Question on Isaiah 7:14 -- was the Messianic prophecy referring to a 'young woman' or 'virgin'?

[SeekAndFind]

I have a questions to all of you knowledgable Biblical Scholars out there and it relates to the so-called Messianic Prophecy in the Book of the Prophet Isaiah. It is relevant as we celebrate the Christmas Season.

“Does Isaiah 7:14 contain a prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ?

Some suggest that Isaiah’s statement should be correctly translated as a ‘young woman’ (not necessarily a ‘virgin’) of his day, who would conceive and give birth to a child, and that this event would be a sign to Hezekiah.

It is then further said that Matthew took that text and applied it to Jesus’ birth, though, allegedly, this was not the meaning of the passage originally. How do we respond to this assertion?”

Some also claimed that a real boy named Emmanuel was born.

How do you respond to this claim ?

Thanks.

[mountainlion]

I can’t read Hebrew so I can’t tell you that it was a young woman. It used to be Virgin and most translate it Virgin. One bad translation changes nothing for me.

[kosciusko51]

The answer is in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament and in Matthew 1:23. The Septuagint, while not inspired, was the translation from Hebrew to Greek and they use the word "παρθένος" (parthenos) meaning virgin, not just a young girl. This is the same Greek word in Matthew 1:23.

[kosciusko51]

Oh, I forgot to mention that the Septuagint was so named because of the 70 Hebrew scholars who translated this into Greek for Hellenized Jews. Sometimes you will even see the the Roman LXX used to describe this translation.

[marinamuffy]

I have heard that the Hebrew could refer to either but my response would be “Why would a young woman conceiving and giving birth qualify as a ‘sign’ from ‘the Lord Himself’”? It would to make more sense for it to be translated as “virgin” in this case if only because it would hardly be unusual for a “young woman” to have a child! I’m sure there are other arguments as well.

[Enosh]

If memory serves, this revolves around the Hebrew word "almah," which can mean virgin and well as maiden or young girl. "Virgin" is more to the point, but a young girl need not be as such to still merit the word.

However, given the context, we Christians will go with the Immaculate Conception.

[count-your-change]

I think what is sometimes missed in the discussion of how this verse should be translated is that Matthew wrote with the guidance of God’s spirit and so when Matthew applies this verse to the virgin birth of Christ it’s not just his own interpretation.

[ml/nj]

The word in the Hebrew is alma which means young woman. Betula is the word for virgin. Properly translated the verse refers to a young woman with child, rather than a virgin who shall conceive.

ML/NJ

[Mrs. Don-o]

Sorry I don't have time to look this up right now and give you links, but as I remember it:

• the original Hebrew word , almah, doesn't distinguish between "young woman" and "technical virgin," but it doesn't matter, because a young woman of good character was assumed to be a virgin, and nobody was asking for a gynecological examination--- not to be crude, but there were certain cultural assumptions that if she was a normal young Jewish woman, not married, and not a whore, she was a virgin.
• The Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, produced by Jewish Hebrew scholars a couple of centuries BC, which was used by Jewish communities throughout the Mediterranean basin --- which was by far the mot widespread version at the time of Christ, and was the translation used by the New Testament writers themselves, the Septuagint, used a word which did mean, specificially, virgin--- parthenos? --- which certainly indicates that THEY (Jewish scholars of the time)thought it means "virgin."
• If the prophcy was fulfilled by the birth of an (ordinary) child in the time of Ahaz, that's no problem, since most prophecies have multiple layers of meanings. The earlier fulfillments are called "types," and they serve as prefigurings of the greater miracles to come.
• The Isaiah prophecy is supposed to be a "great sign" or "wonder" or "miracle." A "young woman" becoming pregnant is not much of a miracle. A virgin becoming pregnant --- that would qualify!

  OK, here's a link with some discussion on th translation issue.

