Of course what was conceived in her was of the Holy Spirit......as in regard to Yahweh's only begotten Son,
Begotten mean sexual reproduction.
And you seem like a knowledgeable person so read Isaiah chapter 7 and tell me if that is a story about testing the faith of a king or a Son that will be crucified. It is the epidemy of cherry picking plucking verse 7:14 out of context from a pretty long story. The virgin in question is Isaiah's wife and it is clear that Isaiah had sex with her and virgin in Hebrew can mean a lady that has not had a baby yet.
Your initial statement — “the scriptures does not imply in any way a virgin birth” — doesn’t match your later comment that Mary’s conception was “of the Holy Spirit.” Those two claims can’t both be true, so I want to be sure I understand your position before addressing the rest of your points.
Your claim that “begotten means sexual reproduction” is not supported by Scripture or by the Greek text. The term applied to Jesus is
monogenes, which means “only, unique, one‑of‑a‑kind,” not “sexually generated.” The New Testament never uses
monogenes to describe physical intercourse, and Matthew explicitly denies sexual conception in Jesus’ case:
“Before they came together She was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18), and
“that which is conceived in Her is of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20). If you insist that “begotten” must mean sexual reproduction, you end up contradicting Matthew’s own narrative.
Your comments about Isaiah 7 also miss the point. Isaiah 7 is indeed a historical episode involving King Ahaz, but Matthew is not pretending otherwise. He explicitly says that the prophecy finds its
fulfillment in Christ:
“All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet” (Matthew 1:22). This is standard Jewish typological interpretation, not cherry‑picking. Matthew is reading Isaiah the way Second‑Temple Judaism regularly read prophetic texts—seeing an immediate historical meaning and a later, fuller realization.
The claim that “the Virgin is Isaiah’s wife” is not supported by the text. Isaiah’s wife is called
“the prophetess” in Isaiah 8:3, and the passage explicitly says,
“I went to the prophetess, and she conceived.” The text never identifies her with the
‘almah of Isaiah 7:14. These are two different women in two different contexts. Nothing in Isaiah 7 says the sign‑child is Maher‑shalal‑hash‑baz, and nothing in Isaiah 8 says the prophetess is the
‘almah.
Your definition of
‘almah is also incorrect.
‘Almah does not mean “a woman who has had sex but not yet had a baby.” Hebrew has words for a woman who has had intercourse (
ishah) and for a woman who has given birth (
yōledet).
‘Almah refers to a young woman of marriageable age, presumed chaste, and not yet sexually active. That is why the Septuagint translators—long before Christianity—rendered
‘almah as
parthenos, which unambiguously means “virgin.” Matthew follows that translation:
“Behold, a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son” (Matthew 1:23).
Finally, none of this changes the linguistic point about
heos in Matthew 1:25:
“but knew Her not until She had borne a Son.” In Koine Greek,
heos marks the boundary relevant to Matthew’s theological claim—Joseph had no role in the conception. It does not imply a change afterward, just as
"Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death" (2 Samuel 6:23) does not imply she began bearing children after she died. Matthew’s concern is the divine origin of Jesus and the virginity of Mary at His birth, not the later details of Joseph and Mary’s marital life.
