A Nubile Shall Conceive . . . ?

[anamchara]

I subscribe to A Word A Day. The feedback AWAD received on one of this week's words, nubile, follows:

From: Nathan Ginsbury

Subject: nubile
Def: 1. Sexually attractive (referring to a young woman). 2. Ready or suitable for marriage (referring to a young woman).

Thank you for the definition (2) of nubile.

The text of the verse in Isaiah 7:14 is commonly mistranslated as "A virgin shall conceive and ..." The original Hebrew rendered as "virgin" actually means "young woman of marriageable age but not yet married", without reference to her virginity (or otherwise).

The mistranslation is usually attributed to the lack of a suitable word in Greek/Latin and hence into English.

A better translation might, therefore, be "nubile young woman".

Nathan Ginsbury, Netanya, Israel

Is there any merit to Mr. Ginsbury's interpretation of the original Hebrew? It seems clear to me he's using it to impugn the Virgin Birth of our Lord, to say nothing of the Blessed Mother's perpetual virginity.

[JayneK]

That is a common claim of Jewish scholars but there are a couple of counter-arguments. 

There is a Wikipedia article on the subject which describes the Jewish position. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_7:14

Jewish scholars argue that the word betulah is used instead of almah in verses where a reference to a virgin is clearly intended (see Genesis 24:16, Exodus 22:16-17, Leviticus 21:14, and Deuteronomy 22:13-21) and that almah is more correctly translated as "young woman."

Jewish tradition states that the "young woman" was in fact Isaiah’s wife and the birth of the child is recorded later in Isaiah 8:3, although that child is not named "Immanuel" but "Maher-shalal-hash-baz".

As an example of how [almah] is used, in Proverbs 30:18-20:

    18 There are three things which are too wonderful for me, yea, four which I know not:

    19 יט דֶּרֶךְ הַנֶּשֶׁר, בַּשָּׁמַיִם-- דֶּרֶךְ נָחָשׁ, עֲלֵי-צוּר;
    דֶּרֶךְ-אֳנִיָּה בְלֶב-יָם-- וְדֶרֶךְ גֶּבֶר בְּעַלְמָה

        The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock;
        the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a young woman.

    20 כ כֵּן, דֶּרֶךְ אִשָּׁה-- מְנָאָפֶת
    אָכְלָה, וּמָחֲתָה פִיהָ; וְאָמְרָה, לֹא-פָעַלְתִּי אָוֶן

        So is the way of an adulterous woman;
        she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith: 'I have done no wickedness.'[7]

In this context it is argued, "the way of a man with a young woman," [almah] does not appear to have the connotations of a virgin.

While a case can be made that "almah" does not necessarily mean "virgin" this does not mean that "almah" cannot be translated as virgin.  Since we are talking about a culture in which unmarried women are assumed to be virgins, there is a lot of overlap in the concepts.

Also, the "young woman" translation is based on the Masoretic text which was complied after the doctrine of the virgin birth was an established part of Christianity and at a time when Judaism was hostile to Christianity.  The Septuagint text ( a translation into Greek) which is older and predates Christianity uses the word "parthenos" which is usually translated "virgin".

[anamchara]

Thanks, Jayne!

[Anastasia]

Just adding to what has already been posted, this argument was made as early as 200AD in the work of an anti-Christian polemic by Celsus. Origen, in his book responding to those arguments, also comes to the conclusion that the original Hebrew indicates "virgin", and adds that in context "virgin" is the only meaning which makes any sense. If you read that passage in Isaias, the dialogue between the king and God, God states that He will show the world a great sign, something beyond the boundaries of nature. "A sign to the depths and the heights" is I think the phrase. And God says that the sign shall be the conception (this is the verse). Now, you can see already the problem. If the word just meant "nubile/young woman", well what's so special about that? Women conceive and bear sons every day of the year, that's not the remarkable, earth shattering sign we're told to expect.

[JayneK]

Anastasia, could you take a look at the Wikipedia link I gave? It looks to me like the article gives a straw man argument for the Christian position rather than the real argument.  I think you could do a good job of editing the article to make it more fair.

[Landelinus]

In addition to what's already been said, we have only to look at our own English language for an equivalent: maid/maiden.  Even in relatively recent times - especially in literature - "maid' or "maiden" meant "young woman" but also "virgin".  "While I was yet a maid" (a line from some English folk song I once heard) meant "While I was still a virgin".  "She was robbed of her maidenhood" (e.g. Chaucer's Franklin's Tale 1379-1385) meant she was raped as a virgin.  The same is true in German where the word "Jungfrau" (literally "young-woman") is the only word used for "virgin".

It is only in modern times - when a "young woman" cannot necessarily be assumed to be virginal with any certainty - that confusion is justifiable.  However, back in Isaiah's day, if an "almah" was a "young unwed woman of marriagable age", I think it's a pretty good bet everyone also assumed she was a virgin.  That's probably why the 70 Jewish compilers of the Septuagint translated "almah" Into Greek as "parthenos" (aka "virgin"). 

[anamchara]

Very interesting! Thanks, everybody!

[anamchara]

The webmaster for AWAD is Anu Garg, who, based on numerous quotes he has included with his daily missives, seems to harbor a rather pronounced anti-Christian animus. So when Jayne responded to my original post, I took the liberty of forwarding her explanation of the nubile-virgin controversy (such as it is) to both him and Nathan Ginsbury.  Nathan Ginsbury replied this morning in Hebrew:

תודה לך שטרחת להגיב
נתן

~Anam-Chara

[anamchara]

Can anybody out there read Hebrew?

[anamchara]

Anastasia, could you take a look at the Wikipedia link I gave? It looks to me like the article gives a straw man argument for the Christian position rather than the real argument.  I think you could do a good job of editing the article to make it more fair.

For what it's worth, Wikipedia, too, seems to harbor some anti-Christian animus. I've noticed it in other contexts.