Isaiah 7:14 - The Virgin Prophecy

[P31Woman]

My conclusion is actually the conclusion of the USCCB and the NIV-CBT. I am just repeating their findings. Like it or not, those revisions are taking place.

I don't need the history or cultural studies for Mary to be a virgin either. It is implied right there in the Book of Matthew. I'm good with that. The history/culture just support the view.

As to her first question...that would be a LONG history lesson on the development of the English translations. Perhaps I will tackle that one day...in its own thread.

As for the latter, I have dozens upon dozens of books in my personal library that go over the different texts, biblical history, theories, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, philosophy, the Crusades, ancient history, the Dark Ages, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, textual criticism, hermeneutics, methods of interpretation, concordances, maps, OT surveys, NT surveys, a study of Koine Greek, a study of Classical Hebrew, on and on. I have copies of published letters from various writers throughout history. I'm probably forgetting some things but you get the idea. Anyone that is in their MA program or PhD program probably has a similar collection of books and documents.

As a matter of fact, give me a minute and I'll use one of my favorite books as my signature...

Again you failed to give me a clear answer to the question I asked. You also failed to anwer my question concerning where you were getting your theology degree. You gave me some bologna answer about it having a lot of people with Masters and PhD's.

As to you long history lesson I don't care for it. That's what we do in Church. I also studied that back when I was working on my religious educatin degree.

 

[Vanguard]

Again you failed to give me a clear answer to the question I asked. You also failed to anwer my question concerning where you were getting your theology degree. You gave me some bologna answer about it having a lot of people with Masters and PhD's.

As to you long history lesson I don't care for it. That's what we do in Church. I also studied that back when I was working on my religious educatin degree.

My degree and educational background is not the subject of this thread.

totopic

 

[John 8:32]

Again you failed to give me a clear answer to the question I asked. You also failed to anwer my question concerning where you were getting your theology degree. You gave me some bologna answer about it having a lot of people with Masters and PhD's.

As to you long history lesson I don't care for it. That's what we do in Church. I also studied that back when I was working on my religious educatin degree.

Attended a religious cemetary did you?

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Attended a religious cemetary did you?

Do you mean "seminary"? I guess you could be cracking a joke. A person could breed "seminary" and "cemetery" to come up with "cemetary".

 

[Guest]

Personally, I think knowing these things can be very helpful when challenged by an unbeliever. There's nothing more defeating to a witness than when the unbeliever knows more than you do. I don't mind when it's another believer that I can learn from but a nonbeliever..

but in the end the nonbeliever.. John 8:44 because John 5:42

 

[Deborah13]

but in the end the nonbeliever.. John 8:44 because John 5:42

satan knows all the Scriptures and knows that they are true. he knows that he has to twist and turn them to use them to deceive. But there are unbelievers that know them too and they know them well. But they read them as a book without a seeking heart. Some can come up with really tough questions and they are surprised when they get a good answer without alot doctrine and terminology.

Sometimes though the toughest are the ones who are set in doctrine but not born again.

I always figure that if I can learn how others think if nothing else I will be better prepared to answer the tough questions. I will have at least thought about them.

 

[Vanguard]

I always figure that if I can learn how others think if nothing else I will be better prepared to answer the tough questions. I will have at least thought about them.

The tough questions and what I call the gray area are what I specialize in. I venture where others dare not. At the risk of being called a heretic or blasphemous, I go where God guides me and quite often it is in the realm of taboo.

Someone has to go there in order to have answers when those tough questions come up.

 

[Guest]

satan knows all the Scriptures and knows that they are true. he knows that he has to twist and turn them to use them to deceive. But there are unbelievers that know them too and they know them well. But they read them as a book without a seeking heart. Some can come up with really tough questions and they are surprised when they get a good answer without alot doctrine and terminology.

Sometimes though the toughest are the ones who are set in doctrine but not born again.

I always figure that if I can learn how others think if nothing else I will be better prepared to answer the tough questions. I will have at least thought about them.

You're right Deb. For me, it's easy to discern who are false prophets,
just ask them what salvation means to them and how to obtain it.
Blessings Deborah.

 

[Webb]

The tough questions and what I call the gray area are what I specialize in. I venture where others dare not. At the risk of being called a heretic or blasphemous, I go where God guides me and quite often it is in the realm of taboo.

Someone has to go there in order to have answers when those tough questions come up.

Hi Vanguard

With due respect I don't grasp how your answers to "tough questions" and "out of the box" thinking are any more than those of many serious students of the scripture (hell, virgin and Lucifer for example in the KJV). To me the most serious with the KJV is Acts 12:4 where "Easter" should have been translated "passover."

 

[P31Woman]

Attended a religious cemetary did you?

