Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Isaiah 7:14 a messianic prophecy? Why are some scholars skeptical?
Christian Post ^ | 12/16/2018 | By Brian G. Chilton

Posted on 12/16/2018 9:27:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind

More and more scholars are becoming skeptical of Messianic prophecy in the Hebrew Bible—that is, the Old Testament. Michael Rydelnik notes that “Although evangelical scholarship still recognizes that there is something messianic about the Hebrew Bible, for the most part it sees it as a story that finds its climax in Jesus, not as predictions that Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled” (Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, 3-4). Yet, such skepticism is not justified. Sure, some passages in the Hebrew Bible have been stretched beyond its scope, something that can become a dangerous trend. Nevertheless, certain passages in the Hebrew Bible enjoy a status of being both Messianic in context and in its history.

One such Messianic prophecy is found in Isaiah 7:14. Four schools of thought have developed on how one should interpret Isaiah 7:14. Some hold to direct fulfillment indicating that the text only speaks to the fulfillment found in Messiah. Others hold to a historical fulfillment which claims that the text only addresses a birth of a child in Isaiah’s day. A third view holds to a double fulfillment in that the prophecy was fulfilled to a degree in Isaiah’s day and later in the Messiah. A fourth view is espoused by Arnold Fruchtenbaum. He calls it double reference (Fruchtenbaum, Yeshua, 364). A double reference “states that the one piece of Scripture actually contains two prophecies, each having its own fulfillment” (Fruchtenbaum, Yeshua, 364). After researching the passage, I must agree that in Isaiah 7:14 one finds a double reference. Although Isaiah 7:14 is among the most controversial of Messianic prophecies (Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope, 147), several good reasons exist to accept the prophecy as Messianic in scope.

1. King Ahaz and House of David. To understand the passage, one must understand the chapter in which Isaiah 7:14 is found. Isaiah comes to King Ahaz while Ahaz and King Rezin of Aram and King Pekah of Israel were reigning. Yahweh (the personal name for God) tells Isaiah to bring his son Shear-jashub with him to meet Ahaz (Is. 7:3). Yahweh speaks to Isaiah again telling him to ask Ahaz for a sign (7:10-11) but Ahaz refuses (7:12). After Ahaz refuses, Isaiah turns his attention to the house of David (7:13) asking if they would try the patience of Yahweh. It is then that Isaiah delivers the Immanuel prophecy. From keeping the text in context, Yahweh through Isaiah is addressing two distinct groups of people. On the one hand, he is addressing King Ahaz. On the other hand, he is addressing the house of David. The Immanuel prophecy is given to the house of David and not to King Ahaz. King Ahaz’s sign was found in Isaiah’s son Shear-jashub who already reached the age of accountability and chose to do what was right. Ahaz was much older and still chose to do what was evil. Thus, Ahaz’s kingdom was coming to an end.

2. Singular and Plural Language. A close examination of the Hebrew text shows a difference in the language used directed toward Ahaz as opposed to the house of David. When Isaiah is addressing Ahaz, he uses singular language and uses plural language when speaking to the house of David. As Fruchtenbaum noted earlier, the text appears to be giving two differing prophecies—one to Ahaz and one to the house of David. Since the Immanuel prophecy is directed to the house of David, it is not necessary to hold that the prophecy only addresses Ahaz and even his time.

3. Present and Future Language. In the Immanuel prophecy, Isaiah uses the Hebrew imperfect verb yitten, which means “he will give,” to describe the timing of the prophecy. The imperfect verb in Hebrew describes something that is incomplete and will transpire at some point in the future. Thus, the sign for the house of David was a sign given by God to transpire at some point in the future. When? The text does not say. Therefore, it is completely appropriate to think that the text could find its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus the Messiah.

4. ‘Almah and Parthenos. The Revised Standard Version translation made a great deal of waves in the Christian community when it translated ‘almah as “young woman” instead of the classical translation of “virgin.” Does the term refer to a young woman or a virgin? The answer is both. ‘Almah is almost always used in the Hebrew Bible to denote a young woman who has just reached the age of marriage who had not yet wed. ‘Almah is used in the following passages in the Hebrew Bible: 1) Gen. 24:43 used of Rebekah; 2) Ex. 2:8 used of Miriam, Moses’s sister; 3) Ps. 68:25 used in the divine royal procession, the virgins symbolize purity; 4) So. 1:3 refers to the purity in marriage; 5) So. 6:8 contrasts the purity of virginity with the impurity of concubines; 6) Pr. 30:18-19 also contrasts virginity with adultery; and 7) in Is. 7:14 (Fruchtenbaum, Yeshua, 364-365). In Jewish culture, a young woman who just reached the age of marriage most certainly implied the woman’s virginal status. The translators of the Septuagint (LXX) understood this to be the case. The LXX translates ‘almah in Isaiah 7:14 with the Greek term parthenos which most certainly means “virgin.”

