DJ Says...

For today's class, we are focusing on Isaiah 7:1-16, with the topic being Act on Revealed Truth. As I was studying this week, I noticed wide, and I do mean wide, variations in the translations of several of the verses. Verse 14 in particular struck a chord because it is referenced in Matthew 1:23 regarding the birth of Christ. I'm not going to bring this up because there wouldn't be a purpose for today's topic but it is interesting to me nonetheless.

Check out the venerable King James:

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Then the New International Version:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Basically the same. Now the NASB:

"Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.

Again, basically the same. Even the ESV roughly matches:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

And the Holman, Young's, Darby, etc. all pretty much match this. But when you review the notes attached to these translations, you'll find that the translations are guided more by doctrine than by scholarship. Check out my favorite bible version, the NET:

For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. Look, this young woman is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young woman, will name him Immanuel.

Quite a bit different. The reason that I prefer the NET is not so much the translation but the fact that they put their translators notes directly in the Bible, so that you can review them and understand why they translated it a certain way. And they generally allow scholarship to determine the translation, not any particular doctrine or creed. Here is the translators notes for that verse:

²⁶ tn Traditionally, “virgin.” Because this verse from Isaiah is quoted in Matt 1:23 in connection with Jesus’ birth, the Isaiah passage has been regarded since the earliest Christian times as a prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth. Much debate has taken place over the best way to translate this Hebrew term, although ultimately one’s view of the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ is unaffected. Though the Hebrew word used here (???????, ’almah) can sometimes refer to a woman who is a virgin (Gen 24:43), it does not carry this meaning inherently. The word is simply the feminine form of the corresponding masculine noun ????? (’elem, “young man”; cf. 1 Sam 17:56; 20:22). The Aramaic and Ugaritic cognate terms are both used of women who are not virgins. The word seems to pertain to age, not sexual experience, and would normally be translated “young woman.” The LXX translator(s) who later translated the Book of Isaiah into Greek sometime between the second and first century b.c., however, rendered the Hebrew term by the more specific Greek word ???????? (parqenos), which does mean “virgin” in a technical sense. This is the Greek term that also appears in the citation of Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23. Therefore, regardless of the meaning of the term in the OT context, in the NT Matthew’s usage of the Greek term ???????? clearly indicates that from his perspective a virgin birth has taken place.

²⁷tn Elsewhere the adjective ????? (harah), when used predicatively, refers to a past pregnancy (from the narrator’s perspective, 1 Sam 4:19), to a present condition (Gen 16:11; 38:24; 2 Sam 11:5), and to a conception that is about to occur in the near future (Judg 13:5, 7). (There is some uncertainty about the interpretation of Judg 13:5, 7, however. See the notes to those verses.) In Isa 7:14 one could translate, “the young woman is pregnant.” In this case the woman is probably a member of the royal family. Another option, the one followed in the present translation, takes the adjective in an imminent future sense, “the young woman is about to conceive.” In this case the woman could be a member of the royal family, or, more likely, the prophetess with whom Isaiah has sexual relations shortly after this (see 8:3).

It is much easier for me to understand what this meant in Isaiah's time by reading and understanding the NET version. It does nothing to undermine my faith, in fact it helps to enhance it because I understand it.

I guess my point is more of a question: why do so many Christians avoid scholarly works like they would the plague?