only begotten Son.

You say you know YHWH, but you don't know YHWH has a Son.

So you don't know YHWH, do you.

Jesus was called "God with us" many times, most famously in John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word (Jesus) was with God, and the Word (Jesus) was God.....and the Word (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us.

God with us.

Emmanuel.

The text is of a virgin giving birth.

You cannot be very sexually informed or experienced or knowledgeable if you do not know that usually does not happen.

Yes, Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, and by his work are most of the people in heaven, in heaven.

You Jews?

Enjoy hellfire.

>Jesus is as much God as though not man, and as much man as though not God.
Oooh, running into another biblical problem, this time Deuteronomy 6:4. It would really help if you read this stuff.

>He made several prophecies; one to the thief on the cross, and one about the impending and utter destruction of the temple that would happen in 70 AD.
Predictions!= prophecies. A prophet is a HUMAN (not God), who speaks in God's name. That they often predict the future is incidental, you have guys like Jonah who did not, and other supernaturally endowed people, the various Roeh's and the like, who did see the future and were not prophets. Daniel falls into the latter category.

>Jesus was called "God with us" many times, most famously in John 1:1
Irrelevant and not scripture.

>The text is of a virgin giving birth.
Nope, the text is of a woman who has explicitly been said to have been inseminated, which disqualifies her from being a virgin. Seriously, Read. It will help you understand how shit Christianity is.

Maimonides (1135-1204), perhaps the most famous rabbi of all time, in a letter to Jacob Alfajumi, stated:

What is to be the manner of Messiah’s advent, and where will be the place of His first appearance? . . . And Isaiah speaks similarly of the time when he will appear…He came up as a sucker before him, and as a root out of dry earth, . . . in the words of Isaiah, when describing the manner in which the kings will hearken to him, at him the kings will shut their mouth; for that which had not been told them they have seen, and that which they had not heard they have perceived.

In this quote, Maimonides applied Isaiah 52:15 and Isaiah 53:2 to the Messiah.

I guess now you're a better Jew than Maimonides, huh.

Father is God
Son is God
Spirit is God
There is one God

You can't grasp the triune nature of God, but why would you, as an active member of the Synagogue of Satan?

>Daniel falls into the latter category.

Daniel told anyone with ears to hear what day the messiah would be cut off.

Nisan 14, 32 AD.

483 years after the proclamation to rebuild the temple was made.

Paul cannot tell the difference between a sin offering and a paschal offering. He doesn't know the difference between sin and ritual impurity. He seems to be unaware of Ezekiel prophesying that in the End Times, there will still be a temple and still be blood sacrifice, including for sins.

He was a fool at best, and a charlatan at worst. Nobody's condition was improved through his work.

What is the sign to the world?

A virgin giving birth to a son.

What is not a sign to the earth?

A young woman giving birth to a son.

That's your failing, not Paul's.

You don't understand the Passover, at all.

The end times temple that Ezekiel speaks of will be built soon.

And you will jump for joy, thinking that the Old Covenant has been restored, and you will worship the Antichrist as your messiah, to your doom.

Thou fool.

No, it isn't. The text is of a young woman being impregnated, but the prophecy isn't about the impregnation or even the woman, its about how by the time her child will be on the cusp of moral adulthood, the current war will be over, it's just God telling the king not to panic and to just wait it out. How you can read that and see "magic virgin woman will bear the son of god" is simply beyond me.
>יד לָכֵן יִתֵּן אֲדֹנָי הוּא, לָכֶם--אוֹת: הִנֵּה הָעַלְמָה, הָרָה וְיֹלֶדֶת בֵּן, וְקָרָאת שְׁמוֹ, עִמָּנוּ אֵל.
>14 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.
>טז כִּי בְּטֶרֶם יֵדַע הַנַּעַר, מָאֹס בָּרָע--וּבָחֹר בַּטּוֹב: תֵּעָזֵב הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה קָץ, מִפְּנֵי שְׁנֵי מְלָכֶיהָ.
>16 Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou hast a horror of shall be forsaken.

I mean seriously how much clearer can it be? there are a lot of vague prophecies in the OT but this one isn't one of them.

That speaks of Isaiah's son, the first fulfillment of the prophecy.

It's like you're intentionally obtuse.

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.

Jesus

>16 Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou hast a horror of shall be forsaken.

Isaiah's son.

So Isaiah's son was born of a virgin? And what part of this applies to Jesus?

Of an Almah, a young woman.

>And what part of this applies to Jesus?

Also born of an Almah, a young woman.

By immaculate conception.

Wow, this stuff is fucking retarded. You people are dumb as rocks.

Live your life however you want, and pay the price thereof.

