Thoughts going in, Sunday Dec 19th

Isaiah 7:10 Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, 11 "Ask the LORD your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights." 12 But Ahaz said, "I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the test." 13 Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of human beings? Will you try the patience of my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. 15 He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, 16 for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.

This is the week of the 4th Sunday of Advent.
We’re almost there!

And because of that, the readings for the Sunday take on an urgency…an ‘annunciation’ quality…because in the unfolding of the drama, the Deliverer is almost here. This week our main focus is on the Advent of the Savior physically in TIME….interrupting human history.

Of course we cannot spend time in Isaiah 7 without going down the sideroad of the “drama” that has historically surrounded vs 14: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign the _____ will conceive and give birth…” The original Hebrew text said that an “alma” would conceive—and alma being simply a young woman (the question of virginity not being applicable). The Greek version of the OT (known as the Septuagint), however, used the word “parthenos” which technically DOES mean virgin. This was then picked up in the account as given in the Gospel of St. Matthew (1:21-23) where Joseph is told in a dream that he shouldn’t be afraid to take Mary as his wife—all of this has happened in order to fulfill what the prophet said, "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" which means "God with us" (vs 23).

In the history of English translations of the Bible, it was always accepted that the New Testament clarified/interpreted the Old Testament, hence Is 7:14 was rendered accordingly in the light of Mt 1:23, giving it a distinctly Messianic/Christian connotation. This tradition held until 1946 and the publication of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible—one of, if not the first, “modern critical” renderings of the Bible in English. The editors/translators of the RSV felt that rendering the Hebrew word “alma” as “virgin” was being unfaithful to the text OF THAT VERSE, regardless of how St. Matthew later interpreted/applied it. Hence Is 7:14 in the RSV reads as follows: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a **young woman** shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” What followed was a proverbial ‘crisis of biblical proportions.’ The RSV was soundly denounced for being “liberal” and for calling into question the virgin birth of Christ. “Liberal vs Conservative” lines were immediately drawn, and what was otherwise a fine translation of the Scriptures never enjoyed universal appeal as a result of failing this single litmus test. The fact that Mt. 1:23 in the RSV reads: "Behold, a **virgin** shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel" which means, God with us” was evidently lost on the RSV’s detractors.

Sadly, this is an ‘issue’ that remains with us to this day, as newer, more modern, ‘critical’ translations of the Bible have continued to come down the pike, but ***few have had the integrity to translate alma correctly. In the end, bible publishers know that the main thing is SALES; and while you may not lose sales by translating alma as ‘virgin,’ you will most likely revive the old debate/accusations by translating it as ‘young woman.’

1982…New King James: alma = virgin
1985…New Jerusalem Bible: alma = young woman
1989…Revised English Bible: alma = young woman
1990…New Revised Standard: alma = young woman
1992…Good News translation: alma = young woman
1994…New American Bible: alma = virgin
1995…God’s Word translation: alma = virgin
1995…New American Standard: alma = virgin
1998…Complete Jewish Bible: alma = young woman
2001…English Standard Version: alma = virgin
2002…The Message: alma = virgin
2004…New Living Translation: alma = virgin
2004…Holman Christian Standard: alma = virgin
2005…TNIV, Zondervan: alma = virgin
2010…NIV(2010): alma = virgin

This brief survey of major English translations shows a continued bias toward translating alma as ‘virgin’ in Is 7:14.

My own hunch, as already mentioned, is that this is more for sales/marketing reasons than sound exegetical reasons. After all, a myriad of (unanswerable) questions arise when trying to deal with the text if Isaiah the prophet truly meant to tell Ahaz that a miraculous virgin birth was going to happen **THEN. And if that wasn’t Isaiah’s point, if he meant all along that his prophecy was only to be interpreted in Messianic terms, **HOW does the birth of the Savior (an event still hundreds of years in the future) square with the rest of the passage/oracle which was obviously intended to give Ahaz/Judah some immediate comfort regarding the aggression of the Israel/Syria alliance against them? In other words, if Is 7:14 can only have one meaning—it foretells the birth of Jesus of Nazareth—then it needs to be functionally omitted from the passage because it has nothing to do with the immediate trouble/difficulty faced by Ahaz. This would be silly, though. Clearly the passage has two references (a) the impending birth of a child to “the young woman” [who is this? A wife/concubine of Ahaz? The wife of Isaiah? Scholars can make a convincing case for either]….and (b) the eventual birth of the Messiah.

Cheers,

TM