5. Current and Future Understanding. Isaiah connects the birth of the child from Isaiah 7:14 to the prophecies given in 9:6-7 and in 11:1-10. Thus, the prophet took the view at the time the prophecy was given that this promised child would come at some point in the future. This child would be linked intrinsically with God in some fashion. But not only did Isaiah understand the prophecy in this way, others did also. Micah is one such example. Micah, a contemporary of Isaiah’s, linked his prophecy in some sense with that of Isaiah 7:14. Micah notes that “Bethlehem Ephrathah, you are small among the clans of Judah; one will come from you to be ruler over Israel for me. His origin is from antiquity, from ancient times” (Mi. 5:2). As already noted, the translators of the LXX understood Isaiah 7:14 to refer to a virgin in the 100s BC. Therefore, Isaiah 7:14 was recognized to be Messianic, or at least more prophetic than some modern scholars, as well as by early Christians, such as Matthew 1:23.

Isaiah 7:14 is a glorious passage that prophesies the birth of a royal, divine king that was to be born in the most miraculous of fashions. In our attempt to properly interpret the Bible, let us not be drawn to a hyper-skepticism that very well could combat the very thinking of the writers of the New Testament. They held the text to be Messianic not because they made it that way, but because that was the prophetic intention of the text.

Sources

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. Yeshua: The Life of Messiah from a Messianic Jewish Perspective. Volume One. San Antonio, TX: Ariel, 2017.

Rydelnik, Michael. The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? NAC Studies in Bible & Theology. Edited by E. Ray Clendenen. Nashville: B&H Academic, 2010.

Brian G. Chilton is the founder of BellatorChristi.com and is the host of The Bellator Christi Podcast. He received his Master of Divinity in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his Bachelor of Science in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); and received certification in Christian Apologetics from Biola University. Brian is enrolled in the Ph.D. program in Theology and Apologetics at Liberty University. Brian has been in the ministry for over 15 years and serves as a pastor in northwestern North Carolina.


TOPICS: History; Religion & Culture; Skeptics/Seekers; Theology
KEYWORDS: isaiah; messiah; prophecy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

1 posted on 12/16/2018 9:27:46 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Moses...put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But their minds were blinded: for until this day remains the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it [Isreal] shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
2 Cor 3:13-16

Coming soon...

2 posted on 12/16/2018 9:36:48 AM PST by Jim W N (MAGA by restoring the Gospel of the Grace of Christ and our Free Constitutional Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a Son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (Matthew 1:23).

Settles it for the Christian.


3 posted on 12/16/2018 9:39:30 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I Corinthians 1: 19-21. That tells me all I need to know about theologians.


4 posted on 12/16/2018 9:43:55 AM PST by mywholebodyisaweapon (Thank God for President Trump.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: mywholebodyisaweapon

Amen


6 posted on 12/16/2018 9:55:36 AM PST by reasonisfaith (What are the implications if the Resurrection of Christ is a true event in history?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"Almah" does indeed mean, literally, "young woman". But at that time, an unmarried young woman would certainly be a virgin. The LXX translation as "Parthenos" is therefore correct, because at that time, an unmarried young woman was free to have sex without legal penalty or (usually) public opprobrium.

The word occurs just seven times in the OT. In six cases the implication that the person was a virgin was never questioned, and indeed is not questioned today. What is wrong with #7? Answer: after it was interpreted as prophesying Jesus, the exegetes changed the interpretation retroactively.

They changed much else, but that is perhaps for another day.

7 posted on 12/16/2018 10:01:17 AM PST by John Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Locke

There is no miraculous prophetic significance in a “young woman” bearing a son named Emmanuel. The word “almah” does mean “maiden”, hence “virgin”. The word that would denote an unmarried young woman who was not a virgin would be “zanah”.

The other Hebrew word “bathulah” has the literal meaning of “virgin daughter”.


8 posted on 12/16/2018 10:06:23 AM PST by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
And Greek parthenos definitely means “virgin”. Not to mention, the Greek translation of Isaiah long preceded the Gospel of Matthew; is there going to be any argument that they mistranslated Hebrew almah, and on what basis?
9 posted on 12/16/2018 10:12:35 AM PST by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Is Isaiah 7:14 a messianic prophecy? Why are some scholars skeptical?

If we read into Isaiah further:

Isaiah 9

6
For to us a child is born,[Birth]
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.[Millennial Reign]
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7
Of the greatness of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.

Leaves no doubt, Isaiah 7, is a prophecy of coming events as well!

