FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-01-2009, 07:00 PM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 3,551
Default

Just a remark on the JPS translation of Genesis 34:2-3:

Quote:
34:2 And Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her; and he took her, and lay with her, and humbled her.

34:3 And his soul did cleave unto Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spoke comfortingly unto the damsel.
Here, the translator says aneha means humbled in 34:2. 34:3 almah morphs into damsel instead of young woman.

As discussed in my OP the Artscroll Interlinear translates almah in this verse as maiden.

My English is much better than my Hebrew and both damsel and maiden suggest a women who is not the village slut, and probably a virgin.

Why is the same word in Isaiah 7:14 translated as young woman? I have great respect for translators (especially Jewish ones) but it is certainly plausible that one reason might be a desire to avoid a polemical attack from coreligionists over a sensitive verse.
semiopen is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 07:08 PM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: land of the home, free of the brave
Posts: 9,729
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
I have to disagree with Hayes about the mistranslation. The word she is talking about is almah in Hebrew and this has a connotation of virgin. The word betulah is often suggested as being more on the virgin side, but even this is not clear. There is no word in Hebrew for virgin
There isn't? Then did the Hebrews not care if a woman was a virgin or not when she came to be married because there was no word that specifically defined one? So when a father presented his daughter as marriage fodder he could fudge a little on describing her sexual condition?
credoconsolans is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 07:55 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 3,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by credoconsolans View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
I have to disagree with Hayes about the mistranslation. The word she is talking about is almah in Hebrew and this has a connotation of virgin. The word betulah is often suggested as being more on the virgin side, but even this is not clear. There is no word in Hebrew for virgin
There isn't? Then did the Hebrews not care if a woman was a virgin or not when she came to be married because there was no word that specifically defined one? So when a father presented his daughter as marriage fodder he could fudge a little on describing her sexual condition?
One would have to use more than one word to describe the situation.

Numbers 31:18:

Quote:
But all the women children, that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
where "lo yodeau mishkav zachar" literally "no she know lying male" is a virgin.

Or Genesis 19:8, Lot offers his daughters in Sodom

Quote:
Behold now, I have two daughters that have not known man...
where "lo yodeau ish" ish = man.

If they wanted to make sure we understood virgin, they could have used a few more words, on the other hand they understood Hebrew better than we do.
semiopen is offline  
Old 12-01-2009, 09:47 PM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
One would have to use more than one word to describe the situation.

Numbers 31:18:



where "lo yodeau mishkav zachar" literally "no she know lying male" is a virgin.

If they wanted to make sure we understood virgin, they could have used a few more words, on the other hand they understood Hebrew better than we do.
Interestingly, in the LXX the single word used for the women is gynaikos in Numbers 31. Not sure what the significance of that is, but you'd think that if they wanted to emphasize their virginity, they would use parthenos (or maybe even koritsi?).
show_no_mercy is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 05:01 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iskander View Post
The Jewish Study Bible also translates Isaiah 7 :14 in the past tense. Perhaps you haven’t noticed,
14 Assuredly, my Lord will give you a sign of His own accord! Look, the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel.

Professor Hayes makes a clear statement regarding Isaiah 7:14 .She would keep her lecture simple for an introductory class, but she would never lower the quality of her teaching to reach her pupils.
I hope Professor Hayes admits you to her class, I am sure it will vastly improve your understanding.
I'm sure my understanding can be improved, perhaps even by someone less esteemed than Prof Hayes, but she is clearly wrong on her Greek digression. The controversy is not with the Greek translation but with the Hebrew word almah. The Greek translation, parthenos, is from everything I've read remarkably accurate. This is usually a given in a discussion of this subject and as I mentioned, I can't imagine how she would respond to a challenge.

Regarding the past tense (and apparently I was correct to be afraid) even the JPS translation is unclear because of the structure of the sentence. The future tense in the verse may be implied by vayoladet, where "va" means "and", "yeled" is "child", and "et" is feminine, presumably indicating the mother. "yo" substituted for "ye" seems to be future tense to me, but my Hebrew grammar is not very good, to say the least.

Despite my linguistic inadequacies, the 14 or so translations of this verse here:

http://bible.cc/isaiah/7-14.htm

all seem to think it is the future tense. Granted these seem to be Christians and therefore somewhat mentally challenged; but it is probably difficult to argue that none of them would be qualified to take Prof Hayes' more advanced classes.

