Aspirin99

I just read something today that sounded very convincing. That is, that the Septuagint in the 1st century only consisted of the Pentateuch. Further, the prophetic books, like Isaiah, were a Christian addition to the Septuagint in the 3rd century.

Here are the details: http://www.outreachjudaism.org/matthew.html

If this is true (is it?), then interpreting Isa. 7:14 to mean a virgin birth of the messiah 700 years later is just a wrong interpretation. I suppose one might still show that bethulah (versus almah) would have been used if true virginity was meant, but the parthenos explaination should be dropped.

If this is true, a lot of websites (including some documents on this one) would need to drop the bit about the poor translation of the Septuagint. I don't think the argument is weakened. In fact, it just takes less time to explain.

Thoughts?

Aspirin99

I guess I should have searched further. I see a similar thread here.
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=133171