Obviously, Trinitarians take, "God with us" to be completely and totally literal. That is, Jesus is God Himself incarnate. But did Mathew mean it literally? How could we know? The only way I can think of is to look at how the phrases, "God with us", God with you", God with me" etc are used in the Old Testament. This, we must assume, is Mathew's paradigm, worldview, background, and category of thought.
 

If you do a study of this, you will find that the phrase is never meant literally. Here are a few examples out of dozens:

 

• 2 Chron 32:8: With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the LORD our God, to help us and to fight our battles." And the people took confidence from the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.

• Gen 21:22: At that time Abimelech and Phicol the commander of his army said to Abraham, "God is with you in all that you do;

• Deut 20:1: "When you go forth to war against your enemies, and see horses and chariots and an army larger than your own, you shall not be afraid of them; for the LORD your God is with you, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.

• Deut 20:4: for the LORD your God is he that goes with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to give you the victory.'

• Deut 31:6: Be strong and of good courage, do not fear or be in dread of them: for it is the LORD your God who goes with you; he will not fail you or forsake you."

• Joshua 1:9: Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage; be not frightened, neither be dismayed; for the LORD your God is with you wherever you go."

• I Samuel 10:7: Now when these signs meet you, do whatever your hand finds to do, for God is with you.

• I Chron 17:2: And Nathan said to David, "Do all that is in your heart, for God is with you."

• I Chron 22:18: "Is not the LORD your God with you? And has he not given you peace on every side? For he has delivered the inhabitants of the land into my hand; and the land is subdued before the LORD and his people.

• I Chron 28:20: Then David said to Solomon his son, "Be strong and of good courage, and do it. Fear not, be not dismayed; for the LORD God, even my God, is with you. He will not fail you or forsake you, until all the work for the service of the house of the LORD is finished.

• II Chron 13:12: Behold, God is with us at our head, and his priests with their battle trumpets to sound the call to battle against you. O sons of Israel, do not fight against the LORD, the God of your fathers; for you cannot succeed."

• II Chron 35:21: But he sent envoys to him, saying, "What have we to do with each other, king of Judah? I am not coming against you this day, but against the house with which I am at war; and God has commanded me to make haste. Cease opposing God, who is with me, lest he destroy you."

• II Chron 36:23: "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, 'The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, may the LORD his God be with him. Let him go up.'"

• Zeph 3:17: The LORD, your God, is in your midst, a warrior who gives victory; he will rejoice over you with gladness, he will renew you in his love; he will exult over you with loud singing...

 

In many cases the phrase in question is merely a figure of speech meaning "you/I/we are in the right". Other times it's a figure of speech that means, "God is on our side" or "God is helping us." What is apparent in every case is that it is not meant in the same kind of literal sense that Trinitarians take, "God with us" in Mathew.
 

• Ruth 1:6: Then she started with her daughters-in-law to return from the country of Moab, for she had heard in the country of Moab that the LORD had visited his people and given them food.

 

A literal visitation is not what's meant here. What is meant is that there was a good harvest.

 

So we see from the Old Testament that the phrase in question ("God with us") is never meant, or taken, in a literal manner. It's a figure of speech. The next question is, can we find anything in the new Testament that would indicate that the content for the phrase in question has changed? Is it now meant and understood to be literal, contrary to the way it is used all throughout the Old Testament?
 

• Luke 1:68: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people..."

 

We are unable to determine from the immediate context alone whether this is meant literally or figuratively.
 

• Luke 7:16: Fear seized them all; and they glorified God, saying, "A great prophet has arisen among us!" and "God has visited his people!"

 

What this illustrates is that the people conceive of God's visitation as occurring in or through the prophet. The phrase, "God has visited his people" is not meant literally. We therefore hold that the same understanding be applied to Luke 1:68.
 

• Acts 15:14: Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

 

This refers to the "visitation" of God at the house of Cornelius, where the Spirit of God fell on the Gentiles and they spoke in tongues. You may think of this as a "literal" visitation if you want, but it is a stretch to compare what happened at Cornelius' house to the alleged incarnation of God Himself in Mathew 1:23. What was actually manifested at Cornelius' house was that the Gentiles spoke in tongues. God was not seen to be literally present in the same way that Trinitarians conceive of the literalness of the Incarnation. He was present through the Spirit, not literally, physically present.
 

• John 3:2: This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him."

 

Nicodemus here uses the phrase, "God is with him" to refer to, "a teacher come from God."
 

We see that no apparent shift or change of meaning has occurred between the Old and New Testaments.
 

Argument: Matthew tries to convey that Jesus was divine, as well as human: "And they will call his name Immanuel, which is, being interpreted, GOD WITH US." Given that this "prophecy" is recognized by Jews as being Messianic, Matthew's citation can mean nothing else than that "JESUS" was not just a name but a title.
 

Response: The meaning of a name, and the fact that it's a title, in and of itself, cannot be used to prove that Jesus is God Himself. Here are a few more Biblical names and their meanings:
 

• Eli - My God.

• Elijah - God the LORD or Yahweh God.

• Elihu - My God Himself.

• Ithiel - God with me.

• Joel - The LORD God.

 

Why would the meaning of a name be non-literal all throughout the Bible, and the history of the Jews, and then, all of a sudden, with no warning or indication of a paradigm shift, a name's meaning be literal?
 

Concerning this person, Jesus of Nazareth, of whom it is said that his name means, "God with us": How is he spoken of by those who wrote about him? Is he spoken of as "God with us" literally? Or is he spoken of as "God with us" in some other sense?
 

• Acts 10:38: "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power. He went about doing good and healing all those oppressed by the devil, for God was with him."

• John 8:29: "The one who sent me is with me. He has not left me alone."

• Luke 7:16: "A great prophet has arisen in our midst, and God has visited His people."

 

We see from these and many other verses that the phrase, "God with us" when applied to Jesus means that God is "with us" in and through Jesus. Jesus is clearly distinguished from God, who is said to be "with him."
 

We must conclude that there is no warrant to understand "God with us" in Mathew 1:23 to be literal. There are all kinds of reasons to take it non-literally when viewed from the perspective of the 1st century Jew who wrote it, as well as those to whom it was written. The entire Old Testament argues against a literal understanding. We should allow the scriptures themselves to help us understand how a word or a phrase is used, and not automatically read our 21st century, literalistic western paradigm into a 1st century Hebraic document.

 

Back to Arguments Index