AndyMartin
Active Member
Of the modern versions, The Contemporary English Version has “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14, but has a lengthy footnote on this: “virgin: Or “young woman.” In this context the difficult Hebrew word did not imply a virgin birth. However, in the Greek translation made about 200 (B.C.)and used by the early Christians, the word parthenos had a double meaning. While the translator took it to mean “young woman,” Matthew understood it to mean “virgin” and quoted the passage (Matthew 1.23) because it was the appropriate description of Mary, the mother of Jesus”. I have chosen this version, to show the misleading information that Bible translators are giving to the unsuspecting and ill-informed, lay Christian. In the first place, The word, “’almah”, is NOT a “difficult Hebrew word”, as suggested in the note. I know not of any Hebrew lexicon or dictionary, or commentary, where it has been so described. Also very wrong, is to say that the “Hebrew word did not imply a virgin birth”, as we have seen that “’almah” is always used ONLY for someone who has NOT had any sexual relations. Then, to add to these grave comments, we read more nonsense, that the Greek word used in the Greek Old Testament version, known as the Septuagint, “parthenos”, was used by these Hebrew scholar of this version, to mean “young woman”. How the Contemporary English Version can arrive at this, is beyond me. If they use the Greek word “parthenos”, to translate the Hebrew “’almah”, how can it be know what definition these translators had in mind for its meaning, as there is no indication to this in this translation, like any footnote? To say that the translators on the Septuagint, meant “young woman”, and the Apostle Matthew says “virgin”, because it was “appropriate for Mary, the mother of Jesus”, is completely wrong and very misleading of the facts.
It is important that we understand that the Doctrine of the Birth of Jesus Christ, does not depend on the meaning and use of words, which can have more than one meaning, and not always clear in their meanings. This is true for the words that we have looked at in the Hebrew Old Testament, as it is for the Greek word “parthenos”. While “parthenos” does have its primary meaning of “virgin”, as from the time of Homer, who lived somewhere between the 12th and 8th centuries, B.C., where it was used for, “a young unmarried woman, a maid, a maiden, a girl” (Richard Cunliffe; A Lexicon of The Homeric Dialect, p.315). But, we also know that Homer used it for, “a young wife” (Georg Autenrieth, A Homeric Dictionary, p.249), which, like the Hebrew “bethulah”, used in Joel 1:8, cannot mean one who is a “virgin”. “parthenos”, is used in Genesis 34:12, for Dinah, who was not a “virgin”, when it was used to describe her, at this time. This is the only time, as far as I am aware, in the Greek Old Testament, where “parthenos” is used for someone who is not a “virgin”. At the time of the Gospels being written, “parthenos”, would have been used in its primary sense, for someone who was not married and had no sexual relations, and therefore was a “virgin”. This can be seen from the fact, that some of the Jews did not like the Christian’s using the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament, where they quoted passages like Isaiah 7:14, which was known and accepted as meaning “virgin”, in the time of the New Testament, and also in the second century A.D. We have the Jew, Aquila, who at this time produced his own Greek version of the Old Testament, where he substituted the word “parthenos”, in Isaiah 7:14, with “neanis”, which was used for “young married women”. This is the same for the Greek versions of the Old Testament, also from this period, by another Jewish proselyte, Theodotion, and an Ebionite (those who rejected the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ), Symmachus, who were also offended by “parthenos”, and replaced it with “neanis”. Had “parthenos”, at this time, also been used for someone who was not a “virgin”, then there would not have been the need to replace it.
It is also important to note, that in both Gospels, Matthew and Luke, where the word “parthenos” is used for Mary, that, there is also additional information on this fact, that removes any difficulties that may arise from the fact, that “parthenos” has also been used for someone who is not a “virgin”. Lest any doubters of this great Doctrine, may use this argument to question Biblical Truth. In Matthew 1:18, we read: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit”. The words, “before they came together”, mean more than “before they married”, and speaks of the fact that Joseph and Mary had not had any “sexual relations”. This is seen from the words, “she was found with child of (lit, “out of”) the Holy Spirit”, which is showing by what “means” Mary “conceived” the Lord Jesus Christ in her womb. This is further seen from verses 24-25: “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus.”. Here, also, the words, “did not know her till”, is used to show that Joseph and Mary did not have any “sexual relations”, TILL after the birth of Jesus Christ. After which time they had their own children.
