Danial 9:23-27. Don't be so hasty as to write off all scripture on account of one insignificant mistranslation which changes not one iota of the prophecy proper. A young woman did still bear a Son...that Son was most assuredly God with us...and Daniel 9 confirms it. Just don't fall for the lies that claim Daniel was written after the event. Those are mere claims of the willfully ignorant and foolish.
I never talked about Daniel 9 and I don't write off other scripture because of one error. Why do you apply these to me, I never said these things? And I did say that Mary was a young woman, but the prophecy is most always about confirming that it is about her virginity. Many young women had babies and I bet some were named Emmanuel. Lets keep going:
Where in the NT does Mary refer to Jesus as Immanual? This part of the prophesy was never confirmed in scripture.
Also,
This verse is taken out of context. Looking at the entire seventh chapter it is clear that the child referenced was to be a sign to Ahaz, king of Judah that he will win in battle against Rezin, king of Syria. In chapter 8, the child Maher-shalal-hash-baz is clearly described as the fulfillment of this prophecy not Jesus 700 years later.
Can you please stop saying that I am just following what others have said or that I am will fully ignorant for foolish. These have nothing to do with whether the prophecies came true or not. I have investigated these for myself and there are issues with most prophecies in the bible if you read them with logic and critical thinking in my opinion.