>More Gish galloping.
There is nothing in there about Isaiah 7, which is what we are discussing. You can read a decent translation here, and of course, you will find no such references. en.wikisource.org/wiki/Epistle_to_Yemen/Complete

And of course, many Jews, even Jews in his lifetime, did not follow Miamonides. You even had his books burned.

So if Jesus is a God, he is not human, and therefore is not a human speaking for God. You can't even grasp a simple sentence.

>What is the sign to the world? A virgin giving birth to a son.
Wrong. 7:16, read it. The only sign in the birth is its immediacy. You would know this if you read the damn text.

So Ezekiel was a liar? Maybe mistaken?

Yup, I knew it. You're more Jew in your own eyes than Maimonides, who knew that Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah, and not Israel.

That's what we're talking about here, Jew. Jesus fulfilling Messianic prophecies.

Isaiah's born of a Jew.
Micah's born in Bethlehem
Daniel's 483 year cut off following the proclamation to rebuild the temple.
There's hundreds more.

Literally hundreds.

Jesus is the hypostatic union of Man and God; both the Son of Man, and the Son of God. Son of Man should spark your one brain cell, as it is a messianic title.

Yes, Isaiah's wife gave birth quickly. First part, fulfilled.

Second part, a sign to the world, a virgin giving birth to a son.

It only happened once.

The Messiah was born of a virgin. And had to be.

No, you just (as usual) can't understand the prophets. What they speak of as the end times has not yet happened.

I tire of you, Jew. A year ago I had a sliver of hope that you could be redeemed.

That sliver is gone.

You are as much the devil's child as anyone could be.

My friend, you're the one breaking the first and second commandments. Have fun in Hell, you poor dumb bastard.

To be clear, are you saying that you have never broken any commandment?

John 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 3:36 He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

I have the bible as the foundation for what I tell you.

You have.......nothing.

>Yup, I knew it. You're more Jew in your own eyes than Maimonides, who knew that Isaiah 53 was about the Messiah, and not Israel.
We are talking about Isaiah SEVEN, not 53. Do you not understand that? Show me where on the link he mentions any verse from Isaiah's 7th chapter.

>hypostatic union of Man and God; both the Son of Man, and the Son of God. Son of Man should spark your one brain cell, as it is a messianic title.
You mean, in contradiction of Deuteronomy 6:4, which proclaimed God's unity. See how many problems you could avoid if you could read?

>Second part, a sign to the world, a virgin giving birth to a son.
Nope. Try again. 7:16.

>The Messiah was born of a virgin. And had to be.
Nope. Try again. Isaiah 7 is not a messianic prophecy.

You know I only engage in these little "discussions" to give you enough of a platform to expose how stupid you, and by extension other Christians are, right? Do you honestly think your inability to read even the most basic biblical texts, or stick to the point, your inability to even condense your thoughts into a single post, and instead making dozens of 1-2 line copypasta posts convinces anyone? You are a laughingstock of Veeky Forums user, you get mentioned in those shitposter threads they have about who the worst and dumbest people are. All I need to do is give you a platform to keep opening your mouth.

Isaiah 53 spells out Jesus as the Messiah far better than Isaiah 7 does.

Both point to the same person in Yehoshua.

God is One. One, threefold God. One God, who manifested himself as three persons.

I already took you through the OT and showed you the Son and the Spirit as God. You have an aversion to godliness.

Isaiah 7 is a messianic prophecy, and you are no student of prophecy is the only conclusion that can be drawn from your utter ignorance.

You think so, but deep down you know you have nothing. No God, no Covenant, no Temple, no High Priest, no Priest, no alter, no sacrifices, nothing.

Nothing you do is as Jews did 3500 years ago. Nothing.

Project much? I'm never on that list.

"The Jew who gives involuntary and unwanted Hebrew lessons" is.

>Isaiah 53 spells out Jesus as the Messiah far better than Isaiah 7 does.
No, not really, given the "crushed by disease" and "buried in with the rich and wicked", neither of which apply to Jesus.

>God is One. One, threefold God. One God, who manifested himself as three persons.
Again, if you could READ, you would know that you're saying something contradicting a scripture you claim to be inerreant. It says יְהוָה אֶחָד, not the reverse. God IS one. No trinities. Interestingly enough, Maimonides says just that in Mishneh Torah.

>More ignorant ad hominems that will be disregarded.

Isaiah 53
Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.

Isaiah 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.

Zechariah 13:6 And one will say to him, ‘What are these wounds between your arms?’ Then he will answer, ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.’

All Yeshoshua, who took the sins of the world onto himself, became sin, and suffered the wrath of God.

Isaiah 53 is your only hope to avoid being in hell forever; you depending on being a good Jew is laughable.

Understanding Isaiah 53 is your only hope.

God is One.

One Triune Being.