Evidence for God from Science

Never sure if I am posting in the right place, but here goes. I am re-reading many books of the Bible trying to get a better understanding of things. I have come across something somewhat confusing and would like an explanation if possible. The following is an excerpt of the NIV FROM MATTHEW 1.

20But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,c because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”d—which means, “God with us.”

24When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

There appears to be two different directions here as to what to name the baby, Jesus and Immanuel, both of which are said to mean different things. Jesus apparently won out as the name. Why the difference? This appears to be contrary to the name the Prophet said he would have.
W

First, let's note that just because Isaiah says that "he will be called" doesn't have to mean we are talking about an actual name. Only two chapters later, Isaiah says this:

• For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (Isa 9:6)

So "Immanuel" doesn't have to be a name, per se.

Second, let's note that the phrase "which means 'God with us'" is not in Isa 7 (from which this quotation comes). It simply says, "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel" (Isa 7:14). The translation was for the benefit of those who did not read Hebrew. For what it is worth, Immanuel really does mean "God with us." "im" means "with"; "anu" means "us"; and "el" means "God." This is the way pretty much all Hebrew names worked. So, you could render original passage, "and they will call him God With Us."

Third, Jesus is, ultimately, the Greek form of Joshua, which in Hebrew lit. means "The LORD is Salvation." It was a fairly common name in the first century, but it obviously fit our Savior particularly well. Thus, that the LORD is Salvation, and He is here to bring us that salvation, perfectly fits with Him being called God With Us.

Two more points, though:

Forth, the prophecy in question speaks of Jesus' virigin birth more than the name Immanuel. That's really what Matthew was talking about with reference to the fulfillment. I doubt he, or anyone really, expected "God with us" to be the messiah's name. What they thought was that the messiah would bring God's kingdom with Him, and thus, God would be with him, and by extention, with them!

And that leads to the fifth point: the whole purpose of the book of Matthew is to present Jesus as the promised King. He is presented as offering the Kingdom to Israel, which the leaders rejected. As such, the last part of my fourth point above really stands out. God was with them in two ways--first, Jesus is God, thus, the verse is fulfilled more than perhaps they expected (and Jesus' ability to forgive sins, among other things, most definitely points to His divinity!); but second, and more importantly, since God was with Christ, and Christ was with the Jews, then God was with the Jews when Jesus was near in that the Kingdom was being offered. This presents a great devotional truth for the believer today; though the leaders rejected the Kingdom, and thus God is no longer with THEM, He is still with us who have believed. He--the LORD who is salvation--is with all of us who have believed in Jesus Christ for everlasting life.

I think, then, Matthew was conveying a lot of depth when he set these two verses side by side.

thank you Jac, to those of us who do not know the meaning of names, something like this looks like a contradiction.....

Thank you for your help.

W