Does your Bible mistranslate Isaiah
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Some of you may have seen Dan McClellan's recent video on the grammar of Isa 7:14. For those interested in the complexities of the verse, here's a response video that delves into the issues (discussing primarily the time when the עַלְמָה is pregnant and who is calling Jesus Emmanuel).
Almah (עַלְמָה 'almā, plural: עֲלָמוֹת 'ălāmōṯ) means MAID or YOUNG WOMAN, it does not have any sexual connotation. Proof of this is in Bereshit (Genesis) 24:16, bethulah (בְּתוּלָ֕ה) meaning "virgin.” It is the way it is written in the HEBREW text, not the Christian bible.
although bethulah does not imply what age the woman is, could be old woman, young woman and anything between, could be married or widowed, whereas almah has the connotation of being a young unmarried virgin woman. So prophet isaiah did use the correct word here.
@@hosannayeshua4446if you missed it above, BneiAnusim explained that Almah means young woman, not virgin. It does not mean "young virgin woman", hence his emphasis on the lack of a sexual connotation to almah.
It lireally isbused for young women who are virgins just like if you speak of specific lion you know they have specific traits,almah is a young women who has never known a man
I am disappointed in this video. I think that the Masoretic Text and the Great Isaiah Scroll are both best translated "Therefore, the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the young woman has conceived and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel". What this creator posits about the future tense isn't evident in the text, but he is just asserting that it is possible. But it seems as though presenting another possibility is rooted in the effort to make this prophecy work.
There are too many grammatical plausibilities presesented here that need to work in order to explain this one away. I am going to stick with the verse as written.
I wish that more Christians would understand that these texts need to be translated in a way that gives honor to their original intent. If you want to say that the author of Matthew is suggesting a second "prophetic" interpretation, that's your perogative, but attempts to go back to the Hebrew Bible and change what is being said to make it match up with Matthew's Septuagint influenced reading of the prophecy is misguided.
Dan recently made a video explaining how many Christian apologists go for "it isn't impossible therefore I will believe it"
Thank God Kevin didn't just believe what Dan said, which I thought was going to happen.
Instead, Kevin used logic. And gave credit to Matthew.
Well done. Both logical and gracious - as well as showing that study takes work.
Wait, aren't we using modern interpretation when saying we can talk about future events in the present? What are the other examples of this throughout ancient literature of the time that are not biblically related?
This is excellently executed. Thank you Kevin.
If he gets basic things like this wrong, I'm not sure how "important" his work on TikTok actually is. I know you're trying to be gracious and friendly, but come on.
Amen he needs to repent cause God will not hold this lightly
Ironically, The Patristic fathers all believed it says VIRGIN, but hey, I guess you know Greek better then the Orthodox Church and her saints who understood the language.
st Basil and John Chrysostom et Al.
Really amazing. Enjoyed it greatly!
Also ...the rest of the prophesy says ..when the boy learns right from wrong then the land of the (two kings ) YOU ( meaning the king ) dread ..will be laid waste ....??
Which 2 kingdoms were laid waste when jesus was old enough to know right ffom wrong ...??
None.He was never called Emmanuel by his parents either. Christians take a single verse as proof and conveniently ignore the context.
Wow fantastic Kevin.
2:19, Why should we compare Hebrew to English? 🤔 Also, if we are talking about the Hebrew text, how WHY SHOULD WE CARE about what the Septuagint says? This is a typical Christian "brain gymnastics". You are relying too much on the Septuagint.
Mainstream Rabbinic Judaism has rejected the Septuagint as scriptural for a couple of reasons. First, the Septuagint often differs from the Hebrew source texts, especially in the Book of Job. Second, the translations sometimes show a lack of understanding of Hebrew idiomatic expressions.
I think that they rely on the Septuagint because they are the origins for these Christian theological traditions. They have to re-evaluate the evidence in light of their theological presuppositions.
Does your Bible mistranslate Matthew 25:46?
Final point is so keen. The interpretation of ancient Jews of the Hebrew word for "Young woman/virgin" is not to be taken lightly. Justin Martyr in his conversation with the Jew Trypho explained that the right word has to be virgin for the prophecy to even make sense. Why would a young woman getting pregnant be significant when that is how all are born? Context will always be the key deciding factor for a word's intended meaning.
Me: Not trying to be a jerk
Also me: not trying to get my Hebrew interpretation from someone associated with the LDS either 🤔
Really good stuff. Do you agree with Dan on what he says about עלמה /παρθένος in Isaiah & Matthew?
Yes. It's ha almah hara . The young woman is with child. Present tense Take the verse in context and its about a woman in the Kings Palace. After I left Christianity. I studied the Jewish side of things and was further convinced I had made the right decision.
What do you think about the argument that Kevin presents from Judges 13:5 for the present tense referring to the future in some contexts?
