54. Did Isaiah 7:14 predict the virgin birth of Jesus?


Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
— Isaiah 7:14

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).
— Matthew 1:22-23

Isaiah 7:14 is the only sentence in the Old Testament that hints at a virgin birth, which makes Isaiah 7 a very important chapter. Could it really be that Isaiah predicted the virgin birth of Jesus 700 years before it happened?

Let’s open our Bibles to Isaiah chapter 7 and attempt to reach an intellectually honest conclusion about what is being predicted, and see if Jesus fits the bill.

Isaiah 7:1 When Ahaz son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, was king of Judah, King Rezin of Aram and Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel marched up to fight against Jerusalem, but they could not overpower it. 

Allow me to set the scene. In 743 BC, Israel was still divided into two nations, Israel and Judah. Ahaz was 20 years old at the time and had just succeeded his father as the King of Judah (2 Chronicles 28:1, 2 Kings 16:2).

MapTo the north of Judah were Ahaz’s rowdy neighbors, King Pekah and King Rezin. Pekah ruled Israel (sometimes referred to as Ephraim, because Ephraim was the primary tribe), and Rezin ruled Syria (sometimes referred to as Aram or Damascus, because Damascus was located in Syria at the time). These three nations were stacked on one another like an ice cream cone, with Syria on top, Israel in the middle, and Judah on the bottom. 

To the east lived a big-bad-wolf named Assyria; a rising superpower that wanted to devour this tasty ice cream cone. Concerned about this threat, King Pekah (Israel) and King Rezin (Syria) agreed to join forces to fight Assyria if necessary, but King Ahaz (Judah) refused to join their coalition (most likely due to past tensions).

In what is now referred to as the Syro-Ephraimite War (736 BC-732 BC), Israel and Syria attacked areas of Judah with some success (2 Chronicles 28:5-6), but neither was able to independently capture Ahaz or the city of Jerusalem (Isaiah 7:1, 2 Kings 16:5, 2 Chronicles 28:16), so they decided to join forces.

Isaiah 7:2 Now the house of David was told, “Aram [Syria] has allied itself with Ephraim [Israel]”; so the hearts of Ahaz and his people were shaken, as the trees of the forest are shaken by the wind.

When King Ahaz heard about their collaboration, he feared the worst.

Ahaz was no friend of God, but Ahaz did represent the Davidic line, so it’s said that God took pity on him and sent Isaiah to reassure him that these two tyrants would not overthrow him.

Isaiah 7:3 Then the Lord said to Isaiah, “Go out, you and your son Shear-Jashub, to meet Ahaz at the end of the aqueduct of the Upper Pool, on the road to the Launderer’s Field. Say to him, ‘Be careful, keep calm and don’t be afraid. Do not lose heart because of these two smoldering stubs of firewood—because of the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and of the son of Remaliah. Aram, Ephraim and Remaliah’s son have plotted your ruin, saying, “Let us invade Judah; let us tear it apart and divide it among ourselves, and make the son of Tabeel king over it.” 

The two kings to the north wanted to defeat King Ahaz and capture Jerusalem so they could share the spoils and put someone else in power who would help them in their fight against Assyria.

God tells Ahaz to keep calm, and to not be afraid, and refers to the northern kingdoms as “two smoldering stubs of firewood” that are on their way out.

Isaiah 7:7 Yet this is what the Sovereign Lord says: ‘It will not take place, it will not happen8 for the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is only Rezin. Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be too shattered to be a people. 9 The head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah’s son. If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all.’”

Again, God reassures Ahaz that this invasion will not happen. Isaiah also gives us an important time-frame for this prophecy: within 65 years, the tribe of Ephraim (Israel) will be shattered.

Isaiah 7:10 Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, 11 “Ask the Lord your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights.” 12 But Ahaz said, “I will not ask; I will not put the Lord to the test.”

God offers Ahaz a sign to verify what Isaiah has spoken and to strengthen his faith. Normally Ahaz would’ve been correct not to test god, but since God was offering, God (presumably) knew Ahaz needed a sign. When Ahaz refuses God’s offer, Isaiah rebukes him for acting as if he didn’t need one.

Isaiah 7:13 Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. 15 He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, 16 for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. 

Isaiah-iconIf it seems a little odd to jump from a story about Ahaz and his naughty neighbors to the north, to a prophecy about the virgin birth of Jesus, that’s probably because it is. Let’s take a look at what has been prophesied so far and see if Jesus fits the bill.

Unlike some prophecies which can be vague, this one is reasonably clear. Isaiah is predicting that:

  1. A child will be born to a virgin (or a young maiden).
  2. His mother will name him Immanuel (“God is with us”).
  3. His birth will serve as a sign to Ahaz.
  4. Before the child matures, the two kingdoms “will be laid waste.”
  5. The two kingdoms will be scattered within 65 years.

In comparing this prophecy to Jesus:

  1. It’s claimed that Jesus’ mother was a virgin.
  2. The angel Gabriel instructs Mary to name him Jesus (“God saves”), not Immanuel (“God with us”).
  3. Jesus’ birth could not serve as a sign to Ahaz, since Ahaz had died hundreds of years earlier.
  4. The two kingdoms were destroyed long before Jesus was born, so their destruction did not take place between his birth and his maturing.
  5. Jesus was not born within 65 years of the prophecy.

Taken at face value, Jesus is no match.

There are, of course, a litany of explanations offered by Christians to address these discrepancies, but there is no consensus. Let’s take a look at some of the most popular explanations.

“Jesus was literally ‘God with us.'”

It’s true that Jesus came to be known as the physical incarnation of God on earth, but was this really what Isaiah was predicting?

The Hebrew grammar makes it clear that Immanuel (“God with us”) was the name to be literally assigned to the child by his mother. The verse reads, “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Immanuel is what she names him after giving birth, it is not a title he earns later in life.

We see a parallel to this in the next chapter (chapter 8). When Isaiah has a son, God tells him to name him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. Isaiah doesn’t give him some other name, he literally names him Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz (against his better judgement). This sort of thing happens several other times throughout the Bible (see 1 Chronicles 22:9, Luke 1:13, and Luke 1:31).

Also in chapter 8, Isaiah speaks about how he and his sons serve as signs:

Here am I, and the children the Lord has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel from the Lord Almighty, who dwells on Mount Zion.
~Isaiah 8:18

In Isaiah’s day, it was normal for children (and even objects) to be given names that represented signs and symbols, or that spoke to the nature of God. Isaiah’s son Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz’s name meant “quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil,” but that didn’t mean he would literally be the one plundering, nor did Isaiah’s son Shear-Jashub‘s name mean that he would literally be the “remnant that returned.” Likewise, to Ahaz, the name Immanuel meant that God would keep his promise and remain with them during this difficult time.

It’s ridiculous to suggest that Isaiah may have thought Immanuel was going to be God in the flesh. If Isaiah did think this, why did he only mention Immanuel twice (in Isaiah 7 and 8)? Other than serving as a sign, Immanuel was an irrelevant character.

“God was addressing the house of David, not Ahaz.”

This explanation suggests that God was giving this prophecy to entire the Davidic line, rather than just Ahaz himself. The motive here is to try to negate the 65-year deadline, but this idea falls apart when you consider the objections.

1) The passage reads: “Ahaz said, ‘I will not ask; I will not put the Lord to the test.’ Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of humans? Will you try the patience of my God also?” Who was it that was trying the patience of humans and God? At that moment it was Ahaz, who had just refused to choose a sign. 

2) Verse 7:2 also refers to the “house of David” when reporting on current events, so there’s no reason to think Isaiah isn’t also referring to the present house of David. (It’s likely that Isaiah was addressing King Ahaz and his counsel, the royal court of Judah.)

3) Verse 16 emphasizes that the two kingdoms will be destroyed before the child matures. The birth of the child signals that these events are about to take place. Had this truly been about Jesus, there would be no need to emphasize the time between the child’s birth and when he matures; God could’ve said, “These kingdoms will be destroyed long before Immanuel is born.”

4) If we insist this sign is intended for a future generation, it takes away from the story of Ahaz. Suddenly this poor schmuck is left with no sign at all. While Ahaz may have refused to ask for a sign, God was not punishing him for his shortcomings, God still knew Ahaz needed a sign, and the sign God offers him is directly related to the situation at hand (the upcoming destruction of the two kingdoms).

