>Matthew 1:23“Behold, a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel”Wasn't Jesus supposed to be named Immanuel?
>>33659499While Inmanuel is a given name, it also means "God is with us". So the idea is that even though that is not Jesus's name, his birth affirms that God is here with us
>>33659499That verse is referring to what the prophet Isaiah said in to the Old Testament. Jesus rode the donkey to seal the deal, doing what Zechariah said. Seems all too convenient if you ask me.
If the verse instead said>they shall call his His name MessiahWould you still be confused as to why his name is Jesus and not Messiah?Immanuel is meant to connect him to prophecy rather than being his literal name. It is meant to be understood as >“Behold, a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His name God in the flesh”
>>33659499It's an epithet. Like saying "Behold, Achilles, they call him fleet-foot" etc.
>>33659499It is a little known fact that "Jesus" was actually his middle name. He hated the way the other guys in the carpentry shop kept calling him Manny, so he started using Jesus instead, because no one would call him Jeezy.
>>33659499>they shall callThe English translation is a little iffy.The term translated here is "καλέσουσιν", which is would be better translated as "be saluted by this title" or "assumed to be" or "that bears the figurative name of", or even "acknowledged as".Point is Ἐμμανουήλ (Greek for עִמָּנוּאֵל) means "God is with us", and basically the messenger is saying>The Son born from the Virgin shall be acknowledged as the God among usor>The Son born from the Virgin shall be recognized as God among mortals
>>33661862But what about the verse Matthew is quoting? Isaiah 7:14the virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him ImmanuelIn this case it does say she will call him Immanuel, it does imply it will be the name for the child
>>33662807Dude, it was like seven hundred years prior. Good luck understanding a book that old.
>>33659499That was actually, Jesus' original name but it got bastardized over and over again until the latest iteration of permutation came out as... "Jizzus".So they cleaned it up a little bit and now every reveres the name Jesus like the star on top of the world's tallest... Early-ass CGi trees you could fucking ask for.
>>33659499because it's not talking about jesus. Isaiah is talking about his own son in a prophecy from the old test. Matthew the evangelist snipped that verse like a foreskin and applied it to jesus out of context. in apoologetics they call this "prooftexting" when you look into an older text to find a prediction for current events. but the text provides no prediction because prophecy is not real and people don't know the future, so the apoologist take some unrelated verse from the bible and make-believe that it is a foreshadowing of current events when it's not.
