Yodan at Yodanco.com
Mon Jul 16 02:46:59 EDT 2007
Thanks for suggesting a more appropriate title. Not only the title is no
longer valid, it seems to me that the discussion in of this topic is not
longer a b-Hebrew discussion... it has gone way into theology on the one
hand and into cultural/societal/legal etc. issues on the other hand. I hope
that we'll get back to Biblical Hebrew discussion soon.
From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Yigal Levin
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 11:20 PM
Subject: [b-hebrew] virginity
Since we're no longer really discussing either "Definite Article" or "Isaiah
7:14", please change the subject line to "virginity".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tory Thorpe" <torythrp at yahoo.com>
To: <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Definite Article 7:14
> On Jul 16, 2007, at 1:25 AM, dwashbur at nyx.net wrote:
>> How does Gen 34:3 suggest any lack of physical virginity? Are you
>> basing this idea on the
>> fact that PARQENOS in that verse translates NA(AR in Hebrew? I
>> have no idea what your
>> point is from this verse, or how it "shows" anything.
>> Dave Washburn
>> But I can't say Sylvester, George!
> It's very simple. If the word PARQENOS meant only physical virginity
> to Alexandrian Jewish translators then Dinah was still a physical
> virgin even after being raped according to the Greek translation of
> Gen. xxxiv 3. Now I suppose its possible the translators may have
> felt that Dinah remained pure and that by some miracle her hymen was
> not broken; but it is painfully obvious that the usage of PARQENOS
> among Jews in the 3rd century BCE could not have been limited to
> women who never had intercourse. One simply has to keep this in mind
> when reading the Greek version of Isa. vii 14.
> Tory Thorpe
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew