Isaiah provides includes great specificity of sixty-five years for when “Ephraim will be shattered from being a people” (7:8).43
Given the fear of the king and the people portrayed in verse 2, combined with the possible dismay of Ahaz that he would not live to see the fulfillment of verse 8, the words of Isaiah must have sounded absurd. So, the Lord offers to prove Himself by commanding44 the king to request of the Lord a sign as “deep as Sheol or high as heaven”
(7:10). The king refuses, providing weak attempt at offering a spiritual excuse (7:12). To which the Lord responds that He Himself “will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”45 This brings us to the Matthew passage. Or does it? The macro lenses of the guardrails of biblical interpretation assist before heading to Matthew.
larger story. That larger story ripples like the concentric circles of a pebble tossed into a pond. The immediate concentric circle of Isaiah 7:14 contributes to interpreting this passage. Hamilton cautions the leap to Messiah directly from verse 14 but also acknowledges, “Affirming that when read in the broad context of Isaiah’s messianic expectation the text does contribute to Isaianic Messianism.”46
The topic of a virgin conceiving then seems to take on the primary focus of verse 14. Certainly, this topic would be important to the birth of Christ and will be further addressed in the analysis of the Matthew passage. However, considering the expectations for the house of David mentioned along with the present context, the name Immanuel would have interested the original audience. Young well summarizes the significance:
“The name Immanuel asserts that God will be present with the Jews, that they will experience success, deliverance, freedom from danger and anxiety.”47
The details of the verses that follow appear to point to a fulfillment that will be verifiable to Isaiah and Ahaz soon. The fulfillment of the Lord’s promise to thwart the invading league will take place before the child prophesied in verse 14 knows how to
“refuse the evil and choose the good” (7:15-16).48 The opening verses of chapter 8 nearly repeat the details of verses 15 and 16: “Before the boy knows how to cry ‘My father’ or
‘My mother,’ the wealth of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria will be carried away before the king of Assyria” (8:4).49 The debate concerning the identity of Immanuel—especially
46 Hamilton, “The Virgin Will Conceive,” 230.
47 Young, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–18, 290.
48 Again, space and scope limit the level of investigation into the details of this passage. There are different opinions by scholars as to whether the context of this prophecy is judgment or blessing. A hybrid of judgment and blessing is proposed by Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 86-87. Watts argues almost convincingly for it being judgment Watts, Immanuel, 93ff. However, Hamilton’s position of the prophecy demonstrating the Lord’s deliverance of Judah convinces in light of context and biblical theology Hamilton,
“The Virgin Will Conceive,” 234ff. Surely, there is a note of judgment in vv 17-25, but this seems to be more the result of Ahaz’s refusal to respond in faith (7:9) by going to Assyria for salvation (7:17).
49 Scholars are divided as to whether the similar vocabulary implies that Immanuel from 7:14 is also Maher-shalal-hash-baz of 8:1. Derek Kidner proposes, “The sign of Immanuel (7:14–17), although it concerned ultimate events, did imply a pledge for the immediate future, in that however soon Immanuel were
with similar phrases included with the prophecy of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, the repetition of Immanuel as possessor of the land (8:8), and the final phrase of the prophecy (8:10)—
is impossible to definitively conclude. However, the biblical theology aspect assists. The repetition of key phrases, individuals, and concepts appears to tip the scales toward Maher-shalal-hash-baz being the child who will affirm to the people that their God with them (Immanuel). Referencing Isaiah 8:4-10, Hamilton observes, “This statement appears to elaborate upon 7:16, and if that is the case, it is tempting to identify Maher-shalal- hash-baz (8:1, 3) with Immanuel (7:14; 8:8, 10).”50
Concluding the biblical theology analysis with the occurrence of Immanuel in 8:10 misses an important “postscript.” The section that follows corroborates with the trajectory of Ahaz to reject a path of faith and instead pursue horizontal solutions (7:12-13).
