PARQENOS and Is 7:14

RHutchin at aol.com RHutchin at aol.com
Fri Apr 13 18:15:51 EDT 2001



This message dated 4/13/01 is from Dave Washburn:

<< > Roger wrote--
> My personal exegetical opinion is that an almah is a young girl that one 
might want to pursue for marriage and the related term, bethulah, is used 
when one wants to make the point that  a young girl is not a harlot.  
> 
> Dave Washburn replied--
>  Um, in that culture, wouldn't a "young girl that one might want to pursue 
for marriage" be assumed to be a virgin?
> 
> RH Response--
> I agree.  There is the assumption of virginity.  However, does the term 
convey  the certainty of virginity?  On this point, the articles I have read 
all seem to waffle.  Almah may imply virginity but it does not guarantee it.

DW
I think this is a non-issue.  If there is the cultural assumption of 
virginity built into the word's usage, why is it necessary for us to try 
and demand linguistic certainty as well?  Linguistic meaning 
doesn't happen in a vacuum; cultural factors affect semantics 
thoroughly, in fact it could be argued that words mean what they 
mean because a society chooses to use them that way and there's 
no such thing as an "inherent meaning."  Witness the subtle 
reversal of meaning of the word "bad" in colloquial American over 
the past 30 years; in many contexts, it now means "good."  If, in 
that culture, a "young woman of marriageable age" was assumed 
to be a virgin if she ever hoped to gain a husband, then it would 
seem that virginity is at least implicitly guaranteed in the word's 
usage.  It is only those who have an ax to grind regarding the 
Christian interpretation who seem to try and read the implication of 
virginity out of the word.  But this is how the culture used the word, 
so really there's no issue here that I can see.
+++

> RH
So, let's charge Mr. Washburn with the task of translating Is 7:14 into 
Greek. Further,  let's require that he do so in a way that conveys the idea 
that the virginity of the almah is a certainty and not just to be assumed.  
How would he translate Is 7:14?  Would he consider the text in Matthew suffic
ient to accomplish this purpose or would he think that a different 
translation is required ?

DW
Why reinvent the wheel?  The LXX and Matthew's renderings are 
good enough for me.  The question, if there is one (see above) 
seems more one of emphasis; was Isaiah out to emphasize the 
woman's youth, her singleness, her virginity, what?  The LXX used 
PARQENOS, which at least suggests that this translator thought 
the emphasis was on virginity (attempts to explain this word away 
have been unconvincing to me so far).  Matthew was obviously 
emphasizing virginity, but even if Isaiah was emphasizing the fact 
that the woman was unmarried, the implication of virginity is still 
there because that's how the culture understood the word.  No 
problem, no need for another translation.  As I said, if one looks at 
the word in its cultural context, this is a non-issue.

Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"You just keep thinking, Butch.  That's what you're good at."

 >>




More information about the B-Greek mailing list