Matthew’s use of the Old Testament is crucial to understanding Jesus. Matthew consistently claims that Jesus fulfills what was written in the Old Testament. Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7:14 has attracted a great deal of individual attention.
While Isaiah 7:14 serves as a clear, near-term sign for Ahaz, Matthew recognizes the broader vision and pattern that points to Christ.
There are several issues to consider in understanding Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7:14. First, Isaiah chooses to use the Hebrew word almah.
The word is not the most specific term Isaiah could have used to specify the young woman as a virgin, prompting some to argue that Matthew is overreading Isaiah 7:14.
Matthew’s translation of “virgin” reflects his adoption of the Greek translation of the Old Testament, or the Septuagint (LXX), and has required careful interpretation to understand how Matthew’s reading fits with Isaiah 7:14.
In addition to the problems associated with Matthew’s use of the LXX translation, the near context of Isaiah 7-9 is often difficult to interpret. Immanuel is not the only child referenced.
Isaiah’s children, as their names reflect, also serve as signs. Exploring the relationship between the children is important to understanding Isaiah 7:14 in context.
After describing the meaning of Isaiah 7:14 in its original context, we will consider these broader interpretive issues. Ultimately, the goal is to understand both Isaiah 7 and Matthew’s use of it.
The Sign Provided to Ahaz
As the Assyrians sought to expand their empire, a coalition of nations began to form in opposition to the Assyrian threat. Coming from the Northeast, the Assyrians had their eyes on Lebanon.
To capture it, the Assyrians would need to go through Aram (Syria). Fearing the Assyrians, Aram joined forces with Israel (or Ephraim), the northern part of the divided kingdom.
Syria and Israel recognized that they were still outmatched. As such, they sought the aid of Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel. After Ahaz, the king of Judah, refuses to join the alliance, Aram and Ephraim turn on Judah.
These two nations seek to avoid a scenario in which Judah joins forces with Assyria. They do not want to be hemmed in by the Assyrians in the North and Judah in the South. As such, they come together to dethrone Ahaz and install a king who will follow their lead.
Ahaz has been told that Syria and Israel are coming against Judah. Isaiah 7 recounts the message Isaiah gives to Ahaz. The message is intended to encourage him not to fear the alliance because Syria and Ephraim will come to nothing.
The “smoldering coals” will do little to Judah as long as Ahaz continues to trust in the Lord. Aram and Israel may seem like mighty nations, but they are driven by two men, Rezin in Syria (or Damascus) and Pekah in Israel/Ephraim (or Samaria). God will not allow Rezin and Pekah to replace Ahaz with a puppet king.
After giving Ahaz assurance that the alliance between Syria and Israel is no threat to nothing Judah, Isaiah offers Ahaz the opportunity to request a sign from God. Ahaz can ask for anything “as deep as Sheol” or “as high as heaven.”
Ahaz may choose virtually anything for a sign, yet Ahaz refuses to ask for a sign, saying, “I will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test” (Isaiah 7:12).
While Deuteronomy 6:16 warns of the dangers of putting God to the test, it does not seem that Ahaz’s refusal to request a sign is an act of piety.
Instead, it reflects an implicit rejection of God. Ahaz is given an opportunity to believe and be established (Isaiah 7:9). He has no faith in the Lord’s ability to protect him against Aram and Syria.
Though Ahaz refuses to ask for a sign, God provides one for him anyway. A “young woman” will have a child who will be called Immanuel, “God with us.” Isaiah 7:14 uses almah (“young woman” or “virgin” in most translations) with a definite article (“the young woman” or “the virgin”).
The use of the definite article suggests that a particular woman is in mind. Both Isaiah and Ahaz are likely familiar with the woman in question.
Their familiarity with the woman does not negate the force of the sign. Signs could be miraculous (Isaiah 38:7-8), but non-miraculous signs were not uncommon (Isaiah 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; 55:13; 66:19).
While we often jump to a discussion of Immanuel’s identity in the near context (an important, debated question in its own right), we should not miss the sign’s quasi-satirical character. In the face of war, Ahaz is offered the opportunity to ask for any sign.
He could have called down fire from heaven on Syria and Israel or asked God to open up the ground to swallow his enemies. By refusing the sign, however, Ahaz is given a sign with no military application.
He will see a child. The child will not deliver his people from Assyria but will suffer with them even while pointing to the enduring presence of God and holding out hope that the Lord will, in time, redeem Israel and fulfill his covenant promises.
That the child will suffer with the rest of Judah is denoted by the reference to the child’s food. He will eat curds and honey and learn to choose right and reject wrong after the kingdoms of Rezin and Pekah have been destroyed.
