Haran

I'm afraid I'm not very familiar with commentaries on Justin Martyr's works. If anyone else knows of good ones (especially deaing with the original language), I'd appreciate the references as well. In the mean time, the following site has some resources that may be good if they can be found.

Resources on Justin Martyr

ozone cowboy

<grk>parQenos</> [is] pregnant and shall bear a son...

It's difficult to take parQenos, which means both "young woman" and "virgin", to mean "virgin" when she is with child.
-------------------------------------------------
Isn't this one of the main points of the xtian faith? We tend to think in the natural world terms and not who, how, or why of the spiritual world. Why is it possible to believe that the O.T. miracles took place but not that she was with child and still a virgin? Wouldn't a young woman would be presumed a virgin unless it could be proven otherwise. Since it's past the historical certainty point the benifit of the doubt would go to the young lady unless it could be PROVEN otherwise.

spin

My important final sentence you should note again:

The importance here is to explain how an ancient reader could get the idea that many xians want this verse to have.

How does an ancient reader get what you want from the text? What are the linguistic clues the writer gives to allow you to read either the Hebrew or the Greek as "virgin"?


spin

Haran

Well, I assume they understood the languages better because they used them. Judging by the early church fathers writings mentioned above, it is pretty obvious that they took 'parthenos' to mean virgin. Apparently, the Jews of that time considered the early Christians to be right enough in their assessment of the word 'parthenos' that they changed it in their newer versions to read 'neanis' or 'young woman'.

For instance, here is one of the ways that the early church fathers (specifically Justin) made more sense out of 'virgin' as opposed to 'young woman' (as already posted above:

But you in these matters venture to pervert the expositions which your elders that were with Ptolemy king of Egypt gave forth, since you assert that the Scripture is not so as they have expounded it, but says, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive, ' as if great events were to be inferred if a woman should beget from sexual intercourse: which indeed all young women, with the exception of the barren, do; but even these, God, if He wills, is able to cause[to bear].

Point is, that they did believe these things when the language (Greek at least) was still alive and understood.

Haran

Here's a link to a pretty good article in PDF which shows the 5/6 Nahal Hever Dead Sea Scroll fragment with 'pierced' as opposed to 'like a lion'.

http://www.torahresource.com/Newsletter/Ps22.16.pdf

Enjoy.

spin

I think you are talking about a status quo of an undefined period. Which translation is it that gives "neanis", Theodotion or later?

Now, which came first, the interpretation of the text or the theology of the virgin and a subsequent reinterpretation of the text?

And the fact that its context would normally make it clear to a reader what was being talked about, ie the Assyrian period, it would suggest that we are dealing with a verse removed from its context, such as a collection of proof texts.

(It would seem that the interpretation in which ever order it came, could only come from the LXX, as it is impossible to get it from the Hebrew.)


spin

Haran

It was defined by Justin in the quotes I gave above. Aquila and Theodotion. Both translations were made around Justin's time, which was the time period I was referring to.

I believe these translations also translated that part of Psalm 22 (that we have been referring to) differently than the Septuagint. The Septuagint seemed to have been fine for Greek speaking Jews up until around the time Christians began to find prophecies in these verses and talk openly about them.

People many times forget that the Jews before the time of Jesus and even for some time after also saw parts of the OT as prophecy of the coming Messiah and prophetic of other events. This is evident from the Dead Sea Scroll peshers especially and other texts as well.

That said, I believe it is possible that some found this passage to be a prophecy of the coming Messiah, maybe even before Jesus by some Jews looking for a savior for them and their land.

In other words, I think 'almah' might have been understood by some as 'virgin' or at least a 'young woman' who had not yet been with a man (that last of which I believe is the way it was mostly used in the OT). I believe it obvious from the ancient writings that we have that most knew 'parthenos' to represent a virgin.

Texts were sometimes assumed to have two meanings, one obvious and the other hidden. This is one possible explanation with examples, I believe, in the DSS. However, there are others who believe this was a future prophecy and did not refer to the current period - I'm not as sure of their reasonings. I think CJD, if he is around, might understand this position better than me.

First, I do not believe it is impossible to get 'virgin' from 'almah'. Most 'young women' did not just sleep around back then, at least not in an accepted and open fashion that would have been written about. I believe there are instances of 'almah' in the OT (which I'd have to look up and don't really feel like doing so at the moment) that can leave one with the impression that an 'almah' is a 'virgin'. The best argument is found in the fact that ancient Jews translated it as 'virgin' in the Greek, id est in the Septuagint...

I've never been very clear on what language would have been predominant in Palestine during Jesus' time. I'm not sure scholars even agree. However, I do think that Greek might have been used quite heavily (due to Hellenization begun by Alexander the Great sweeping through the area with his armies and settling some of his men in locations as he went). After all, the apostles appear to have used the Septuagint in their gospels. I can't remember for sure, but I think Josephus and Philo both used the Septuagint (correct me on this if I am wrong). So, it seems that many may have considered it as inspired by God as the Hebrew, at least it might have been all they could read and so was authoritative in their lives. It is, therefore, not a big surprise to me that many of these prophecies seem based on the Septuagint reading. In fact, I believe the Eastern Orthodox churches today still use the Septuagint as inspired by God.

Amaleq13

I can't speak for "people" but I certainly have not forgotten that Jews considered certain passages of Scripture to be messianic prophecies. However, you will need to provide something more than your belief in the possibility that this passage was one of them.

Do you know of any pre-Christian references to this story that interpret it to refer to a virgin birth or as a messianic prophecy?

Haran

Again, the LXX is a pre-Christian translation which either rendered the Hebrew 'almah' as 'virgin' (greek 'parthenos'), or was translating from another MS tradition which possibly used the Hebrew 'bethulah' ('virgin').

As to the 'virgin birth' possibly having been a pre-Christian messianic prophecy, I wish I did but do not know of any references. Sorry, I thought I made it clear that I was speculating on that part, however, I personally think it likely.

spin

I might defer on the Greek as I'm no longer in any way up with literature and usage.

As to `LMH in the text, there are no clues from which to eke out "virgin". A text must point to a desired understanding for it to be possible and there are no indicators of anything besides a pregnant young woman, which upon reading would be understood as not referring to a virgin.

Rereading the Justin citation, it would appear that he wasn't reading the full passage, but just the one verse, for he says:

if great events were to be inferred if a woman should beget from sexual intercourse

which shows that he is not considering the context, for it is not the child which is important in the context, but the fact that before the child is old enough to know good and evil Assyria will have done its dirty deeds.

Firstly the scrolls indicate three flavours of Hebrew and Hebrew texts are at least 80% of the corpus. Texts from further south (Murabba'at and the like) show a much more balanced weighting of percentages. And Babatha's archive is predominantly Greek. Masada only seemed to yield religious texts and they were all in Hebrew (including a fragment of the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifices).

I've found lots of evidence that Josephus's sources reflected the Hebrew while other people have found evidence that he used the LXX. Names for example are often transliterated differently from the LXX.

There is no great reason to believe that any of the gospels were written in Palestine.

Among the scrolls were found examples of a Hebrew Vorlage to the LXX. We don't really have a good way of dating when the first LXX translations began. Pseudo-Aristaeus only talks about the law being translated anyway.

I think there seems to have been a list of appropriate verses detached from their contexts and collected in books, perhaps like 4Q175 in format, which could explain why Mark 1:2-3 splices two quotes together.


spin