Read Matthew 1:20-23; Isaiah 7:10-17, Born of a Virgin

It is Matthew’s commentary, so to speak, that relates the prophecy of Isa. 7:14 (Mt. 1:22-23) to the words the angel spoke to Joseph concerning Mary (1:10-21).  Was Matthew justified to make this connection? 

·        It is important to understand that Isa. 7-12 is a cohesive unity, referred to as “The Immanuel Prophecy.”  A quick perusal of these chapters shows that the prophet deals with both the immediate situation (the Assyrian menace, 7:1-9; 10:5-19) as well as the glorious Kingdom of the Messiah (e.g. 9:6-7; 11:6-9; 12:1-6).  There is more than one reference to “Immanuel.”  In Isa. 8:8 Isaiah says the land will belong to Immanuel.  Isa. 8:10 indicates that the meaning of the name Immanuel (God with us) is part of the message.  Further there are other references to this Child (especially 9:6-7 and 11:1, the Rod from the stem of Jesse).  Matthew actually draws four fulfilled passages from the Immanuel Prophecy: Mt. 1:23 and Isa. 7:14; Mt. 2:23 and Isa. 11:1; Mt. 4:13-16 and Isa. 9:1-2; Mt. 13:10-17 and Isa. 6:9-10.

·        Isa. 7-12 is not a hopeless, confusing section of Scripture if one merely pays attention to the wording.  One illustration of this is Isa. 7:10, “Moreover.”  Isa. 7:1-9 involved Isaiah and his own son, Shear-Jashub.  That young man was a sign to King Ahaz in that his name meant, “A Remnant Shall Return.”  Verse 10 indicates that while Isaiah continues to speak with the King, there is movement in the conversation.  He tells Ahaz to ask for a sign, no matter how hard it might be (v11).  Ahaz refuses (v12).  So Isaiah says that God Himself will give a sign.  The context indicates that this sign is going to be something extraordinary, something in the depth or in the height above, something that God will do.  The amazing event has to do with a virgin having a son.  It cannot be a reference to Isaiah’s wife because she has already given birth to a son.  King Ahaz also had a son by this time, Hezekiah, as the historical record indicates (2 Ki. 16:1-2; 18:1-2).  So who was this woman who would be with Child?

·        Jewish scholars today claim that the Hebrew word used by Isaiah refers simply to a “young woman” (Heb. almah).  They further claim that if Isaiah means to refer to a virgin he would have used a different term (Heb. bethulah), which is a term that always refers to a sexually pure woman.  However, in the Bible, almah never refers to a married woman and is always used of a young woman whom, in that society would usually have been a virgin.  In addition, the Jewish scholars of Alexandria who translated the Jewish scriptures into Greek translated almah as a “virgin.”  There is additional evidence of the use of almah as referring to a “virgin” in the time of Isaiah (for a good explanation see the online article entitled Messianic Prophecy in the bibliography). 

We have sought to explain the meaning of the term in Isa. 7:14 as being properly translated by Matthew in 1:23.  Further, we have described the context (Isa. 7-14) as being a perfect place to expect Messianic prophecy.  As we have said, we will come back to the Immanuel Prophecy three more times in these studies in Matthew.  We should not be surprised at the thought of the Messiah being a “Child.”  The first Messianic prophecy (Gen. 3:15) promised the seed of the woman, Eve.  It appears that Eve was looking for a child and wondered if Cain (Gen. 4:1) or Seth (Gen. 4:25) might be the promise of a Child who would remedy the issue of sin and guilt.