You don't consider anything Christian to be relevant to your own Torah studies or prayers. Its external, so I was not talking to Gnostic about Jews. No offense!JayhawkerSoule said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
haalmah harah: "a young woman is pregnant"
- Thread starter gnostic
- Start date
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi Gnostic, I not only read your OP and all the posts following properly, but repeated corrected you in your attempt to make a "myth" out of the TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. This Hagar attempt using the Hebrew--"hareh"=pregnant/with child is no better than you did with "almah".
Yes, Hagar was pregnant by Abraham prior to the angel's speaking---that's contextual. But to apply the noun "pregnant" without the verb is fraudlant/a lie. Jay pointed that out to you in another post.
Yes, "almah" denotes a young qirl/woman, but as you refuse to accept in this topic-- the fact of virginity.
It isn't Matthew who has "cherry-picked", but yourself.
Yes, I fully understand that the same false pattern of accusation/reasoning by the serpent was being demonstrated to Eve.
Yes, "Hareh" is used some 16 times in the OT Scriptures. The Context of Gen.16:11 clearly denotes was/"is pregnant/ has conceived".
Now look at Judges 13:5-7; the context and the meaning given by the interpretation are the same. You "shall conceive" a future tense.
However, the context doesn't support your figment of imagination---Isaiah and son met Ahaz "at the end of the conduit of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller's field".
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi BJ, Jesus answered your question concerning Elijah in the parable of the Rich man and Lazarus. Luke 16:31, "And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. "
Today that would apply to the Scriptures of the Bible as a whole. And you are correct---"No body seems to care." And doesn't that fill the prediction of Jesus---Most persons are one the "broad road"---"few of the narrow path." The Truth seekers will "seek and find".
Look at Matthew 26:56 for his stated concern of the "fulfillments"---"But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled."
Yes it says that they might be 'Fulfilled' which makes junk of the word 'Fulfilled', since there weren't any predictions to fulfill except for riding the colt, but anybody can ride a colt. I think Matthew is saying these things happened to draw attention to those particular scriptures. Think of them as flares lighting up large sections of the prophetic writings and pushing those prophets into your face.Sincerely said:
Somewhat surprisingly, the book arrived this afternoon.
gnostic
The Lost One
sincerly said:
I have never said PREGNANT is a noun.
Where did I say it was a noun?
For English, PREGNANT is an adjective. In Hebrew, harah is a singular feminine (present tense) adjective, just like that of the English "pregnant".
You clearly didn't understand my OP, if you think so.
In basic English, adjective is used to describe a noun. For instance, the "sky is blue", or "this woman is young"; both "blue" and "young" are adjective words. The verb used both examples is "is". I could rearrange both sentences, which would have precisely the same meanings without the needs for a verb like "is": "blue sky" or "young woman".
PREGNANT is used to describe a woman condition. So, when I say "there is a pregnant woman" or "this is woman is pregnant", both usage of the phrase (in English) used PREGNANT as an adjective, not as a noun.
Look up the dictionary PREGNANT and you will see that you are clearly mistaken.
Now, if I was to use a noun instead of adjective, to describe the same condition of the PREGNANT woman, I can say "this woman is with child", then the word CHILD is a noun. Here, two nouns are used with one verb ("is") and one preposition ("with"), thereby avoiding the use of adjective like "pregnant".
And for your information, whether I used a noun "child" or an adjective "pregnant", I did use a verb in those translation - "is with child" and "is pregnant" (respectively). The word IS is a singular, present-tense verb.
Sincerly, I don't know if you can speak, read or write in another language (other than English), but it is my understanding that Hebrew used feminine or masculine voice, for any verb, noun or adjective word.
You know that almah is feminine noun to describe a young woman or a girl. Let's not complicate it with virgin or virginity, and just concentrate that almah is female. Okay?
Since almah is feminine noun, then any noun or adjective being used with almah, must also be feminine. So harah has to be feminine word. Do you understand this concept?