5) An almost identical incident plays out years later with Ahaz’s son Hezekiah (Isaiah 38). God sends Isaiah to speak to King Hezekiah who is on his deathbed. God promises to add fifteen years to his life and deliver him from the Assyrians, and then seals this message with a sign. 

“‘This is the Lord’s sign to you that the Lord will do what he has promised: I will make the shadow cast by the sun go back the ten steps it has gone down on the stairway of Ahaz.’” So the sunlight went back the ten steps it had gone down.
— Isaiah 38:7-8

Just as Hezekiah received a sign to show that the Lord would do as promised, Ahaz was also to receive a sign.

“This chapter has a dual meaning.”

Upon careful inspection, many Christian scholars agree that this prophecy was far too relevant to Ahaz’s circumstances to only be about Jesus.

Taken in the context of Isaiah 7, it is hard to deny that verse 14 directly predicts a child who would be born during rather than after Ahaz’s life …
Built Upon the Rock: Studies in the Gospel of Matthew edited by Daniel M. Gurtner, John Nolland, pp. 238-239

But if the prophecy was for Ahaz, then it’s not about Jesus… unless there is some kind of dual meaning. A dual meaning might seem like an ideal solution, but it’s not without consequences.

First, Matthew strongly suggests that all the events surrounding Jesus’ birth represent a direct fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophesy.

All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).
— Matthew 1:22-23

While Matthew may want to believe this prophecy is about Jesus, he doesn’t bother to explain how the rest of the prophecy applies to Jesus, or what it would mean for Ahaz. (Perhaps this is why Matthew and Luke are the only New Testament authors to cite the virgin birth as evidence.)

Second, not all Christians agree with the dual-meaning, because dual meanings are subjective, easily faked, and impossible to prove.

This two-fold approach provides an easy way out of a difficult problem because it enables the reader to maintain contemporary relevance for Ahaz as well as the New Testament perspective on the fulfillment of these verses… It seems fundamentally illegitimate to claim that God inspired Isaiah to say things that meant one thing (the meaning he was aware of), and then suggest that these words also mean something different from what Isaiah understood them to mean (the New Testament meaning)… there would be no legitimate authoritative basis for the second meaning.
Isaiah 1-39, Gary V. Smith, p. 204

Indeed. Dual meanings allow anyone to read anything into Isaiah’s words; a practice formally known as eisegesis (which literally means “to lead into”). Exegesis (which means “to lead out”) is the opposite of eisegesis, and insists on letting the text speak for itself. Gary Smith admits there is little exegetical grounds for interpreting Isaiah 7:14 as Messianic:

The main critique of this Messianic approach is that it appears to read back into the Isaiah passage a meaning that is difficult to develop from the words in 7:14. It almost seems that this interpretive conclusion is controlled by theological beliefs derived from the New Testament rather than exegetical evidence in Isaiah 7.
—  Isaiah 1-39, Gary V. Smith, p. 204

CaveIf you’re going to allow eisegesis for Christianity, you must also permit it for other religions. A good example is how Muslims read their prophet into Isaiah 7:14. Specifically, Muslims claim that because the Qur’an uses the phrase “God is with us” (Qur’an 9:40) in a remark loosely related to Muhammad, this is evidence that Isaiah was prophesying about Muhammad. Christians would, of course, argue that Muslims are reading this into the text, but Muslims could accuse Christians of the same thing. I think they’re both right.

We also saw dual-meanings crop up in Isaiah 53. When Christians came to the realization that the suffering servant was just a personification of Israel, they attempted to salvage the connection to Jesus by appealing to various allegorical, spiritual, metaphorical, or typological types of dual-meanings. But again, these dual-meanings are extremely subjective, and can be easily manipulated to conform to any preexisting theological bias, and therefore they cannot be used as evidence to prove the claim.

“Isaiah 9 also speaks about a child, who appears to be the Messiah.”

Isaiah chapter 9 may actually be about the Messiah, and so some Christians attempt to link the child in Isaiah 9 with Immanuel in Isaiah 7.

For to us a child is born,
    to us a son is given,
    and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
    Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Of the greatness of his government and peace
    there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne
    and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
    with justice and righteousness
    from that time on and forever.

There are good reasons to doubt this theory.

1) Jews do not believe that Isaiah 9 is Messianic prophecy, because it describes a child who has already been born (most likely King Hezekiah).

2) Even if we assume the child in Isaiah 9 is the Messiah and he is also the child Immanuel, the Messiah would still need to be born within 65 years of Isaiah’s prophesy.

3) There are no details linking these two children. The child in Isaiah 9 is never called Immanuel, nor is it said he was born of a virgin. Likewise, it’s never stated that Immanuel would reign on David’s throne, or bring about a new government of everlasting peace.

4) To make matters worse, between Isaiah 7 and 9 there is another child, Isaiah’s child. There are actually more reasons to speculate that Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz is Immanuel. However, Isaiah’s wife was no virgin (or young maiden), nor did she name him Immanuel, so it appears these are two separate children.

In all likelihood, Isaiah is speaking of three separate events and three separate children, one in each chapter.


An honest evaluation of the evidence should lead us to conclude that Isaiah was speaking of a child to be born within 65 years, not 700+ years in the future.

Hearkening back to question 32, we see a number of prophetic problems with Isaiah 7:

  1. Isaiah’s prophecy was no secret to New Testament authors (#2). In fact, Isaiah is more frequently alluded to in the New Testament than any other book of the Old Testament. Early Christians who were invested in trying to persuade others that Jesus was the Messiah would’ve had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to fabricate this virgin connection (#4, #7, #19).
  2. In their eagerness to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, followers ignored the other prophetic details in Isaiah 7 that did not point to Jesus (#8).
  3. The virgin birth, while highly improbable (#5), is valueless as prophecy because it is easily lied about and impossible to verify (#19).
  4. To its credit, Isaiah’s prophecy is not “eternally pending” (#17), and sets a deadline of 65 years. But then this important deadline is either discarded or reinterpreted by Christians who want it to be about something else.
  5. Because the remaining prophetic details don’t match up, Christians must shoehorn Jesus into a prophecy that was never considered Messianic (#9, #18).

… it should be noted that no known Jewish writings prior to Matthew interpret this passage as a reference to the virgin birth of the Messiah.
— Isaiah, Volume 1, by Terry R. Briley, p. 125

While Mary’s virginity is impossible to verify, it is possible to show that Isaiah 7:14 was never intended to be viewed as Messianic, and that Jesus does not fit its description.

If God truly wanted to give a prophecy about Jesus, he could’ve said: “The Messiah will be born of a virgin in 725 years, and he shall be named Jesus.” Sure, skeptics could still argue that Jesus’ story was manufactured to match up with Isaiah’s prophecy, but at least we would have a match; at least we could say the prophecy was spot-on.

What we have here is not a match, it’s a prophecy about another child, who was to be born in another time, for another purpose, and we’re forced to resort to fuzzy logic and mental gymnastics to force Jesus’ slipper onto Immanuel’s foot. We shouldn’t have to resort to these kinds of tactics to defend a legitimate prophecy.

This entry was posted in Jesus, New Testament, Old Testament, Prophecy and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to 54. Did Isaiah 7:14 predict the virgin birth of Jesus?

  1. john zande says:

    Awesome. This is a keeper.

  2. Anonymous says:

    What are the chances of a virgin birth being mentioned in the Old Testament hundreds of years before one happening? How you claim it has nothing to do with our savior’s birth. What virgin birth do you think God was referring to? Your argument is not logical.

    • Hello, thanks for writing.

      The odds of it being mentioned are actually irrelevant, because no matter what Isaiah says, all Matthew has to do is lie about it occurring (so long as it’s easily lied about).

      For example, if Isaiah predicted, “Immanuel will be delivered to us by a flying pink unicorn!” All Matthew has to say is, “Jesus was also delivered by a flying pink unicorn!” It’s not that hard to lie, and we cannot prove Jesus was not delivered this way.

      Likewise, what are the odds that the words “God is with us” would show up in the Qur’an? It was just as easy for the authors of the Qur’an to write that Muhammad was called “God is with us” as it was for Christians to write “Mary was a virgin.”

