OK. Let's all maintain a civil discourse.

Juice,
I'm not throwing rocks at you here. This is the place to put down arguments and defenses of a position that one holds. Thus, my rationale for asking you to explain why it is that you hold to the specific position that you hold. I don't mind if you use exegesis straight out of a commentary. But I do want to see more than "I think most scholars, conservative and liberal, agree that the prophecy was fulfilled in 8:3." What's the argument? (You could also mention someone by name that holds it.) That's what I'm looking for so I can evaluate it and perhaps be persuaded by it, or rebut it, or offer a different interpretation without a specific rebuttal.

It's not the case that all agree on such an interpretation. My view is nearly that of Calvin, and exactly that of Ussher. The interpretation of vv. 14-16 is not simple, by any means, but neither E.J. Young nor J.A. Alexander (both which I disagree) which commentaries I have here support a reference to 8:3.

I have to go. I have no time to expound my view. But TimV, I believe you are correct in bringing up verse 3, and the son Isaiah was explicitly directed to bring with him. I think his presence is key to the correct interpretation of the passage. In fact, without reference to him in vv. 14-16, his presence (which was commanded by the Lord) passes nearly without explanation, unless one extrapolates on his name, which receives no mention in the deliverance of the prophecy.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --