Chizuk Emunah (Pt 2) Under the Microscope: Chapter 3

Continuing our analysis of Troki's work.

Matthew 1 concludes with these words concerning Joseph, the husband of Mary; "And [he] knew her not until she had brought forth her first-born son, and he called his name Jesus." The wording of this passage shows, in the first place, that after she had brought forth "her first-born son" Joseph did "know her"; and secondly, the appellation of Jesus the "first-born son," proves that the same mother bore more children than one, otherwise the term first-born could not be applicable. This harmonizes well with Matthew 13:55, where Jesus, "the carpenter's son," is mentioned together with his brothers "James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas." This passage is an incontrovertible contradiction of the opinion of those who consider Mary to have been a virgin before and after she had given birth to Jesus.

The English version of Matthew 1:23, has, "And they shall call his name Emmanuel"; but in the Hebrew original, we have וקראת "and she shall call."

It is also a striking fact that the name Emmanuel was not given to Jesus by the virgin. Nor do we find that the Emmanuel mentioned in Isaiah was ever to be considered the Messiah.

Matthew 1 only states that Mary was a virgin before giving birth to Jesus. It says nothing about whether she remained a virgin afterward.

While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” (Matthew 12:46-50, ESV)

This passage makes no sense unless it was his biological mother and biological brothers standing outside. The passage contrasts his literal mother and brothers with his figurative mother and brothers. Yes, Catholic and Orthodox think tanks have explanations for this; these explanations are forced and run roughshod against the plain meaning of the text.

In ancient Semitic cultures, the word for "name" often meant reputation, and sometimes means monument. Examples abound, and one of them is Isaiah 55:13

Instead of the thorn shall come up the cypress; instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle; and it shall make a name for the LORD, an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off.”

These events are not giving God a new, and previously unknown name. They are establishing his reputation as powerful and in charge. Similarly, this passage in Isaiah is saying that Jesus will be known as God with us among great numbers of people, and that is certainly as true today as ever.

For those who still insist that he has to be called Emmanuel in order to fulfill the prophecy, might I remind you that Jesus is often called Emmanuel in Christian liturgy and in songs.

Troki also objects that Emmanuel is nowhere called "Messiah." This is an easy claim to make, since the word has only two references in the entire Tanakh. Isaiah 7:14, and Isaiah 8:8.

and it will sweep on into Judah, it will overflow and pass on, reaching even to the neck, and its outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel.” (Isaiah 8:8)