      There are other prophecies that were much more difficult to lie about. For example, you couldn’t lie and say that Jesus became king of Israel and brought about world peace. Even though this was also predicted, it is not easily lied about, people could prove it was untrue.

      Have a good one,

    • toby says:

      The virgin birth wasn’t mentioned in the Old Testament hundreds of years before it happened. Christians take Isaiah 7:14 completely out of context.

  3. pavsko says:

    There is very interesting book (2005) by Peter Enns: Inspiration and incarnation (Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament). Author admits without hesitation that apostolic hermeneutic is clearly based on eisegeis. But he still stays on evangelical position and believes in the inspiration of Scripture. He points to the necessity of trying to understand ancient common approaches to texts and ancient ways of interpretations and he shows that apostles where no exception.

    He suggest we need to understand God as the one who comes to our human level (ie. level of people of the first century AD) and that he lets Himself be known throught human imperfection. Dr. Enns offers so called incarnational model of Scripture, ie. it is 100% divine and simultaneously 100% human text. He also emphasize that New Testament writers by their “links” to the OT prophesies tries to show broader and deeper theological context (not the one expressed literally by one verse).

    I quite understand you could argue that Dr. Enns’ solution is only another endeavour how to escape from obvious inconsistency of the Scripture’s texts. It is no doubt based on confession of faith in Christ but for me it is acceptable way how to honestly cope with so clalled text problems including “weird” prophecies.

    (sorry for my bad english, it is not my native language)

    • Hi pavsko, thank you for your comment.

      Enn’s book was quite controversial among Christians (even cost him his job at Westminster Theological Seminary). But you’re correct, I would probably argue that his solution is just one more attempt (in a very long line of attempts) to apologize for and evolve the scriptures to address the challenges raised by modern Bible scholars.

      But you’re certainly welcome to take this kind of interpretation on faith, I don’t really take issue with that. I only take issue with those who insist this kind of prophecy proves the Bible is true, it doesn’t, because it relies far too heavily on eisegesis and hopes pinned on a dual meaning. This subjective secondary meaning can be whatever you like, and it can (and does) vary from religion to religion, so whatever interpretation one settles upon (likely the one that supports their current beliefs), this acceptance will require faith.

      In terms of Christianity, not only must we have faith that a dual meaning exists, but we must also have faith in the gospel writers, that they were telling the truth, and that they inspected Mary’s hymen before she give birth. Somehow I doubt that happened — so ya, it requires a LOT of faith. 😉


  4. Anonymous says:

    You said that Matthew may have been lying. Matthew died for his faith. Why would he die for something he knew was a lie.

    • Hi there,

      I’ll borrow a quote from Wikipedia: “The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription ‘according to Matthew’ was added some time in the second century.”

      Not knowing who he was, we cannot say how he died.

      It’s believed that the gospel of Matthew was written around 70-110 AD, so even if the author was an eyewitness, he would’ve been getting on in years by the time the book was completed.

      But I do get your point, and the willingness to sacrifice one’s life is a question I wish to explore in the future. There are many people who have knowing died for lies they told, each for their own reasons, so it’s not uncommon. It’s even more common for people to die for their faith, and we see this all the time (terrorists, etc.). But as it relates specifically to Matthew, we just can’t say.


      • Anonymous says:

        None of my college courses accept Wikipedia because any one can change the content. My NLT version acredits Levi or Matthew as the author and does not state where it could be unknown like other books. It also states it was written between 60 and 65 AD. Also, suicide bombers have no idea if what they believe is true or not they have not physically seen their god at work where the disciples saw Jesus walk on water and preform miracles. It just doesn’t make sense for11 out of 12 disciples, not to mention Paul, willing be put to death for something they knew was a lie. How would they have benefited.

        • Just for a moment, let’s go ahead and assume that Levi or Matthew was the author. Let’s also assume the author and 10 others were executed for what they had personally witnessed. Why would someone die for something that may not be true?

          Consider Marshall Applewhite, who convinced 39 people to end their lives in order to reach “the Next Level.” They weren’t forced, they weren’t executed, they were free to walk away. You can even watch their testimonies on YouTube; they gave their lives willingly because they were convinced of what this man said. But their willingness to die doesn’t convince me that there is any truth to Applewhite’s lies, it just convinces me that people can be persuaded and deceived by charismatic characters, it happens all the time.

          Likewise, Jim Jones convinced 909 people to end their own lives. How would they benefit by ending their lives? Why didn’t they all run for it? If Jones didn’t have the truth, it just doesn’t make sense that 909 followers would be willing to give their lives!

          Without any substantial miracles, these men convinced hundreds of people to die for them. Jesus, on the other hand, heals hundreds and can’t even get the locals to spare his life over Barabbas.

          The disciples did have a benefit — a big one — eternal life in paradise, and hell if they denied him. They believed Jesus’ promises just like the followers of Marshall Applewhite believed his, and the followers of Jim Jones believes his, and followers of David Koresh believed his, and followers of Joseph Di Mambro believed his, and so on, and so forth. A willingness to die for what you saw, or what you think you saw, or what others later said they thought you saw, does not prove anything.

          Long story short, Matthew’s willingness to die does not prove Mary was a virgin, nor does it prove Isaiah was speaking of Jesus when he gave this prophecy.


          • Anonymous says:

            All the people you mentioned ended their lives on a basis they couldn’t prove just like the terrorist and unlike the disciples and thousands others who witnessed,saw, felt and heard the supernatural miricals of Jesus. Jesus had a genuine adgenda unlike the selfish ambitions of the lunatics you mentioned. You might as well have compared Mother Teresa to Hitler.

  5. michael says:

    Heyyyyyy 500!

    The dangers of making doctrine upon one passage out of the whole Bible is a problem. We must connect the dots from Genesis to Revelation. In doing so, we are given tremendous insight into all of prophecies. Scripture is FULL of current prophecies pertaining to that time in scripture and are at the same time prophecies of a future time. Its easy not to understand when you do not put all of the pieces together.

    This prophecy is pertaining to BOTH, the current times of those days and gives insight to the prediction of Jesus the Messiah. This is not uncommon for God to give a prophecy within a prophecy. There are hundreds of them. Many very familiar. This is not the only prediction of the Messiah Jesus to come from a virgin woman. We can find the first in Gen 3:15 “And I will put enmity between you and THE WOMAN, and BETWEEN YOUR OFFSPRING AND HERS; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” So, even here is insight to a woman (Mary) giving birth to a child (Jesus) and this child will crush the serpents (Satan) head.

    Now, this is giving us insight that a woman will give birth to a child that will defeat satan the serpent but in order to do that God will first have to put separation between the womans seed and satans seed. Satans seed is the seed of sin which we are all born from and that every man caries because it is passed down since the fall of Adam. The messiah could NOT come from a mans seed because a mans seed contained tainted sin within it. Therefore, this woman that God speaks of must and has to be a virgin and the seed that she gave birth from was Gods seed the holy spirit. This also give insight to those who are “born again”, not of blood or the flesh or the will of man but of God. When we are born again we contain Gods seed within us. “No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God.” -1st Jn 3:9 Jesus was born of God by being born of Gods seed within a virgin Woman. So, this is the same seed that God put within the virgin mary so to give birth to “He who will crush your head”. Jesus did this on the cross. Jesus coming from a virgin was in Gods plan right from the beginning. Putting separation between the woman and satans seed is allowing this woman to be first a virgin.

    When we say Jesus as not being the Messiah due to that one little part in Isaiah then we must dismiss all other evidence and prophecies that Jesus did indeed fulfill. There are hundreds even that are outside sources that non biblical pagan witnesses wrote about. We cant dismiss Jesus being the predicted messiah based on one chapter of the whole bible when he fulfilled hundreds of others. Right from Genesis the Messiah was predicted to be born of a virgin. Isaiah gives us much insight to the Messiah and even gives an example of a current prophecy to that time but is fully fulfilled in a future time. Again, scripture is FULL of current prophecies pertaining to that time in scripture and are at the same time prophecies of a future time. Its easy not to understand when you do not put all of the pieces together. The book of Daniel is also full of them on its own.

    • Heyyyyyy michael! Thanks for taking the time to comment.

      Allow me to restate the position I find myself in:

      I believe that anyone making a claim is responsible for providing evidence to prove that claim. In this case, Christians claim the Bible is divinely inspired, and they use prophecy as their evidence. That’s fine, so long as we can agree on what qualifies as a good prophecy.

      At this point I would say, “Give me a prophecy and we’ll take a look at it.” And if the prophecy doesn’t fail for any of the reasons outlined under question 32 (i.e. if it’s a decent prophecy), there may be something to it. However, some Christians cast a very wide net and say, “Well… ALL of them are evidence, which must be considered together.”

      That’s fine, and I absolutely understand and agree that evidence is cumulative, (just like the evidence for evolution). HOWEVER, each and every piece of evidence must be able to stand or fall on its own merit, otherwise the conclusion will be flawed.

      For example, if I made 1,000 prophecies and later announced, “All of my prophecies have come to pass, I am God,” would you worship me? Probably not. You would say, “Heyyyyyyyy, hold up there a minute, let me take a gander at them there prophecies. Here in prophecy #1 you predict that: ‘The world will come into a great knowledge,’ but you don’t say WHAT knowledge, that’s far too vague! And here in #2 you say, ‘The sun will continue to rise,’ which is both obvious and highly probable,” and so on and so forth.

      It’s not until you evaluated the merits of each prophecy that you realized that none of them were truly outstanding, and my conclusion was flawed. I should not be allowed to rake together a pile of low-grade prophecies and proclaim: “This is an A+ collection!” It’s not.

      To put it another way, it’s like building a house out of bricks vs. straw. You can build a house out of either material, but one is going to hold up much better, and be much stronger, and more reliable.

      In our case, a conclusion about the Bible’s ability to predict the future should be based on solid, high-quality prophecies in order to build a solid conclusion. If this conclusion is based on nothing more than a pile of problematic prophecies, then our conclusion is also likely to be flawed.

      The material in this case is so poor that Muslims use the same stuff to build arguments for Muhammad being prophesied throughout that the entire Bible. Again, I bet if I were to examine these claims individually, I would also find the same kinds of weak prophetic arguments.

      Take care,

      • johnrosstar says:

        I’ll give you an example of the benefit of prophecy. Jehovah’s Witnesses linked the beast of Rev. to the League of Nations well before WWII. In 1942, Nathan Knorr delivered the talk “Peace – Can it Last” in which he outlined how the prophecy in chapter 13 was about to be fulfilled in which the beast had suffered a death-stroke (the L of N’s had been disbanded during WWII) but would be re-born after the war. Keep in mind that this was 1942 in the thick of the war and during which some ‘christians’ were in fear of it being the beginning of Armageddon. Knorr mentioned that this war would end and an era of man-made peace would be ushered in but questioned whether it be lasting and dependable. Of course, it won’t as the UN is counterfeit world govt that is set in opposition to God’s Kingdom.

        • toby says:

          The Jehovah’s Witnesses organization has a poor track record when it comes to biblical interpretation in my opinion. This can be seen by simply referring to their own publications wherein numerous failed prophecies and/or predictions were made or strongly hinted at. Jehovah’s Witnesses when confronted will usually deny that any predictions were made but this is all one can do when a prediction fails and is in print. Often these predictions were cloaked in ambiguity but one hundred years of failures is enough to demonstrate the folly of placing any importance in a contradictory, unreliable and ambiguous book.

  6. johnrosstar says:

    I’d venture to say the great majority of prophecy has two-fold fulfillment. Much information is couched within passages that may not even have a direct bearing on the then current happening. Like the passage about Lucifer when talking about the king of Tyre. There were some similarities in their personalities so Jehovah found it a convenient place to give some insight into what makes Satan tick and the flaws in his character that lead him to do what he did.
    Minor and major fulfillment are found in abundance. The minor fulfillment would give persons of faith confidence in the bigger prophetic picture. Jehovah is hiding his doings from ‘wise men’ and revealing them to babes.
    Perhaps Ahaz was a fitting representation of the faithless nation of Israel that ultimately rejected the Messiah- his refusing a sign reflected the state of the nation at large when they refused to believe the powerful miracles Christ performed right before their eyes, thereby proving that ‘God was with him’.

