104
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 45:
Line 45: + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Matthew 1-9 (Translated) (view source)
Revision as of 01:01, November 14, 2009
, 01:01, November 14, 2009→Matthew 4:19: new section
Was Jesus born of a virgin? In the analysis segment of the translation, it states that Matthew refers to Isaiah 7:14 from the Greek LXX. The LXX translated the Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14 as parthenos. But while parthenos may mean virgin in Greek, almah in Hebrew means young woman. Betulah is the Hebrew word used to mean virgin. In Genesis 24:16, where Abraham's servant was sent to find a wife for Isaac, Rebekah is described as a "maiden [who] was very beautiful, a virgin [betulah] whom no man had known". (From the JPS Torah Commentary) The word maiden here is naarah, which Strong's defines as a young, adolescent girl. It might be assumed that she is a virgin, yet the text further explains that she is a virgin, and then qualifies that with the phrase "whom no man had known". Nahum Sarna, in the JPS Torah Commentary, writes that even betulah by itself doesn't connote a virgin without a qualifying phrase, as in Gen. 24:16. He mentions Joel 1:8, where a betulah laments the husband of her youth. He also cites "an Aramaic incantation text [that] speaks of a 'bethultha' who is pregnant". When Isaiah wrote that an "almah shall conceive and bear a son", without using any qualifying phrases that even the term betulah seems to require to connote a virgin, can we then say that Isaiah was foreseeing a virgin birth? Was Matthew reading too much into the Greek word parthenos? Comments? - Danielitld
Was Jesus born of a virgin? In the analysis segment of the translation, it states that Matthew refers to Isaiah 7:14 from the Greek LXX. The LXX translated the Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14 as parthenos. But while parthenos may mean virgin in Greek, almah in Hebrew means young woman. Betulah is the Hebrew word used to mean virgin. In Genesis 24:16, where Abraham's servant was sent to find a wife for Isaac, Rebekah is described as a "maiden [who] was very beautiful, a virgin [betulah] whom no man had known". (From the JPS Torah Commentary) The word maiden here is naarah, which Strong's defines as a young, adolescent girl. It might be assumed that she is a virgin, yet the text further explains that she is a virgin, and then qualifies that with the phrase "whom no man had known". Nahum Sarna, in the JPS Torah Commentary, writes that even betulah by itself doesn't connote a virgin without a qualifying phrase, as in Gen. 24:16. He mentions Joel 1:8, where a betulah laments the husband of her youth. He also cites "an Aramaic incantation text [that] speaks of a 'bethultha' who is pregnant". When Isaiah wrote that an "almah shall conceive and bear a son", without using any qualifying phrases that even the term betulah seems to require to connote a virgin, can we then say that Isaiah was foreseeing a virgin birth? Was Matthew reading too much into the Greek word parthenos? Comments? - Danielitld
== Matthew 4:19 ==
Should be 'people', not 'men': the issue is faithfulness to the original text.
Copies from Conservative Bible Project talk page:
The Greek texts for this verse are completely consistent, barring diacritical marks: 'καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, δεῦτε ὀπίσω μου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς ἁλεεῖς ἀνθρώπων' (Tischendorf text). Details here. άνθρωπος is translated as 'human being' by Wharton, Etyma Graeca: an Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek and by Powell, Lexicon to Herodotus:. In Modern Greek, άνθρωπος normally means 'person' (gender-neutral) but is also a slang term for a man, equivalent to 'bloke' or 'guy'.
In Tyndale's time (early 16th century), 'men' was a gender-neutral word to refer to people, male and female. This was already becoming archaic by the time of the KJV (much of the language in the KJV was old-fashioned partly because that seems to have been a prestigious writing style and partly because it relied very heavily on Tyndale's work). In any case, 'fishers of people' is a more accurate translation into modern English than 'fishers of men' and the notion that 'people' might sound politically-correct and gender-neutral to those familiar with the KJV is neither here not there. [[User:JosephMac|JosephMac]] 20:01, 13 November 2009 (EST)