An exhaustive look at almah/bethula (part 3): The search comes to a screeching halt

July 2, 2009 at 8:27 pm (Christ myth theories, theories on Jesus's parents)

Part 1; Part 2.

After such suspenseful distaste of illiterate literature, the mystery must come to an end. If logic didn’t convince you, hopefully this will.

According to Isaiah 8:2-4, 8, the “prophecy” of Immanuel is fulfilled by a king named Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia article doesn’t say much. All we know is that his name means “plunder speedeth; spoil hasteth” and that he was indeed an Assyrian king. The name “Immanuel” appears again in Isaiah 8:8, which is the solid reference to the real Immanuel. Who is the real Immanuel? Said Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

Evidence? Muslim apologists point out the following. According to http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/forgeries.htm:

  1. There is no evidence that Jesus was ever called “Immanuel” thus, the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 was not fulfilled in Jesus.
  2. Damascus and/or Aram were not conquered during the time of Jesus’ childhood, as we read in Isaiah 7:16 → “But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.” Again, then Isaiah 7:14 was not fulfilled at Jesus’ time and/or at his birth. Rather the prophecy had already been “fulfilled” in Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz.
  3. The birth of “Immanuel” {Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz} was intended as a sign for Ahaz. Jesus was born about eight centuries too late to be a sign for Ahaz, who was already long been dead.

This just furthers my point. The whole Jesus mytharc is based around a fictional Maher-shalal-hash-baz story. A story that was meant to be Maher-shalal-hash-baz’s alone. Maher-shalal-hash-baz was suppose to be this legendary hero who saved the world from the clashes of sin. Immanuel is the proper name for the prophetic savior. But, as everyone can see, there was nothing special about Maher-shalal-hash-baz other than he was an Assyrian king who was not so godly.

And so, I must conclude that based on Isaiah 7:14, the prophecy referred to an Assyrian king. This prophecy was fulfilled in Isaiah 8:2-4 because Isaiah 7 talked as though the prophecy referred to an Assyrian king who would be victorious. In Isaiah 8:8 it’s revealed that the king’s name was Immanuel, “evidence” that the prophecy was fulfilled. Since the prophecy was fulfilled, there was no need to continue looking for a king. Therefore, Matthew 1:23 falsely fulfills an already fulfilled Biblical prophecy. Since the prophecy was fulfilled, Matthew 1:23 is based on nothing but empty air and is a blatant lie. Matthew 1:25 says that Joseph names the child Jesus instead of Immanuel as instructed by the angel. This contradiction must prove without doubt that Jesus does not fit the prophecy’s requirements, and was thus not born of a virgin.

It’s also worth mentioning that 2 Nephi 17:14 plagiarizes Isaiah 7:14.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: