Jayrok

In another thread it was mentioned that 'virgin' (almah) was an object of challenge in the second century and the Christian reference was defended by Justin.

Is there any Jewish literature where this is in dispute from the time of Isaiah's writing up til the first or second century CE? Did the Hebrews take this passage as simply meaning a young woman or was there controversy and discussion about this being a literal virgin giving birth?

If the Jews believed this was a miraculous virgin conception, is there documentation where Jewish leaders discuss this? Or was the idea that this "virgin" was an actual miracle presented with Matthew's gospel, thus leaving the Jews scratching their heads?

Thanks in advance

Jayrok

Also, Isaiah 7 reads that this will be a sign for King Ahaz. It doesn't literally say it will be a "miraculous" sign (i.e. supernatural birth).

It could be read as this young woman, who was a virgin, will conceive and bear a Son. Will/Shall conceive could mean she will get pregnant the natural way. Does the text render that she be a "virgin" at the baby's birth here?

As for the "sign", it seems the sign is that King Ahaz's enemies will be dealt with prior to this young boy learning the difference between right and wrong. In other words, when this boy is still a child your enemies will be dealt with, so stop worrying.

Couldn't this reading be valid?

Voice of reason

If you read Isaiah chapters 7 and 8 you can see that it is no way a reference to a Jesus or a Christ some 700 years later.

It is a sign for King Ahaz the King of Judea. Pekah was the King of Israel and joined forces with the King of Syria, I forget his name.

The easy thing to do is read Isaiah 7 and 8.

Clouseau

One does not necessarily exclude another.

Jayrok

I understand the story behind the passages. Christians counter with it being a dual prophecy or what have you.

My questions was did the Jews believe this initial prophecy to by a literal virgin birth, or was the child to be born in the natural way.

Clouseau

The Septuagint was a Greek translation made from the Hebrew around 200 years before Christ. It uses the word parthenos, exactly the same word as used in the gospels.

Toto

How is this question different from that other thread that you refer to? Why do you think you will get a different answer here?

Please check this post and tell me why this thread should be open?

JoyJuice

Is Isaiah included in the Septuagint, or was it just a translation of the Law?

How do we know exactly when Isaiah was translated?

Clouseau

Isaiah is included, as is the whole Hebrew canon (and more besides were added, which fact has led to contention).

It is not known when any particular book was translated. The general scholarly opinion, from textual analysis and other evidence, is that the Pentateuch was translated first, the major prophets, including Isaiah, after that. The project is reckoned to have commenced in the second half of the third century BC, and finished in the first century BC.

Ray Moscow

Clouseau is right about the parthenos (mis)translation in Isaiah 7:14 coming in with the Septuagint. In itself, this doesn't tell us what the various Jewish opinions were about any "virgin birth".

It does indicate that whoever wrote that part of Matthew understood Greek better than Hebrew, or else only had access to the Septuagint translation.

Ray