  7. PETER KARIUKI says:

    How people labour to proof Jesus was not the Messiah! Its almost as if, Jesus needs people to belief that he was the messiah for him to be. It does not matter. Jesus was the messiah. His Kingdom is of paradise, not of the earth.
    Beloved of the Father,
    I am Jesus. (Acts 26: 9-18). I am not of this world. I am from above.” John 8: 23-23 I preexisted (John 6:61-62 ) I was there, even before the world was made. John 17: 1-5. I have my origin in God, John 8: 42-42 I was with Him from the very beginning. John 17: 1-5 Through me everything came to be, and not a thing that has its being without me. John 1:1-4 I am the Christ. I am the Son of the Living God. Mark 14: 61-62 I am a King. John 16:32 But my Kingdom is not of this World. John 18:37 Its in paradise. Luke 23: 39-43.
    I am the Light. And I as the Light, I have come down to the World so that anyone who believe in me won’t have to stay any longer in the dark . He will have the Light of life John 12:46:46. I , as God the Manifest, am greater than anyone who has ever lived on earth including Solomon, even with all His wisdom. Mathew 12: 38-42 And none, will ever be like Me! I am the Lord. I am the First, and the Last. Revelation 1:17 With my voice, I make the tumultuous sea calm again. Luke 8:24-25 With my voice, I heal the sick. Mathew 8:2 With my Voice, I call the dead, and they are restored to life. John 5:26-28 I am of David’s line, the root of David, and the bright star of the morning. Revelations 22: 16 And I, am your God. John 20:24-29 I am He, from eternity. John 17: 1-5 For I, and the Father are One. John 10:30 I am God from God! Psalms 45:1-7 I am the Great I am. John 8: 37-38. I am the Lord, your Master. John 13:14-15 Mathew 12:1-14
    I tell you most solemnly, the hour will come-in fact, it is here already-when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and all who hear it, will live. For the Father, who is the source of Life, has made the Son, the source of life, and because he is the Son of Man, has appointed him, supreme judge. John 5:26-28. This should tell you, that I am your Savior, and also your Judge. John 5:26-28. Therefore, you must listen to me. Mathew 17:1-5 I have come to take you to be where I am. so that you may always see my glory which the Father gave me ,because He loved me before the foundation of the world. John 17: 24-24 I have come to save you. John 3:16 I have come so that you may have life to its full. John 10:9-11 I am your redeemer sent by God. John 3:16 I am Ye-ho-shua, Yahweh, who is your Salvation. John 8: 37-38 He sent me to you, to invite you, in to His Kingdom. John 8:42- 43 I was sent, to take you home, where you are to shine like the sun, in the Kingdom of the Father. Mathew 13:41-23 Fear not , for I am with you. John 14: 20-22 I am in you, and you are in me . Therefore we are One. I am you, you are me get that! John 17:21-23
    I want to will speak to you of your own salvation, and if you heed to my voice, will live. John 5:25-25 Yes, its my Fathers will, that whoever sees the Son, and believes in him, shall have eternal life, and I shall raise him up, on the last day John 6:39-40 Beloved, all the Father has, is now mine. It has been given to me. John 16: 15-17. And all the power in heaven and earth, has also been given to me. Mathew 20: 18-20 I know the prince of this world has come. But he has no power over me. John 14: 30. For the time has come for judgment, when he shall be overthrown. John 12: 31 Therefore, fear not, for am always with you. I have not left you an orphan. I shall come to you, if you invite me. Here I am, I stand at the door and knock. If you here me knocking, I shall come, and share a meal with you. Revelations 3:20 The world no longer sees me. But you will see that I live and you also will live. On that day, you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you John 14: 18-20
    I, as the savior of Man, already have drawn all men to myself. I have bought you, with my wounded body , and my blood. You all belong to me. John 12: 31-32 Beloved I love you, with a greater love, which has no man. For a man can have no greater love, than to lay down his own life for his friends. You are my friend, if you do what I command you. John 15:12-14 I now, give you a New commandment, love one another, as I love you. With that love, everyone will know you are my disciple. John 13:33-35 I lay my life for you, on my own accord. No man can take it from me. I have the power to lay it down, and I have the power to take it. John 10: 18, I am the good shepherd, I lay down my life for my own John 10:13-16 . Follow me, and you shall have treasures in heaven. Matthew 19: 16-22. I am the Resurrection and the Life John 11:25 If you believe me, and follow my command, I shall raise you up, on the last day. John 6:39-40 For, I am the Living One. I was dead, but now, I am to live for ever and ever, and I hold the key, to death, and underworld. Revelations 1:18
    I am the Way, the Truth and the Life John 14:6 I am the gate. Anyone who enters through me will be safe; such a one will go in and out and will find pasture. John 10:9- 11 I am the True Vine, and the Father is the Vine dresser. John 15:1 I am the Vine, you are my branches, get that. John 15:5 You take care therefore, and bear fruits aplenty. Every branch that does bear fruit, he prunes, to make it bear even more. John 15: 1-2 7And every branch of mine that does not does not bear fruits, he cuts away. These branches are collected and thrown in the fire, and they are burnt. John 15: 1-7 Therefore abide in me, and I in you. For no branch, can bear any fruit on its own. It must remain on the vine. It’s the same with you. You cannot bear fruits without me. That means that without me, you can do nothing. John 15: 1- 4 Ask, and whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask me anything, in my name, I will do it John 14:13-14 Therefore, ask of me, and I will give you the living water. John 7:37-38
    I am the bread of Life. John 6:35 I am the Living bread, that came down from heaven. John 6:41 He who eats this bread, will never see death. John 8:51-51 And the bread that I shall give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood lives in me and I live in that person. As the living Father sent me and I draw life from the Father, so whoever eats me he will also draw life from me. For my flesh, is food in deed. And my blood, is real drink. John 6:56-57 To eat my flesh, and to drink my blood, is to live the life of the Cross! That’s my way, that’s my Truth, that’s my life! I am the Melchizedeck! Hebrew 9: 11-15
    Beloved, how much do you love? Learn from me, and always treat others as you would wish them to treat you. That’s the law, and the prophets. Mathew 7:12 Stop trying to change people and change yourself first. Be the change you want in the world. Be like I am. Why do you only see the speck in your brothers eyes yet you do not see the log in your? Deal with your weakness first. Mathew 7:3-5 Behold, I am now making everything New. Help me, to make the world a better place for the Father. If you suffer for me, I will set you free. And if I sets you free, you will be free indeed. John8: 36-37 But anyone who does not take his cross and follow my footsteps is not worthy of me. And anyone who finds his life, will loose it. But anyone who looses his life for my sake will find it. Mathew 10: 38-39
    I am the Light of the world, John 8:12 As long as I am in this world, I am the light of the world. John 9:5 If I am in you, and you are in me, you are the Light of the World. A city built on a hill-top cannot be hidden. No one lights a lamp to put it on under a tub; they put it on a lam-stand where it shines for everyone tin the house. In the same way, your light must shine in people’s sight, so that seeing your good works, they may give praise to your Father in heaven”. Mathew 5: 14-16. So, go Light the World!
    Beloved, do not be afraid of the suffering that are coming to you. Look, the devil will send some of you to prison to put you to test, and you must face hardship for days. Fear not. For I will give you the crown of life for your prize. Revelation 2: 10 I am coming soon, to give you, your reward. Revelations 3: 11If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we shall come to him, and make home with him John 14:23-24
    So, dear brother, come to me, you who labour and are overburdened, and I will give you rest. Shoulder my yoke and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. Yes, my yoke is easy and my burden light.’ Matt 11:30 Receive the Kingdom of God like a child. Let me train you. Follow me and learn the ways of life. Luke 18: 16-17 I will certainly not reject anyone who comes to me, because I have come from heaven, not to do my own will, but to do the will of him who sent me John 6:37-38 And His will, is that you should not be lost. That you may be One with me, as I am One with the Father . With me in you, and you in me. John 17:21-23 Look, I have given you an example, so that you may copy what I have done for you. John 13:14- 15
    Beloved, you are persecuting me when you persecute my people. Acts 26: 9-18 I am the Lord, walk before me, and be blameless. Leave your life of sin, and you will not be condemned John 8: 11 I am the one who reproves and disciplines all those he loves. So, repent in earnest. Revelations 3: 19-20 Have mercy on each other. Forgive each other’s failings. If you do that, your heavenly Father will forgive you yours. But if you do not forgive others, your father will not forgive you either. Mathew 6: 14-15 Do not love preferentially. That does not make you any different from others! Love even your enemies, also , and pray for those that persecute you. Mathew 6: 43-47 That’s what I did! Luke 23:33-34 Follow me, and I will give eternal Life. John 10; 25-28 Take you cross, and follow me. Mathew 10: 38-39 I fed the hungry; feed the hungry! John 6: 1-10 I forgave, and I forgive sins, forgive those who wrong you. John 8: 11-20 I showed pity. Show empathy. Mathew 20:32-34 Love each other, for me. Therefore tend to my sheep. Whatever you want others to do for you, do it to them also. Try your best, to enter by the narrow door, because I tell you, many will try to enter and they will not succeed. Luke 13: 23-24. But be very carefully when you are giving to the needy. Do not practice your righteousness in front of others. If you do, you will have no rewards from your Father in heaven. Do it in secret, so that you get your reward from your Father. And when you are fasting, do not let people you that you are doing it.
    Do not concern yourself with what you will eat or what you will wear. It’s the pagans who do that. And why should you worry yourself about clothes? See the flowers in the field, and how they grow. They do not labour or spin. Yet, even Solomon, in all his splendor was not dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass in the field which is here today and gone tomorrow, will He not cloth you-you of little faith? So, do not worry about these things, seek first the Kingdom of God, and His righteousness, and all these other things will be given to you as well. Mathew 6:1-34
    Obstacles unfortunately, are sure to come. But alas, for the one who provides them! It would be better for him to be thrown in to the sea, with a millstone put around his neck, than he should lead astray a single of these little ones. You must watch yourselves! Luke 17:1-3 Be on guard, of false prophets, who come disguised, but they are in fact ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Mathew 7: 15-16. Look, I am sending you out like sheep among wolves; so be cunning as snakes and yet innocent as doves. Matthew 10:16
    A Disciple is not above his teacher, nor a savant above his Master. Its enough for the disciple to be like his teacher and the savant like his Master. If they have called the Master of the House Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household? Mathew 10:24-25 Therefore while you are in this World expect to have much trouble. But be of good cheer, I have overcome the World. John 16: 32-33 Therefore, do not let your heart be troubled. Trust in God, and trust also in me. There are many rooms in my fathers house. I am making a place for you. After I have done it, I shall return to take you with me, so that where I am, you may bee too. John 14: 1-3 Prepare yourself, and pray for strength , because you will be betrayed, even by parents, and brothers, relations, friends, and some of you will be put to death. You will be hated by all men, on account of my name, but not a hair of your head will be lost. Your endurance will win you your lives Luke 21: 16-19 Learn from me, how to be a man of peace, a man with a contrite heart. Therefore how happy are you, when you are poor in Spirit; Yours is the kingdom of Heaven. I will teach you the ways to the Kingdom. Happy are you, when you are gentle. You shall have the earth for your heritage. Happy are you who mourn, because of persecution; You shall be comforted. Happy are you, when you hunger and thirst for what is right, you shall be satisfied. Happy are you, when you are merciful; you shall have mercy shown on you. Happy are you when you are pure in heart, with no sinister intentions; you shall see God. Happy are you, when you are the peace maker. You shall be called son of God. Happy are you, when you are persecuted in the cause of right. Yours is the kingdom of heaven. Happy are you, when people abuse you, and persecute you, and speak all kinds of calumny against you. Rejoice, and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven; this is how they persecuted the prophets before you Matthew 5: 3-12 And this is how they persecuted me! Mathew 26:67-68
    Therefore if the world hates you, just remember that it hated me, before it hated you. If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own. But because you do not belong to the world, because my choice withdrew you from the world, therefore the world hates you. And since they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. They hate me for no reason. And therefore, they will hate you for no reason. John 15:18-25 But if you persevere, and keep working for me, there is nothing to be afraid of in second death. Revelation 2:10-11 If you persevere, and keep working for me, and prove victorious, I will feed you, from the Tree of Life, set in God’s paradise Revelation 2:7. If you persevere and prove victorious, and keep working for me till the end, I will give authority over pagans, which I myself have been given by my Father to rule them with an iron scepter, and shatter them like earthenware. And I will give you the morning Star. Revelations 2:27-29 If you persevere, and keep working form me, I allow you to share my throne. Revelation 3: 19-20 I will l make you a King, and a priest, in the line of kings and priests of the Father to serve Him. Revelation 1:5-7 Be strong, therefore and take courage! Yours, will be the Kingdom of God Luke 6:20-21 And know that I am with always, yes, to the end of times. Mathew 28:19-20 Enter by the narrow gate, since the road that leads to destruction is wide and spacious, and many take it. Enter by the narrow gate, and a hard road that leads to life, and only a few find it Mathew 7: 13-14
    I the Lord have spoken. I am the Alpha and the Omega. I am the First, and the Last. Revelation 1:17 Be warned therefore, for I am now making the whole creation new for the Father. Revelations 21:5 I am the Light. I have come to bring fire on earth, and how I wish it were brazing already. Therefore watch out, for I am Hell to pay if you do not listen to me, and do as I have commended you. Luke 12:49-50 I am the Lord God, God who was, who is, and who is to Come. Revelation 1: 8-8 Stay awake ! Mark 13:35-37
    Your Beloved Elder Brother,
    Jesus the Christ

