then you have to be fair and balanced and say that 90 year old women don't give birth either...

so you don't believe in Isaac? 

I do.

I don't see a second possible reading of that event.

It's weird and maybe they got the age wrong (or rather, we get it wrong because we don't know how they counted back then).

or there's another possibility which we see played out over and over in scripture for a reason.  That is, that these things have no other meaning other than the fact it had to be of spiritual origin.  It had to be a miracle.  It had to point to God . 

See God didn't want us to look to some sort of human explanation (knowing we would) so he made sure these things happened with no other possible explanation.   So he took a 90 year old woman and had her give birth to show that he was God and with God anything is possible. 

Yes, and that's perfectly all right.

My beef is with the idea that any perfectly simple text has to be read in such a way as to produce the most unbelievable miracle.

If the text says that  90-year old woman gave birth, that's fine.

But if the text used a word that, for example, means "40" and can be read as "90" only by stretching the definition of "40" to include "90", in that case I would read it as "40", because it says so and because it is more likely.

So if the prophecy says that a "young woman" will give birth to the Messiah, I will read that as exactly that. But to say that a "young woman" can be read as "virgin" and to accept a virgin birth despite the fact that (Hebrew) scripture does not have to be read that way is quite different.

(Your list of annointed kings appear to contain only believers. What about an example of a righteous pagan annointed to be a king?)

When the prophecy was spoken it probably referred to the woman, a virgin at that time who Isaiah took later as his second wife.  The virgin of Isaiah's prophecy is a type of the virgin Mary.  The Hebrew word that is here translated virgin is found elsewhere in the OT in Gen 24:43, Ex 2:8, Ps 68:25; Prov 30:19, Song of Solomon 1:3;6:8 and in those instances refers only to a virgin girl who is unmarried.  So why not here? 

Have you read 24:43 lately?

The translation as "virgin" doesn't make any sense:

"Behold, I stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the virgin cometh forth to draw water, and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;"

Think about the same sentence with "3alma" translated correctly:

"Behold, I stand by the well of water; and it shall come to pass, that when the girl cometh forth to draw water, and I say to her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher to drink;"

Who refers to a young woman he sees as a "virgin" and how would he know?

I have seen girls coming forth many a time and probably commented on it too. But I would never ever refer to them as "virgins", not even when I actually knew that they were. It's always "the girl", never "the virgin". Nobody talks like that.

Exodus:

"And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother."

From the context it's clear that "3alma" is a "maid". "Virgin"? Really? Who sends his or her "virgin" to do chores???

And Psalms:

"The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels."

This stupid ("damsels" for "3almoth"), let's use another translation:

"The makers of songs go before, the players of music come after, among the young girls playing on brass instruments."

Do you know anybody who would use the word "virgins" instead of "young girls" in that context?

Proverbs:

"The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid."

This is just weird.

Solomon:

"Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee."

Really? "Virgins", not "girls", love him? How would that be triggered? In my experience virgins and any girls pretty much like the same things when it comes to being attracted. I.e. there is nothing that would specifically attract _virgins_ but not other girls (except perhaps impotence?).

"There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number."

Here the word "virgin" makes sense. But so does a more general "young maiden".

Perhaps the writers of the Septuagint or someone who changed the Greek text later (what's the oldest extant copy of the Septuagint we have?) added some interpretation, decided which of the 3almoth (girls) would be virgins and which not. Obviously Pharaoh's daughter's hand maiden was a "maid", not a "virgin". But who decides which of the 3almoth is a virgin? Translators? Copiers?

The word 3alma is used for a reason. And the reason is that the people described as 3almoth are "maids", not "virgins".

Those who look for any other word than virgin here are only trying to negate the prophecy.  Let me explain.  It is important to capture the whole context here for clarification.

The setting begins with King Ahaz (Judah) refusing to join Rezin, the King of Aram (Syria) in Damascus and Pekah the king of the northern 10 tribes of Israel in Samaria aganst the Assyrians who had subjugated most of the Near East.  For Ahaz's resistance to their overtures, Pekah and Rezin marched against Judah with the intent of overthrowing the Davidic dynasty and placing the son of Tabeel (7:6) on the throne in Jerusalem.  

In order to reassure Ahaz that nothing like this was going to happen.  God sent the prophet Isaiah to join King Ahaz.  Isaiah's instructions from God were to invite the King to request from God any "sign" that he wished, for that miracle would be God's promise to the king that Pekah and Rezin would not have their way.  God's word to Ahaz was "If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all."  (7:9)

Ahaz refused protesting he did not want to tempt/test God.  But, Isaiah explained this was not the same as testing God for God himself invited the request.  Despite Ahaz's reluctance to cooperate, Isaiah proceeded to give a "sign" from the Lord himself that would be for all the house of David. 