The NRSV and the New Jerusalem bibles also translate Isaiah 7:14 as a woman already pregnant
Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel


http://www.devotions.net/bible/00bible.htm
http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=29

There is an interesting discussion of Hebrew grammar here (page 21 ff):

http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/availab...02chapter2.pdf
Iskander is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 05:48 AM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default Dinah

Dinah:
The verb 'ānāh refers to humiliation, but when combined with shākāb, “to lie with”, it evokes the sense of sexual dishonour, but not necessarily a violent act

The alleged rape could have been nothing more than illicit sex between consenting adults.
The sons of Jacob describe the behaviour of Shechem as nebālāh and therefore a grave insult to the house of Jacob whether or not Dinah consented to sexual intercourse.

The story of Dinah is an ancient tale of lovers being punished for breaking the existing traditions: their love was unacceptable to society, just as the love of Romeo and Juliet was in another story
Iskander is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 07:28 AM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
Default ThAlmah & BetuLouise

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
I have to disagree with Hayes about the mistranslation. The word she is talking about is almah in Hebrew and this has a connotation of virgin. The word betulah is often suggested as being more on the virgin side, but even this is not clear. There is no word in Hebrew for virgin, and I suspect Hayes tempered her words for the inexperience (introduction) of her audience.

Almah is a link I've posted before.
JW:
I've inventoried the issue of the proper translation of "almah" here:

Matthew 1:23

at ErrancyWiki

This isn't much of an issue in Polemics anymore. Christianity lost the battle for "almah" 50 years ago. Rightly dividing Christian Bible scholarship into:

1) Liberal

2) Mainstream

3) Conservative

4) Fundamentalist

1) - 3) all accept that "almah" does not equal "virgin". The fundamentalists are split on the issue. Generally Christianity would confess that "virgin" is based on interpretation and not translation.

As a counter-missionary the subject is boring as there really isn't anyone to argue with. Steven Avery would be the type of Christian who would still argue for "virgin". If anyone would like to present a defense of "virgin" at ErrancyWiki be my guest.

The starting point is the use of "almah" in the Jewish Bible:

Meaning of "Almah"

Quote:
Here are the other 6 uses of "almah" in the Jewish Bible:

Genesis 24:43

Behold, I am standing by the fountain of water. And let it come to pass, that the maiden that cometh forth to draw, to whom I shall say, Give me, I pray thee, a little water from thy pitcher to drink.

Exodus 2:8

And Pharaoh`s daughter said to her, Go. And the maiden went and called the child`s mother.

Psalms 68:25

The singers went before, the minstrels followed after, In the midst of the damsels playing with timbrels.

Proverbs 30:19

The way of an eagle in the air; The way of a serpent upon a rock; The way of a ship in the midst of the sea; And the way of a man with a maiden.

Song of Solomon 1:3

Thine oils have a goodly fragrance; Thy name is [as] oil poured forth; Therefore do the virgins love thee.

Song of Solomon 6:8

There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, And virgins without number.
JW:

Note that none of these uses give a technical definition of "virgin" or by context even a preferential meaning of "virgin" over "young woman"/"maiden".
Note especially that Proverbs 30:19 and Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8 seem to preclude "virgin".

The Wiki article cited isn't very good.



Joseph

ErrancyWiki
JoeWallack is offline  
Old 12-02-2009, 11:39 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: land of the home, free of the brave
Posts: 9,729
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by credoconsolans View Post

There isn't? Then did the Hebrews not care if a woman was a virgin or not when she came to be married because there was no word that specifically defined one? So when a father presented his daughter as marriage fodder he could fudge a little on describing her sexual condition?
One would have to use more than one word to describe the situation.

Numbers 31:18:



where "lo yodeau mishkav zachar" literally "no she know lying male" is a virgin.

Or Genesis 19:8, Lot offers his daughters in Sodom

Quote:
Behold now, I have two daughters that have not known man...
where "lo yodeau ish" ish = man.

If they wanted to make sure we understood virgin, they could have used a few more words, on the other hand they understood Hebrew better than we do.
Thanks. Sounds like fudging to me. A Hebrew woman could be queen of the BJs and makeouts, but so long as she didn't go 'all the way' and was a virgin so that they could prove it (she had an intact hymen) she was fine.
credoconsolans is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 07:36 AM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 3,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeWallack View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
I have to disagree with Hayes about the mistranslation. The word she is talking about is almah in Hebrew and this has a connotation of virgin. The word betulah is often suggested as being more on the virgin side, but even this is not clear. There is no word in Hebrew for virgin, and I suspect Hayes tempered her words for the inexperience (introduction) of her audience.

Almah is a link I've posted before.
JW:
I've inventoried the issue of the proper translation of "almah" here:

Matthew 1:23

at ErrancyWiki

This isn't much of an issue in Polemics anymore. Christianity lost the battle for "almah" 50 years ago. Rightly dividing Christian Bible scholarship into:

1) Liberal

2) Mainstream

3) Conservative

4) Fundamentalist

1) - 3) all accept that "almah" does not equal "virgin". The fundamentalists are split on the issue. Generally Christianity would confess that "virgin" is based on interpretation and not translation.

