I read the article you shared on Facebook regarding the virgin birth of Jesus in the gospels. My question regards Matthew 1:22-23 and its use of Isaiah 7:14. Why did Matthew use the Septuagint and not the Hebrew version? Also, wouldn’t he have known the difference between `almah and parthénos?

For those who did not read the article that I recommended on Facebook, allow me to explain what we are talking about here. `Almah is the Hebrew word used in Isaiah 7:14 for the future mother.

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel. (NRSV) [emphasis mine]

Normally `almah refers to a young woman of marriageable age, who may or may not have had sexual relations with a man. For whatever reason the translators of the Septuagint chose to render `almah as parthénos in Greek, which — although can refer to a young woman who has had sex — normally refers to a virgin. This meaning virgin is the one utilized by the writer of Matthew.

All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet:

“Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and they shall name him Emmanuel,”

which means, “God is with us.” (1:22-23 NRSV) [emphasis mine]

The Septuagint was (and is) a comprehensive Greek translation of Jewish religious texts.  It includes not just the Tanaḵ (Jewish scriptures — Law, Prophets, Writings) but also includes many texts that modern Jews do not consider canonical (like Tobit or 1 & 2 Maccabees) that are nevertheless included in Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Bibles. (This is what Protestants call the “Apocrypha.”)  So, the Septuagint does contain all the Hebrew books (and then some).  The order of the books was different than the Hebrew, but it’s the order we Christians now use for our Old Testament.

Most scholars believe the writer of Matthew (whoever that was) was a Palestinian Christian of Jewish extraction.  I’m not sure why he would have used the Septuagint instead of the Hebrew.  But there is a real question by scholars regarding how much Hebrew the average Jew would have known at that time.  Did the writer of Matthew even know Hebrew?  Paul, who presumably knew Hebrew, still quoted the Septuagint in his letters.  I’m guessing it was because Greek was the language of the Near East at that time.  It was the language any educated person could read, but the same could not be said for Hebrew.

I think stressing about the historical virginity of Mary is very much a modern concern.  Ancients did not concern themselves with what we call “facts” or even “history.”  To them what was important was the truths conveyed.  As mentioned in the article, virgin births were very common in the ancient world.  Every important figure supposedly had one.  It makes sense that the writer of Matthew would want put Jesus on par with other important ancient figures.

You asked why the writer would apparently mix up `almah and parthénos.  We need to realize that the ancients did not use texts like we use them today.  The writer of Matthew, in his zeal to connect Jesus with the Jewish Scriptures, pulled out bits and pieces of quotes, sometimes mangling them or even taking them completely out of context.  The `almah or parthénos of Isaiah 7 is a good example.  If you read that chapter I think that it is clear that the prophecy refers to the time of King Hezekiah (8th century BCE) and a divine promise of deliverance from the Assyrian army.  The writer of Matthew creatively re-tooled that quote to refer to Jesus several centuries later.

Does that help?

+Chris.