    • toby says:

      The original article was very well written. It covered the common objections often raised by Christians in a logical methodical fashion. In contrast, your response is par for the course for Christians. I do not wish to offend but what you have done is simply quote ad nauseam from an old book which if examined with an open mind and intellectual honesty is clearly flawed. Many of the verses quoted were written anonymously, so right of the bat we have little reason to believe them. Outside of the religious writings there is no evidence of any substance in support. I was a Christian for 35 years but at some point I was challenged to defend my faith. When I examined my beliefs in depth I realised I had been duped. My faith was the result of childhood indoctrination. This 500 series of articles are excellent and I would encourage all religious folk to read them with an open mind. Value knowledge over belief.

    • Anonymous says:

      I could say the same thing Jesus said about myself. Would you believe me?… LOL

  8. Anonymous says:

    The simplest way for God to prove the truth of Isaiah’s prophecy and Jesus’s virgin birth is for God to allow a virgin to become impregnated miraculously and give birth RIGHT NOW — where the whole process can be documented & monitored by scientists with cameras and audio recorders and computers who can share their findings with the ENTIRE PLANET. Wouldn’t that be more believable than some anonymous agrarians from 1st century Palestine who could only share an unverifiable, hand-me-story with local illiterates? THINK ABOUT IT…..

  9. Sharyn says:

    It’s fantastic that you are getting thoughts from this post as well as from
    our discussion made here.

  10. Hebrew scholars have often pointed out that the word _’alma_ in our text is better translated “young woman” than “virgin”. It was the Greek Septuagint translation that for some reason used a word (parthenos) that more specifically mean “virgin”, and Matthew (writing in Greek) develops his own story from this dubious translation.

    Moreover, Immanuel is better translated “With us is God” than “God with us”. Since traditional Christian theology makes Jesus an incarnation of the deity, believers may see him as “God with us” (God come to earth), but the text in Isaiah rather assures Ahaz that Yahweh will be on the side of the defenders in the conflict with the northern kings. The name of the child born is to reflect this, NOT to indicate that the child is somehow an incarnation of Yahweh.

  11. Great post 500!! Lol I think I say this a lot. I noticed someone wrote a lot of Jesus ‘ quotes….here’s what I have wondered… If Jesus didn’t have a stenographer following him around and the gospels were written decades later… How can anyone know what Jesus said word for word. My Bible has Jesus’ words in red…. I’m thinking how can anyone remember exactly what He said? I can’t even tell u word for word conversations I had yesterday, how can these writers remember 70 years later?

    • Not to mention there are some events in Jesus’ life that are documented when there was no one around to witness them (such as his trials in the desert, or what he prayed the night before being arrested). Makes you wonder how we came to know these details.


  12. Judith says:

    secretsally70, I wondered the same thing when I was around 12 years old but then again the bible seems to have an excuse, I mean answer for everything as it says somewhere in it that it is the inspired word of god.

    Any who, 500Q, love love love your work, and you’re funny too so that’s a bonus…the only issue I have though, and it’s a little one, is that you seem to have replaced your christian beliefs with the belief in evolution. Isn’t that a bit ironic? I am pretty sure that the only evidence you have of evolution is things you read in some place or other. Isn’t that the same as the Christians providing proof of the existence of god using the bible? I wonder have you or the scientist you trust so much ever witnessed evolution with your own eyes? Is there any tangible proof that is not supported by the stories scientists make up in their minds that is available to the public?

    No one alive today has lived through the ages and so no one can ever say they know with certainty what happened before they were born. The past is a mystery and as you have stated many times, people lie. What’s sad though is that sometimes they tend to believe their own lies.

    But I love you man, keep on doing the good work 😉

    • Hi Judith,

      Thanks for commenting and challenging my assumptions.

      You’re right, I can never say with 100% certainty that evolution happened. All one can do is cull the available evidence and try to make a determination as to where the arrows are pointing. I was highly skeptical of evolution when I first started out, but I have to admit that the evidence eventually won me over.

      But I do believe it’s possible to know many things about what happened before we were born, based on the clues that are left behind. For example, I believe that dinosaurs once roamed the earth. I’ve never seen one, but the fossilized bones are enough evidence for me to conclude that these things were once alive. Like forensics, we look at these clues and try to determine the “causes” that led to the “effects” we now observe.

      But granted, the evidence for evolution is like a huge jigsaw puzzle — scattered all over the place — and there is no single piece that screams, “See! Evolution!” But there is a lot of evidence we can still observe with our own eyes.

      For example, we can observe that there are layers in the ground where only certain types of animals existed at that time, or animals that are not around today. We can also observe the many oddities that infer evolution, such as how whales, dolphins, and manatees have arms, wrists, and fingers… an odd design choice for a “fish”. Likewise, we can observe how birds, pterodactyls, and bats all developed different ways to fly, also by morphing the same basic arm-wrist-hand structures. We can look at atavisms, such as human yolk sacks. We can observe the marsupials in Australia, who appear to have evolved independently from placental mammals. We can observe the many different kinds of dogs that man has been able to produce by applying our own selective pressures over the past few thousand years. We can also observe how our bodies are built entirely out of tiny cells, as if these cells came together because of advantages provided by working together. There is also a large variety of human skulls that have been unearthed that tell us humans have been changing over time, and there are numerous examples of transitional forms, such as archaeopteryx. These are just some of the clues we can observe for ourselves.

      For other things, you are correct, we have to take scientists at the word. For example, I’ve never seen an atom, so I have to assume scientists have validated each other’s work on the subject, and that all the evidence points to their existence. But scientists are always trying to prove each other wrong, which makes the scientific method more reliable than, say, an ancient text that just tells you what you ought to believe.

      But even Christian scientist Francis Collins (leader of the Human Genome Project) confesses that evolution must be true. He points out that not only do we share most of our DNA with apes, but that there is other evidence, such as genes that are broken in apes, monkeys, and humans in exactly the same way (such as our vitamin C gene), suggesting these genes broke in a common ancestor. Mr. Collins also points out that if were to take the DNA of all living things, and put them in a computer, it could sort out the evolutionary hierarchy just based on the changes to their DNA. But you’ll have to take his word for it.

      Still, if better evidence for an alternative theory were to present itself, I would like to think I would be open-minded enough to change my mind, just as I was willing to change my mind in this case.

      Thanks again,

    • johnrosstar says:

      Did you read his ‘Question 24’? If you have a week, take a look.

  13. Judith says:

    Hey 500, thank you for responding, I didn’t think you would do so so quickly. Yes johnrosstar I did read Question 24, interesting stuff, quite sad too.

    So 500, I get only just the gist of what you’re saying above because every time anyone talks about evolution, my mind just goes to other places and it becomes hard to concentrate (even though I did life sciences in high school). Perhaps one day I will be able to read tons of books and writings about it and be able to understand it more but right now I don’t see that happening. It just seems too far fetched for me.

    People, myself included, have this nagging need to understand where they came from and so there is always a group who will try to fulfill that need. Religion has been there to try and close that gap but of recent it seems that it is slowly being replaced by the big bang THEORY and the evolution THEORY and such.