As a counter-missionary the subject is boring as there really isn't anyone to argue with. Steven Avery would be the type of Christian who would still argue for "virgin". If anyone would like to present a defense of "virgin" at ErrancyWiki be my guest.

The starting point is the use of "almah" in the Jewish Bible:

Meaning of "Almah"

Quote:
Here are the other 6 uses of "almah" in the Jewish Bible:

Genesis 24:43

Behold, I am standing by the fountain of water. And let it come to pass, that the maiden that cometh forth to draw, to whom I shall say, Give me, I pray thee, a little water from thy pitcher to drink.

Exodus 2:8

And Pharaoh`s daughter said to her, Go. And the maiden went and called the child`s mother.

Psalms 68:25

The singers went before, the minstrels followed after, In the midst of the damsels playing with timbrels.

Proverbs 30:19

The way of an eagle in the air; The way of a serpent upon a rock; The way of a ship in the midst of the sea; And the way of a man with a maiden.

Song of Solomon 1:3

Thine oils have a goodly fragrance; Thy name is [as] oil poured forth; Therefore do the virgins love thee.

Song of Solomon 6:8

There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, And virgins without number.
JW:

Note that none of these uses give a technical definition of "virgin" or by context even a preferential meaning of "virgin" over "young woman"/"maiden".
Note especially that Proverbs 30:19 and Song of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8 seem to preclude "virgin".

The Wiki article cited isn't very good.



Joseph

ErrancyWiki
Thanks Joseph,

This is impressive.

Just a few comments:

You don't mention the almah referrences in Dinah, is this because the type is covered in one of your other references?

Your comments deal with almah as not meaning virgin, yet you equate almah with young woman/maiden. My understanding of maiden is that there is at least a hint that a maiden is a virgin. The issue with translating almah to young woman is that it loses some of the respect implied by the term almah. For example a zona (harlot) would not be referred to as an almah although certainly she might be a young woman.

You also claim that Betulah has a hard meaning of virgin. I believe this is not completely accurate as there are several passages where Betulah is translated as maiden.

My understanding is that almah means young lady->maiden and Betulah means maiden -> virgin.

The actual translation of almah in Isaiah 7:14 as young woman therefore might be criticized as not conveying the actual meaning of the term used there, damsel and maiden seems to be a better choice.

Your explanation of the tense issue in the Isaiah passage seems clear to me, but, as you acknowledge, it is not known to a certainty that Isaiah knew the almah he wrote about.
semiopen is offline  
Old 12-03-2009, 05:46 PM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,619
Default

[
Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
Continuing my monologue about the meaning of Almah in Isaiah 7:14

Quote:
Behold, the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the almah will conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Where almah means something on a continuum between young woman and virgin.

Dinah is used to illustrate that almah does not neccesarily mean virgin.



Assuming this sequence is correct, the bible calls her an almah after she was anehaed. If aneha means raped, she would presumably no longer be a virgin and therefore almah does not mean virgin.

There are a few issues with this, one being that aneha does not clearly mean raped. It means humiliate, degrade, defile, etc.

The Wiki article cited above says:

Quote:
...One contemporary biblical scholar, Alexander Rofé, has suggested that the verb describing Dinah as "defiled" was added at this time also, as elsewhere in the Bible only married or betrothed women are "defiled" by rape; the fact that Genesis 34 is the sole exception suggests that it reflects a "late, postexilic notion that the idolatrous gentiles are impure [and supports] the prohibition of intermarriage and intercourse with them." The anachronistic preoccupation with racial purity indicates a date in the 5th or 4th centuries BC, when the restored Jewish community in Jerusalem was similarly preoccupied with anti-Samaritan polemics.[5] It is not clear that Dinah was actually raped at all in the original story: the narrative is vague about what happened between Shechem and Dinah (the verb translated as "humbled" or "violated" can also mean "to subdue"), and the older version of Genesis 34 may therefore reflect a custom of abduction marriage.[5]
This makes sense, verse 3 is clearly out of tune with verse 2.

Artscroll Interlinear translates almah as maiden here.


Quote:
:
Genesis 34

1 Dinah, the daughter of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. 2 Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, the prince of the land, saw her. He took her, lay with her, and aneha her. 3 His soul joined to Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the almah, and spoke kindly to the almah.


I could not find the word almah in Genesis 34:3. I don’t know why.

My reading of Genesis 34:3 is that the Hebrew word used for girl/maiden is naarah

I am only a learner, though
Iskander is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:21 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.