[metmom]

ravenwolf, over here for an excellent point raised by e-s

Post 166

e-s “The fact that all manuscripts render that as “Firstborn” is ample evidence that she had many sons.

It would have been “only begotten” otherwise.”

[ravenwolf]

Post 166

e-s “The fact that all manuscripts render that as “Firstborn” is ample evidence that she had many sons.

It would have been “only begotten” otherwise.”

---

I can plainly see your point, and it has some credibility to it. below is another

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

No, it does not say a multitude of sons and daughters it says a son, and his name shall be called Immanuel, but it was,nt, it was finally called Jesus.

So if first born means many sons then a son must mean just one. I will take the latter.