"Virgin Birth" Questions

[Omniskeptical]

יהיה לי לבן perhaps you missed this part in both verses.

No, you missed the point in the book of Job.

I never said Jesus was god and I certainly didn't say you did either. You are creating another strawman.

I am telling you like it is.

I have more than made my case. 2 Samuel 7:14 and 1 chronicles 22:10 both of which call Solomon G-d's son which you fail to exegete to show contrary beyond an "attempt" to translate the Hebrew which you did even worse here this time than before. The verse as you translate above would have to say אהיה לו להיות האב and it doesn't say that. Give up while you can!

It does ever say Solomon ben Elohim anywhere in the Tenach; I suggest you go look for it.

Rofl! There are no definite names in the phrase אהיה לי לאב והוא יהיה לי לבן. Your whole argument about definite name being here is a joke. You truly are an amateur with Hebrew.

Father is definite, so it needs a definite article in English.

I gave two verse that prove you wrong. Your "nuh uh" approach is amusing. Still you haven't shown a lie anywhere or substantiated anything.

No rather, 2 verses from a Jewish troll who knows nothing about them or what they could mean.

Your entire argument is absurd. You don't know Hebrew and you are just trolling.

Few other Christians care about your lame opinions about afterlife, and what the sons of g-d are supposed to be.

[Omniskeptical]

If you want me to give another Israel was called called G-d's first born in Exodus 4:21.

Either a forgery, or a potential metaphor for Yeshu. Yeshu was an Israel himself. Think about the name.

[Avraham Ibn Ezra]

No, you missed the point in the book of Job.

This is relevant how? Please fully cite when you quote something and how it is relevant to the current discussion. If you can't then it is a red herring.

I am telling you like it is.

Or rather what you wish it were.

It does ever say Solomon ben Elohim anywhere in the Tenach; I suggest you go look for it.

Saying "he will be my son" is plenty enough to prove the point. You have still yet to parse the verse and exegete the verses to the contrary.

Father is definite, so it needs a definite article in English.

Actually it isn't and this goes to show how much you really don't know Hebrew.

The word with nikudot is לְאָב the shwa directly below the ל shows it is indefinite. Had the vowel under the ל been a patach and the vowel under the א would have changed to chatef patach it would have been definite. You truly don't know anything about Hebrew do you?

No rather, 2 verses from a Jewish troll who knows nothing about them or what they could mean.

Few other Christians care about your lame opinion about afterlife, and what the sons of g-d are supposed to be.

Wow, I can tell you are on the losing end of this discussion. First I never said anything about the afterlife and second, I obviously know a bit more than you both linguistically and interpretively. The ad nominees prove which side of winning and losing end you are on. Come back when you can intelligently discuss the text.

[Avraham Ibn Ezra]

Either a forgery, or a potential metaphor for Yeshu. Yeshu was an Israel himself. Think about the name.

Evidence? Substantiation? All you are doing is making a broad statement!

So did G-d forge the Bible? That is essentially what you are claiming.

Please explain how ישוע is the same as ישראל! So Jesus was one who struggled with G-d?

[Omniskeptical]

Saying "he will be withmy son" is plenty enough to prove the point.

I have parse it to the contrary by saying the preposition interferes. Nothing with of the sort is implied by "He will be into me, into a father, and I will be into him into a son". I am sorry for implying it should be translated without the indefinite article, when the article is buried in the vowel point. I actually like how both phrases come out literally in english now. But the greek doesn't have the article. It may also be too easy to say such a thing in hebrew too smoothly making indefinite articulation unecessary.

So Jesus was one who struggled with G-d?

I wouldn't say the only one. Hard on himself, and was hard on everyone else; I wouldn't want his burdens, and his sonship as a human being.

My point is Solomon is not a true son, and God wasn't the true father, though there is element of going into the roles.

[Avraham Ibn Ezra]

I have parse it to the contrary by saying the preposition interferes. Nothing with of the sort is implied by "He will be into me, into a father, and I will be into him into a son". I am sorry for implying it should be translated without the indefinite article, when the article is buried in the vowel point. I actually like how both phrases come out literally in english now. But the greek doesn't have the article. It may also be too easy to say such a thing in hebrew too smoothly making indefinite articulation unecessary.

You can't even stay consistent with whether לאב and לבן are definite or indefinite. Two posts ago you said they were definite, now you say they aren't after I corrected you. And you apologize for something I never claimed, said, or implicated. This is astonishing.

