Was Mary supposed to even BE a virgin according Messianic Prophecy?

Question

an example of "cross referencing" NT with OT in the bible:

Isaiah 7:14 Good News Bible
Well then, the Lord himself shall give you a sign: a YOUNG WOMAN [emphasis mine] who is pregnant will have a son and will name him Immanuel.


Isaiah 7:14 NRSV
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Look, the YOUNG WOMAN [emphasis mine] is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.


The Good News Bible even provides a footnote explaining this:

YOUNG WOMAN: The Hebrew word here translated "young woman" is not the specific term for "virgin", but refers to any young woman of marriageable age. The use of "virgin" in Mat. 1.23 reflects a Greek translation of the Old Testament, made some 500 years after Isaiah.

as referenced by MATTHEW,

Matthew 1:22-23
And this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The VIRGIN [emphasis mine] is with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel-which means 'God is with

BALTIC, you need your jesus because you're LAME... try answering a question, rather than getting points... moron.

ANA, i'm surprised... no i'm not, you're a fundy... did you not READ my quotes??? my quotes are from actual translations of the bible, i didnt' make them up... read again the bit about how the "virgin" word was from a greek text written 500 years after Isaiah... then you'll see where matthew came from... oh, but matthew was supposed to BE jewish, not greek, right? so why was he quoting a greek text??? hmmmm.... you and your NIV are not the end all be all... sorry... it is WELL known that the KJV and the NIV are full of mistranslations...

BIRDSFLIE, read AGAIN about the tranlations:

The Good News Bible even provides a footnote explaining this:

YOUNG WOMAN: The Hebrew word here translated "young woman" is not the specific term for "virgin", but refers to any young woman of marriageable age. The use of "virgin" in Mat. 1.23 reflects a Greek translation of the Old Testament, made some 500 years after Isaiah.[4] [a]

this is from an ordained version of the bible... a footnote... the word in question is:

ALMAH, a young woman of marriageable age.

OLD GUY, not ONE reference to your point! I can speculate too... it doesn't make it true.

NEMROD, i gave you 2 different translations of the bible... you gave me none. why should i trust you?

OLD GUY, that didn't prove a thing, but i ask you... when was jesus ever called Immanuel? another prophecy unfulfilled?

AND, are we to honestly believe that jesus was ever at a place in his life wherein he couldn't choose good from bad? or right from wrong? if he didn't know how could he be sinless?

MAHAL, so we have to have lived in the time of the bible to make assertions on what the terms meant, right? so when jesus later says to cut off your hand he doesn't mean it right? i mean, you'd never do that... it's all cultural and you have to live in their days to "get it" but i'm still curious, why would the Good News bible give us this other translation? Almah doesn't MEAN virgin, but in your words implies it. how then can we know that "saved" means "heaven?"

And the "doh" etc. is more arrogant than anything I wrote, so get off your high horse, you weren't there either at the time of the writings. in fact, you don't speak aramaic nor do you have the original texts, so you can make as many assertions as i can.

NIGUAYONA, sorry if i misspelled... basically every case of "almah" is undersuspicion. in your reference of Genesis 24:43 i find it translated to "maiden." either the word means virgin or it implies it or it means woman. if it CAN mean a young woman, as many scholars think, then there is NO reason to believe it didn't mean just that. if it meant virgin then there should be no case where it was translated otherwise. besides all that, if jesus was in the line of david but joseph was NOT his father then how was he in the line of david?

Answer 1

The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 7:14 is "עלמה" or "almah."

Most scholars translate this as a young, unmarried woman. And, of course, a young, unmarried woman would be a virgin.

Even your referenced footnote, if "any young woman of marriageable age" is unmarried then it is assumed that she is a virgin.

With love in Christ.

Answer 2

The Hebrew word can also be interpreted as "virgin" so that is not a mistranslation, and remember the New Testament was inspired also. So the inspired New Testament gives us the correct interpretation of the inspired Old Testament text. There are other text as well, even back as far as Genesis God says that it is the seed of the woman that would crush the head of the serpent.
You also need to be aware of a prophetic rule in the Bible. The test for a prophecy of the future was that it come true. So when prophecies were made of events that would happen beyond the life span of those listening often dual prophecies were made, one in short future and one in long. If the short term prophecy did not happen then the long term one would not be accepted. This is one of those cases and the short term prophecy was of a child that would be born in the days of Ahaz. which took place in that day. The availability of a word that meant both young woman and virgin made it possible for the prophecy to be made in one statement.

Edit: If you don't think there is a dual prophecy there read the next few verses:14 "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. 15 "He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. 16 "For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken. 17 "The LORD will bring on you, on your people, and on your father's house such days as have never come since the day that Ephraim separated from Judah, the king of Assyria."

Answer 3

Good question. You are correct that the term "virgin" did not necessarily have the same meaning as it does today. In 384, St. Jerome complained about "virgins" having abortions. It was used in the sense of "an unmarried girl or woman", which can still be found in the dictionary.

