LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Thalma and Bethalouis

Post by GakuseiDon » Wed Dec 23, 2020 3:46 am

mlinssen wrote:
Wed Dec 23, 2020 2:50 am
I'm afraid I can't go with the translation of virgin here, but perhaps the trick is in the translation with the word "neither" - or my bad English, of course
From Strong's entry for "bethuwlah":
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 1330&t=KJV
The KJV translates Strong's H1330 in the following manner: virgin (38x), maid (7x), maiden (5x).
It looks like "neither" is implied through context rather than a separate word for itself, so it isn't a contradiction. But it is interesting that the author had to qualify "virgin" with "no man had known her", if that latter expression was a reference to sexual intercourse. It suggests an overlap between "virgin" and "girl" that I've seen in Japanese.

Whereas with Strong's entry for "almah":
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 5959&t=KJV
The KJV translates Strong's H5959 in the following manner: virgin (4x), maid (2x), damsels (1x).
Though that is under the influence of Christian translators.

But anyway, I'm not arguing that "virgin" is the right word for "almah" in Isaiah 7:14. I'm not a Christian so I don't care from any theological viewpoint. I'm just wondering if "almah" was vague enough to be the source for Jesus's virgin-birth story, or whether the virgin-birth story came first and then Isaiah 7:14 was rationalised to refer to a virgin. If the latter, then how valid is the rationalisation?

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 421
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Thalma and Bethalouis

Post by mlinssen » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:02 am

GakuseiDon wrote:
Wed Dec 23, 2020 3:46 am
mlinssen wrote:
Wed Dec 23, 2020 2:50 am
I'm afraid I can't go with the translation of virgin here, but perhaps the trick is in the translation with the word "neither" - or my bad English, of course
From Strong's entry for "bethuwlah":
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 1330&t=KJV
The KJV translates Strong's H1330 in the following manner: virgin (38x), maid (7x), maiden (5x).
It looks like "neither" is implied through context rather than a separate word for itself, so it isn't a contradiction. But it is interesting that the author had to qualify "virgin" with "no man had known her", if that latter expression was a reference to sexual intercourse. It suggests an overlap between "virgin" and "girl" that I've seen in Japanese.

Whereas with Strong's entry for "almah":
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/le ... 5959&t=KJV
The KJV translates Strong's H5959 in the following manner: virgin (4x), maid (2x), damsels (1x).
Though that is under the influence of Christian translators.

But anyway, I'm not arguing that "virgin" is the right word for "almah" in Isaiah 7:14. I'm not a Christian so I don't care from any theological viewpoint. I'm just wondering if "almah" was vague enough to be the source for Jesus's virgin-birth story, or whether the virgin-birth story came first and then Isaiah 7:14 was rationalised to refer to a virgin. If the latter, then how valid is the rationalisation?
I assumed you weren't arguing that, as you stated that earlier already. With regards to Christians or theological viewpoints: as long as the παρθένος of Isaiah matches the παρθένος of Matthew, all's well I suppose. If Isaiah wanted to stress the fact that a virgin would conceive, I think it's likely he would have elaborated on that in some way

As I tried to illustrate in viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7489&start=10#p115880, the birth narrative of Samson is conspicuously similar to that of J&J. Fulfilling scripture undoubtedly prevailed over hinting at a "true" hero who had a track record of saving Israel from its enemies.
Think about it: you have decided that Mark's Jesus misses a lineage and birth narrative and need to make up both

In the lineage you put David, of course, and his sons that are born in Jerusalem. Solomon stands out there but has no birth narrative yet 1 Chronicles 14 is about the Philistines. You think of Samson's birth, who kicked their ass continuously, and the woman being barren is a gift!
Then you copy Marcion, copy Samson, make sure that the birth narrative of JtB is a verbatim copy of Samson just about, and you are a little more subtle on Jesus'.
Then you write your own gospel, include the prophecy of Isaiah and repeat his words. And you find a way to make the Immanuel thing work for Jesus, although no one has ever called Jesus Immanuel so technically, two thousand years later, we could drily observe that Matthew's application of Isaiah 7:14 has utterly failed - but I digress

So you make up Luke and give the women full attention there, explain the entire story, and can comfortably lean back in your own one and keep it strictly man's business.
Yes, I know. There's a fine line between creativity and ridiculous, preposterously insane ideas

Exodus 2:8 has νεᾶνις for almah, by the way

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8404
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Thalma and Bethalouis

