The virgin conception of Jesus
Hi Rambi,
While I appreciate the sincerity and effort that you devoted to your post on the virgin birth, I feel a certain obligation to offer my own insights and certain historical facts to bring us all closer to the truth on this matter.
Your first two points about the usage of the Hebrew words "almah" and betulah" are essentially correct. "Betulah" is always used for virgin while "almah" is sometimes used for virgin and sometimes for "young woman".
Your next paragraph has at least two serious errors. The first error is an error of oversight or possibly omission because of lack of knowledge. You fail to note the critical and unique significance of Hebrew scholars translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the third century B.C. These ancient Hebrew scholars were bilingual in Greek and Hebrew thus giving them a profound feel for the original Hebrew text and equivalent meaning in the Greek language. In addition, these Hebrew scholars of 250 B.C. were not burdened with the post Christian-Jewish controversy over the virgin birth of Jesus. The second error is simply a misstatement of facts. You stated that "When the scriptures referred to a virgin ...they always used the Hebrew word "betulah". This is simply false because there are instances other than Isaiah 7:14 where "almah" is translated virgin.
You words were::
"When they were translating the Hebrew writings into the Greek Septuagint and similar translations, the translators converted the Hebrew word "almah" as the Greek equivalent of our English word for virgin. "Almah" appears 9 other times in the Hebrew Scriptures; in each case it means "young woman". When the scriptures referred to a virgin (and they do over 50 times) they always used the Hebrew word "betulah".
First of all, there are no "similar" translations to the Greek Septuagint. I say this because the Septuagint, unlike other translations, plays a unique role in both the Second-Temple Hebrew era(539 B.C.-70 A.D.) and in the later establishment of the Christian Church. It's not that the mechanics of the translations were different, but the fact that the Septuagint served as a comprehensive and authoritative bridge between the Hebrew theological mindset of the Old Testament(the old covenant) and the Hebrew-Greek theological establishment of the New Testament Church (the new covenant). In many cases, the mindset of the men of faith of the Old Testament was identical to the mindset of the men of faith of the New Testament. In addition, the New Testament Church was established by Jews who fluently spoke both Hebrew and Greek. The Septuagint had the special quality of being translated by bilingual Hebrew-Greek theological experts with no axe to grind.. These Hebrew-Greek scholars were familiar with the nuances of both languages. Another important point is the fact that since the Hebrew text was translated 250 years before Christ, the translators were far removed from the Christian-Jewish emotional controversy over the virgin birth. The translators simply had no conception of this future controversy. This gives even more credibility to the Septuagint rendering of "almah" as virgin in Isaiah 7:14. Another important point was the fact that some of the central figures of the New Testament were also bilingual in the Hebrew and Greek languages and this comfort in both languages gave them a unique vantage point in interpreting and comparing the Hebrew and Greek texts under consideration.
The Septuagint was an authorized Hebrew to Greek translation completed in approximately 250 B.C. We call it an approved version because it was approved by the Hebrew theological leadership in Jerusalem). In approximately 170 A.D., Irenaeus said:
"2. For before the Romans possessed their kingdom,402 while as yet the Macedonians held Asia,
Ptolemy the son of Lagus, being anxious to adorn the library which he had founded in Alexandria,
with a collection of the writings of all men, which were [works] of merit, made request to the people
of Jerusalem, that they should have their Scriptures translated into the Greek language. And they-for
at that time they were still subject to the Macedonians-sent to Ptolemy seventy of their elders, who
were thoroughly skilled in the Scriptures and in both the languages, to carry out what he had
desired.403 But he, wishing to test them individually, and fearing lest they might perchance, by taking
counsel together, conceal the truth in the Scriptures, by their interpretation, separated them from each
other, and commanded them all to write the same translation. He did this with respect to all the
books. But when they came together in the same place before Ptolemy, and each of them compared
his own interpretation with that of every other, God was indeed glorified, and the Scriptures were
acknowledged as truly divine. For all of them read out the common translation [which they had
prepared] in the very same words and the very same names, from beginning to end, so that even the
Gentiles present perceived that the Scriptures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God.404 And
there was nothing astonishing in God having done this,-He who, when, during the captivity of the
people under Nebuchadnezzar, the Scriptures had been corrupted, and when, after seventy years,
the Jews had returned to their own land, then, in the times of Artaxerxes king of the Persians, inspired
Esdras the priest, of the tribe of Levi, to recast405 all the words of the former prophets, and to
re-establish with the people the Mosaic legislation.
3. Since, therefore, the Scriptures have been interpreted with such fidelity, and by the grace of God,
and since from these God has prepared and formed again our faith..."
This confirms that both historically and philologically the word "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 had been normally translated as virgin by both pre-Christian Hebrew scholars and by Christian scholars, and not as "young woman" as the Jews and other detractors claim today.. The rabbinical authorities and Jews who rejected Christ clearly have an axe to grind and consequently go against established historical and philological reality in maintaining that the word "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 should be translated "young woman" instead of the correct established translation virgin.. Many agnostics and some so-called "higher critics" have joined this anti-Christian position in the last 150 years. But these are simply detractors and not the opinions of honest Christian scholars.
(There is also clear internal and contextual evidence that demanded that the Hebrew scholars of 250 B.C. translate "almah" as virgin rather than young woman. Also, and most importantly, we have the evidence from the words of Mary and Joseph recorded in the Gospel that Mary's conception was virginal. I hope to address this in my next post.)
The second error in your comment was:
"When the scriptures referred to a virgin (and they do over 50 times) they always used the Hebrew word "betulah".
This is also in error. There are three additional places in the Old Testament where the word "almah" is translated virgin.
1. Genesis 24:43
2. Song of Solomon 1:3
3. Song of Solomon 6:8
This also shows that the Hebrew word "almah" can and sometimes is referred to as virgin rather than "young woman". It all depends on the context of the passage.
In my next post I will try to show why it was necessary to translate the Hebrew word "almah" as virgin rather than "young woman" just by looking at the context of Scsriptures.
I hope that this will contribute to our understanding of the virgin birth of Jesus. |