The child’s food is significant in so much as it will teach the child wisdom and judgment. The NIV’s translation of “when he knows” in verse 15 is somewhat misleading in this case.
The Hebrew grammar underlying this translation can denote time, but the construction is more often used to denote purpose or result (cf. Genesis 24:21; Exodus 2:4; 31:13; Deuteronomy 4:35; Judges 3:4; 2 Chronicles 32:31; Isaiah 50:4).
A better translation might read as follows: “He will eat curds and honey so that he knows to reject evil and choose right.” After the land is destroyed, the people will find sustenance in curdled milk and wild honey.
It will be a constant reminder of the consequences of sin and train the child in question to reject evil and choose what is good.
The land’s destruction, however, will not come at the hands of Syria and Israel, but Assyria (Isaiah 7:17). Syria and Israel’s alliance will come to nothing. The Assyrian threat is, unfortunately, real.
Context of Isaiah 7:14
The sign of the child gives hope that Jerusalem will not fall to their enemies but will survive the siege.
This is underscored by verses 7:15-16, which proclaim that the boy will grow to the point of discernment and that Judah has been delivered from Syria and Ephraim. Yet, God’s presence amongst his people is not without difficulty.
Ahaz’s lack of faith will not be rewarded with a pure victory. Judah will ultimately fall to Assyria. Ahaz will not be able to claim that his political savvy saved Judah because his actions will result in an Assyrian victory over Judah.
Rather than trusting God by asking for a sign, Ahaz depends on himself. In doing so, he condemns Judah to defeat. Israel will not overcome Judah, but Assyria will.
At times, prophecies pointed beyond the near-term situation to something more distant. Prophecy often reveals a pattern of sorts…like ripples from a stone thrown into water…that reverberate across time.
When read within the context of the completed biblical canon, many prophecies appear to point beyond a near-term event.
It seems plausible, therefore, to affirm that the prophetic author consciously looked both for a relatively immediate referent and for a more longer-term eschatological fulfillment.”
For instance, in Isaiah 8:9 and following, we see the context broaden so that Isaiah can say in Isaiah 8:18, “Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.”
The children in mind are Shearjashub and Maher Shalal Hash Baz. Shearjashub, whose name means “a remnant will return,” was born prior to the Immanuel prophecy.
The return of the remnant is, at the same time, a positive and negative prophecy. God’s people will not be eliminated (positive) even though they will go into exile (negative).
Isaiah’s point is that his sons hold out hope while pointing toward the consequences of disobedience. They function as signs for Israel (though, as will be discussed in the following section, not the sign of Isaiah 7:14).
They point beyond Isaiah’s present context toward a time when the light will break through the darkness. At some future point, a child will also have the government on his shoulders.
A child will offer Israel a new beginning of sorts as they emerge from Assyrian rule. This child will also be called by names, expressing the superiority of God and the actions God takes on behalf of his people.
While traditional translations render four titles (“wonderful counselor,” “Mighty God,” “Everlasting Father,” and “Prince of Peace”), it is also possible to read these in a way similar to Shearjashub and Maher Shalal Hash Baz, thus translating them as titles.
As Old Testament scholar John Goldingay translates, “One who plans a wonder is the warrior God; the father forever is a commander who brings peace.”
In either reading, Isaiah sees a child who will be born to rule and fulfill the ideas expressed in the names given to him. The child, who is referenced again in Isaiah 11, will receive the Spirit of the Lord.
That Spirit is described as having wisdom and understanding, counsel and might, and knowledge and the fear of the Lord (Isa 11:2). This child will usher in a time of redemption and prosperity.
The ‘Young Woman’ of Isaiah 7:14
Translating “young woman” rather than “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14 may seem odd given the New Testament rendering and the doctrine of the virgin birth. However, the Hebrew word almah, translated as “young woman,” does not necessarily denote virginity.
Had Isaiah wanted to emphasize the virginity of the girl in question, he could have used betulah, which is more often used to refer specifically to a virgin (Genesis 24:16; Leviticus 21:3,14; Judges 21:12).
Isaiah was aware of betulah though his use of the word only suggests virginity in more symbolic contexts.
For instance, in Isaiah 37:22, “the virgin daughter of Zion” mocks Assyria. Though “her” purity is being threatened, Zion’s virgin daughter is unconcerned with the Assyrian threat.
While Isaiah 37:22 uses betulah to refer to a virgin specifically, Isaiah’s other uses of betulah are less clear (Isaiah 23:12; 47:1; 62:5). In the end, betulah would have been the more likely word to use if Isaiah wished to emphasize rather than allow for virginity.
