Jesus was immanuel

JESUS WAS IMMANUEL
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Isaiah7:14 14Thereforethe LORD himself will give
you a sign: The virgin will conceiveand give birth to a
son, and will call him Immanuel.
New Living TranslationAll right then, the Lord
himself will give you the sign. Look! The virgin will
conceivea child! She will give birth to a son and will
call him Immanuel (which means ‘God is with us’).
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Pulpit Commentary Homiletics
The PresenceOfGod
Isaiah7:14
W. Clarkson
We naturally ask the question - In what ways is God ours? "Immanuel;" in
what respectis he one of whom we can saythat he is "Godwith us;" how and
where is his presence to be found and to be felt? There are many answers to
this question; there is -

I. THE ANSWER OF SACRED POETRY. Thatthe presence of God is seenin
the results of his Divine handiwork, in the foundations and pillars of the earth,
in the "meanestflowerthat blows," in the varied forms of life; that it only
needs a true imagination to see him in all the objects and scenes ofhis creative
power; that "everybush's afire with God, but only he who sees takesoffhis
shoes."
II. THE ANSWER OF PHILOSOPHY. That his presence is in all-
surrounding nature, in which he is immanent; that though all nature does not
include Deity, the Divine poweris present in all things, sustaining, energizing,
renewing; the "laws of nature" are the regular activities of God.
III. THE ANSWER OF NATURAL RELIGION. Thathe is with us in his
omnipresent and observant Spirit; that he fills immensity with his presence,
being everywhere and observing everything, and taking notice of every human
soul; that the Infinite One is he who cannotbe absent from any sphere or be
ignorant of any action.
IV. THE ANSWER, OF THE EARLIER REVELATION. That his presence is
in his overruling providence; that God is with us, not only "besetting us
behind and before," not only "understanding our thought afar off," but also
"laying his hand upon us," directing our course, ordering our steps (Psalm
37:23), making plain our path before our face, causing all things to work
togetherfor our good, defending us in danger, delivering us from trouble,
establishing us in life and strength and joy (see Genesis 39:2;1 Samuel 3:19; 1
Samuel 18:12;2 Kings 18:7; Matthew 28:20).
V. THE ANSWER OF THE LATER REVELATION. That his presence was
in his Divine Son. The time came when the words of the text proved to have
indeed "a springing and germinant fulfillment;" for a virgin did conceive, and
bring forth a Son, and he was the "Immanuel" of the human race, God with
us - that One who dwelt amongstus, and could say, "He that hath seenme
hath seenthe Father." They who walkedwith him and watchedhis life, and
who understood and appreciatedhim, recognizedthe spirit, the character, the
life, of God himself. In his mind were the thoughts, in his words the truth, in
his deeds the principles, in his death the love, in his mission the purpose, of

God. When "Jesus was here among men," God was with us as never before, as
never since.
VI. THE ANSWER OF OUR OWN CONSCIOUSNESS.Thathis presence is
in and through his Holy Spirit. God is with us because in us; present,
therefore, in the deepest, truest, most potent, and influential of all ways and
forms; in us, enlightening our minds, subduing our wills, enlarging our hearts,
uplifting our souls, strengthening and sanctifying our spiritual nature. Then,
indeed, is he nearestto us when he comes unto us and makes his abode with
us, and thus "dwells in us and we in him." Our duty, which is our privilege, is
(1) to realize, increasingly, the nearness of the living God;
(2) to rejoice, practically, in the coming of God to man in the presence ofthe
virgin-born Immanuel;
(3) to gain, by believing prayer, the presence ofthe Divine Spirit in the
sanctuary of our own soul. - C.
Biblical Illustrator

Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign.
Isaiah7:14
God's sign to King Ahaz
D. M. Sweets.
Perhaps more perplexity has been produced among commentators by this
passagethan by any other in Old Testamentprophecy. The chief difficulties of
the passage maybe statedas follows:Does the prophecy refer to some event
which was soonto occur, or does it refer exclusivelyto some event in the
distant future? If it refers to some event which was soonto occur, what event
was it? Who was the child intended, and who the virgin who should bring
forth the child?
1. The first step toward the unravelling of the prophet's meaning is to
determine the exactsignificance of the words. What, then, is the meaning of
the word ‫,תוא‬ which is translated"sign"? Delitzschdefines the word as "a
thing, event, or act which may serve to guarantee the Divine certainty of some
other thing, event, or act." It does not of necessitydenote a miracle. For
example, in Genesis 17:11, circumcisionis said to be a "sign," ortoken. The
context, togetherwith the nature of the thing, event, or act, must decide
whether the ‫תוא‬ is a miracle or not. All that is necessaryto constitute a "sign"
to Ahaz is that some assurance shallbe given which Jehovahalone can give.
And the certain prediction of future events is the prerogative of Jehovah
alone.
2. We turn now to the word ‫ע‬ ַ‫ל‬ְ‫,הָמ‬ translated"virgin" and shall try to find its
exactmeaning. The derivation of it from ‫ע‬ָ‫,הַמ‬ to hide, to conceal, is now
generallyabandoned. Its most probable derivation is from ‫ע‬ָ‫,הַמ‬ to grow, to be
strong, and hence the word means one who has come to a mature or
marriageable age. Hengstenberg contends that it means one in an unmarried
state;Gesenius holds that it means simply being of marriageable age, the age
of puberty. Howeverthis may be, it seems mostnatural to take the word in
this place as meaning one who was then unmarried and who could be calleda
virgin. But we must guard againstthe exegeticalerrorof supposing that the

