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 απο
παρθενωσαι 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.
