The stolen virgin

This is the first of several posts examining the traditional belief surrounding Christmas and the Christian tales of Jesus' birth.

Right from the beginning of his tale, St. Matthew is eager to insert Jesus into Old Testament prophecy.

MAT 1:20-23

...the angel of the lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, you son of David, fear not to take Mary for your wife: for that thing which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and you shall call his name "Jesus", for he shall save his people from their sins." Now all this was done so that it would be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child,

and shall bring forth a son,

and they shall call his name Emmanuel"

(which means "God with us").

Now, the scripture that Matthew is (of course) misquoting is Isaiah 7:14. Matthew's citation reads, "a virgin", but the original wording of Isaiah said, "the young woman". That's quite a difference -- first in the meaning of the articles "a" vs. "the", and second in the meaning of the terms, "virgin" vs. "young woman"!

So, what was Isaiah 7:14 all about? It does not take much effort to determine the meaning of the verse. All we need is to read more than just the few lines which Matthew extracts from Isaiah's 7th chapter:

In 735 b.c.e., about 735 years before Jesus was born, Judah (the house of David) was under attack from Israel and Syria. Judah's King Ahaz asked prophet Isaiah for a sign as to how long the siege would last. Isaiah replied that it would be a short time because there was a child who would be called Immanuel by his mother, and that before this child was old enough to distinguish right from wrong, Israel and Syria would have been defeated. Incidentally, Syria was defeated and pillaged by Assyria about three years later, and Israel was forced into submission to Assyria.

The verse in its context reads as follows:

Isaiah 7:10-16

Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, saying,

"Ask a sign of the Lord, your God. Ask it either in the depths, or in the heights above."

But Ahaz said, "I will not ask, for I will not tempt the Lord."

Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, O house of David: Is it enough that you weary men, but will you also weary my God?"

Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign:

Behold the young woman with child, bearing a son.

And she will name him "Immanuel".

Because, when he learns to refuse wrong and choose right,

he will eat butter and honey.

And when the child knows how to refuse wrong and choose right,

the nations of the two kings who trouble you will be laid waste.

The Hebrew word used here for "young woman" is almah. It refers to a woman of the age typical for marriage. almah denotes age only -- it just means "young woman", "woman of marrying age". Any woman -- married, single, virgin, or even whore -- of that age is an almah. In fact, almah is used in Songs 6:8 in contrast to a true virgin, Solomon's "undefiled dove". Much to the Evangelicals' frustration, the word does not denote, connote, or imply virginity. Biblical scholars agree, and the Interpreter's Bible Dictionary gives a thorough exposition on the subject (nevertheless, plenty of Evangelicals these days ignore this). St. Matthew translated the word,almah, by using the Greek word, parthenos, as did the Greek translation of the Old Testament at the time, the Septuagint (a.k.a. "LXX", meaning "The 70"). Matthew simply copied it.

Like almah, the word, parthenos, does not imply virginity. In both Classical and Biblical Greek, it is used to refer to both virgin and non-virgin women, and therefore technically only means "sexually mature young woman". The emphasis of the meaning is on the age. Accordingly, it should be noted that the LXX uses parthenos to refer to a woman who is not a virgin (Dinah in Gen 34:3), as well as to women who could be virgins. Thus, the question of whether the LXX translators, or even Matthew, had thought that the wordalmah in Isa 7:14 meant "virgin" is a bit cloudy. After all, while we know that Matthew considered Mary a virgin, he also considered her a young woman of marrying age. Nevertheless, to suit their doctrines, later Evangelicals forced a translation of "virgin" onto both words.

But, Biblical Hebrew has a specific word that means "virgin woman",bethulah, and it was used frequently by Isaiah's time. It refers to a woman who is a virgin, or to one who in the foregoing context was a virgin. And, it is this word, bethulah, and words based on its root which are used in the Levitical laws and elsewhere when virginity is to be specified. If Isaiah had meant that the mother of Immanuel was a virgin, an extraordinary proposition indeed, he would surely have used bethulah.