No I graduated from Miss. College with a degree in Religious Education. As most people will tell you the best thing college did for me was help point me in the right direction so that I can uncover for myself trustworthy sources of information. Most people can do that with their Church's support or by visiting a large Chruch whom they agree with their doctrine and using their Library.

Most of one's education comes from private passion and study.

 

[Sinthesis]

This really is a non-issue when you consider the context of Isaiah 7:14. There are many instances throughout the Bible where various individuals can be understood to be a prophetic type for other peoples, or even Jesus Christ. The difference being that Jesus succeeds whereas mere humans fail. To this end it can be seen that Hezekiah was a type for Jesus, and the parallels are numerous. God tells Ahaz through Isaiah that the evil designs of Syria and Israel against Judah will not come to pass, and as a sign, his young wife (Abijah) would bare him a son. Hezekiah is the near fulfillment of this prophecy; his was not a virgin birth, and it did not have to be according to the prophecy. Jesus is the far fulfillment of the prophecy; His was a virgin birth, but it did not have to be in order to fulfill that particular prophecy. However, it did have to be a virgin birth in order to keep Jesus from the stain of original sin.

 

[Vanguard]

However, it did have to be a virgin birth in order to keep Jesus from the stain of original sin.

Says who? That may be your belief and I respect that as you are entitled to your opinion.

I, however, believe that God is all powerful, and if He wanted Jesus to be born without sin, all He had to do is snap His fingers and make it so. God doesn't need our help.

 

[Aloysium]

Says who? That may be your belief and I respect that as you are entitled to your opinion.

I, however, believe that God is all powerful, and if He wanted Jesus to be born without sin, all He had to do is snap His fingers and make it so. God doesn't need our help.

don't intend to be argumentative but
He "did snap His fingers and (made) it so" thru' the virgin birth,
but not only because of original sin, but also so Jesus would be born both human and God

as an aside: the only importance that i see in prophecy is that it demonstrates God's intent
from the time of our original sin, that we be saved

or do i have it wrong?

 

[Vanguard]

don't intend to be argumentative but
He "did snap His fingers and (made) it so" thru' the virgin birth,
but not only because of original sin, but also so Jesus would be born both human and God

What I am saying is why do we, as humans, feel the need to invent theories and speculation about something such as being born without the stain of original sin? Where does it say babies, upon their first breath, have sinned? Sin is not transfered from mother to child at the moment of birth. Each soul is unique and will be judged on an individual basis.

This is where one must separate a traditional belief from one based on what the Bible actually says. We don't need to invent anything extra (the Bible even says not to add to it).

Just a thought...

 

[Agape]

Furthermore, to say "The LXX is the scripture Jesus and the Disciples used and the word Virgin is used...It appears the LXX translators, Jesus, the Disciples, Paul and the early Chruch fathers AGREE that the term Virgin was correct." is quite a bold statement. Cite your source please.

--- There is no conclusive argument for "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 being either "young woman" or "virgin." However, it is interesting to note, that in the 3rd century B.C., when a panel of Hebrew scholars and Jewish rabbis began the process of translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, they used the specific Greek word for virgin, "parthenos," not the more generic Greek word for "young woman." The Septuagint translators, 200+ years before the birth of Christ, and with no inherent belief in a "virgin birth," translated "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 as "virgin," not "young woman." This gives evidence that "virgin" is a possible, even likely, meaning of the term.
source: http://www.gotquestions.org/virgin-or-young-woman.html

______________________​

--- It is interesting that in modern Hebrew either ’alma or betula can mean “virgin.” However, Isaiah did not use betula because in Old Testament Hebrew it can refer to a married woman who is not a virgin (Deut. 22:19; Joel 1:8). It’s apparent, therefore, that he used ’alma in 7:14 with the clear, precise conviction that the woman who would bear the Messiah would indeed be a young woman who never had sexual relations with a man.

Matthew’s use of Isaiah’s prophecy followed directly in the prophet’s path. The apostle was not giving ’alma a Christian “twist” to make its usage fit a theory of the virgin birth. Instead, Matthew gave the term the same meaning as Isaiah intended, demonstrated by his translation of ’alma with the Greek parthenos, the same word used by the Jewish translators of the Greek Old Testament.
source: http://www.gty.org/blog/B111223

______________________​

--- The LXX is a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. This translation was made around 200 B.C. by 70 Hebrew scholars. In Isaiah 7:14, they translated the word "almah" into the Greek word "parthenos." According to A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature,2 parthenos means "virgin." This word is used in the New Testament of the Virgin Mary (Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:27) and of the ten virgins in the parable (Matt. 25:1, 7, 11). If the Hebrews translated the Hebrew word "alma" into the Greek word for virgin, then they understood what the Hebrew text meant here.
http://carm.org/isaiah-7-14-virgin

 

[P31Woman]

What I am saying is why do we, as humans, feel the need to invent theories and speculation about something such as being born without the stain of original sin? Where does it say babies, upon their first breath, have sinned? Sin is not transfered from mother to child at the moment of birth. Each soul is unique and will be judged on an individual basis.

