That was written in I think the state of affairs is much worse today. At least back in those years one could find commentaries and books on theology in Bible bookstores. Today they have almost disappeared from the shelves to be replaced by massive amounts of Christian fiction, self-help books, and other Christian fluff.
It is the purpose of this Web site to present as much solid, deep, biblical and theological study material as we can. This book makes a good contribution. Miller's commentary is non-technical in that it does not explicitly cite the Greek text. However, it is very well-written, and we feel that the author incorporated an extraordinary number of practical insights to the text of Luke and the events in the life of Jesus.
We offer only one caution.
At one point in the commentary, Dr. Miller refers to "Second Isaiah" when citing a passage from the Book of Isaiah. The vast majority of conservative scholars argue vehemently for the unity of Isaiah and that the entire book is the product of the eighth-century prophet.
Layman's Bible Book Commentary: Isaiah
For a detailed defense of this position, see for example Gleason L. Archer, Jr. Discusses the nature and purpose of the gospel, its distinguishing characteristics, and its author and date. All Rights Reserved.
- Why Read This Book.
- Stomping Out Fear: Finding Courage in Christ.
- Skip Beat!, Vol. 1 (Skip Beat! Graphic Novel).
- Psychic (Sex) Academy: Good Boy (Telepathic/psychic gay domination petplay erotica)?
- Conan Chronicles 1.
Contact Us Email Webmaster. Next Mike goes into a litany on the debate of "virgin" or "young maiden" which is not really relevant and doesn't change the fact that Mary was and remained a virgin. For this reason I am deleting this section from my reply, but if you are interested, there is a hotlink to Mike's homepage at the bottom of this response.
Dual Prophecy? The general Christian defense when forced to confront the reality of Isaiah is to conjecture the notion of the dual prophecy. Isaiah was in fact delivering two prophecies, the one that occurred approximately 2, years ago as well as the birth of Jesus. This certainly would have risen some attention had this been the case. Dual fulfillment is a concept completely alien to scripture. In no way is it indicated by the text that it concerns the Messiah, nor is it indicated by the text that it would occur hundreds of years later.
Verses 11 and 16 makes it crystal clear how we should interpretthe verse in question.
The problem I have with this sort of solution is that the only reason someone would believe in dual fulfillment is to satisfy the needs of Christian theology. Christian theism depends on the verses that the New Testament quotes to be quoted accurately.
The belief in dual fulfillment of Isaiah comes strictly from the Christian need for it to be so, and is not provided by the context. For it to be true, more than just the need has to be present. Is there another reason to believe this conjecture? Who Is Immanuel? Mike added this section after I made my initial response, so I am inserting it here, in the same place it is now in his essay:. Is Immanuel mentioned anywhere else other than Isaiah ? Isaiah The LORD spake also unto me again, saying,  Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son;  Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong 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:  And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach [even] to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.
How about that? Yes, Immanuel is mentioned in the very next chapter, but is it the same Immanuel from the previous chapter? Isaiah himself is referred to as "God is with us" but seems to be talking about another Immanuel that will come in the future. So, while this "very next chapter" is interesting, to say the least, it does nothing to further Mike's case.
How about that. The Lord gave Immanuel to Isaiah to use as a sign for Israel, just like chapter 7 of Isaiah indicated. Isn't it fascinating when you read scripture in its proper context? Yes Mike, it is fascinating! But again, is the "Immanuel" the same "Immanuel" that is mentioned in ?
stomadwrathhocong.gq - Ancient Christian Commentary for e-Sword
No, this one is another reference to Isaiah himself who has God with him. It is not a prophetic statement of someone who will be born of a virgin or even a young maiden , but a statement of the present. If the Christian were to accept Mike's arguments here as true, and I am not saying one has to, then one obscure verse in Matthew that may or may not be a direct reference to Isaiah 7 is not the entire basis for the Messianic prophecies in the book of Matthew. One thing that is a bit problematic to me in Mike's essay here is that he says this prophecy was fulfilled centuries earlier, but he never stated by whom or gave the biblical reference to this fulfillment.
So with regard to this "dual prophecy" argument, Mike leaves us hanging.
If it was not Jesus who fulfilled this, who was? Mike also spends a lot of time making a case toward a "possibility" that this verse does not refer to a "virgin" but a "young maiden. All in all, this entire argument is then rather weak. It says nothing to deny the Christian his faith, and only raises a couple weak possibilities for the Jew to question Christian integrity. It by no means refutes the Christian claims or position regarding the Messiah.
- The New Jerome Biblical commentary in SearchWorks catalog!
- SearchWorks Catalog?
- Account Options;
Some are stronger than others, but all point to Jesus. The next section, Mike responded to me in email:. Text only email without color prevents me from exphasizing the proper points. You are correct, that I should have shown the "first fulfillment," and that's what I did today in updating that essay. Take special note of Isaiah , where the true Immanuel is mentioned by name. First, thank you for acknowledging that you left out that important fact.
Your inserted reply seems to deal more with it - but it also cites two sources that seem to be pointing to Isaiah himself which I concur but is prophetic, pointing to Someone who will be born in the future. Scott, I didn't invite you to my site for your circus games. Attack my points head on or not at all.