Matthew was not “trying to fit the virgin birth in certain passage of the Hebrew scriptures” because there was no Hebrew scriptures at the time of Matthew’s writings, only the Greek or OG/Septuagint was available at that time,
Hi Nonconformist,
What is the source of this information that no Hebrew Scripture existed, it sounds absurd. The Hebrew Bible has always been with us and the Dead Sea Scrolls were mostly Hebrew.
Here is what Josephus had to say about it and is sounds the exact opposite of you:
Josephus:
I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greek language although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own language, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness: for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of the nations (Ant. 20:11:2)
and from this OG/Septuagint, at that time frame only, it says “parthenos/virgin” in Isaiah 7:14. IOW, the 72 Jewish translators translated the ancient Hebrew text [Isaiah 7:14] “Almah” into Greek’s “Parthenos/Virgin”.
The "original Septuagint" was only of the first five books of Moses, i.e. the Torah only. Isaiah was not commissioned in Alexandria to be written by the 72 Jews. But even at that, even the original five books do not exist today, church father Origen said it was already corrupted in his day and he reconstructed it. Todays LXX is a 100% Christian newer Greek document which may or may not look anything like the original with the later being most likely.
Here is some more from Uri Yoseph:
 The LXX contains errors that learned Jewish scholars would not make, particularly when one considers the size of the team that produced the translation.6
 Lastly, an analysis of the Greek language used in the LXX translation, which includes Prophets and Writings, indicates that it is not the Koiné Greek that was prevalent in the mid-third century B.C.E.; rather, it is a more modern dialect of the Greek language.
 The Original Septuagint was a translation of only the Torah (the Five Books of Moses) into (Koiné) Greek by 72 learned bi-lingual Jewish scholars (Rabbis). The work took place in Alexandria, Egypt, in the mid-third century B.C.E. The well-known Letter of Aristeas describes this entire project as having been commissioned by King Ptolemy II Philadelphius of Alexandria.7

 In Section 3 of his Preface to the Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus states that the translation was "of our law" (i.e., the Mosaic Law),8 and the details on the entire event appear later, in Book XII, Chapter 2, Sections1-4.9

 St. Jerome, an early Christian Church father, in the Preface to his Book of Hebrew Questions, affirms Josephus' statement that the Original Septuagint was a translation of only the Five Books of Moses.10

 The Babylonian Talmud, in Tractate Megilah, Folios 9a&b, records 15 phrases which the Jewish scholars translated in a unique fashion, and which deviate from the (later) Masoretic Text, yet only two of these uniquely translated phrases appear in the Christian LXX.11
6 One such error concerns the number of people who went to Egypt with Joseph. Three references in the Hebrew Bible have the number as 70 (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5; Deuteronomy 10:22). The LXX has the number as 75 at Genesis 46:27 & Exodus 1:5, but as 70 at Deuteronomy 10:22. The most likely reason for the 75 at the first two places and 70 in the third place is that in the New Testament the number is cited as 75 (Acts 7:14), and that the unknown (probably Christian) translators forgot to change the number at Deuteronomy 10:22, something a learned Jewish scholar would never do.
7 The Letter Of Aristeas, R.H. Charles-Editor, Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913; available on the Internet at - The Letter of Aristeas
8 Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews – Preface; available on the Internet at -
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-pref.htm
9 Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews – Chapter XII; available on the Internet at -
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-12.htm
10 St. Jerome, Preface to the Book of Hebrew Questions; available on the Internet at - NPNF2-06. Jerome: The Principal Works of St. Jerome - Christian Classics Ethereal Library
11 The 15 phrases which appeared in the Original Septuagint are in the following verses: Genesis 1:1, 1:26, 2:2, 5:2, 11:7, 18:12, 49:6; Exodus 4:20, 12:40, 24:5, 24:11; Leviticus 11:6; Numbers 16:15; and Deuteronomy 4:19, 17:3. The only two of these found in the LXX are: Genesis 2:2 and Exodus 12:40.
Why would they translate “almah” to “parthenos/virgin” if it was not meant to be a “virgin”?
Today's LXX uses parthenos not once but twice in the place of the Hebrew word
narrah i.e. damsel in Genesis 34 here:
Gen 34:2 And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and defiled her . 3 And his soul clave unto Dinah the daughter of Jacob, and he loved the damsel, and spake kindly unto the damsel.
If Dinah had a baby from this encounter, could it be called a "virgin birth"?
Isaiah 7:14 can not support this theory of yours because Isaiah’s wife certainly was not a virgin anymore when she gave birth to her 2nd son [Isa. 8:3] so this could not have fully satisfied the prophecy of Isaiah’s 7:14.
She very well could have since the children who were for signs
as told in 8:18 were all given to Isaiah. Jesus was not and she could have been beheld by both Ahaz and Isaiah while Mary could not. Isaiah said "you"(second person feminine) will call him Immanuel, someone who had to be there. Mary never named Jesus Immanuel, the NT story says "they" shall call him that name, not per prophecy.
None of the characters in Isaiah’s chapters 7-8 have fulfilled this prophecy [Isa.7:14].
In verse 12 C7 Ahaz refused the sign. Verse 13 “Hear ye now, O house of David” and in verse 14 this “the house of David” became “Therefore the Lord himself will give “YOU/House of David” a sign:”
So, the sign was for the “House of David” and if you read Jesus’ genealogy at the end of it in,
Was Jesus known to weary men and God often? Or
get scared?
I actually agree the house of David got the prophecy since Hezekiah used it when the latter parts of it came to pass. Says who was affected and involved right in the text:
Isaiah 7: 17 The LORD shall bring upon thee(Ahaz), and upon thy people(the Jews), and upon thy father's house(the house of David), days that have not come , from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria.
Jesus never had that brought upon him, Hezekiah would have.
Jesus never ate butter and honey, five years later everyone was in Isaiah 7:22, right when Immanuel would have started to refuse evil and choose good.
"God with us", means God is on the side of. Never that God dwells with man on earth. NEVER, not found in Scripture. "WIth us" means on the side of. See here:
2 Chron 6:18 But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house which I have built !
Immanuel was also for another prophecy and I agree it was to the house of David, namely Hezekiah, Ahaz's son. It was when Assyria came to the neck of Judah.
Isaiah 8:8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over , he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel . ...10 Take counsel together , and it shall come to nought ; speak the word, and it shall not stand : for God is with us.
Here was the fulfillment when Assyria was at Judah's neck:
2 Chron 32:8 With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the LORD our God to help us, and to fight our battles. And the people rested themselves upon the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.
Also note that God's arm is not flesh(
Jesus' is).
Fletch