To prove the concept of the “virgin birth,” the book of Matthew 1:22-23 states: “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, ‘Behold a virgin shall be with child and will bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.”
hebrewscriptures with Benjamin Leon
Missionaries claim that this is the fulfilment of a prophecy recorded in Isaiah 7:14, that actually reads: “Behold, the young woman is with child and will bear a son and she will call his name Emmanuel.” (In the present tense.)
If we go back to the original Hebrew text, we see that there are numerous inaccuracies in the missionary translation. For example:
The Hebrew word “almah,” means a young woman, not a virgin, a fact recognised by biblical scholars. some missionaries argue that in an ancient translation of the Bible called the “Septuagint,” 70 great rabbis translated the word “almah” in Isaiah 7:14, as “parthenos” and that this Greek word means a virgin.
This claim is false for several reasons:
- the 70 rabbis did not translate the book of Isaiah, only the Pentateuch, the five books of Moses. In fact, the introduction to the English edition of the Septuagint states concerning the translation:
“The Pentateuch is considered to be the part best executed, while the book of Isaiah appears to be the very worst.”
- In Genesis 34: 2-3 the word “parthenos” is used in reference to a non-virgin, a young woman who had been raped.
- The entire Septuagint version that missionaries quote from is not the original, but from a later, corrupted version.
- The verse says ha’almah, “the young woman,” not a young woman, specifying a particular woman that was known to Isaiah during his lifetime; and
- The verse says “she will call his name Emmanuel,” not “they shall call.” Never once has Jesus been called by this name.
The prophet Isaiah uses the word virgin [betulah] five times throughout the book of Isaiah.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
ref: (23:4, 23:12, 37:22. 47:1, 62:5)
Even apart from these inaccuracies, if we read the whole of Isaiah:7, from which this verse is taken, it is obvious that this verse is taken out of context.
This chapter speaks of a prophecy made to the Jewish King Ahaz c. 740-681 BCE to allay his fears of two invading kings (those of Damascus and of Samaria) who were preparing to invade Jerusalem, about 600 years before Jesus’s birth. Isaiah’s point is that these events will take place in the very near future (and not 600 years later, as Christianity claims). Verse 16 makes this abundantly clear: “For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken.”
In fact, in the very next chapter this prophecy is fulfilled with the birth of a son to Isaiah. As it says in Isaiah 8:4, “For before the child shall know to cry, ‘My father and my mother’ the riches of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.” This verse entirely rules out any connection to Jesus, who would not be born for 600 years.
No amount of missionary rhetoric or rebuttal will alter the prediction of the birth of this child as a sign to King Ahaz in his lifetime, and not 600 years later. The prophecy is in the present tense. This child cannot be born twice. Jesus was never called Emmanuel.
Benjamin Leon is a member of the Jewish Community in Zimbabwe.
Feedback: vleon@ mango.zw