b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum
List archive
- From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
- To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_
- Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 06:55:29 -0600
Dear Dan,
You write:
>I freely confess that the issue of "virgin" [_BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_] is
>a difficult one for any of us. There are, at least, potential problems no
>matter what you do with either word. In the case of _(ALMAH_ we beg for more
>data, but don't have it. In the case of _BETHULAH_, we have plenty of data
>but struggle desperately for consistency, and seemingly can't find that
>either.
(skip)
>HOWEVER, all should note that my argument regarding Isa. 7:14 was not based
>uniquely or even primarily on the term for virgin. Rather, the strongest
>evidence is based on necessary implication from a context requiring some
>kind of a miraculous _)OT_, whereas "any old girl" giving birth to a baby
>*cannot* meet that requirement. No one responded to that point.
>Also, the time is future--remote future--because Ahaz rejected it (though it
>was, as often the case, still *presented* in terms of imminence and
>virtually like the _futurum instans_, considering the following participle),
>and so Isaiah moves on from singular to plural, from Ahaz to the "house of
>David," from present to the logically future. Ahaz never saw *that* (good!)
>sign of Immanuel, though he did see some "bad stuff" happen as a consequence
>of his faithlessness (cf. v. 9 to Ahaz, "If you do not stand firm in faith,
>you will not be left standing").
>The near context of a "Son/Child" to be born and to reign in Isa. 9:5(6),
>also divinely titled as "mighty God", and again presented in terms of
>extreme imminence (WAYYIQTOL verbs here! as if it were already done as far
>as God and the prophet were concerned), further supports my position on
>7:14. Likewise for the "nobody" born to the "stem of Jesse" (Isa. 11:1ff),
>unexpectedly sprouting up from his roots in the remote future, who would be
>the greatest King of all (and certainly this was *not* fulfilled in Isaiah's
>day).
On these subjects I wrote an article which is on-line in the first issue of
the Journal of Biblical Studies. You may access the web site with the
following link:
http://journalofbiblicalstudies.org
Just go to the articles of issue one, and look for THE LINKAGE BETWEEN
ISAIAH 7:14 AND 9:6, by
by Harold R. Holmyard.
There is an excursus on the use of the word "almah."
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
Dallas, TX
-
virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_,
Dan Wagner, 01/29/2001
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Jonathan D. safren, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Jonathan D. safren, 01/29/2001
- RE: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Dan Wagner, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Jonathan D. safren, 01/29/2001
- virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Shoshanna Walker, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Dave Washburn, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Charles David Isbell, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Jonathan D. Safren, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Jack Kilmon, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Moshe Shulman, 01/29/2001
- RE: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Moshe Shulman, 01/29/2001
- virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/29/2001
- Re: virgin: _BETHULAH_ and/or _(ALMAH_, Charles David Isbell, 01/29/2001
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.