Post by Ben C. Smith » Wed Dec 23, 2020 6:58 am

mlinssen wrote:As I tried to illustrate in viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7489&start=10#p115880, the birth narrative of Samson is conspicuously similar to that of J&J. Fulfilling scripture undoubtedly prevailed over hinting at a "true" hero who had a track record of saving Israel from its enemies.
Which is probably why Matthew 2.23 attributes the Nazarene prophecy, not to any single figure like Isaiah or Jeremiah, but rather to "the prophets" collectively:
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 3:19 pm
Thus, at some point a Greek Christian author or scribe must have rendered the Semitic root NṢR as NZR on the strength of the latter pointing to the Nazirite vow, which is (A) why we find Jesus being called a Nazarene in the same context in which he is also called the Holy One of God and (B) why we find his being reared in Nazareth being put on the anonymous lips of "the prophets" (the combination of a "former prophet" in Judges and a "latter prophet" in Isaiah or some such). Just as the boy Samson was going to be a NZR, so too the boy Jesus. This author or scribe either already thought of Jesus as a Nazirite/nazir in some way (as my own view of the Messiah ben Joseph connection might suggest) or straight up misunderstood the term Naṣoraean (which he or she did not understand) as Naziraean (which he or she did understand) and decided that it was appropriate to paint Jesus in Nazirite hues, at least for some purposes. Certain factors conspired against turning Jesus into a full Nazirite, however, not least of which was the concept of the Messianic Banquet: if the Messiah is present, there is eating and drinking to be done. 1 Enoch 62.14 lists eating as one of the main activities the righteous will do with the Son of Man; so of course "the Son of Man came eating and drinking" (Matthew 11.19 = Luke 7.34); the bridegroom was present; only in his absence would there be abstinence by either party (Matthew 26.29 = Mark 14.25).
Both the specific prophecy ("he shall be called a Nazarene") and the birth of Jesus overall were composite ideas, gleaned both from Judges and from Isaiah, in the main.

Kunigunde Kreuzerin
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 2:19 pm
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact:

Re: LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Post by Kunigunde Kreuzerin » Wed Dec 23, 2020 8:15 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:40 pm
What is this based on?
My impression was that GakuseiDon and I agree that the text of the LXX changed the meaning from maiden to virgin, and we just disagree on whether this change by way of an interpretative translation improved the story in a literary sense or did not.
GakuseiDon wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 4:24 pm
But I know how hard it is to decide between literal translation vs meaningful translation.
Without discussing this point, I suspect that GakuseiDon's point of view is that the change of meaning made to appear the conception and the birth of Immanuel more sacred. If that is the case, then GakuseiDon would be right insofar as the Hebrew Bible often illustrates faithfulness with the image of virginity but not with girlishness.

My opinion differs from GakuseiDon’s because I think that the story has a deliberate contrast between the weakly acting King Ahaz and the strongly acting maiden (strong in the manner of the arch-mothers, think of Rachel and Leah in their birth contest and the naming of Jacob’s children) and that the contrast to the „great king“ requires the emphasis on the girlishness of the maiden while the emphasis on virginity throws a red herring into the story. In addition, the births of Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Isaiah 8:3) seem to me to be on the same level from the point of view of the supernatural. The spirit may rest upon all of them (Immanuel, the maiden, Isaiah, the prophetess and Maher-shalal-hash-baz) and in this way these are not natural births but not miraculous conceptions in the sense of a virgin birth.

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:40 pm
What do you do with the cases laid out in the usual lexical sources, cases which lead the lexicographers to define, for example, παρθένος primarily as maiden or girl and secondarily as virgin? (Why, for instance, does Heracles refer to Iole as a παρθένος in The Women of Trachis when he is making clear that he has slept with her?)
GakuseiDon wrote:
Sun Dec 20, 2020 4:47 am
I know a lot more Japanese than I do ancient Hebrew, and there is a similar situation there also. The word "shoujo" (少女) means "girl" with a connotation of "virgin" (though there is a more specific word for "virgin" as well).
It's similar in German. The German word for virgin is „Jungfrau“ (there is no other specific word). It is literally „young-woman“ and initially designated an unmarried noble young lady. A short form is “Jungfer”. It had a wider range of meaning. It could mean an unmarried noble young lady, an unmarried normal girl, an unmarried old woman (similar to “spinster”), a virgin or a waiting girl. The term “Jungfer” is out of date now but the derived verb “entjungfern” for deflower is in use.