Likewise, in Luke’s Gospel, we have the account where the angel Gabriel announces to Mary, the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ. “Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus” (vs,30-31). To which Mary replies: “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” Mary is asking, how will it be possible to bear a child, since she had not had any “sexual relations”, with Joseph, to whom she was “betrothed”. And the angel replies: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born of you, will be called the Son of God.”(v.35). We have already seen, that the Greek text of both Matthew 1:16, and Luke 1:35, is very clear to the fact, that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus Christ, as His birth is only “out of Mary”, who was made “pregnant” by the supernatural work of God the Holy Spirit. Our human minds will never be understand the Incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ, which must be completely accepted on the basis of faith on the Authority of the Holy Bible, as the Infallible and Inerrant Word of Almighty God.
It is important that we understand that the Doctrine of the Birth of Jesus Christ, does not depend on the meaning and use of words, which can have more than one meaning, and not always clear in their meanings. This is true for the words that we have looked at in the Hebrew Old Testament, as it is for the Greek word “parthenos”. While “parthenos” does have its primary meaning of “virgin”, as from the time of Homer, who lived somewhere between the 12th and 8th centuries, B.C., where it was used for, “a young unmarried woman, a maid, a maiden, a girl” (Richard Cunliffe; A Lexicon of The Homeric Dialect, p.315). But, we also know that Homer used it for, “a young wife” (Georg Autenrieth, A Homeric Dictionary, p.249), which, like the Hebrew “bethulah”, used in Joel 1:8, cannot mean one who is a “virgin”. “parthenos”, is used in Genesis 34:12, for Dinah, who was not a “virgin”, when it was used to describe her, at this time. This is the only time, as far as I am aware, in the Greek Old Testament, where “parthenos” is used for someone who is not a “virgin”. At the time of the Gospels being written, “parthenos”, would have been used in its primary sense, for someone who was not married and had no sexual relations, and therefore was a “virgin”. This can be seen from the fact, that some of the Jews did not like the Christian’s using the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament, where they quoted passages like Isaiah 7:14, which was known and accepted as meaning “virgin”, in the time of the New Testament, and also in the second century A.D. We have the Jew, Aquila, who at this time produced his own Greek version of the Old Testament, where he substituted the word “parthenos”, in Isaiah 7:14, with “neanis”, which was used for “young married women”. This is the same for the Greek versions of the Old Testament, also from this period, by another Jewish proselyte, Theodotion, and an Ebionite (those who rejected the Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ), Symmachus, who were also offended by “parthenos”, and replaced it with “neanis”. Had “parthenos”, at this time, also been used for someone who was not a “virgin”, then there would not have been the need to replace it.
It is also important to note, that in both Gospels, Matthew and Luke, where the word “parthenos” is used for Mary, that, there is also additional information on this fact, that removes any difficulties that may arise from the fact, that “parthenos” has also been used for someone who is not a “virgin”. Lest any doubters of this great Doctrine, may use this argument to question Biblical Truth. In Matthew 1:18, we read: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit”. The words, “before they came together”, mean more than “before they married”, and speaks of the fact that Joseph and Mary had not had any “sexual relations”. This is seen from the words, “she was found with child of (lit, “out of”) the Holy Spirit”, which is showing by what “means” Mary “conceived” the Lord Jesus Christ in her womb. This is further seen from verses 24-25: “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus.”. Here, also, the words, “did not know her till”, is used to show that Joseph and Mary did not have any “sexual relations”, TILL after the birth of Jesus Christ. After which time they had their own children.
Likewise, in Luke’s Gospel, we have the account where the angel Gabriel announces to Mary, the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ. “Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus” (vs,30-31). To which Mary replies: “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” Mary is asking, how will it be possible to bear a child, since she had not had any “sexual relations”, with Joseph, to whom she was “betrothed”. And the angel replies: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born of you, will be called the Son of God.”(v.35). We have already seen, that the Greek text of both Matthew 1:16, and Luke 1:35, is very clear to the fact, that Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus Christ, as His birth is only “out of Mary”, who was made “pregnant” by the supernatural work of God the Holy Spirit. Our human minds will never be understand the Incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ, which must be completely accepted on the basis of faith on the Authority of the Holy Bible, as the Infallible and Inerrant Word of Almighty God.