Robert "Monkey" Loggia said:
But that's what I was saying was debatable due to the wording.
I like pie.
It's only debatable in the english. This is where much of today's doubt is derived on the bible - english translators used english words to translate very speicific languages. I quoted in the other thread that our translation of "love" covers three distinctly different meanings that make an enormous difference in intent.
In this case, let's look at what Monkey is saying here. We used "virgin" to denote the condition of Mary. While we may have looser connotations to the term (back then), the Hebrews did not.
Quite the contrary, the Hebrews used a phrase specifically to infer lack of sexual intercourse. The greek in this case uses the proper wording with:
ginwvskw (ginosko).
Literally: Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman.
The text?
Mary questions the angel delivering the message to her about becoming pregnant. Note, Mary was promised, but not married at this point.
1:34
"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"
In the greek, it goes as follows:
Lu 1:34
Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
"...I know not a man.." uses
ginwvskw to mean "I have not had sexual intercourse with a man."
Sure, this may be debatable in
english, but not the original language of the text.
And, of course, the bible was not inspired in english.
[/URL]
[/URL]
