[malakhi]

I can only assume that you believe that Isaiah 7:14 does not refer to the Christ or that the sign is not of a virgin. Is this correct?

You are correct. That prophecy was given to King Ahaz, pertaining to a specific situation happening within the time of his reign. The word frequently translated as "virgin" is almah, which means "young woman" (who may or may not be a virgin). Had Isaiah intended to refer specifically to a virgin, he would have used the word betulah. This passage has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus.

[CCWoody]

You are correct. That prophecy was given to King Ahaz, pertaining to a specific situation happening within the time of his reign. The word frequently translated as "virgin" is almah, which means "young woman" (who may or may not be a virgin). Had Isaiah intended to refer specifically to a virgin, he would have used the word betulah. This passage has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus.

Of course, in addition to making me an idolater for worshipping this man as God, it also means that Jesus is nothing more than the bastard of a prostitute who probably should have been stoned to death for her crimes.

But, since we are on the subject, what scriptures do you have that require that Messiah to be born from first son to first son in the line of David? Just curious again.