Why would any prophet prophesy about something that would not hapoen for 200 yrs .....why would that prophesy matter to the ppl of the time ? ?
Good point.
Awesome.
Love it!
If indeed it said a young girl shall conceive, it really wouldn’t have been much of a miracle would it? I sincerely think God was going for the mundane
It is known that "whoever wrote the gospels" (in case you don't know they used pseudonyms. Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John didn't write them) not only didn't know well the Hebrew language but were not familiar with Oral Torah. Chances are the writers were not Jewish. There are a plethora of examples about this but it is out of the scope of this video.
Where you get this conspiracy, your claiming ? its not what theologians and history and new testement scholarship says, while true in the opening of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John does not say I...... am writing to...... ! But you are completely wrong here, this is why tiktok info or wherever you got this theory from should be ignored, I would pay money to see you publically debate the guy behind the channel "everything NT" or maybe debate michael jones of "inspiring philosophy" my point is these 2 people know what they are talking about, so because the begging of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Job all don't explicitly open saying: By Moses to my people Israel, does tbis mean we don't know moses authored the torah and the book of Job and authored atleast Psalm 90 ? Well no, after 2k years we have never been more confident of all 40 authors of all 66 books with the exception, the book of Hebrews which is a pseudonomus author. So where are you getting the confidence for your absurd claim ? I hope next you don't say the earth is flat and the moon is made from cheese, which are as silly as anonymous authors of the 4 fold gospels we have.
I love seeing white people teaching Jews their own language
And they have the cheek to say Jews don't understand their own Bible and language. It's the Christian's who changed things to support their claims. Any decent Rabbi can demolish Christianitys claims with ease. Example Tovia Singer.
🤣🤣😂ain't that true. What I can't ever comprehend is why an all powerful supernatural being who wrote a book requires human apologists to explain his supposedly "perfect" word. The guy literally created a universe that spans 90+ billions of light years across just by saying a few magical incantations but choose papyrus and quill feathers to communicate his most important message to his priced creation.
Biblical Hebrew is no one's own language, it is a dead language that only scholars who specialize in it fully understand, and even they still debate about certain issues. A "white person" who is a scholar of biblical Hebrew and linguistics will certainly know more about biblical Hebrew than any modern Hebrew speaker who does not have those qualifications, even if they are Jewish and have been reading the Bible their whole life. This video is actually a great example of that as it shows that something which may seem obvious at first glance is actually more complicated, and thus there are more options than a surface level reading may lead one to believe.
@@ReconciledByFaith Biblical Hebrew is a Semitic language and as all Semitic languages, isn’t just words but a culture. There is a royal plural for example that is used to speak of one individual but Saint Augustine learnt Hebrew and made the claim it proves the trinity because he was outside of the culture. This is a Semitic language feature of the language. What do you think a scholar does when they discover Moses was referred to in royal plural or in Arabic which is a sister language of Hebrew uses royal plural to refer to God, would we then say Moses was actually a plurality within himself or Muslims believe in pantheon of gods? Language is for those who respect it not for those who twist it and change the cultural context behind it.
@@NoMan-pp1jq Augustine actually knew little to no Hebrew. He wouldn't come close to qualifying as a scholar of Biblical Hebrew. That said, to your point there probably are some scholars of biblical Hebrew who make the same claim, or at least there have been some in the past. Does that mean that non-Jewish scholars will always know less than modern Hebrew speakers who are not scholars of biblical Hebrew? Of course not. You're right that cultural knowledge and bias can affect one's views, but modern Hebrew speakers who are Jewish are no exception. Their culture is still different from the culture of ancient Israelites and their own religious and/or ideological bias may also lead them to incorrect conclusions regarding the language and interpretation of biblical texts.
I say all of this as a non-Jewish person who loves reading Jewish scholars as I appreciate their unique contributions and perspectives. My point to you is that you are overstating your case. There are significant differences between biblical Hebrew and modern Hebrew, and for those who have actually specialized in biblical Hebrew, their knowledge of the rules of the language will certainly surpass a non-specialist, native modern Hebrew speaker. Moreover, Kevin Grasso (the guy in the video) REALLY knows his stuff. He has a PhD in Hebrew language from Hebrew University in Jerusalem; he's one of the last people you could make this claim against and we could both learn a lot from him (I say this as a teacher of biblical Hebrew myself).
Not all language experts will agree on every issue, as we see in this video and as we see when comparing any reference grammar to another, but those differences can only be decided through analysis and argumentation, not through appeals to authority.
Well done! I am very surprised when a modern person dismisses ancient translations of the Bible, like the Septuagent, as being full of mistakes. Who understood Greek better, a native Greek speaker, or a native English speaker who studied Greek? We need to be humble enough to admit our limitations and the idea that maybe those native Greek speakers know Greek better than us.