7:14 begins with a "therefore" indicating that what precedes is the reason for what follows.  So the divine word is not unattached to all that I have just described. 

The virgin (ha almah) will be with child and will give birth to a son.  The word "ha almah" has caused much debate.  The Septuagint translated it by the Greek noun "parthenos", a word that has the specific meaning of "virgin."  But what about the Hebrew?

When all the passages in the OT, like the sample I gave you, are investigated, the only conclusion one can come to is that the word means "virgin."  To date, no one has produced a clear context either in Hebrew or in the closely related Canaanite language from Ugarit where "almah" can be applied to a married woman.  Neither did you see that in the scripture I gave you previously in my last posting. 

Moreover, the definite article with this word must be rendered "the virgin" a special one God had in mind.  Added to this is the question of what would be so miraculous (sign) about a "young woman" having a baby?

The word "almah" was deliberately used because it always referred to a young woman who was a virgin.  God promised that there would be something miraculous about the birth and if that promise was not completed in the near fulfillment then it would be in the final fulfillment.  That One would be Immanuel, "God be with us." 

websters dictionary: virgin- a person who never had sex

Well its not your beef.  If G-D is an all powerful G-D then anything is possible.  I am sure that HE can make a 90 year old woman give birth.  Unless you don't believe that G-D is all powerful.  Then what's the point of studying or worshiping a weak pathetic god?

If you look at this week's haftarah portion did that stuff really happen to Elijah?  Or leading up to it, did fire really come from heaven?

In the Pinchas parashah, what's the point of sacrificing if this god is so weak and can't do anything?

Non sequitur. Nobody denied the definition.

Non sequitur. Nobody here denied that Sarah gave birth at 90.

How quickly we forget:

When you go on your honeymoon a very high percentage of people do the hibadee dibadee (and that's not a dance either).

This quote still stands true no matter how you cut it.

And?

The fact remains, whether you like it or not, that 3alma is any young woman or girl and not, specifically, a virgin and nor does the word, specifically, focus on the virginity status of the woman.

KFC provided many examples of the use of the word in the Tanakh and all except one don't even make sense if you translate 3alma as "virgin". (Pharaoh's daughter sent her _maid_, not her virgin. What you see next to the lake are _girls_, not virgins. Who the heck sees "virgins" next to a lake? How does he see that?)

Yes, so?

You seem to think that by proving that 3alma _can_ be a virgin, you have proven that 3alma _is_ a virgin.

I.e. you are trying to argue that since the number 1 is in the set s = {1, 2, 3}, all numbers in s are 1. It's not true. Plus you seem to think that anybody who argues that 2 and 3 are also in s, specifically denies that 1 is too. The quote that "still stands" even points that out: "It puts no stress on virginity". Sometimes languages just have two different words for "girl" and "virgin" and usually there is a reason for that, and the reason is NOT that the words mean the same thing. That would be silly.

The prophecy merely says that a young woman will bear a child, it doesn't say that this woman is specifically a virgin. (Perhaps it was just meant to be a change from the common theme of important children being born to very old women spiel in the Tanakh.)

Not all young women are virgins and virginity is usually something you don't even see from afar. Hence the use of the word 3alma in those situations where the "girl" status of a person can be determined, but the "virgin" status cannot.

A prophecy that only works by mistranslating a word is no real prophecy. It has to be negated.

So, yes, I am negating the prophecy. What's your point?

Really? Pharaoh's daughter sent her "virgin" (not her "maid") to do chores? Are you sure?

How do you know Pharaoh's servant was not married?

What's your problem with the word "girl"? You seem to live in a world where the only words that can be used to refer to women are "married woman" and "virgin". What happened to the concept of a "girl", a word for a young woman that puts no specific focus on virginity status?

(Incidentally, Ugaritic was no Canaanite language.)

are you purposely being obtuse Leauki?  Because I know you're smarter than this.   You say you want the truth  but when it's delivered you say "no thank you." 

again I bring up:

Sorry, you know my policy: I read the Bible literally unless a literal reading doesn't make sense. But a young woman giving birth makes sense. So there is no need to assume a miracle here.

Who said it had to be miraculous?

But let's go back to the many examples you referred to. Are you sure that Pharaoh's daughter sent her "virgin" and not her "maid"? Would you refer to a girl you see as a "girl" or as a "virgin"?

Perhaps the prophecy just meant that the Messiah would be born to an unmarried woman? Prophecies do not have to predict anything miraculous. They can just predict that, for example, the Messiah, although later King of Israel, would be born as a bastard; teaching us that we cannot judge people based on the circumstances of their birth.