A more simplified/compact version:
"Your point:"The Bible says 'young woman' in Hebrew (almah), not 'virgin.' Christians only got 'virgin' from the Greek version later. So the whole virgin birth thing is made up based on a wrong translation, and it ruins the idea that Jesus fulfilled prophecy."
My counter, simplified way down:
- In Bible times, when they said "almah" (young woman), they almost always meant an unmarried girl—which meant virgin.Think of it like today: if someone says "she's a young single lady," you don't picture someone who's already slept around. Same idea back then.The word "virgin" (betulah) was used sometimes too, but almah carried the same vibe without needing to spell it out.
- Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek (called the Septuagint) way before Jesus or Christians existed—around 200 BC.They chose the Greek word for "virgin" (parthenos) when they translated Isaiah 7:14.So it wasn't Christians cheating or twisting it; the Jews themselves already read it that way.
- The virgin birth story shows up in both Matthew and Luke, and they don't even tell it the same way.That means it wasn't just Matthew grabbing one verse and inventing everything.Plus, super-early Christian writings (even stuff from Paul) hint at it without quoting Isaiah. It was already a belief.
- Bible prophecies often work on two levels: something happens soon (like in Isaiah's time), but also points to something bigger later (Jesus).That's normal in the Bible. God can layer meanings—He doesn't need perfect one-word matches.The Hebrew word fits a virgin just fine in that culture, so no "mistake" broke the prophecy.
Bottom line, simplified version:The "young woman = virgin" idea was already there in Hebrew culture and in the old Jewish Greek Bible. Christians didn't fake it. The virgin birth isn't built on one shaky word—it's backed by multiple stories and old beliefs. Your argument sounds strong at first, but it falls apart when you look at how the words and culture actually worked back then."
