I had been constipated for a while and it affected my English – actually, there’s no way to express a title better in modern times than to use new wine for new wine skins. God _did_ know shit and it’s about to hit the fan.
But you may assume there is no God, and the Bible is yet another book. Nevertheless I started reading Isaiah – a central figure living in Babylonian times, who says Jesus would be born and come again – assuming this Isaiah is a real guy and that he actually wrote this book; assuming his god really did give him this prophecy. A lot of assumes but we can cut through the thick hide of stubborn [anti-] dogmatism pretty easily as there are one or two discrepancies often overlooked.
Isaiah says he had _2_ sons. He also prophesied that the Jews would be gifted with _2_ prophetic men – not just Jesus! Maybe it’s just the beauty of this parallelism – of the prophet’s children and God’s children, or the irony that the Messiah would have a duality. This should prove a lot – that there is actually _science_ at work here and it shows how God would introduce his next steps. Far into the future, Matthew quotes Isaiah on the _controversial_ “virgin birth” of so-called “Immanuel”. One of Isaiah’s sons was named “the remnant returns” and the other “war happens”. Science is provable no matter who wrote it so let’s carry on. God’s two son are not the same person as so often is thought. King Ahaz was to call the first son Immanuel [We”am” God] while Mary called her son Jesus [Redeemer, a form of Joshua, Moses’ son’s name].
We read that Immanuel, who was soon to be born, was the duality of “the remnant returns” and that Jesus was the duality of “war happens”. Why wasn’t Jesus associated with the correct name? I will post more on this puzzle tomorrow, showing just how sneaky God is!