[Replying to otseng in post #3212
[Gen 24:43 KJV] 43 Behold, I stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the virgin[H5959] cometh forth to draw [water], and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;
There are three words in this passage which refer to a young woman. One is alma
, which means "young woman", and a second is na'ara
, which the BLB translates as "damsel". The third, which is used in the only place referring to Rebekah's sexual state, appears in verse 16:
And the damsel
[na'ara] was very fair to look upon, a virgin
, neither had any man known her....
"Betulah" is the word for virgin
, and it appears in the one place where Rebekah's sexual state is mentioned.
[Sng 1:3 KJV] 3 Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name [is as] ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins[H5959] love thee.
[Sng 6:8 KJV] 8 There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins[H5959] without number.
The sexual state of the women in these verses is not specified as is that of Rebekah in Gen. 24:16.
You cite a definition, but the definition you cite doesn't fit the context of the passage.
It fits with my interpretation of the passage. However, it does not fit with your interpretation. So the point is the definition supports my interpretation.
Your definition may support your interpretation, but my interpretation fits the context
Again, I agree the first part of the chapter is addressing Ahaz. What we're talking about is the prophecy of Isa 7:14, not the beginning of the chapter.
The beginning of the chapter introduces us to the people in the subsequent verses. The only prophecies in verse 14 are about the gender of the child soon to be born and what his mother will call him.
There is no requirement a chapter should always have the same subject. In Isa 7:13, it specifically mentions who Isaiah is addressing.
Yes----it's addressing Ahaz. He's the one doing the wearying, which is specifically why
Isaiah is addressing him as he does in verse 13.
You seem to be claiming that I take the text as empirical evidence to give yourself an excuse to do so.
I'm just using your same logic. If you think your logic is correct that the Biblical text can be used as empirical evidence, then you should accept my usage of your logic.
You're still pushing the off-base notion that I'm presenting text as empirical evidence and ignoring the real-world observations which I'm actually
presenting as empirical evidence.
If a historian writes down the testimony of another person, would that also be hearsay evidence?
Then might as well throw out the vast majority of historical writings. Few historians have actually personally witnessed things they have recorded. Rather, they got their information from other sources.
A disagreement over who could have been the last defender at the Alamo is of considerably less significance than a disagreement over who could have been the Messiah.
"Isaiah (“Yeshayahu”) is the fifth book of the Prophets and is known for its visions of universal peace and renewal. Beginning in the period of the First Temple against the backdrop of a rising Assyrian empire and Israel on the decline, Isaiah rebukes Israel for abandoning God and pursuing corruption, calls for change, and warns the nations of their ultimate downfalls."
Yes, I agree with this. But how is it relevant to the debate?
Part of the debate has been about who is being addressed in Isaiah 53.
Correction: it's invented out of a prophecy about the downfall of two neighboring powers.
It's also mentioned by the NT, so it's an affirmation of the fulfillment of the prophecy.
[Mat 1:23 KJV] 23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Moreover the Lord said to me, “Take a large scroll, and write on it with a man’s pen concerning Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. And I will take for Myself faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.” Then I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. Then the Lord said to me, “Call his name Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz; for before the child shall have knowledge to cry ‘My father’ and ‘My mother,’ the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be taken away before the king of Assyria.”
Then what passage in the OT fulfilled Isa 7:14? Who is the virgin/young woman? What son was called Emmanuel?