10 posted on 12/16/2018 10:19:10 AM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

What’s the point in mentioning the mother and the conception if there wasn’t something extraordinary about it? History books talk about Abraham Lincoln being born in 1809. No mention of his mother conceiving and giving birth to him, because that goes without saying. Focusing on a historical hero’s conception by definition implies it was out of the ordinary


11 posted on 12/16/2018 10:19:38 AM PST by rintintin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: mywholebodyisaweapon
20Where is the philosopher of this age?

Paul was speaking of his time, though certainly, the same can be said of today.

12 posted on 12/16/2018 10:30:21 AM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
J*sus and the "new testament" fulfill the prophecies of the Hebrew Bible only if you already believe in J*sus and the "new testament." Unless you accept from the outset the "new testament's" authority to interpret the Hebrew Bible, you've got nothing.

Why can't anyone see that?

13 posted on 12/16/2018 10:33:34 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Honestly, as the answer to a question about whether they shall make their God weary, it almost sounds sarcastic. As if “yeah, as soon as a virgin conceives...”


14 posted on 12/16/2018 10:41:30 AM PST by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. Hebrews 1:1-3

Someone's resistance to God's Word is not something about which we need to be upset. So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it. Isaiah 55:11

That's nothing about which to upset about. Hopefully such a person who came to faith by hearing God's Word and will soon recognize the essential truth contained within that Word and find that same faith throughout His Word (Ephesians 2:8-9 and Romans 10:17)

Though Matthew's quoting Isaiah 7:14 and 9:6 in Mt. 1:23, no doubt should remain. So, why does it (1 Cor 1:18-21)?

But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation. 2 Peter 1:20

Thus nothing that persons says, believes or interprets changes what God has caused and inspired to be written.

The Isaiah 7:14 literary device claims truth, as does the rest of Scripture. As logic is a construct of man which came only many centuries after the Bible was written, nothing in the bible should be considered man's attempt at proving something.

If God considered proof His ultimate goal through the bible, we could all simply believe in God because His existence would have been proved there, in black and white (and maybe some red if your bible puts Christ's words in red). God does want His words to be read (or at least heard).

No, God knows that true faith is not simply the result of a proof, akin to simply proving to us that he exists, as any properly programmed computer could do in mindless, heartless response. We have a divine trait of free will and can choose to follow at his call, or not. He desires that we have a saving faith and graciously has given us that gift.

As with Paul speaking in Rome, Some were being persuaded by the things spoken, but others would not believe. Acts 28:24

Its often difficult for those attuned to logic to appreciate the way God's people in millennia past Word understood his Word to embody truth again and again.

There have many times been fore-shadowings of things that were to come, often as seen as a contrast between Old Testament, where there were things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ, as in the New Testament. Col. 2:17

In the Old Testament, God's presence was seen in the tabernacle and in the Jews' temples on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, but the woman at the well, when she asked Jesus where the proper place was to worship, Mt. Gerazim, where the Samaritans worshiped, or in Jerusalem. Jesus doesn't reflexively say "at the temple in Jerusalem, of course," but adds the dimension of "in spirit and in truth. Add to that the further revelation in Acts 17:25 that "the Lord of heaven and earth does not dwell in temples made with hands." That probably came as purely heretical to some in his audience, just as some modern day skeptics don't wish to hear of a virgin giving birth in the time of Isaiah having the least little thing to do with Mary, Jesus' mother.

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. Romans 5:14

Hebrews compares Jesus to Melchizedek, saying, "Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually.

God's truth resonates throughout Scripture. Resonates...
a lesson for another day!

15 posted on 12/16/2018 10:52:43 AM PST by rx (Truth Will Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
We can see the reprobate mind of Romans 1:28-32:

28And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,

29being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,

31without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;

32and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.
16 posted on 12/16/2018 11:57:05 AM PST by righttackle44 (It is a good day to diet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Thank you for your response. I sense that we are in broad agreement.

Pax tecum.

17 posted on 12/16/2018 12:17:48 PM PST by John Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Jesus said (to the unbelieving Jews) “You search the scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, BUT THEY ARE THEY WHICH TESTIFY OF ME”.

Jesus is all over the Hebrew scriptures.


18 posted on 12/16/2018 12:19:32 PM PST by beethovenfan (Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Exactly.

Scripture tells us it was the fulfillment of prophecy.

The only reason to challenge or doubt it is to question the deity of Christ.

Do that and the whole plan of salvation falls.

Satan would love nothing better.


19 posted on 12/16/2018 3:02:48 PM PST by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Yellow vest

Welcome to FR.

Your post makes no sense.


20 posted on 12/16/2018 3:05:09 PM PST by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson