Quote:
Originally posted by Contra_Mundum
Juice,
I'd need to see an exegetical presentation of an intra-Isaianic fulfillment of the text. I don't think the virgin-birth prophecy has a pre-fulfillment, i.e. something that Jesus' birth then later makes more of. The Pharisees would have loved to expose Jesus' earthly father. Then Jesus could not have been the Messiah--because the Messiah had to be virgin-born, and they all knew it.
|
I kind of think that God was telling King Ahaz that he would be with him and to trust God to protect him from the invading countries. What do you think?
Also, consider what is written in Hosea 11. I have seen many claim that this is a prophecy of Jesus, but if we read it in context, we find that this cannot be true. I think context is important to understanding the message of Scripture. There are other passages where I think the context is stronger in support of a messianic prophecy, such as the suffering servant that is found later in Isaiah 53, and even stronger than that in Micah 5.
So, what do you guys think? Does the historical and textual context of the passage matter as to whether or not it is a messianic prediction, or is there something that I am missing?