Cyber-Chapel Blog

This week’s message explores the Immanuel prophecy. It argues that

• the meaning “virgin” for עלמה is legitimate, and it is not true that  בתולה would be a more appropriate word to convey this sense;
• the emphasis on the virgin birth of one who would be “God with us” would be profoundly meaningful to Ahaz in the context, and is probably intentional on the part of Isaiah;
• thus Matthew’s quotation of Isa 7:14 is not a loose adaptation of a non-messianic prophecy, but entirely in keeping with how the verse functions in its context.

Interested readers should listen to the mp3 file (and that of last week’s study, which prepares for it). In a few weeks, detailed study notes will be available as well. Meanwhile, here’s the basic flow of the argument.

1. The entire chapter emphasizes the theme of dynastic succession. Notice the reference to Ahaz (singular) as “the house of David” in v. 2; the repeated reference to Pekah as “Remaliah’s son,” emphasizing his role as a usurper; the historical context in which Ahaz’s son Maaseiah has been killed by the Ephraimites (2 Chr 28:7); the declared intent of the Syrians and Israel to dethrone Ahaz and install Tabeal in his place (Isa 7:6), and the last clause of 7:9, “thou shalt not be established,” echoing the promise to David in 2 Sam 7:16.
2. It is commonplace to assert that if Isaiah had meant to refer to a virgin, he would have used בתולה rather than עלמה. Recent study shows that this assumption is no longer valid. The argument has been presented most forcefully by Wenham in VT22. BibleWorks users can find it conveniently summarized in the TWOT article by Bruce Waltke on בתולה. Meanwhile, עלמה is never used to refer to a married woman. It really was Isaiah’s best choice if he meant to describe a virgin birth.
3. Though God originally offers Ahaz an encouraging sign, the rebuke in 7:13 suggests that the Immanuel sign should be understood as one of condemnation.
4. A  king seeks instinctively to preserve his family’s tenure, particularly a king in the davidic line who inherits the promises of 2 Sam 7.  The dynastic emphasis in the context shows that Ahaz is very much at risk of being the last of his line, and this concern must be weighing heavily on his mind. The Immanuel prophecy confirms his worst fears. “Ahaz,” God is saying, “you treasure your role as the davidic king, and the expectation that the future kings through whom God fulfills the promise of 2 Sam 7:14 will be your descendants. In fact, when Immanuel does come, he will not be your son, or the son of any man. Your line, which you seek so strenuously to preserve, will end, and the ultimate king will be born to a virgin.”