Isaiah's immediate prophecy to Ahaz referred to the king's wife, certainly not a virgin, and predicted that his son, Hezekiah, would be a more virtuous king than he was. The Jews and Gentiles of Jesus' time were most familiar with the Greek Septuagint verison of scripture, which imprecisely translated the term "almah" as "parthenos", which definitely means "virgin". That word suited Christian exegesis so the "error" was not corrected. As to which interpretation is correct, that's a matter of belief.
2007-02-26 06:19:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by skepsis 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
You are in error about the Greek.
When the translators of the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament) translated the Hebrew into Greek, they had two words they could use to translate the Hebrew word `almah. You are correct that 'almah could mean either a virgin or young woman. But recall the context: Isaiah told Ahaz to ask for a sign. It would not be at all spectacular for a young woman to give birth. It happens every day.
The translators of the Septuagint knew the context, and used the Greek word parthenos for the Hebrew word 'almah. A parthenos is a virgin. The other Greek words that mean "young woman," (not necessarily a virgin) are: "neanis", "neanidon", and "neanides." These weren't used in the translation of the Septuagint.
Therefore, the intent of the Hebrew, according to context,and the comparison of the Septuagint, determines that it would be a virgin, not a young woman, who would give birth to a child.
2007-02-26 06:20:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
by way of fact Isaiah 7:14 is the only verse interior the finished Jewish Bible that could desire to be compelled to intend a virgin beginning; there is not any different verse that comes everywhere close. in case you element out that Isaiah 7:14 would not even talk if a virgin beginning, the Christians have no longer something to fall decrease back on, and could could desire to come to the top that the NT claims that the messiah could be born of a virgin are fake, and if this is fake, how a lot else interior the NT is fake, and it snowballs until eventually they could desire to come to realize the finished factor is fake. The concept that Jesus became a god-in-the-flesh relies upon on his having been born a lot in a distinctive way than the different guy. The virgin beginning might fill that want. The god/men of the pagans have been usually born of virgins, so the early Christians claimed Jesus became (additionally) born of a virgin. Paul (who made up the religion) did no longer point out virgin beginning. He speaks of a Christ that apparently regarded as an grownup without family individuals tree in any respect. that's why Paul in comparison Christ to Melkhizedek, "having no mum or dad nor commencing up of existence nor end of days."
2016-09-29 22:48:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The hebrew word for virgin is "bethulah" not "almah".
In Isaiah (Yesha'yahu) 7:14, the word is most definitely "almah" which means young woman.
I don't know if they were "fibbing" or if they honestly were ignorant of hebrew. Either way, Isaiah doesn't fit in with a virgin birth prophecy.
2007-02-26 06:15:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kallan 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
The reason is because this kind of young woman, "almah", is unmarried. She sure as hell better be a virgin!
This is what happens when you get lost in word studies. You forget that "almah" and "betulah" both refer to a virgin. Just because you personally prefer one over the other says nothing of the original writer's preference.
It's very possible that Isaiah was not referring to a miraculous virgin birth but a scandalous product of human sin, meaning the "sign" given the king would be the sin of the people and the mercy of God.
2007-02-26 06:10:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
In the Spanish version of Reina-Valera is also translated;Virgen;
virgin; in English. To me; they don't contradict S.Mathews 1:23
which also says virgin, because an old woman can be a virgin also. Shalom.
2007-02-26 06:27:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by yahshuael39 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Its not the wording that lacks, its the definition OF the wording that is important. Knowing at the time what words were chosen and in which context and meaning they carried at the time is the whole idea behind translation.
For instance, consider the word f*g. In America, its a derogatory term for a homosexual, but in England, it means Cigarette. THATS the difference in the MEANING of words, hence translation.
2007-02-26 06:12:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by sweetie_baby 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
עלמה <-- Hebrew
‛almâh
al-maw' <---pronounced
Feminine of מעלם
‛elem <---pronounced
eh'-lem
meaning a lass (as veiled or private): - damsel, maid, virgin.
The proper literal translation is "virgin" sir. See ESV or NASB, the two most literal translations of the bible.
2007-02-26 06:14:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ask Mr. Religion 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Here is the scripture
Isaiah 7:14
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.
The word translated as virgin is almah;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
05959 hmle ‘almah al-maw’
from 05958; TWOT-1630b; n f
AV-virgin 4, maid 2, damsels 1; 7
1) virgin, young woman
1a) of marriageable age
1b) maid or newly married
++++
There is no instance where it can be proved that this word designates a young woman who is not a virgin. (TWOT)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TWOT stands for The Wordbook of the Old Testament.
grace2u
2007-02-26 06:15:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Theophilus 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Because young women were virgins then not like our society.
2007-02-26 06:09:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Tribble Macher 6
·
2⤊
2⤋