This is where one must separate a traditional belief from one based on what the Bible actually says. We don't need to invent anything extra (the Bible even says not to add to it).

Just a thought...

Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

NASB

Romans 5 discusses both origional and imputed sin.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.

18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

NASB

 

[P31Woman]

--- There is no conclusive argument for "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 being either "young woman" or "virgin." However, it is interesting to note, that in the 3rd century B.C., when a panel of Hebrew scholars and Jewish rabbis began the process of translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, they used the specific Greek word for virgin, "parthenos," not the more generic Greek word for "young woman." The Septuagint translators, 200+ years before the birth of Christ, and with no inherent belief in a "virgin birth," translated "almah" in Isaiah 7:14 as "virgin," not "young woman." This gives evidence that "virgin" is a possible, even likely, meaning of the term.
source: http://www.gotquestions.org/virgin-or-young-woman.html

______________________​

--- It is interesting that in modern Hebrew either ’alma or betula can mean “virgin.” However, Isaiah did not use betula because in Old Testament Hebrew it can refer to a married woman who is not a virgin (Deut. 22:19; Joel 1:8). It’s apparent, therefore, that he used ’alma in 7:14 with the clear, precise conviction that the woman who would bear the Messiah would indeed be a young woman who never had sexual relations with a man.

Matthew’s use of Isaiah’s prophecy followed directly in the prophet’s path. The apostle was not giving ’alma a Christian “twist” to make its usage fit a theory of the virgin birth. Instead, Matthew gave the term the same meaning as Isaiah intended, demonstrated by his translation of ’alma with the Greek parthenos, the same word used by the Jewish translators of the Greek Old Testament.
source: http://www.gty.org/blog/B111223

______________________​

--- The LXX is a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. This translation was made around 200 B.C. by 70 Hebrew scholars. In Isaiah 7:14, they translated the word "almah" into the Greek word "parthenos." According to A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature,2 parthenos means "virgin." This word is used in the New Testament of the Virgin Mary (Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:27) and of the ten virgins in the parable (Matt. 25:1, 7, 11). If the Hebrews translated the Hebrew word "alma" into the Greek word for virgin, then they understood what the Hebrew text meant here.
http://carm.org/isaiah-7-14-virgin

Got Questions, MacArthur and CARM all good and respected Christian sources! Great job.

 

[Agape]

Got Questions, MacArthur and CARM all good and respected Christian sources! Great job.

Thanks. ;)

 

[Vanguard]

Got Questions, MacArthur and CARM all good and respected Christian sources! Great job.

GotQuestions.org is HIGHLY biased toward conservative Christian beliefs, and I personally have found misinformation on that website. They spin things out of context to make them fit. You won't change my mind on that point, so don't bother trying.

As far as the Hebrew terminology, I'll trust one of my professors, since he is a former Orthodox Jewish rabbi.

As to the rest, I am unsure of which god you are talking about, but God the Father of Jesus, being all powerful, can do as He pleases and doesn't need our doctrines and theories to make something a reality. Do you refute that He is all powerful? Are you saying that He is bound by our manmade doctrines?


Edited response to deleted post

I don't have to guess again. I am spot on. But thanks anyway.

 

[P31Woman]

GotQuestions.org is HIGHLY biased toward conservative Christian beliefs, and I personally have found misinformation on that website. They spin things out of context to make them fit. You won't change my mind on that point, so don't bother trying.

As far as the Hebrew terminology, I'll trust one of my professors, since he is a former Orthodox Jewish rabbi.

As to the rest, I am unsure of which god you are talking about, but God the Father of Jesus, being all powerful, can do as He pleases and doesn't need our doctrines and theories to make something a reality. Do you refute that He is all powerful? Are you saying that He is bound by our manmade doctrines?

Edited response to deleted post

I don't have to guess again. I am spot on. But thanks anyway.

Your post is not making sense after the first part addressing Got Questions. If I had to guess their Statement of Faith is the same as this websites. I am a conservative Christian. I agree wtih the SoF of this forum, GotQuestions, CARM and MacArthur. I don't agree with liberal theologians who often teach Jesus' body was eaten by dogs. Nor do I turn to the emergent group whose theology is like jello.

Please copy and paste each post you are responding to. It's best to address each individual poster in seperate post.