Matthew On The Virgin Birth

According to some critics of the Bible, the Virgin Birth, & assorted Village Atheists & Skeptics, the author(s) of Matthew invented the Virgin Birth by reformulating or outright misquoting the text of Isaiah 7:14.  

The key to correctly understanding this text. Matthew’s citation of Isaiah 7:14 is found in the doctrine of Continuationism. The objection assumes Cessationism & it assumes that the Hebrew reading is the only correct reading.  However, if Continuationism obtains (WSC 5.3), then this objection disappears. 

The Hebrew version of Isaiah reads “young woman of marriable age.”   The LXX reads, “virgin.”  Which one is correct?   The solution is simple & elegant: 

Both!  The Hebrew points us to the child born in Isaiah’s name as an answer to Ahaz.   Matthew chooses the LXX version to point us to Christ.   From a continuationist perspective, God inspired both versions & inspired Matthew to use the LXX not the Hebrew.   


O LORD, Hear our prayer(s)!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Romans 1:18 - 32 & Leviticus 18

  Paul is following the basic outline of a suzerain covenant in general     & the outline of Lev. 18 in particular.   Shema & Decalogue (Rom. 1:18 - 20)   God’s Image testifies to His attributes & Law.    God created people. His temple bears His Image & runs according to his Law & Gospel.    This corresponds to Lev. 18 : 1 & 2. A - Rom.    1:18 - 19.  God’s wrath falls on those who suppress His image.   B - Rom 1:20  - For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made so that people are without excuse.  What is the teleological intent of the created order?    To serve as an epistemic warrant on par with God Himself? No!  It’s purpose is to serve as a pointer to God who is Himself the only sufficient epistemic warrant for all faith & practice....
Read more

Favorite Fallacies & Homosexuality

Thesis - The tradition bound view on homosexuality commits a number of logical, epistemic, & exegetical fallacies.  1-  Is - Ought Fallacy  - Human anatomy is said to provide    a blueprint for sexual ethics.  We examined this in my previous article.  A moral “ought” is derived from a physical “is.”  The disputant makes an illicit leap from what is to what ought to be. A classic example is the way some homosexuals defend their sexual ethics by appealing to their biology/genetics.  2 -  Vicious Circularity   - Human anatomy & physiology are raised to the status due a non-arbitrary epistemic warrant.    A non-arbitrary epistemic warrant must be necessary, reasoned, & principled.  In truth, the body is unnecessary to deduce sexual ethics. By way of contrast, God’s nature is definitionally necessary, insofar as God is a necessary being, &, since God is infinite, eternal, & unchangeable in being, w...
Read more

Covenant Theology In Outline Form (Part 11)

Isaiah 6:1- 13 Shema   In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple. Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one called to another and said: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!” And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. Historical Prologue   And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke. And I said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the  Lord  of hosts!” Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a burning coal that he had taken with tongs from the altar. And he touched my mouth and...
Read more