Isaiah 7:14 Mistranslation or Not...

Isaiah 7
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.

I was watching history channel, and I keep seeing a commercial claiming that Isaiah 7:14 is a mistranslation. Now the two Hebrew words we need to look at are almah and betulah. Now the argument is that virgin should have been translated "young woman." While it is true that the word almah does not necessarily imply the girl is a virgin, but remember a girl of the age to marry in biblical times would be presumed a virgin. Almah is used ten times in Hebrew Scripture. Six of those times are the plural form of the word, alamot. The other four times is the singular form of the word, and is normally translated "maiden" and describes a girl who is of age to marry, but not married. Now it would appear at first glance, that the word should be translated betulah if it was meant to say virgin, but lets examine a bit closer.

Lets take a look at other places in Hebrew Scripture where the two words are used:

Almah

Genesis24
43 Behold, I stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the virgin cometh forth to draw water, and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;

44 And she say to me, Both drink thou, and I will also draw for thy camels: let the same be the woman whom the Lord hath appointed out for my master's son.

This is in reference to a woman, Rebekah, and it is translated virgin as well.

Exodus 2
8 “Pharaoh's daughter said to her, "Go ahead." So the girl went and called the child's mother.”

The girl her is said to be 10-12 years of age around this time according to Josephus, and it would not be reasonable to assume she was anything other than a virgin.

Song of Solomon 1
3 Because of the fragrance of your good ointments, your name is ointment poured forth; therefore the virgins love you.

Many Jewish commentators translate alamot virgins in this passage as well. The consistent use of the word almah or its plural form shows that it normally refers to a girl that is a virgin.

Betulah

Genesis 24:15-16
"And it came to pass, before he had done speaking, that, behold, Rebekah came out, who was born to Bethuel, son of Milcah, the wife of Nahor, Abraham's brother, with her pitcher upon her shoulder. And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her: and she went down to the well, and filled her pitcher, and came up."

In this passage Rebekah(same one in Genesis 43 where almah is used), is referred to as a virgin with the betulah, but if this word invariably understood as virgin, why did the writer add the phrase neither had any man known her?"

Joel 1:8
Lament like a virgin girded with sackcloth for the husband of her youth.

In this verse the word used for husband is ba'al, and this word is only used for a married man, therefore context would show that betulah was referring to a married woman.

Conclusion
In conclusion, I would say that virgin is definitely the most correct translation of the word almah in Isaiah7:14. Not only is it more consistent with the rest of Hebrew Scripture, but also the Septuagint predates the Hebrew Bible by a few centuries, and it uses the Greek word parthenos, which unequivocally means virgin. So apparently, the ancient translators who translated the Septuagint believed it was to be a virgin, and this is later confirmed in Matthew.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

This is an excellent choice.
I assume you are going to expound the "Immanuel" prophecy, and compare the double function of the prophecy as an encouragement to the people of Ahaz, and also as an encouragement to the people of the future.

reply to post by DISRAELI


they say talking to yourself is the first sign of madness...

p.s. what???

reply to post by Beavers

No, the first sign of madness is having hair on the palm of your hand...
And the second sign is looking for it [Old schoolboy joke which requires very precise timing]

I was talking to the OP, leaving him a message for when he gets back.
(That is what I would do if I were expounding Isaiah ch7)

DISRAELI
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

This is an excellent choice.
I assume you are going to expound the "Immanuel" prophecy, and compare the double function of the prophecy as an encouragement to the people of Ahaz, and also as an encouragement to the people of the future.

Or this verse: "If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all."

Compare this to Solomon stating that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge. Ahaz thought the Assyrian military might would save him. He feared the King of Assyria instead of the King of Kings.

DISRAELI
reply to post by Beavers

 

No, the first sign of madness is having hair on the palm of your hand...
And the second sign is looking for it [Old schoolboy joke which requires very precise timing]

Holy buckets, it wasn't just a cruel trap played on an unsuspecting young wee wino...

Oo

Evil people.. Evil people...

reply to post by EnochWasRight

I disagree with that analysis.
What Ahaz thought was that help would come from nowhere- he was heading towards despair.
The suggestion of help from Assyria came from God, through Isaiah- the help from God was going to come through Assyria (v17). And historically that is what happened.