    Maybe one day I will put more effort into finding out how it all began but for right now I’m content with the idea that I will never know and neither will any other human being, not for certain anyway.

    Here’s a site I found when my brain was struggling to comprehend something you said in one of your posts, I forgot which. As I said, my brain starts to wonder off every time I read anything about evolution so I only, heavily skimmed through it but I think you might enjoy reading it.


    • Hi Judith,

      Thanks for the article. This is exactly the kind of thing I used to believe, and teach, and I would say it is pretty typical for creationist propaganda.

      Joe Crews, the author, claims science is up in arms over evolution, but the truth is that 99.9% of scientists believe in evolution (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/02/creationism-america-survey_n_5434107.html). If anything, it’s Christians who are up in arms over evolution. The majority now embrace evolution, and Joe is in a shrinking minority, still fighting against it. (By the way, a theory in science is considered much more concrete than a theory in more casual terms. Gravity, too, is still just a theory in science.)

      Joe also says spontaneous generation is a problem, but doesn’t bother to explain how God spontaneously generated, or why God’s complexity didn’t require a designer, or why God, in all his complexity, is more likely to “just exist” than a relatively simple cell (see questions #5 and #6).

      Joe covers a lot of other territory, but the crux of his problem is this: Joe begins with an assumption, that the Bible is true, and then works backwards from there.

      So why is this a problem?

      Imagine you came upon a murder scene and you had a bloodhound. You could then follow that bloodhound, in hopes that it will lead you to door of the murderer, or you could drag that bloodhound to the door of someone you suspect is the killer. Which conclusion is going to be most accurate? Joe is guilty of dragging the bloodhound.

      Joe didn’t come to his conclusions about the Bible because, for example, there was an abundance of evidence for a global flood, where all animals of every kind were neatly buried together in a single strata. To the contrary, early Christian scientists found just the opposite, that strata contained different types of animals (e.g. you will never find a cow or moose in the same strata as a dinosaur, or a bird or jawed fish in a field of invertebrates). Joe was sold on an emotional religious story filled with promises of unconditional love, forgiveness, heaven, and threats of hell; and Joe is now going about trying to confirm his cherished religious bias.


      • johnrosstar says:

        “99% believe in evolution”. I believe in evolution too but firmly believe in creation so your term is a bit vague, to me at least. God’s creative designs ‘evolved’ over billions of years. Why is that concept so hard to grasp?
        As for ‘who created God?’, wouldn’t the chain have to end somewhere? Your reasoning is baseless since the creation of matter also includes the very creation of time itself as the theory of relativity meshes space & time into one inseparable ‘thing’. So before the material universe was created, God could have simply ‘been’. Obviously a concept not easy to grasp for any of us but does have a basis in science.

        • Hi Johnrosstar,

          I’m not sure what’s vague about the term (“evolution?”). Many Christians do believe in “theistic evolution,” but its still evolution (as opposed to spontaneous creation). I wasn’t implying that scientists were not religious (if that’s what you were getting from that).

          “As for ‘who created God?’, wouldn’t the chain have to end somewhere?”

          Not necessarily. Whether we are talking about God or matter, they either existed eternally, or they had a beginning.

          While our present Universe may have had a “beginning” 14 billion years ago, that doesn’t mean the matter and energy it now contains didn’t exist prior to the big bang. I tend to believe it did, simply because it seems less probable that it should just burst onto the scene from absolute nothingness.

          If Christians can reason that God has always existed, then materialists can likewise reason that matter and energy have always existed, as a “brute fact” of nature. I tend to think the latter is more credible, given that we can actually confirm matter and energy exist, and that these substances are surely far less complicated than an all-knowing, all-powerful, super-being… who then creates matter. (Why not just cut out the super-being, and start with matter?)

          I’d like to respectfully draw this conversation to a close, as we’ve gotten off-topic from the question of the virgin birth. But you’re welcome to have the last word, or pick it up again under a more appropriate topic (such as question #6).


  14. Judith says:

    Last night I debated with my dad, who is a pastor, for the fifth time in the space of less than four years about the existence of god. I am mentally and emotionally exhausted from it, I don’t know how you do it but I commend you coz someone has to do it.

    Looking forward to question #66

  15. Ishmael kolobile says:

    Yes, i agree that jesus was not imanuel and now i need to know further about kuresh there in isaiah

  16. Robert Brett says:

    Dear author of this website,

    You obviously are neither a Christian nor have the Holy Spirit residing within you. You are all logic and no soul. I pray for your salvation.

    • Hey Robert.

      What’s wrong with using logic? Isn’t it better to reason and test the truths we believe in, than to blindly trust in whatever religious story we are offered? Clearly not all religious stories can be true, yet billions of people believe in them. My logic tells me that religion is very deceiving, and therefore I should question my own.

      I was indeed a devout Christian for over 35 years, and — oddly enough — can still speak in tongues (evidence of the Holy Spirit).Though I would now say this is more likely a skill, and less likely a “gift.”

      Thanks for your concern,

      • johnrosstar says:

        You can still “speak in tongues”, can you…interesting. If you can as they did at Pentecost of 33 then that means you can miraculously speak foreign languages (as in foreign tongue). If you’re doing what modern fundamentalists are doing (speaking gibberish) then you’re simply under control of demons.

        • Well, that’s certainly not what I was raised to believe in the Pentecostal church, lol. I would now agree with you that it is nothing more than gibberish, but I can assure you we Pentecostals still take the baptism of the Holy Spirit very seriously. Some Pentecostals would go so far as to say you’re not truly saved without this evidence.


          • johnrosstar says:

            The special ‘gifts’ that were given to the apostles that included healing, tongues, prophesy, immunity from snake bites and even resurrecting the dead were only meant to be temporary. According to 1 Cor. 13 they would “be done away with” over the course of time. They served to give this new Christianity a jump start and make it obvious that Jehovah’s approval had shifted from the Jews to Christians. They ceased to be given after the death of the apostles. As the scripture goes on to relate, ‘love’ would become the identifying mark of true Christians.

            • I’m no longer a Pentecostal, so I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I’ll just say that many Pentecostals believe that God was pouring out his Spirit in “these last days.” Some early Pentecostals even went so far as to travel to other countries to try and witness in a foreign tongue. The failed, obviously.


      • Robert Brett says:

        Respectfully…as I am sure you have learned… Christianity is a faith, not a science. If you still had faith and the Holy Spirit within you, you would have faith in the truth of the Bible.

        I am both a student of the Bible and a historian.

        Why do you hide behind the title of an alias, 500Q?

        • Respectfully, by its very nature, Christianity MUST be based on faith. Not because believing in things without evidence is somehow desirable in God’s eyes (for some weird reason), but because a non-existent God must be defended by a myriad of excuses. Belief in ALL deities must be based on faith, because there is no evidence that any of them exist.

          As for my alias, most people here use an alias. One of the great things about the internet is anonymity, which allows people to speak their minds more freely. But the choice is yours. 🙂


  17. Pedro says:

    So 500Q, what do u believe in?

    • Hi Pedro.


      At this point (and my opinion is subject to change, based on new information), I believe that the universe exhibits naturalistic tendencies. I believe the Universe probably “just exists” as a brute fact, and that all life is the result of time and chance, mutations, and natural selections.

      I believe thinking beings evolved because thinking aided in our survival, and thinking led to us being able to ask big questions. When the answers were difficult to come by, people created myths to explain themselves and their surroundings.

      I believe these stories evolved over time, to fulfill the many needs of the human brain, and that humans have a deep-seated psychological need to believe.

      When these myths are confronted with opposition, I believe the brain defends itself by inventing excuse that are not easily falsified (e.g. “God is invisible and desires faith!”)

      While Christianity may be incredibly comforting to believe (because it brings us love, hope, and comfort in the face of fear and uncertainty), it is nevertheless untrue. But I also believe not every mind is ready or able to accept that truth.


      • Pedro says:

        So you are readily believe in something that is subject to change as in your opinion, new info that will be feed to you by someone you dont even know him or her well, regardless the truth but you wouldnt believe what your Creator tells you?

        Nothing cannot start, create or make something. Billions of stars that are perfectly organised as a strike of accidental effects? DNA that is so sophisticated as a mere coincidence? Life cycle that cycle and recycle the whole thing over n over again?

