Discussion must focus on the Hebrew text (including text criticism) and its ancient translations, not on archaeology, modern language translations, or theological controversies.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Kenneth Greifer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 8:56 am
You make up rules that languages must follow, instead of letting the language make the rules.
You want people to find words in the Hebrew Bible to prove every possible meaning, but what if the Bible does not have examples beyond that one example? How many examples do you need?
Kenneth:
I ask you for evidence for the rules that you make up. When you don’t provide it, I conclude that your rule is invalid.
You made up the rule that בתולה is the technical term for “virgin”. Tanakh is not that long a book, one example of בתולה being used within a marriage is enough to disprove your rule. I know of two examples.
You have zero examples of בעל being used in the marriage context to refer to anyone other than a woman’s husband. You speculate to make up such a rule, but I want to see evidence. Where is your evidence? You need to show clear examples, but so far all you’ve done is speculate.
Karl W. Randolph.
Last edited by kwrandolph on Thu Dec 16, 2021 10:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 1:55 pmAre you asking for evidence of people using the term בַּ֫עַל when the man and wife have not yet come together sexually? How about Mary and Joseph, who had married without having consummation, and they were still called man and wife in the NT.
How is this evidence for how words were used in Tanakh?
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 1:55 pmNothing prevents a couple from becoming husband and wife without yet having consummated their marriage. According to Jewish tradition, a marriage may be sealed in three ways: (1) money [כֶּ֫סֶף], (2) contract [שְׁטָר], and (3) sexual consummation [בִּיאָה].
Do you have example from Tanakh for this three step practice? After any of which steps that a man can be called a woman’s “husband” בעל?
I ask for evidence within Hebrew language as used within Tanakh.
Karl,
Deuteronomy 22:23-24 says that a man who lies with an engaged virgin (or young woman) has humbled the wife of his
neighbor. The word "woman" is used as "wife" around 400 times. The word "beula" is used 3 times for wife.
Karl,
I also said that Joel 1:8 could be a poetic way of describing a man who was engaged to a virgin as her husband, but then he died.
By the way, what was the word in the Hebrew Bible for a man who was engaged to a woman?
Kenneth Greifer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 15, 2021 8:56 am
You make up rules that languages must follow, instead of letting the language make the rules.
You want people to find words in the Hebrew Bible to prove every possible meaning, but what if the Bible does not have examples beyond that one example? How many examples do you need?
Kenneth:
I ask you for evidence for the rules that you make up. When you don’t provide it, I conclude that your rule is invalid.
You made up the rule that בתולה is the technical term for “virgin”. Tanakh is not that long a book, one example of בתולה being used within a marriage is enough to disprove your rule. I know of two examples.
You have zero examples of בעל being used in the marriage context to refer to anyone other than a woman’s husband. You speculate to make up such a rule, but I want to see evidence. Where is your evidence? You need to show clear examples, but so far all you’ve done is speculate.
Karl W. Randolph.
Joel 1:8 could be the only example of the word baal used about a man who was engaged to a virgin or married to a young woman. There are not a lot of quotes about engaged women or men to look at.
Karl,
The verb "to marry" in Isaiah 62:5 is only used in a few quotes in the Hebrew Bible. You say it means "to husband" in an ongoing way, so it can't be about marrying a virgin because it is about an ongoing relationship. I think that is what you mean. I think your understanding of this verb is unique to you. I don't think anyone else has decided that this verb can't be about just getting married. I am curious what a quote would have to say for you to understand the verb to mean "to marry" without meaning "to husband" in an ongoing way. It would be nice to know what could prove you wrong, if that is possible. I have a feeling that any use of that verb to marry someone could be understood either way.
I realize now that people think that almah can't mean virgin, if betula means virgin, so they have to prove that betula doesn't always mean virgin. I have noticed that husband is eesh or baal and wife can be eesha or rarely beulah, and I am sure there are many other words that can be said using more than Hebrew word. Why not just say that they can both be virgin and stop trying to attack the word betula?
I don't know how common it is to have more than one way of saying something in Biblical Hebrew, but I am sure there are different verbs that mean the same thing and not just nouns. Why not just try to show people that more than one word can mean virgin and other nouns too? I am not saying I think almah means virgin. I am just saying why act like only one word can mean virgin?
Karl,
In Deuteronomy 22:23 and 28, it says a man will lie with a virgin, but technically you could say that is impossible. The instant he lies with a virgin, she is not a virgin. You could argue that no one can lie with a virgin because the state of virginity ends with the act of doing that.
In Isaiah 62:5, you say a man cannot husband a virgin because she wouldn't be a virgin. I guess it would mean a virgin at the beginning of the process, but not at the end. It is a confusing logical argument to me. Can a man lie with a virgin or even marry a virgin, if marrying includes the act that makes her not a virgin?
Karl,
I was thinking about Isaiah 62:5. You say a man can't marry (husband) a virgin because she wouldn't be a virgin. You take quotes pretty literally. How about Genesis 19:23? Abraham buried his wife Sarah. If she was dead, she wasn't his wife anymore technically. Does this quote prove that marriage continues after the death of one of the people?
Here is another possible quote that might relate to Joel 1:8. Hosea 2:18 says the people will call God "my husband (eeshee)" and not "my husband (my husband) (baali)."
Then Hosea 2:21-22 says God will betroth them to Him forever. It doesn't say "marry" but "betroth" which I think means "to engage" them. It sounds like being betrothed (engaged) to someone means married.
In Deuteronomy 22:23-24, a virgin or young woman betrothed to a man is called his wife or his woman. This also sounds like once you are betrothed, you are married to the person.