From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Almah (was Re: Supposed Talmud quotes  (was Re: Almah in Isa 7:14)
Date: 10 Jan 93 18:56:55 GMT
Organization: University of Turku

In article <1993Jan9.210036.6669@udel.edu> carroll@bifur.cis.udel.edu (Mark C. Carroll) writes:
> In article <141794.2B4D63A9@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Harvey.Smith@p0.f1.n7002.z8.FIDONET.ORG (Harvey Smith) writes:
> ]
> ]To: Bruce Krulwich

> ] BK] hard to say it means a virgin.  "The way of a man with a 
> ] BK] woman" makes perfect sense.
> ]
> ]Sure it sure does especially during the time when Israel kept the law.
> ]Of course now the Law is irretrievably broken, because there are very very 
> ]few virgins in either Israel or the Jewish community before marriage...

> You're again ignoring Bruce's point: that it isn't specific. Do men
> only have sex with virgins? Certainly not. Why *must* this be read as
> "the way of a man with a virgin" rather than "the way of a man with a
> woman"? Remember, you're arguing that *the only correct reading* is
> virgin.

Harvey, I replied to BK but the posting may have been too long to reach
your site. I'm still waiting for a reply.

> ]AGAIN, in every instance and the Rabbis back me up on this, In every 
> ]instance where the term is utilized for a specific maiden, it refers to 
> ]a virgin...

> No - in every case it refers to a young woman, without regard to
> whether or not she is a virgin. You don't provide *any* support of any
> kind that any of the references indicate the virginity of the women.
> Again remember that you are claiming that this word means *only*
> virgin; this means that you have to provide evidence that the other
> reading "young woman", which INCLUDES virgins, cannot be correct. If
> you cannot show for these examples that the virginity of the women
> mentioned is indicative of the exclusive meaning of the word, then
> your entire case falls apart.

S'o'S 6:8

> ]Again you are speculating.hardly good scholarship thats for sure... In 
> ]accordance with the Law of Moses which you are supposed to be going by but 
> ]can't, because over 80% of it is abrogated by the breaking of the 
> commandments by you and all of us...So in the light of the Torah, my friend,
> ]it would always be Virgin.  anything else is speculation.

...
> Bruce is providing specific references demonstrating his claim, and
> you are making non-specific claims that "the Rabbis support me". Who
> is being a better scholar?

I gave the references, BK only tried to interpret them as he would have
liked them to be.

Seems to me this discussion has moved so far that it's no use to give
references to any earlier scholarly works, dictionaries etc, but 
everybody taking part speaks for him/herself relying on facts.

- Laura
--
"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government 
will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Councellor,
Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."  - Yeshaya 9:5 (9:6)
 
"To the Jews who had believed him, Yeshua said, "If you hold to my
teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth,
and the truth will set you free.""   - Yochanan 8:32-33