        I agree, we are an intellect being, yes our thinking has evolved, but compared to God, our thinking is limited, compared to the vast knowledge, superior intellect of a Supreme Being. So if you say God, Jesus and all the apostles are myths, i think Alexander the Great, Confusius, and all the pharaohs from Egypts are myths too. Does your brain defends itself now and inventing new excuses that Alexander the Great was not a myth?

        Christianity is not a religion, it is The Way, The Truth, and The Life. It is NOT a chicken soup feel good, and escape from reality stories.

        Then again, i believe your mind CHOSE That it is completely on the other side and not able to accept the truth.

        • “So you are readily believe in something that is subject to change … but you wouldnt believe what your Creator tells you?”

          When I was young, I believed in Santa Clause, but changed my mind and more information became available. I’m not an unreasonable man, and if I actually believed that the words in the Bible were that of the Creator, and not men, I might have reason to believe them. But I find no evidence of anything supernatural contained in the “scriptures,” no matter how men try to twist them.

          “Nothing cannot start, create or make something.”

          Whether we accept that God has always existed, or matter has always existed (in some form or another), we must accept that something has always existed, or something had a beginning. Since atoms and partials are infinitely less complicated than a creative person (i.e. a god), I seems more reasonable to me that a simple thing would exist by pure chance than an extremely complex thing.

          “Billions of stars that are perfectly organised as a strike of accidental effects?”

          I think they are drawn together by physics, not by a thinking being. Now, if they were clearly arranged designed into legible pictures, that might suggest intelligence.

          “DNA that is so sophisticated as a mere coincidence?”‘

          The first repeating combinations of DNA (or possibly RNA), absolutely. We’ve observed autocatalysis in living things, which leads to greater and greater amounts of organized information through trial and error. We look at it now and see it’s extremely complicated, but it took billions of years of trial and error for DNA arrive at where it is now.

          As for the first DNA, the universe is filled with trillions of planets just like ours. Given the possibly of an infinite amount of time, and an incredible amount of material to work with, all sorts of improbable combinations become probable.

          “… compared to God, our thinking is limited, compared to the vast knowledge, superior intellect of a Supreme Being.”

          If it is somehow probable that an extremely complex supreme being can “just exist,” then how much MORE probable is it that a far less complex being might come to exist?

          “So if you say God, Jesus and all the apostles are myths, i think Alexander the Great, Confusius, and all the pharaohs from Egypts are myths too.”

          God yes. Jesus and the apostles, no. The difference between God, Jesus, and Alexander the Great is, for starters, the extraordinary claims being made about the former. If someone said Alexander the Great walked on water, I wouldn’t believe them, either. We KNOW people sometimes get turned into myths. Which is more likely, that men would lie? Or that men have defied natural laws?

          “Does your brain defends itself now and inventing new excuses that Alexander the Great was not a myth?”

          Well, for one, we have a lot more written about some historical figures than Jesus. Strangely, very little was written about Jesus outside of the gospels. And again, no one is claiming Alexander the Great defied nature.

          “Christianity is not a religion, it is The Way, The Truth, and The Life. It is NOT a chicken soup feel good, and escape from reality stories.”

          And who fed YOU this information?

          Keep thinking!

          • Pedro says:

            When I was young, I believed in Santa Clause, but changed my mind and more information became available. I’m not an unreasonable man, and if I actually believed that the words in the Bible were that of the Creator, and not men, I might have reason to believe them. But I find no evidence of anything supernatural contained in the “scriptures,” no matter how men try to twist them.

            When you find out that santa claus is not real, “your truth” as a child were flawed becasue the real truth was not found by your rationale, so you concluded that santa claus is not real only after you have been enlighten by more info; yet the truth is absolute, just because when you were a child couldnt or you wouldnt believe it, the truth is santa claus is not real. The real truth still is the real truth. Same with God. If you want something supernatural, the best way is to start by being born again, as Jesus prescribed to Nicodemus, and i guarantee you will start experiencing supernatural stuff.

            Whether we accept that God has always existed, or matter has always existed (in some form or another), we must accept that something has always existed, or something had a beginning. Since atoms and partials are infinitely less complicated than a creative person (i.e. a god), I seems more reasonable to me that a simple thing would exist by pure chance than an extremely complex thing.

            True, and God is the Causa Prima from all this big bang and the beginning.. He is the alfa and also the omega…. God is not a person, He is a Spirit.

            I think they are drawn together by physics, not by a thinking being. Now, if they were clearly arranged designed into legible pictures, that might suggest intelligence.
            The first repeating combinations of DNA (or possibly RNA), absolutely. We’ve observed autocatalysis in living things, which leads to greater and greater amounts of organized information through trial and error. We look at it now and see it’s extremely complicated, but it took billions of years of trial and error for DNA arrive at where it is now.
            As for the first DNA, the universe is filled with trillions of planets just like ours. Given the possibly of an infinite amount of time, and an incredible amount of material to work with, all sorts of improbable combinations become probable.

            Science is the human way to solve mysteries of our surroundings n how things work. As human keep researching, new discoveries are being found on a yearly basis, sometimes monthly. Yet, that doesnt change the actual truth. If i say the sun revolves around the earth would you agree with me? But back then, this is what people believe. DNA was not found until we have the tools and the brain and as you quoted, recently there is a RNA. This founding only shows that there is a Supreme Being that created this sophisticated atom n particle, a universe inside a universe. And this is not a trial n error, like an evolution to find itself a perfection. This DNA was perfect from the beginning… we just happened to know it, in the 21st century.

            If it is somehow probable that an extremely complex supreme being can “just exist,” then how much MORE probable is it that a far less complex being might come to exist?

            You can ask God that question later when you pass away, but for me, i dont think so.

            God yes. Jesus and the apostles, no. The difference between God, Jesus, and Alexander the Great is, for starters, the extraordinary claims being made about the former. If someone said Alexander the Great walked on water, I wouldn’t believe them, either. We KNOW people sometimes get turned into myths. Which is more likely, that men would lie? Or that men have defied natural laws?

            I thought you dont believe that God exist? Anyway, Alexander couldnt walk on water, thats the truth and you are right, human cannot defy natural laws, but if he Did walk on water, im pretty sure alex would brag about it and he himself or someone else would note it, and make a record so that people would know, alex was the first man to walk on water. As from your reference, Jesus is God incarnate as man, the God that created these laws, obviously He shall be above these laws, because He created these laws. Jesus was walking on water, the gospel recorded this event. Jesus is God, not only He walks on water, He brought dead men back to life, turn water into wine, cast away evil spirits, heal the blind and leprechaun and so on. Which one is easier: to say your sin is forgiven or to say “wake up and walk?” The answer is in Luke 5:24.

            Well, for one, we have a lot more written about some historical figures than Jesus. Strangely, very little was written about Jesus outside of the gospels. And again, no one is claiming Alexander the Great defied nature.

            Of course. Everything happens for a reason, and there is a purpose for everything. Jesus was born in the era where there is very little media exposure, no internet, no twitters, facebooks, instagrams, wikipedias, no whatsapps. Now imagine if Jesus is here in 2016. He would be so famous that the twitterverse and internet would be bombarded with all His news, He would be the guest speaker for all seminars and events. But people might worship His statues or his pictures instead of the Father in Spirit and Truth. And He was born in the nation which His father prioritised first. Imagine if He was born, lets say in greece. He would be more famous than socrates, aristotle and plato combined. More writings would be made and recorded about Him. But thats not His point of coming to earth. He knows His purpose well, but the nation He loves so much has strayed away far far away from worshipping the Father, instead being hypocritical about the actual message of the Torah Law. Another reason is at the time more scholars who “made writings” doesnt like Him. If they made writings about Him, about Jesus they despised so willingly, that means they accept His teachings which never happen until now, that nation is still waiting for the real “saviour”. Also just because not a lot of biographies has been made about a person, that doesnt mean that person never exist.

            I believe there are some writings about Him from the roman people, does Flavius and Tacitus rings the bell?

            And who fed YOU this information?

            My Saviour my father, my God, my wonderful counsellor, my healer, Jesus. Do you want to experience Him?

Leave a reply (but please keep it related to the topic)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s