[kosciusko51]

Actually, alma can mean either young woman or a virgin. Betula is more more specific in meaning virgin. The 70 translated the Isaiah 7:14 alma into Greek as parthenos which means virgin. And Matthew uses parthenos as well.

[SeekAndFind]

Properly translated the verse refers to a young woman with child, rather than a virgin who shall conceive.

If this is true, that would mean that almost all popular English translations of this verse from King James to New American Standard to New International Version are improper translations ??

[kosciusko51]

Sorry I did not see your link before I wrote. Good stuff!

[SeekAndFind]

“Why would a young woman conceiving and giving birth qualify as a ‘sign’ from ‘the Lord Himself’”? It would to make more sense for it to be translated as “virgin” in this case if only because it would hardly be unusual for a “young woman” to have a child! I’m sure there are other arguments as well.

Therein lies the rub. Skeptics (or even Jews who do not accept Jesus as Messiah ) would argue that this particular prophecy of Isaiah is REALLY referring to an actual historical woman who gave birth to a boy who was REALLY named Emmanuel.

Hence the following texts after verse 14 --

15 He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. 16 But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.

In other words skeptics and unbelieving Jews would say that it is a PURELY HISTORICAL statement made by Isaiah unrelated to Jesus Christ. Christians are simply force-fitting the historical statement made to make it fit Jesus.

[goodtomato]

Immanuel=God with us.

I'm not a scholar, but it was a sign. A young woman pregnant, common. A virgin pregnant, not common.

[tang-soo]

A Bible teacher answered this question this way.

Look at the context. A prophecy is promised in this passage - one of a great promise (ie The Lord Himself will give you a great sign). What makes more since ...

1) A child will be born of a young maiden! (yawn)

2) A child will be born of a virgin! (what?)

Case 1 would fall into the same category as ...

"I predict the sky will be blue tomorrow" - or more to the point ...

"I predict a sign - verily I say unto you, the next time Al Gore makes a speech about global warming, there will again be record cold temps."

[kosciusko51]

This is a two-fold prophesy. The first being the immediate, and the second being in the future. IIRC, I think there are several other examples of immediate/future prophesies in the OT, but I don't have the time to look them up for you.

The reason that Christians use it in the context of a virgin is that the followers of Jesus Himself (who were Jewish) used it in this same context, i.e. Matthew 1:23. Matthew also goes on to explain that Emmanuel means "God with us", and Jesus, as God Incarnate, is God with us (mankind).

[element92]

Luke 1, 34
............................
34Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
............................

[Tucker39]

Luke 1:26 through 1:38 describes the visit of the angel Gabriel to Mary and his announcement to her that she would bear The Son of God, The Saviour of the world.

Luk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

Now my friend, YOU may think it a small matter to lie to Gabriel, but I don’t; and somehow I don’t think Mary did, either. Therefore, I must conclude that Mary was a virgin indeed. And the nitpickers and error-spotters can have a field day if they want to.

But as for me; I agree with the old, black, fellow-believer, from somewhere in the deep south, who is reported to have said: “I believes da’ Bible is true from ‘Generations’ to ‘Revolutions.’ I believes it from cover to cover! I even believes da’ cover is genuine leather!” That pretty well covers what I, Old Watashi; Old Tommy Tucker believes, too!

[Mrs. Don-o]

As I understand it, the scholars using the word "parthenos" (virgin) ran into no controversy from the Jewish community whatsoever during the centuries when the Septuagint was the, "the" authorized translation. It was completely and universally accepted as accurate.

After the 1st century AD, some of the Jewish community decided to "de-authorize" the Septuagint because it gave such unambiguous authority to the Jewish-Christian belief that the prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus Christ.

So the problem wasn't that the Christians "force-fitted" the translation, but that the A.D.-era Jewish community "retrofitted" the translation.

If this were not so, why did they previously accept the word "parthenos"?

[kalee]

Did you mean Virgin Birth? The Immaculate Conception is the belief that Mary was herself conceived without original sin.