Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Uri Hurwitz <uhurwitz AT yahoo.com>]

   Of course;  I  avoided mentioning the other root, beginning with 'Ayin, to 
prevent confusion, especially since it is totally separate in  lexical 
meaning from that of ' Almah, which started this discussion.
 
   Uri

Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org> wrote:
On 02/04/2005 16:36, Uri Hurwitz wrote:

> In the discussion of 'Almah one should keep in mind that this is one 
> example of the change from proto-Semitic "ghayin" ( which disappeared in 
> Hebrew, Phoenician etc.) into "'Ayin" , (YN. Other examples in BH are 
> Ghaza, the city name that became 'Azah in BH, S(.)aghir, "small", became 
> Tsa'ir, "young" in BH.
> 'Almah is the F. of 'Elem in BH which is the exact equivalent of Ghulam in 
> Arabic, meaning a young man.
> 
> 
>
....And this Arabic root is not to be confused with the one underlying 
`aalam "world-- ....

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
>From kgraham0938 AT comcast.net  Sat Apr  2 13:39:25 2005
Return-Path: <kgraham0938 AT comcast.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from sccrmhc14.comcast.net (sccrmhc14.comcast.net [204.127.202.59])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D54444C006
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat,  2 Apr 2005 13:39:25 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from 204.127.205.148 ([204.127.205.148])
        by comcast.net (sccrmhc14) with SMTP
        id <2005040218392501400dngvqe>; Sat, 2 Apr 2005 18:39:25 +0000
Received: from [69.136.149.33] by 204.127.205.148;
        Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:39:24 +0000
From: kgraham0938 AT comcast.net
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Almah vs. Bethulah in Isaiah 7
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:39:24 +0000
Message-Id: 
<040220051839.6659.424EE6DC000B250500001A032200735446C8CCC7CF030E080E9D0905 AT comcast.net>
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Dec 17 2004)
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2dyYWhhbTA5MzhAY29tY2FzdC5uZXQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:39:26 -0000

For the sake of not getting too far away from Hebrew.  (which I am guilty of 
as well).  It has been argued that Matthew's definition of fufillment does 
not always have to be in the sense of prophesy/fufillment but rather analogy. 
(i.e Matt 2:18)

Here in Matt 2:18, he makes an analogy, just like there was weeping in the 
days of Jeremiah, so to there is weeping during this time as well.

