Mistranslation of 'Virgin'?

[TrinityKnot]

atheistfoundation.org.au/virgin.htm

So I stumbled across this a few days ago on another forum, and it really made me question my faith.

But then I though: wait; if priests studying Latin, Greek, and Hebrew… how have they been getting that wrong all this time?

Could anybody help me clarify this? It is an article by Richard Dawkins, so I don’t know how reliable it is… or if anyone else has heard of this.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on it.

 

[vinarabo]

Dawkins has been refurted hands down, There are articles and books out there that answer his statements. What I want to know is how can a mans opinions cause another to lose their faith? If Dawkins knew the truth, he would not be so against God. Therefore, he elects to not know the truth, or he does know the truth, but elects to worship Satan.

 

[TrinityKnot]

Dawkins has been refurted hands down, There are articles and books out there that answer his statements. What I want to know is how can a mans opinions cause another to lose their faith? If Dawkins knew the truth, he would not be so against God. Therefore, he elects to not know the truth, or he does know the truth, but elects to worship Satan.

So then he DID get the translation wrong?

 

[garysibio]

atheistfoundation.org.au/virgin.htm

So I stumbled across this a few days ago on another forum, and it really made me question my faith.

But then I though: wait; if priests studying Latin, Greek, and Hebrew… how have they been getting that wrong all this time?

Could anybody help me clarify this? It is an article by Richard Dawkins, so I don’t know how reliable it is… or if anyone else has heard of this.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on it.

Hi,

The Hebrew ‘almah’ does mean a young woman. ‘Bethulah’ is the Hebrew word for virgin. However, an ‘almah’ can also be a ‘bethulah.’ The Septuagint (Greek) version of the OT - translated by Jews around 300BC - uses the word ‘parthenos’ which does mean virgin. Matthew quoted the passage from the Septuagint version.

Think about it. Isaiah is saying a sign is going to occur. It’s no big deal for a young woman to give birth to a child, especially in that culture when they married a lot younger than we do. It would be a sign if a virgin gave birth. That would be something you’d notice.

So yes, it does say young woman but it was understood by the Jews of that day to refer to a young woman who was a version. Dawkins is correct in what he says but he isn’t giving the entire truth, just the part that is convenient for him.

Gary

 

[HyeDetroit]

Just another atheist trying to subvert a Christian.

No mention of any sources in that article. No pictures of ancient texts. Nothing. Just one guy stating his flawed views.

I’ll pray for him and all atheists to see the truth.

 

[TrinityKnot]

Hi,

The Hebrew ‘almah’ does mean a young woman. ‘Bethulah’ is the Hebrew word for virgin. However, an ‘almah’ can also be a ‘bethulah.’ The Septuagint (Greek) version of the OT - translated by Jews around 300BC - uses the word ‘parthenos’ which does mean virgin. Matthew quoted the passage from the Septuagint version.

Think about it. Isaiah is saying a sign is going to occur. It’s no big deal for a young woman to give birth to a child, especially in that culture when they married a lot younger than we do. It would be a sign if a virgin gave birth. That would be something you’d notice.

So yes, it does say young woman but it was understood by the Jews of that day to refer to a young woman who was a version. Dawkins is correct in what he says but he isn’t giving the entire truth, just the part that is convenient for him.

Gary

Thank you. But why didn’t they just use the word for virgin then to avoid confusion? That was one of the arguments on the other forum I mentioned.

I don’t doubt it anymore, but that was another question I was wondering about.

 

[thistle]

atheistfoundation.org.au/virgin.htm

So I stumbled across this a few days ago on another forum, and it really made me question my faith.

But then I though: wait; if priests studying Latin, Greek, and Hebrew… how have they been getting that wrong all this time?

Could anybody help me clarify this? It is an article by Richard Dawkins, so I don’t know how reliable it is… or if anyone else has heard of this.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on it.

If stuff like this made you question your faith then your faith must be pretty weak. You would be better advised to put more effort into studying your faith than what crazy atheists write!!

 

[TrinityKnot]

If stuff like this made you question your faith then your faith must be pretty weak. You would be better advised to put more effort into studying your faith than what crazy atheists write!!

No! See, I doubted it for a second, and then I came up with an argument about the priest’s studying the languages. I’m really new to all of this, too, and I’m very young (13), so please don’t be too harsh on me.

Whenever I doubt my faith, God wins a victory when He crushes the doubt. It’s bringing me closer to God, in my eyes. It helps me not worry as much.

 

[Namesake]

Dawkins has been refurted hands down, There are articles and books out there that answer his statements. What I want to know is how can a mans opinions cause another to lose their faith? If Dawkins knew the truth, he would not be so against God. Therefore, he elects to not know the truth, or he does know the truth, but elects to worship Satan.

OK then, what if information came to the fore that refuted the virgin birth myth. Would your faith be shaken?

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Thank you. But why didn’t they just use the word for virgin then to avoid confusion? That was one of the arguments on the other forum I mentioned.