Other languages used this type of word usage or grammar. In Spanish for instance, they have 2 different words for friend - the masculine noun "amigo" and feminine "amiga".
The word harah can be either masculine or feminine.
(It is unfortunate that I can't create tables here, so I have to settle with doing this.)
Here are the following examples of harah:
masculine harah => future tense, verb => eg. "to conceive"
feminine harah => present tense, adjective => eg. "is pregnant"
feminine harah => present tense, noun => eg. "is with child"
The KJV translation (as well as NIV) of ha'almah harah (actually they had used Greek LXX, instead of Hebrew Masoretic Text, to translate 7:14 into English) mixed feminine and masculine words together (female "shall conceive"), which is clearly incorrect translation.
The correct translation to ha'almah harah would be used a feminine noun almah with a feminine adjective harah, which would translate to female "is pregnant", or its equivalent, "is with child" (and the English word "is" being the verb).
I am glad you brought up Judges 13. But even here with this new verse (5 & 7), they are just two instances where harah have been used in future tense. But did you both to check the earlier verse - at the end of Judges 13:3?
Judges 13:3 said:
Judges 13:3 said:
Here, instead of using harah like verses 5 and 7, verse 3 used harit, which is a feminine (future tense) verb, which can be translated to "to conceive", "will conceive" or "shall conceive".
As I understand it (as Levite had explained in post 3, Hebrew don't have past, present or future tense. They rely on perfect tense - or something that have been completed (which is similar to past tense), and imperfect tense, something yet to be done or ongoing, which could be similar to English present or future tense, depending on context of the passage.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
I have never said PREGNANT is a noun.
As I understand it (as Levite had explained in post 3, Hebrew don't have past, present or future tense. They rely on perfect tense - or something that have been completed (which is similar to past tense), and imperfect tense, something yet to be done or ongoing, which could be similar to English present or future tense, depending on context of the passage.
Hi Gnostic, Yes, I know how you have attempted to twist the Hebrew, Greek and English and Spanish, however, that doesn't Change any of the Scriptures.
Because it satisfies your literary ambitions doesn't annul the purposes and Scriptures of the Creator GOD.
gnostic
The Lost One
sincerly said:
I have provided enough examples in the KJV to justify my interpretation being more than valid view, even despite KJV being my least favorite translation.
Although, you chosen to verses both from Judges 13 (5 & 7) to indicate harah could mean "shall conceive", but an earlier verse - 13:3 showed that it also has the angel saying to the woman - thou "shalt conceive", exactly like verses 5 & 7, and yet the Hebrew transliteration in verse 3 doesn't use "harah", but "harit" or "haryit".
I have showed (textual evidences), where every other verses that used Hebrew transliteration harah, in which every other instances of KJV had translated harah into "with child", which is similar to "is pregnant".
(Sources for harah being used in OT: Judges 13:3, Exodus 21:22, Jeremiah 31:8, Genesis 16:11. In Amos 1:13, harot was used because there was a number of women "with child", so a plural form of harah was needed).
I am not twisting anything.
The reason why I brought up Genesis 16:11, is because provided a similar circumstance.
Both instances, showed that one party was speaking to another, PRESENTLY (angel to Hagar in Genesis, Isaiah to Ahaz).
Both verses have the character saying "behold" or "look" to them. Both of them saying harah "with child", and that they would bear a child or son. The only differences between the two is that Isaiah say almah or "young woman", while Genesis say "thou" or "you", which in this case is Hagar, and what names were to be given to the respective sons.
I believed that young woman was present in the meeting between Isaiah and Ahaz (Isaiah 7:1-17), when Isaiah was giving the king the sign of reassurance that hostilities against Judah would cease, in perhaps two years time.
It doesn't make sense the child being Jesus, because there are nothing to connect Jesus with what was happening in Judah, and with Israel, Aram and Assyria.
Isaiah 8:6-8 also connect Immanuel with these kingdoms.
Read Isaiah 8:6-8:
Isaiah 8:5-8 said:
If Jesus is Immanuel, then how could Jesus be Immanuel in Isaiah 8:6-8?
