[B-Greek] Luke 2:36
Tory Thorpe
torythrp at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 5 01:55:45 EST 2007
--- Harold Holmyard <hholmyard at ont.com> wrote:
> HH: Why do you say there is an error? The forms look
> to be plurals to
> me, no different than the ones in Deuteronomy 22.
TT: But they are not plurals in Lev. 21:13; Jud.
11:37f; and Ezek. 23:3, 8; and 'btwlym' is not the
term used in any of these passages.
> HH: If someone had a puberty
> delayed until seven
> years after their marriage, she would be the victim
> of a physiological
> disorder, and I've never heard of such a delayed
> onset of puberty as
> seven years after marriage. Having just read an
> article on the subject,
> it seems that it would be a disorder at the least:
TT: We are talking about a society where early
marriages, and marriages with minors, was fairly
commonplace. And although delayed puberty has specific
diagnoses today, the fact of the matter is that if a
girl below puberty was married, and if she did not
experience her first menstral flow at the normal time,
every day, week, month, or year that her first period
was delayed during marital life, for whatever
physiological reason, would be reckoned as a
continuation of her status as a Betulah ("virgin")
among religious Jews. An extended delay would be
something noteworthy, and long remembered -- not as a
disorder but as a mark of special uniqueness. You
would need to live in a community obsessed with purity
laws to appreciate this.
> > TT: The Bible only provides snapshots of the
> language;
> > but it is very clear that 'btwlh' requires
> > qualification and does not, by itself, imply
> chastity.
> >
>
> HH: That's not the point. The point is that it can
> imply chastity. That
> is the meaning in some contexts.
TT: I think the qualifying clauses in Gen. 24:16 and
Jud. 21:12 make it fairly clear that btwlh, by itself,
does not imply chastity. We also have Est 2:17, and
the context here is pretty clear as well. One night
with the king meant goodbye to biological virginity.
The LXX uses PARQENOS at Est 2:17, showing once again
that the Greek term does not always mean virgo
intacta.
> HH: The verse in Luke was not written to record
> Anna's medical
> disorders. It was written to give chronological and
> life background
> information about a godly woman who was waiting for
> divine promises
> about the Messiah to be fulfilled for the sake of
> Israel. The meaning I
> suggest is the meaning I have heard throughout my
> life, and it makes
> perfect sense. You have now read the TWOT article,
> which shows that the
> meaning is perfectly plausible.
TT: It also shows that a Jewish interpretation of a
Jewish term, btwlh, is perfectly plausible at Lk.
2:36. It seems to me that you may be using
"plausibility" differently than I am. If something is
plausible you give it a voice, not a veto.
> HH: The idea here is that she was married for 7
> years after her
> virginity, after which time she continued as a widow
> to the age of 84.
TT: That's not how BDAG has it, but I agree it falls
within the interpretive options. So does mine. Saying
it is nonsensical or freakish simply reveals a lack of
familiarity with orthodox Jewish religious customs,
and the seriousness with which purity laws were and
still are observed.
My very best,
Tory Thorpe
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list