So, Isa 7:14 should not read "a virgin", but rather "the young woman". This does not mean that almah cannot refer to Mary. Mary was, after all, a young woman of marrying age. In fact, this is why some of the more accurate Christian Bibles translate the word as "young woman" or "maiden" (terms which do not necessarily imply virginity).

So, now that we know the true translation of the word, what does this all mean? We need to consider the translation of the rest of the verse, not just this one word, as well as its context.

Evangelicals love to remind folks to keep context in mind when quoting the Bible. Yet, they are loathe to take their own advice medicine. Disregard for context lent itself to Matthew's scheme to present the unwed Mary as a virgin mother, just as mistranslation lent itself to later Evangelicals' desires to do the same. In mistranslating Isa 7:14, they tore the "Immanuel" story out of its context, abandoning its original relevance to King Ahaz by moving its fulfillment up 750 years later, and foisted a stolen omen about a child born 750 earlier as a "prophecy" about Mary.

The child in question might have been any child near that time (the point was not to find the child, but rather to specify the duration of the siege). But, the young woman spoken of is referred to with a definite article as "THE young woman" (as opposed to the erroneous "A young woman" which Matthew gives us). Thus, it was a woman known to either Isaiah or Ahaz. The child could be perhaps one of Isaiah's new sons, one of whom Isaiah gave the symbolic name, Maher Shalal Hash Baz. He was born just a few verses later, and he fits in imagery, context, and time.

Isaiah 8:3-4

And I went to the prophetess,

and she conceived, and bore a son.

Then, the Lord said to me,

name him "Maher Shalal Hash Baz"

(meaning "Hasten plunder, Hurry the war prize!").

Because, before the child shall even know how to cry,

"Pappa" and "Mama",

the riches of Damascus and the booty of Samaria

will be taken away by the king of Assyria.

We note that both Jesus and Maher' were obviously not named "Immanuel", though Maher Shalal Hash Baz was referred to as such in Isaiah 8:8.  Rather, Jesus was named "Yeshua", which was a degenerate form of the name Yehoshua, which meant "God is salvation", which is also where “Joshua” is derived.  ("Yeshua", interestingly enough, was a Hebrew acronym meaning "May his name be blotted out forever").

"Maher Shalal Hash Baz" implies God's salvation of Judah through his arranging the pillage of Syria. So, both names -- Immanuel and Maher Shalal Hash Baz -- mean that "God is with us". However, Maher Shalal Hash Baz fits the bill much better than Jesus given that,

There is a direct, parallel match in the imagery used in Isaiah 7:14 and 8:3.

Temporal Proximity: The sign/prophecy necessarily had to have been fulfilled in King Ahaz's time, when it was both needed and declared.

Maher Shalal Hash Baz has greater historical relevance since he served the purpose of the sign during King Ahaz's time.

Maher Shalal Hash Baz is referred to as Immanuel in 8:8

Mary's birth tale may have had similarities to the Immanuel birth, but Mary could not have fulfilled a prophecy that had already been fulfilled 750 years earlier (back when it was actually relevant).

It’s also telling that Isaiah makes it clear his children are the signs mentioned in his prophecies:

Isaiah 8:18

Behold, I and the children whom the Lord has given to me are for signs and for symbols to Israel from the Lord Almighty, who dwells in Mount Zion.

Though it is not specified when these prophecies are made with respect to one another, the age differences between siblings would be a year or so.

Isaiah's children were to be the signs, and Judah's delivery from its military siege was to come before they left their early years. And, indeed, within about 3 years, the siege was over, Maher would have been old enough to begin talking, and a sibling Immanuel would have been just at that age of beginning to develop an awareness of right and wrong.

Incidentally, the issue of how Isaiah 7:14 is translated is a good gauge of the honesty of any particular version/translation of the Bible. An entire book cannot truly be rated on the basis on one passage. But, Bibles which impose the word "virgin" on the passage are those that seem to be the most popular among Evangelical and missionary organizations, and reflect their motives to impress people into assimilation. They would sacrifice accuracy for their cause. The reason why is obvious. Such "virgin-making" Bibles (if we may call them that) include the NIV, among others, and ought to be read by anyone interested in accurate translation of this passage with this caveat in mind. Some Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version, translate the passage correctly, using "young woman".