IMHO, changing the word “virgin” to “young woman” is changing doctrine. I went to BibleGateway .com and looked at many of the Protestant Bibles, including modern english ones, and all I loked at use the word “virgin”. As we all know, not all young women are virgins. This is just not right. This us apostacy.
This implied for many “a virgin”. Sort of like the word “maiden” in English, implies that she might well still have a “maidenhead”/ hymen. But “virgin” is NOT a direct translation, especially in the context of that young woman giving birth.
Apostasy is a bit of a strong word for ‘walking back’ a incorrect translation to one that is more accurate, if less directly prophetic of the doctrine of perpetual virginity.
Agreed. The argument that the Hebrew of the passage in Isaiah from the mesoretic text would be better translated "young woman" disappears when you realize the Greek Septuagint specifically translated it as "virgin" despite several preferable Greek words available for "maiden" or "young women". The Septuagint was translated by 70 Jewish scholars, who spoke Biblical Hebrew as a first or second language, and were 2200 years closer to the original Hebrew text and usage. The proper translation is "virgin".
“IMHO, changing the word virgin to young woman is changing doctrine.”
Nope. There is no Church on earth which believes in Mary’s virginity more than the Catholic Church. The problem is that the Hebrew clearly means “young woman”. In the Septuagint it says “virgin”. The translators and editors decided to use the ACTUAL MEANING OF THE WORD. My complaint is not that, but that they also used a more poorly written footnote on the issue. I read both the old footnote and the new one and I though the old one was stronger in its explanation:
The sign proposed by Isaiah was concerned with the preservation of Judah in the midst of distress (cf Isaiah 7:15, 17), but more especially with the fulfillment of God’s earlier promise to David (2 Sam 7:12-16) in the coming of Immanuel (meaning, “With us is God”) as the ideal king (cf Isaiah 9:5-6; 11:1-5). The Church has always followed St. Matthew in seeing the transcendent fulfillment of this verse in Christ and his Virgin Mother. The prophet need not have known the full force latent in his own words; and some Catholic writers have sought a preliminary and partial fulfillment in the conception and birth of the future King Hezekiah, whose mother, at the time Isaiah spoke, would have been a young, unmarried woman (Hebrew, almah). The Holy Spirit was preparing, however, for another Nativity which alone could fulfill the divinely given terms of Immanuel’s mission, and in which the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God was to fulfill also the words of this prophecy in the integral sense intended by the divine Wisdom.
Here’s the new footnote:
[7:14] Isaiahs sign seeks to reassure Ahaz that he need not fear the invading armies of Syria and Israel in the light of Gods promise to David (2 Sm 7:1216). The oracle follows a traditional announcement formula by which the birth and sometimes naming of a child is promised to particular individuals (Gn 16:11; Jgs 13:3). The young woman: Hebrew almah designates a young woman of marriageable age without specific reference to virginity. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew term as parthenos, which normally does mean virgin, and this translation underlies Mt 1:23. Emmanuel: the name means with us is God. Since for the Christian the incarnation is the ultimate expression of Gods willingness to be with us, it is understandable that this text was interpreted to refer to the birth of Christ.
No apostasy, just an accurate translation. I just wish they had a better footnote.