I don’t doubt it anymore, but that was another question I was wondering about.

Elsewhere someone pointed out that at that time a young unmarried woman was presumed a virgin.

 

[vinarabo]

OK then, what if information came to the fore that refuted the virgin birth myth. Would your faith be shaken?

Information or proof? Theres lots of “information” out there. Dan Browns books claim to be based on fact, but their not. He cant prove anything. All he does is throw something out there, and see’s what sticks. If enough people think its true, then it “Becomes”: the truth. It will take a lot more than someones opinion to shake my faith.

 

[garysibio]

Thank you. But why didn’t they just use the word for virgin then to avoid confusion? That was one of the arguments on the other forum I mentioned.

I don’t doubt it anymore, but that was another question I was wondering about.

Just because it is confusing to us now doesn’t mean it was confusing to the average Jew in 800BC.

Gary

 

[mark_a]

Speaking of Richard Dawkins, did anyone else catch him on Al Kresta’s show the other day saying that the Russian Orthodox Church has cannonized Joseph Stalin?

 

[Chesster]

Thank you. But why didn’t they just use the word for virgin then to avoid confusion? That was one of the arguments on the other forum I mentioned.

I don’t doubt it anymore, but that was another question I was wondering about.

According to St. Jerome Against Jovinianus book 1:

I know that the Jews are accustomed to meet us with the objection that in Hebrew the word Almah does not mean a virgin, but a young woman. And, to speak truth, a virgin is properly called Bethulah, but a young woman, or a girl, is not Almah, but Naarah! What then is the meaning of Almah? A hidden virgin, that is, not merely virgin, but a virgin and something more, because not every virgin is hidden, shut off from the occasional sight of men.

 

[Mark77]

If Dawkins can make you question your faith, then it must be really weak!

Pray unceasingly and read Sacred Scripture and the Catechism!!!

Do you think that the Church, after 2000 years of Satan’s attacks, would still be here if it were not True?

Dawkins is the definition of “mistranslation”, he is a sad example of all that is wrong with us when we think we are smarter than God.

Look up the word arrogance and you will see a picture of Dawkins there!

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark

 

[diggerdomer]

Thank you. But why didn’t they just use the word for virgin then to avoid confusion? That was one of the arguments on the other forum I mentioned.

I don’t doubt it anymore, but that was another question I was wondering about.

There’s no reason to expect or require the ancient (8th century) author to be writing about a “virgin” giving birth. Obviously he was writing about a “young woman” giving birth. It is also no surprise to presume, based on Jewish morals, that a “young woman” would be unmarried and so a virgin. But this is not required.

Matthew, the evangelist, in writing his Gospel, understood the passage from Isaiah more clearly, and so chose to translate it as “virgin” specifically rather than more generally as “young woman.”

Dawkins’ point may be valid, rationally, but it need be of absolutely of no consequence to faith. Typical of his writings.

Your question is good, I am sorry for those in this thread that instead of responding to you in charity are attacking you and your faith.

 

[TrinityKnot]

If Dawkins can make you question your faith, then it must be really weak!

Pray unceasingly and read Sacred Scripture and the Catechism!!!

Do you think that the Church, after 2000 years of Satan’s attacks, would still be here if it were not True?

Dawkins is the definition of “mistranslation”, he is a sad example of all that is wrong with us when we think we are smarter than God.

Look up the word arrogance and you will see a picture of Dawkins there!

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark

I’m really new to the atheist world, so, sorry.

I know atheists are ignorant, it’s just that I wanted another tool under my belt to use as well if this came up between me and an atheist.

 

[diggerdomer]

I’m really new to the atheist world, so, sorry.

I know atheists are ignorant, it’s just that I wanted another tool under my belt to use as well if this came up between me and an atheist.

I don’t think it’s fair or accurate (not to mention charitable) to assume all atheists are ignorant.

And it certainly would not improve one’s chances of witnessing Christianity to them, would it?

 

[TrinityKnot]

I don’t think it’s fair or accurate (not to mention charitable) to assume all atheists are ignorant.

And it certainly would not improve one’s chances of witnessing Christianity to them, would it?

Not ALL… but many have seemed so unfriendly to me and bash me for my faith. They treat me like a complete retard or something…

And yes, it might. You could point out they did not hear the full story, and that they should reconsider. By all means, this will most likely not convert them, but it will give them something to think about.

Why is everyone attacking me so much, anyways? I came here to try and get answers and make friends, not arguments.

 

[diggerdomer]

Not ALL… but many have seemed so unfriendly to me and bash me for my faith. They treat me like a complete retard or something…

And yes, it might. You could point out they did not hear the full story, and that they should reconsider. By all means, this will most likely not convert them, but it will give them something to think about.

Why is everyone attacking me so much, anyways? I came here to try and get answers and make friends, not arguments.

I wasn’t attacking you. I’m the one who apologized for others who did. Sorry if anything I posted came across as attacking you.