By contrast, almah tends to refer to age rather than one’s sexual status. For instance, the almah in Genesis 24:43 is a virgin, whereas the almah in Isaiah 54:5, which refers to a barren woman, likely refers to a young woman who has been able to bear children despite having had sex.
As such, it seems best to translate almah as “young woman;” however, the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, translates almah with parthenos. This latter term (parthenos) tends to emphasize one’s status as a virgin primarily and one’s age secondarily.
The translation of almah is related to a second interpretive matter: was the young woman already pregnant or will she soon become so? Obviously, if almah is understood to mean “virgin,” this second interpretive matter is easily resolved.
Several translations (e.g., ESV, NIV, NASB, and KJV) translate almah as “virgin” (though most include a note that the word could also be rendered “young woman”) and assume that the young woman is not currently pregnant but will become so in the near future.
While this translation is certainly valid, the Hebrew word translated “will conceive” more often refers to someone already pregnant (Genesis 16:11; 38:24-25; Exodus 21:22; 1 Samuel 4:19; 2 Samuel 11:5; 2 Kings 8:12; Isaiah 26:17), rather than to someone who will soon become pregnant (Judges 13:5-7).
In this prophetic context, it is certainly possible that the young woman in view has yet to become pregnant. In this reading, as in Judges 13:5-7, the prophetic context would suggest that conception is forthcoming.
Identifying the woman and child is notoriously difficult. Some suggest that Immanuel should be identified with the child in Isaiah 8:3. Others suggest that Hezekiah is the near reference for Immanuel.
Both suggestions have their problems. In the case of the child in 8:3, it is difficult to believe that Isaiah’s wife, the prophetess, would have been considered a young woman of marriable age (an almah) given that she and Isaiah already had a child.
While dating is a challenge, it seems likely that Hezekiah would have been born well ahead of the prophecy (possibly 12 years earlier).
In the end, it seems best to assume that the sign given to Ahaz would have been intelligible and tangible to him, referred to a child whose birth was imminent if not yet to come, and pointed to the foolishness of Ahaz’s refusal to request a sign.
Ultimately, the child of Isaiah 7:14 is identified as Jesus.
Isaiah 7:14 in Matthew 1:23
Certain aspects of the analysis of Isaiah 7:14 may seem to preclude Matthew’s application of Isaiah 7:14 to Jesus; however, it is important to remember that Old Testament prophecies were not only intended to point to Christ (though they do).
Often, Old Testament prophecies refer to a near-term consequence arising from the behavior of the nation of Israel and/or its leaders.
As we return to Matthew 1:23, we should recognize that the context in which Isaiah 7:14 occurs in the Old Testament has a clear historical setting, and Isaiah gestures beyond that historical setting.
Matthew’s citation of Isaiah 7:14 needs to be understood in the broader context of Isaiah, particularly Isaiah 7-9.
Matthew removes whatever ambiguity may have been in the Hebrew almah by utilizing the Septuagint’s translation (parthenos). As noted above, this word refers specifically to a virgin. “Virgin” (parthenos) is an appropriate description of Mary.
Matthew’s gospel makes this clear, and Luke’s gospel reinforces Mary’s status as a virgin (Luke 1:26-38). As God acts through Mary to bring his Son into the world, Matthew rightly recognizes that Jesus fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah: child ruler will usher in God’s deliverance and judgment.
As we consider Jesus’ birth in Matthew, we should view it as the fulfillment of the hopes of Israel contained in the Old Testament. Jesus is not simply born of a virgin. That aspect of Isaiah’s prophecy is just the tip of the iceberg.
The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is the child who was to come. He has become human among us to fulfill all God’s promises and to bring the salvation that was to come through the nation of Israel.
What Does This Mean
When Matthew uses Isaiah 7:14, he is not ripping it out of context or applying a foreign meaning.
Instead, having come to know and understand who Jesus was and is, Matthew recognizes Jesus in the prophecy about the young woman who will conceive and bear a child.
Jesus is that child even though there was a previous child born as a sign to Ahaz. Isaiah’s prophecy looked beyond the time of Ahaz to a day when others would not accept a sign from the Lord. His prophetic word establishes a pattern through which we may come to understand Jesus.
For further reading:
Why Did God Choose Mary as the Mother of Jesus?
Immaculate Conception and the Virgin Birth: Biblical Meaning
4 Biblical Prophecies Fulfilled on the Night Jesus Was Born
Photo Credit: ©Getty Images/rudall30