I think that from the 2nd century BC at the latest, παρθένος (parthenos) is the technical term in Greek for virgin, but depending on the context, the emphasis can be more on the age of a girl, premarital status or the purity of her soul (so to speak).

In LXX-Deuteronomy 22:17 the virginity test is mentioned in which the parents of the bride have to show the blood-smeared dress of the wedding night as the token of her virginity (παρθένια) and Wisdom of Sirach 20:4 used the verb αποπαρθενωσαι for deflower.

I think the problem of LXX-Isaiah 7:14 is the definite article.

ιδου η παρθενος εν γαστρι εξει
Behold, the virgin in womb (will) have

I would say that without the definite article and because a man is not mentioned in Isaiah 7:14 the literal sense would be quite clear: that a virgin birth is meant. At first glance, this should also be the natural understanding with the definite article but it opens the possibility that there is one well-known girl at the court of King Ahaz (for example his only daughter) who is currently a virgin and will have sex after the prophesy and then conceive a child.

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Thalma and Bethalouis

Post by JoeWallack » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:01 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f6OZlCVJx0
mlinssen wrote:
Wed Dec 23, 2020 2:50 am
JoeWallack wrote:
Tue Dec 22, 2020 6:44 am
Hebrew and The Jewish Bible do use a dedicated word for "virgin" which is "bethulah". The Jewish Bible even goes to the trouble of explicitly defining the word:

Genesis 24:16
And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, neither had any man known her. And she went down to the fountain, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
Note that this definition is also the first use of the word in The Bible
I'm puzzled. "Neither" usually means "(as such / however) not", if I'm not mistaken?

"Joe was a funny guy. Neither his posts nor their youtube content received much laughs, however"
"Joe was a funny guy. Neither Ben nor GakuseiDon was funnier"

Yet what does neither mean without nor? "And also not", I think?
Shouldn't this thus read
And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, and also not had any man known her. And she went down to the fountain, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
So she was a "virgin", and in addition to that, not any man had known her?
That means that she was a young girl, not a virgin, who hadn't had sex yet. Saying that she was a virgin AND hadn't had sex yet is not very informative

We could also go the other way:
And the damsel was very fair to look upon, a virgin, yet also not had any man known her. And she went down to the fountain, and filled her pitcher, and came up.
So she was a hot looking babe, yet no one had had sex with her, as unbelievable as that is because she was so very luscious indeed

I'm afraid I can't go with the translation of virgin here, but perhaps the trick is in the translation with the word "neither" - or my bad English, of course
JW:

The "neither" you are seeing is just this translator's combination of the conjunctive attached to "man" and the negative that follows. Note that the translator still used "virgin". "Neither a borrower, nor a lender be". The only proper way to analyze is to look at the underlying Hebrew which I will do here after this post. For those who never studied it's best to look at the best translation, the Jewish JPS:

Genesis 24:16
The maiden was very beautiful, a virgin whom no man had known. She went down to the spring, filled her jar, and came up.
Reasons to think "virgin" is the intended meaning based only on this verse (in order):
  • 1) The subject is already identified as a maiden (different but very similar word to "almah") at the start. It would be largely duplication to use such a similar word again in the description.

    2) The maiden word has a strong connotation of youth and "almah" actually has a closer meaning to "maiden", often used in Hebrew to describe a young unmarried women. It's possible the intent here was both, to indicate a young woman who was eligible. The Hebrew conjunction though indicates two descriptions for the subject who is identified as a maiden, beauty and virginity. I'm not sure if a meaning other than virgin here is even grammatically possible. Again, where the hell is spin?

    3) As I said this is the first use of a very important word in the Jewish Bible so it's natural to provide a definition here.

Joseph

FIDELITY, n. A virtue peculiar to those who are about to be betrayed.

Skeptical Textual Criticism
Last edited by JoeWallack on Wed Dec 23, 2020 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Post by GakuseiDon » Wed Dec 23, 2020 5:12 pm

Kunigunde Kreuzerin wrote:
Wed Dec 23, 2020 8:15 am
My opinion differs from GakuseiDon’s...
To be clear, I don't really have an opinion. My curiosity was sparked by JoeWallack's claim that translating "almah" as "virgin" was dishonest. Now, translating the word "tree" as "virgin" would be dishonest. But given how "girl" implies "virgin" in Japanese, I wondered if the same thing was true in ancient times. Then I wondered how Isaiah 7:14 factored into the virgin birth narrative itself. I have no knowledge of ancient Hebrew and Greek, so no opinion on how they should be translated outside the mainstream.