I wouldn't say the only one. Hard on himself, and was hard on everyone else; I wouldn't want his burdens, and his sonship as a human being.

What does being hard on himself have to do with proving a correlation between two words that do not mean the Same? Also, what does being hard on himself have to do with being a person who struggles with G-d? Jacob had to literally wrestle with an angel to ge that name.

My point is Solomon is not a true son, and God wasn't the true father, though there is element of going into the roles.

According to scripture and what it literally says you are wrong. Both verses speak to the contrary of your position that "son of G-d" is a title that is unique but it truly isn't. Scripture attests to that.

[Omniskeptical]

According to scripture and what it literally says you are wrong.

It literally says either, "I will be to hisn with a father, and he will be to me mine with a son", or "I will be to hisn with the father, and he will be to mine with the son." Both are not an uios relationship, but rather a tekna relationship. As if God had begotten Solomon, that is what he was to be to G-d; and vice versa, as if G-d were his father. But son of god is a unique title to Adam, and Yeshu; and no such title is given to Solomon. Scripture attests otherwise.

[Avraham Ibn Ezra]

It literally says either, "I will be to hisn with a father, and he will be to me mine with a son", or "I will be to hisn with the father, and he will be to mine with the son." Both are not an uios relationship, but rather a tekna relationship. As if God had begotten Solomon, that is what he was to be to G-d; and vice versa, as if G-d were his father. But son of god is a unique title to Adam, and Yeshu; and no such title is given to Solomon. Scripture attests otherwise.

First you say it's definite...which was wrong. Then you say it is indefinite...which is a change in your position. Now, you say it can be both....which one is it?

I can tell you are just trolling. Don't bother replying I figured out the ignore function so I won't see your posts. Either way I will wait for teallaura and have a good conversation with her.

[JonathanL]

First you say it's definite...which was wrong. Then you say it is indefinite...which is a change in your position. Now, you say it can be both....which one is it?

I can tell you are just trolling. Don't bother replying I figured out the ignore function so I won't see your posts. Either way I will wait for teallaura and have a good conversation with her.

Smart move. I don't think there's anyone on these forums who take Omniskeptical seriously.

[Omniskeptical]

Smart move. I don't think there's anyone on these forums who take Omniskeptical seriously.

Or anything else which the moderators should.

[Geert van den Bos]

Are you going to swear that David and Solomon are uniquely begotten by G-d as well. There is biological statement or physical connection of sonship and fatherhood during the humanhood of these man. A relation with G-d is the only thing you can prove. Why waste time on the English, when I have both biblical languages to use."

"uniquely begotten" is mistranslation of John's μονογενὴς. It (just) does mean: unique, only, singular; after Hebrew "yachid".

Psalms 2:7 mentions "to beget" -- I will tell of the decree; The Lord said to me, "You are My son; this day have I begotten you.

Noteworthy is that both Matthew and Luke don't apply this verse to their stories about the virgin birth, but to their stories about Jesus' baptism by John.

[Geert van den Bos]

Furthermore it never says that God fathered Jesus, but:

Matthew 1:20, that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

and

Luke 1:35, ; therefore the holy to be born will be called son of God."


Furthermore Jesus is never called "Jesus the son of God" ("Yeshu ben Elohim", like you (Omniskeptical) suggested )

[Omniskeptical]

"uniquely begotten" is mistranslation of John's μονογενὴς. It (just) does mean: unique, only, singular; after Hebrew "yachid".

Psalms 2:7 mentions "to beget" -- I will tell of the decree; The Lord said to me, "You are My son; this day have I begotten you.

Noteworthy is that both Matthew and Luke don't apply this verse to their stories about the virgin birth, but to their stories about Jesus' baptism by John.

It means unique, because Satan is a son of god too.

[Omniskeptical]

Furthermore it never says that God fathered Jesus, but:

Matthew 1:20, that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

and

Luke 1:35, ; therefore the holy to be born will be called son of God."


Furthermore Jesus is never called "Jesus the son of God" ("Yeshu ben Elohim", like you (Omniskeptical) suggested )

Nor is Solomon called a son of God.

[Geert van den Bos]

Nor is Solomon called a son of God.

The sons of God ("b'nei elohim") are mentioned in Geneisis 6:2,


And it came to pass when man commenced to multiply upon the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them.
that the sons of God saw the daughters of man when they were beautifying themselves, and they took for themselves wives from whomever they chose.

Soccer players are also often called "sons of God"