So where did the idea that Mary was a virgin, in the sense of "a person who has not had sexual intercourse", come from? The Catholic Church! The Church teaches that Mary NEVER had sex, before or after the birth of Jesus. It is funny that some accept the first part of the Church's teaching, while rejecting the second, because, as you have indicated, the Bible really doesn't say that.

Answer 4

There is no etymological evidence to support the frequently aired claim that almah can refer to a young married woman or an unmarried woman who has had intercourse. The [Hebrew] root 'lm suggests quite the opposite view and supports the traditional understanding of "young virgin" as a suitable rendering of the term. To your question the answer is YES.

Much of the controversy surrounding Isaiah 7:14 revolves around the meaning of almah: specifically as to her virginity and marital status. The derivation of the noun almah is not known. It is suggested that it originates from either the Hebrew verb 'lm ("to conceal or hide") or from the Aramaic 'lm ("to be strong"). In sexual connotations, the former verb suggests "virgin" because literally and physically, as a woman she had not been uncovered - she had not known man. The latter verb leads to the meaning of sexual maturity and youthful vigor.

In addition to Isaiah 7:14, almah was used eight other times in the Old Testament. In 1 Chronicles 15:20 and Psalm 46:1 (BHS), the plural was used as a technical musical term; Psalm 68:26 gives no indication of the moral character or marital status of the almaoth. The plural was again used in Canticles 1:3 and 6:8. In both, almaoth referred to women who are unmarried. Proverbs 30:19 seems to have referred to the pre-marriage courting of a young man toward his prospective bride.

The remaining two passages shed considerable light on the meaning of almah. In Exodus 2:8, Moses' sister, Miriam, was called an almah. Not only is it assumed she was sexually chaste, "it is [also] very difficult to think that at this time she was a married woman." Rebekah was called an almah in Genesis 24:43. Scripture took great effort to give a full picture of her character: not only was she unmarried, she was also, in Genesis 24:16, given the threefold description of nahar ("girl"), betulah ("virgin") and w'sh lo' ydh ("and not knowing a man"). In recounting to Laban the details of this well-known story, the servant, in 24:43, summed up Rebekah's moral and marital status with one word: almah.

Answer 5

I've heard this argument before.

(Does it seem two-dimensional to you? No depth--just a technicality hanging on a nuanced definition? Do you really think you can offer FINAL proof of what the original writer meant without asking him? What arrogance!)

The reason why we consider "al-mah" to be a virgin was because young women of marrying age WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO GET PREGNANT!

(Doh!)

Hence our contention that they were virgins. We don't need the word "bet-u-lah" to figure it out.

Something kinda has to happen to get pregnant, right? And, uh, there's the problem of that societal norm of either killing, excommunicating or cursing a woman who strays from the nest? Suffice it to say that 99% of the "almah's" were virgins.

(Without realizing it, you've pointed out the perfection with which the prophecy was fulfilled in Mary. She actually WAS an "almah", a young woman of marrying age, wasn't she? And she was found to be "with child", right? Not bad, huh?)

To prevent you from shopping for versions that suit you, allow me to give you the exact quote from the Bible used by the gospel writers (the Septuagint, mine is the Brenton version):

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel."

(This translation was used in Palestine for a long time before Jesus was born and was universal in some areas. The Masoretic text was the version of choice in Mesopotamia, not Israel.)

Answer 6

Any birth other than a virgin one would be in sin. All of us were conceived in sin no matter if our parents were married or not they were sinful people.

Jesus was born, lived and died a sinless life and was sacrificed as a sinless gift for our (yours and mine) sins. I would suggest you look at other translations of the Bible and try to get closer to God rather than question the foundations of his work.

I am not saying you don't have the right to question, Jesus died so that you could have the choice of accepting his gift or rejecting it. Many have fought and are fighting wars so that you can keep that right.

Your choice.

God Bless.

Answer 7

Therefore the Lord himself will give you [a] a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and [b] will call him Immanuel

This is the correct version for your verse. The words translated mean virgin, not young woman.

Mary was a virgin whenshe gave birth to jesus. Do you know that she was 13 and prior to getting pregnant she had lived at the temple (aka church)? These are just historical facts

Answer 8

Looking at Isaiah 7:14 in the King James & the Aramaic bibles, It say A VIRGIN SHALL CONCEIVE, Now do you have another question?

Answer 9

Unfortunately, if we read our bible, God could only use a certain type of individual expressed through faith (ie Abraham). For a child to be born you need a woman -- Mary had that character trait - faith.

It is irrelevant for wondering if she was virginal because if she wasn't she would not have been chosen. And her name happened to be Mary.

Answer 10

No. Christians probably stole the 'virgin' part from Mithras or another earlier god, since so many other things about the Jesus story came from them.