Why do you continually ignore this? Are you going to twist Isaiah 8:6-8 as you have done time and time again, in this thread and others?
Last edited:
sincerly
Well-Known Member
By the same reasoning and misinterpreting the serpent apparently convinced Eve with his subtleness.
Hi Gnostic,The translators correctly understood the the differences expressed by the variances of the words. Therefore, the future tenses.
You have stated that The prophetess and the "almah" of 7:14 are the same.
Present? Not hardly.
That which you believe and that which is seen in the Scriptures are two different things.
At that time, present had not caught up to future.
With the Neighboring nations eager for "spoil"--- and the kingdom of Israel already alienated from GOD and Judah(Ahaz) following Israel. Yes, with the Assyrians "spreading out the conquest of lands --the inhabitants had a reason to say "O Immanuel"/ "GOD (be) with us".
In Matthew,(1:23)there was a glad tidings of the birth of the long looked for Messiah.----indeed, the promise of "GOD (being) with US"---fulfilled.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe Mary is a female. She is also an Almah, a young girl. As I said before, it is not a sign that a young girl gets pregnant because it happens all the time but it is a sign for a virgin to get pregnant.
So are trying to say that a woman can never conceive because the verb is masculine. I prefer that God produces a conception in women as is evidenced by scripture where God opens or closes the womb which means I believe He decides whether a conception will take place of not. However the perception is still that the woman becomes pregnant.
I believe I do not in the least.
I believe you are still assuming a contemporary pregnancy which history and the context reveals it is not.
I believe Immanuel in no way refers to Maher....; it refers to Jehovah. Are you saying that Isainah's son was an incarnation of God? I don't believe there is any supporting evidence for that. However there is plenty of supporting evidence that jesus is an incarnation of God.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Just as the people rejected the evidence 2000 years ago. and having done so---continue in the denial.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
How reliable is the evidence? Does it demand the verdict that Jesus is Messiah? Not if there has been tampering with the evidence. If the Bible is the Word of God, then why don't people agree on what it says and what it means? Was she pregnant? Was she going to be pregnant? Just a few simple manipulations of a few words changes everything. Does the Hebrew Bible say "a young woman is pregnant"? Is the Masoretic text reliable or was it changed somewhere along the way? If so, then what in the Hebrew Scriptures is reliable? One thing for sure, the Christian version does change it. What it says in Matthew and what it says in Isaiah say and mean two different things, both can't be right. So is Matthew right and the Masoretic text wrong?
Levite
Higher and Higher
^^^ This.
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
The evidence says, if Jesus isn't the Messiah, you'll never have one.
Levite
Higher and Higher
It actually says nothing of the sort. Jesus didn't do any of the things our messiah is supposed to do. In order to make the messianic mantle fit him, Christianity had to completely reinterpret and eisegetically insist upon new meanings to the prophecies, and change the very definition of what a messiah is, and is supposed to do. If that suits them, great, and they should live and be well. But our messiah was not Jesus-- he wasn't even close-- and we are still waiting for him to arrive, though I personally don't anticipate him showing up any time soon. But we wait, and do what we can to make a world worthy of him-- though we're not really rocking that agenda right now. But Jesus doesn't even enter into the picture.
CMike
Well-Known Member
What evidence and whose?
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
I still haven't seen any logical, alternative interpretation. Do you have one?
sincerly
Well-Known Member
It has been shown by the Scriptures that the looked for Messiah has come and the Woman at the Well and many of the people of the area attested to the Fact.(and others besides the Apostles/Disciples which HE taught).
HE came unto HIS own and they received HIM not---as was prophesied.
However, What was it that "our messiah is supposed to do" And What is it that you/"we can to make a world worthy of him".????
Also, Why aren't you "we're not really rocking that agenda right now."???
Wasn't that the prophetic role that was given to Abraham's descendants?? To be a Blessing to the Nations/"light to the Gentiles"??