> In a message dated 07-26-94 scott wrote to Steve Schaper:
> s> I am aware that the word translated "virgin" in the passage in
> s> Isaiah does not actually mean chaste.
> In college, my professor of Hebrew, Richard Whitaker, who has published part
> of an Eerdman's commentary, as well as working on the computerized Ugaritic
> concordance, etc., said that the reason that betullah was not used was
> because it was the name of a Canaanite goddess, and if Isaiah had used that
> term for virgin, instead of the term for young, unmarried woman (who as a
> holy woman, would indeed be a virgin, as the rabbis who translated the
> Septuagint knew), he would have been stoned to death for appearing to predict
> that YHWH would have a child by a Canaanite goddess.
> |toadnet: STEVE SCHAPER 1:100/435
> |internet: STEVE.SCHAPER@1-100-435-0.cheswicks.toadnet.org
Are you quite sure that you're accurately remembering what Dick said? I
can't see him getting that out of the text -- what's this stuff about a
"holy woman"?? Check out the standard commentaries: this seems like
exegesis by wishful thinking.
Sterling G. Bjorndahl, bjorndahl@Augustana.AB.CA
Augustana University College, Camrose, Alberta, Canada (403) 679-1516
When dealing with computers, a little paranoia is usually appropriate.