He pursues the solution of alliance with Assyria, which proves to be a snare and stone of offense on which they would stumble (8:14-15). The birth of Immanuel would reveal to the present company that God’s Word, like His character, would prove faithful. Tragically, this would be too late for Ahaz. Isaiah then calls his disciples to himself and instructs them instead to learn from the failure of Ahaz and choose to patiently wait as they seek the Lord through His Word (8:16-22).
The history of ethnic Israel offers patterns that are consistent with this Isaiah passage. Jeremiah describes Israel in the early days of the first exodus as a bride,
emphasizing her obedience and devotion: “I remember the devotion of your youth, your
born, the present threat would have passed before he could be even aware of it. But the time of his birth was undisclosed; hence the new sign is given, to deal only with the contemporary scene and with its darker aspect.” F. Derek Kidner, “Isaiah,” in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, ed. D. A. Carson et al., 4th ed. (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity, 1994), 639, Logos Bible Software. Hamilton acknowledges the identity is “disputed” Hamilton, “The Virgin Will Conceive,” 236. Four primary positions appear to be the most popular: (1) Immanuel is one of three sons of Isaiah, each having a name that reveals an aspect of the future plans of the Lord for His people; (2) Immanuel is intentionally mysterious to set His birth in the long distance future, which would mean Immanuel in the Isa 7 context is intended to specifically predict the birth of Jesus; (3) Immanuel is the child of king Ahaz; and (4) Maher-shalal-hash-baz and Immanuel are the same child.
50 Hamilton, “The Virgin Will Conceive,” 236.
love as a bride, how you followed me in the wilderness, in a land not sown” (2:2). This
“bride” symbolism would vividly illustrate Israel’s unfaithfulness to the Lord in the book of Hosea. Yet, Hosea repeats the patterns provided in Isaiah 7. Despite the unfaithfulness of the bride, neither the redemptive plan nor the faithfulness of the Lord is deterred. The predictive fulfillments of the promised child of 7:14 in 8:3 and the strategies of the league of Syria and Ephraim being thwarted (2 Kgs 16:5, 9) provided yet another example of the patterns of the Lord’s faithfulness despite the unfaithfulness of His people. These scenes of the faithfulness of the Lord and the spiritual failure of His people remind the reader not to put faith in the nation or the leaders of the nation to reverse the pattern and demonstrate they can live up to the Lord’s standards on their own. They also encourage the reader to long for another who will fulfill where Israel failed.
I have proposed that the child predicted in Isaiah 7:14 is not Jesus. Instead, it is the child of Isaiah, also called Maher-shalal-hash-baz. H. M. G. Williamson observes, “In the immediate context the prediction of his birth is securely tied to the prevailing historical circumstances of the reign of Ahaz, so that a long-range messianic prediction is ruled out, at least at the primary level.”51 While debated, it appears that such a conclusion holds up under the historical, grammatical, and biblical theology aspects along with the concept presented above of full bloom aspect being the end of the mystery novel or the second narrative. The conclusions drawn here appear to remain faithful to the context of the Isaiah passage. However, does this miss the full bloom aspect that Matthew intends to provide?
Does Matthew disagree with this conclusion? This sets up the full bloom aspect that Matthew’s first fulfillment passage will provide. However, before examining the full bloom aspect, the Matthew passage must be viewed through the micro and macro lenses of the interpretive guardrails.
51 H. G. M. Williamson, “The Messianic Texts in Isaiah 1-39,” in King and Messiah in Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. John Day (New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark, 2013), 254, emphasis added. The article by Hamilton introduced this quote and surrounding context. Hamilton, “The Virgin Will Conceive,” 239.
Applying the Guardrails to Matthew 1:18-25
The first fulfillment quotation in Matthew tempts the reader to immediately home in on the word “virgin.” Because the virgin birth is an important aspect to the birth of Christ, this is understandable. However, the traditional understanding of this passage should be laid aside to first understand the passage in its own terms and context. The emphasis in the previous section is on the way the details of the prophecy of Isaiah demonstrate patterns consistent with the rest of the Old Testament. This concept guides the topic of predictive or typological fulfillment when preparing to interpret Matthew 1:23 and will surface throughout the following analysis.