So, the sign was given to Ahaz, it was fufilled during his time.  Matthew 
uses this prophesy as an analogy of what happened in Jesus time.  Meaning 
just like this particular event took place during Ahaz time period as a sign, 
Jesus birth is happening as well.  In a nut shell.
--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> On Sat, 2 Apr 2005 10:17:11 EST Myshalom777 AT aol.com writes: 
> In a message dated 02/04/2005 16:05:34 GMT Daylight Time, 
> gfsomsel AT juno.com writes: 
> Let me turn the tables on you a bit. This birth is said to be a sign to 
> Ahaz. A sign would need to be something which the one to whom it is 
> given would witness. If it is regarding the birth of Jesus Christ, an 
> event several hundred years later, how then is it a sign to Ahaz since he 
> will never witness it? Also, if it is regarding a nearer event as well 
> as a more remote event (i.e. that there was some kind of fulfilment in 
> the time it was originally given, and if it refers to a virgin birth, are 
> there then two virgin births in scripture? 
> 
> george 
> gfsomsel 
> 
> 
> It seems to me Mark Eddy gave a very good response to your point almost a 
> year ago when this topic came up on this list. Here it is again : 
> 
> ===== 
> 
> Subj:Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 7:13 ha-alma and xarah 
> Date:12/05/2004 18:23:34 GMT Daylight Time 
> From:markeddy AT adams.net 
> To:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> Sent from the Internet (Details) 
> 
> 
> Isaiah does not say that the sign is "for Ahas." Ahaz refused to ask for 
> a sign.(v. 12). So instead of giving a sign of Ahaz's choosing, the Lord 
> will give a sign to the "house of David" (v. 13). In verse 11 
> Isaiah addressed Ahaz with the singular Sha(aL LKa ("Listen, you!") but 
> in verse 13 Isaiah switches to referring to the "house of David" in the 
> plural (MiKKeM, and the verb TaL(U, also LaKem in verse 14). Ahaz 
> is just the most recent part of the house of David, which has tried God's 
> patience for a long time. The sign is for the whole house of David, not 
> primarily for the king in that house at that particular time. 
> 
> Mark Eddy 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
> 
> =================== 
> 
> Celal Berker 
> www.eefc.co.uk 
> www.fiec.org.uk 
> www.hristiyan.net 
> 
> _______________ 
> 
> That strikes me as pure sophism. The sign is clearly for Ahaz. 
> 
> 1. Ahaz is instructed to ask for a sign 
> 2. He refuses (most piously, of course) 
> 3. The prophet then says that the LORD would therefore name the sign 
> 
> Then, examine the nature of the sign. 
> 1. A young woman is pregnant and is to give birth 
> 2. She will give a particular name to her child (Immanuel) 
> 3. BEFORE THE CHILD IS WEANED the Assyrians will no longer be a power. 
> 
> The sequence in which prophesy is given as well as the prophesy itself 
> demand a nearly immediate fulfilment. 
> 
> george 
> gfsomsel 
> ___________ 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk  Sat Apr  2 13:43:44 2005
Return-Path: <ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from smtp.argonet.co.uk (centipede.freedom2.net [213.161.67.201])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB5834C006
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat,  2 Apr 2005 13:43:43 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from [213.116.56.198] (helo=213.116.56.198)
        by smtp.argonet.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.20) id 1DHnTG-0006Yx-5V
        for b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Sat, 02 Apr 2005 19:35:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: ben.crick AT argonet.co.uk (Ben Crick)
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Sat,  2 Apr 2005 18:49:07 +0100
X-Organization: ArgoNet, but does not necessarily reflect its views.
X-Mailer: Posty - Voyager Email 1.31 for RISC OS 4.03
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Almah vs. Bethulah in Isaiah 7
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <E1DHnTG-0006Yx-5V AT smtp.argonet.co.uk>
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:43:44 -0000

On Sat  2 Apr 2005 , tladatsi AT charter.net wrote:
> For me, the key contextual element is it is not all unusual  for a
> young woman to give birth to a baby but it is  completely unheard of in
> the OT for a virgin to give birth.    Nowhere else in the OT does such
> an event occur.

 The Sign offered to Ahaz was a *cosmic sign*, "either in the depth, or in
 the height above" (verse 11). That would make a Virgin birth more likely
 than any unmarried mother giving birth.

 In Isaiah 8:3, the "prophetess" (Mrs Isaiah?) gives birth to a son with a
 prophetic name MaHeR $aLaL Xa$ BaZ; a brother for $e:'aR Ya$uWB 7:3. This
 child is certainly a contemporary Sign (present persuader) to Ahaz.

 The son of the `aL:MaH is to be named `iMMaNuW'eL. He is the `aL:MaH's son
 7:14; he is the Owner of the Land 8:8; he is the Defender of the Land 8:8;
 he is the Protector of the Land 8:10; and he is the Wonder Child of 9:6-7.

 The Wonder Child's names or titles in 9:6b  PeLe' YoW:`eC  'eL GiBBoWR
 a:BiY`aD   &aR-$aLoWM  sit very well with his prophetic name of `iMMaNuW'eL.

 Whereas MaherShalalhashBaz is a "present persuader" sign to Ahaz, Immanuel
 is a Future Confirmer to generations yet to come.

 The view from here...

 Ben
-- 
 Revd Ben Crick, BA CF                                       ZFC Lu
 <ben.crick AT NOSPAM.argonet.co.uk>
 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
*Acorn RPC700, RO4.03+Kinetic Card, 126MB, 4.3GB HD, x32CDROM
*Castle Iyonix X100, RO5.06, 600MHz XScale processor, 512MB DDR RAM,
 114GB HD, CD-RW, etc. *Ethernet networking.