Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Qumran agreement with LXX and MT, was: aph

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
  • To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Qumran agreement with LXX and MT, was: aph
  • Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:05:36 -0700

On Wednesday 25 February 2004 13:20, Yigal Levin wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Since most of what you've written has already been addressed, just a few
> comments:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan Walther" <krooger AT debian.org>
>
> > Witness one: Isaiah 7:14. Pastor Herrell says that in the Septuagint,
> > it reads "virgin", while in the Masoretic text this is altered to "young
> > woman". Is this a true or a false witness? The matter touches directly
> > on the New Testament account of the birth of Jesus.
>
> How in the world does Pastor Herrell know whether the MT's "Almah", which
> means "young woman", or the Septuagint's "virgin" is the original. Since
> the text was originally in Hebrew and only then translated into Greek, he
> seems to think that the Masorets "changed" an original "bethulah" to
> "almah" somewhere along the line and that nobady noticed. How on Earth
> could he know that. Just as an interesting point, the DDS Isaiah scroll has
> "almah".

Again, I refer Jonathan to the archives where this matter has been discussed
to death. And of course, `almah does not preclude virginity, it simply does
not specify it.

> As far as "The matter touches directly on the New Testament account of the
> birth of Jesus", that's also rediculous. Isaiah DID NOT have Jesus in mind.
> It was convenient for Matthew to have a "prophecy" to quote, but that's
> all.

Wow, nothing like throwing down a gauntlet! But rather than get offended or
pick up said gauntlet, I'll just point out that this is an assumption
beginning from a particular world-view, and as such is beyond the bounds of
this list.

> >Lack of copies of the Talmud in all the major
> > public libraries in my area is also suspicious.
>
> Yes, it is. Your librarians are obviously anti-Semites. Now let's be
> serious. The Talmud is a multi-volume, highly specialized legalistic text
> in an Aramaic dialect not used by anyone else. Jews begin to study the
> Talmud after several years of preliminary study. There are not a lot of
> good English translations, and those that do exist are also expensive. Why
> should a public library put out good money for an expensive series that
> nobody's going to read. Go to any university that has a serious Jewish
> Studies program and you'll find a copy.

Every edition I've ever seen also costs as much as some new cars, and I have
yet to see a public library that had enough money...I suggest that if
Jonathan thinks this is a serious problem in his area, perhaps he could foot
the bill and buy a Talmud for his local public library. I'm sure they would
be happy to accept the donation!

--
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
Learning about Christianity from a non-Christian
is like getting a kiss over the telephone.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page