(ETA) I just looked up the Japanese version of the Bible for Isaiah 7, and the word used for "almah" is 'otome' (乙女), which is defined as:

"Female of young years. Also, an unmarried woman. Daughter. Girl. Virgin." (年の若い女。また、未婚の女性。むすめ。しょうじょ。処女。)

I don't know if the translation is based on the Hebrew or the English though. Not that this means anything. I thought it was interesting.

moses
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 1:34 am

Re: LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Post by moses » Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:27 am

The angel makes an appearance to mary after she is already betrothed to joseph.
he tells her "you will conceive"
are pre-teens in jewish writings identified as virgins?


18Zechariah said to the angel, ‘How will I know that this is so? For I am an old man, and my wife is getting on in years.’

30The angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God. 31And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son.... 34Mary said to the angel, ‘How can this be, since I am a virgin?’ 35The angel said to her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God. 36And now, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month for her who was said to be barren. 37For nothing will be impossible with God.’
does it make better sense to have mary say "how can this be, since i am too young" ?

30The angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favour with God. 31And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son.... 34Mary said to the angel, ‘How can this be, since I am young?’ 35The angel said to her, ...... 36And now, your relative Elizabeth in her old age has also conceived a son; and this is the sixth month for her who was said to be barren. 37For nothing will be impossible with God.’

it seems her question makes better sense if it is translated as "too young"


any thoughts on this?

i wonder if there is some kind of connection

mary = too young too conceive
elizabeth = too old to conceive.
Last edited by moses on Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

moses
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 1:34 am

Re: LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Post by moses » Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:32 am

"Female of young years. Also, an unmarried woman. Daughter. Girl. Virgin." (年の若い女。また、未婚の女性。むすめ。しょうじょ。処女。)

"female of young years" = child?

User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1338
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

The Hebrew Of Isaiah 7:14 (Release The Laken!)

Post by JoeWallack » Thu Dec 24, 2020 8:38 am

7:14


Strong's Hebrew English Morphology
3651 [e] לָ֠כֵן lā-ḵên Therefore Adv
5414 [e] יִתֵּ֨ן yit-tên will give V-Qal-Imperf-3ms
136 [e] אֲדֹנָ֥י ’ă-ḏō-nāy the Lord N-proper-ms
1931 [e] ה֛וּא hū He Pro-3ms
- לָכֶ֖ם lā-ḵem you Prep | 2mp
226 [e] א֑וֹת ’ō-wṯ; a sign N-cs
2009 [e] הִנֵּ֣ה hin-nêh behold Interjection
5959 [e] הָעַלְמָ֗ה hā-‘al-māh, the virgin Art | N-fs
2030 [e] הָרָה֙ hā-rāh shall become pregnant Adj-fs
3205 [e] וְיֹלֶ֣דֶת wə-yō-le-ḏeṯ and bear Conj-w | V-Qal-Prtcpl-fs
1121 [e] בֵּ֔ן bên, a Son N-ms
7121 [e] וְקָרָ֥את wə-qā-rāṯ and shall call Conj-w | V-Qal-ConjPerf-3fs
8034 [e] שְׁמ֖וֹ šə-mōw His name N-msc | 3ms
- עִמָּ֥נוּ ‘im-mā-nū - -
6005 [e] אֵֽל׃ ’êl. Immanuel N-proper-ms

JW:
Note that this is from Strong's and the translation is from the KJV, probably the worst English translation. I use it as a starting point because it is readily available and easy to use and also so I can say:

My verse is long,
My concordance is Strong's,
And I'm down to get the religious friction on.
Hell yah!



Joseph

"For they will see what had not been told them, and they will understand what they had not heard. "

Why Must You Be Such An Angry Young Man? GMark 1:41 - Was Jesus Angry?

User avatar
mlinssen
Posts: 421
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:01 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: LGBTQ - El's Greek Byzantine Translation Question

Post by mlinssen » Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:07 am

Jesus was angry, very angry. Or rather, IHS was

Take the numerical value, transcribe that to Hebrew, and you get

יחר

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/yichar_2734.htm

One of my latest brain farts. That, and 60 / 120 meaning one or two handfuls - that, in unrelated news

Post Reply