EnochWasRight
Compare this to Solomon stating that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.

How is fear of anything the beginning of knowledge?

Understanding, is the beginning of knowledge.

But god would not have his believers understand him, because knowledge shared is power lost.

DISRAELI
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I disagree with that analysis.
What Ahaz thought was that help would come from nowhere- he was heading towards despair.
The suggestion of help from Assyria came from God, through Isaiah- the help from God was going to come through Assyria. And historically that is what happened.

Didn't Tiglath-Pileser give him trouble instead of help?

reply to post by EnochWasRight

No, the Assyrians gave trouble to the other kingdoms, the ones which were attacking him.
(the trouble to Jerusalem came in a later reign)

winofiend

EnochWasRight
Compare this to Solomon stating that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.

How is fear of anything the beginning of knowledge?

Understanding, is the beginning of knowledge.

But god would not have his believers understand him, because knowledge shared is power lost.

Fools despise wisdom (Proverbs 1:7b). Despise is buz, meaning to hold in contempt, to belittle or to ridicule. Used in Proverbs: 6:30, 11:12, 13:13, 14:21, 23:9 and 22, 30:17.

Three words meaning fool:

ksil - characterized by a closed mind

nabal - one who lacks spiritual perception

ewil - illustration of someone who is arrogant

DISRAELI
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

No, the Assyrians gave trouble to the other kingdoms, the ones which were attacking him.
(the trouble to Jerusalem came in a later reign)

edit on 10-11-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)

2 Chronicles 28:20
New International Version (NIV)

20 Tiglath-Pileser[a] king of Assyria came to him, but he gave him trouble instead of help.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

Fair enough. I was following the Kings history (2 Kings ch16).
But the fact remains that the Assyrian help was part of God's promise, as far as Isaiah ch7 is concerned.

DISRAELI
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

Fair enough. I was following the Kings history (2 Kings ch16).
But the fact remains that the Assyrian help was part of God's promise, as far as Isaiah ch7 is concerned.

I agree with that analysis somewhat. God was offering Ahaz a chance to follow wisdom. As a result of the choice, the Assyrian King subjugated Syria, the Northern Tribe and Judah. Ahab wanted Assyria and got it, but not as he had planned. Ahaz and Judah continued to pay tribute and worship the Assyrian gods. As a result, he was burred in Jerusalem, but not in the tombs of the Kings.

God did promise the outcome. It's what he got, but not what he wanted.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


We covered you pretty good on this OP. I enjoyed it. When will you be posting your thread topic?

The first post was an accident I hit enter lol I apologize the OP has been edited and fixed thanks all.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

Yes, the modern commentaries will point this out.
I believe the word "virgin" comes originally from the Septuagint translation, which is where the gospels will have picked it up.

This is where my comment on the two functions of the prophecy is relevant.
In the prophecy to Ahaz, the birth of the child is not the main point of the promise, so it is not neessary that she should be anything except a young woman.
The change to "virgin" only has value for New Testament purposes. We may, if we wish, believe that the change in emphasis was prompted by the Holy Spirit.

reply to post by DISRAELI


As far as I know Isaiah 7:14 is a dual fulfillment prophecy, which is basically a prophecy that will be fulfilled in two parts, but normally a partial fulfillment is provided. There are many examples of these one is Isaiah 9:6

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Only the first part has occurred, the child was born and the son was given. The rest will be fulfilled in the Millennium.

Another example is John 5:43
43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

This was speaking of the Anti-Christ who will be accepted as the Messiah within the 70th week of Daniel, however it was partially fulfilled by Barabbas whose name means "son of the father," and also some translations even say his first name was Jesus.

Isaiah 7:14 is also one of these. Isaiah's first child was most likely the one named Immanuel(means God with us), and was the partial fulfillment of the real prophecy who is Jesus a literal representation of the prophetic name Immanuel in that he was literally God with us.

Isaiah used almah instead of bethula,because the word can also refer to any young woman, and his wife wasn't an exact fulfillment(there would only be one virgin birth). This is probably the reason Isaiah had to use a word that could describe both her and the future virgin.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


The KJV says "virgin", virtually all of the modern translations say "young woman". The point of the verse is to prophecy the miracle birth of the Messiah. Where is the miracle in a young woman conceiving a child? Young women have children everyday.

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


True statement.