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.
Here is my take on the issue:
_BETHULAH_ is as Dr. Athos said, a social term indicating a single or
marriageable person. It is a *social* term. _(ALMAH_, on the other hand, is
a *technical* term which more closely approximates our "virgin" in regards
to sexual inexperience. I think finding association with _(LM_ as
"covered/hidden" works well with this. That is why it is used in Prov. 30 of
the marvel of the way of a man who is able to woo a (fearful?) _(ALMAH_ into
marriage union (although there is a significant textual question here if it
should be "the way of a man in [his] youth"; see most of the versions and i
think some Heb. mss. also), thereby taking "mastery" over her just as a
snake can master going straight up a rock, a bird through the sky in
fight--something elusive for the rest of creation, and like a ship which is
able to sail gracefully across the ocean. (I cite this Proverb since it is
the passage most commonly used to attempt to discount the idea of "virgin"
for _(ALMAH_).
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.