word here used implies that the person spokenof must be a virgin at the time
when the child is born. All that is said is that she who is now a virgin shall
bear a son.
3. Let us now proceedto considerthe interpretation of the prophecy itself.
The opinions which have generally prevailed with regard to it are three —(1)
That it has no reference to any Messianic fulfilment, but refers exclusively to
some event in the time of the prophet.(2) That it has exclusive and immediate
reference to the Messiah, thus excluding any reference to any event which was
then to occur. On this view, the future birth of the Messiahfrom a virgin is
made the sign to Ahaz that Jerusalemshall he safe from a threatened
invasion(3) That the prophet is speaking ofthe birth of a child which would
soontake place of someone who was then a virgin; but that the prophecy has
also a higher fulfilment in Christ. This last view we regards the only tenable
one, and the proof of it will be the refutation of the other two. The following
reasons are presentedto show that the prophecy refers to some event which
was soonto occur.
1. The context demands it. If there was no allusion in the New Testamentto
the prophecy, and we should contemplate the narrative here in its
surrounding circumstances, we should naturally feel that the prophet must
mean this. If the seventh and eighth chapters, connectedas they are, were all
that we had, we should be compelled to admit a reference to something in the
prophet's time. The recordin Isaiah8:1-4, following in such close connection,
seems to be intended as a public assurance ofthe fulfilment of what is here
predicted respecting the deliverance of the land from the threatened invasion.
The prediction was that she who is a virgin shall bear a son. Now Jehovah
alone can foreknow this, and He pronounces the birth of this child as the sign
which shall be given.
2. The thing to be given to Ahaz was a signor tokenthat a present danger
would be averted. How could the fact that the Messiahwould come seven
hundred years later prove this?Let us now look at the reasons forbelieving
that it contains also a reference to the Messiah.

1. The first argument we present is derived from the passagein Isaiah9:7.
There is an undoubted connectionbetweenthat passage andthe one under
consideration, as almostall critical scholars admit. And it seems that nothing
short of a Messianic reference willexplain the words. Some have assertedthat
the undoubted and exclusive reference to Messiahin this verse (Isaiah 9:7)
excludes any localreference in the prophecy in Isaiah7:14. But so far from
this being the ease,we believe it is an instance of what Baconcalls the
"springing, germinant fulfilment of prophecy." And we believe that it can be
proved that all prophecies take their start from historicalfacts. Isaiahhere
(Isaiah 9:7) drops the historical drapery and rises to a mightier and more
majestic strain.
2. The secondand crowning argument is takenfrom the language ofthe
inspired writer Matthew (Matthew 1:22, 23).
(D. M. Sweets.)
Who was the "virgin" and who the son
D. M. Sweets.
? —
1. Some have supposedthat the wife of Ahaz was meant by the "virgin," and
that his son Hezekiahwas the child meant. There is an insuperable difficulty
againstthis view. Ahaz's reign extended over sixteen years (2 Kings 16:2), and
Hezekiahwas twenty-five years old when he succeededAhaz (2 Kings 18:2).
Consequently, at this time Hezekiah could not have been less than nine years
old. It has been supposedthat Ahaz had a secondwife, and that the sonwas
hers. This is a mere supposition, supported by nothing in the narrative, while
it makes Isaiah8:1-4 have no connectionwith what precedes or follows.
2. Others have supposed that some virgin who was then presentbefore Ahaz
was designated, and they make the meaning this: "As surely as this virgin
shall conceive and bear a son, so surely shall the land be forsakenofits

kings." This is too vague for the definite language used, and gives no
explanation of the incident in chap. 8. about Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
3. Another opinion is that the virgin was not an actual but an ideal virgin."
"Michaelis thus presents this view: "By the time when one who is yet a virgin
can bring forth (i.e., in nine months), all will be happily changedand the
present impending dangerso completelypassedawaythat if you were to name
the child you would call him Immanuel." Surely this would not be a sign or
pledge of anything to Ahaz. Besides, it was not a birth possible, but an actual
birth, which was spokenof.
4. But the view which is most in keeping with the entire context, and which
presents the fewestdifficulties, is that the prophet's own son is intended. This
view does require the supposition that Isaiah married a secondwife, who at
the time of this prophecy was still a virgin and whom he subsequently
married. "But there is no improbability in the supposition that the mother of
his son, Shear-jashub, was deceased, andthat Isaiah was about againto be
married. This is the only supposition which this view demands. Such an
occurrence was surelynot uncommon. All other explanations require more
suppositions, and suppositions more unnatural than this. Our supposition
does no violence to the narrative, and certainly falls in best with all the facts.
We would then identify Immanuel (as Ahaz and his contemporaries would
understand the name to be applied) with Maher-shalal-hash-baz. With this
view harmonises what the prophet says in Isaiah8:18: "Behold, I and the
children whom Jehovahhath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel
from Jehovahof hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion." It is no objection to
this view that anothername than "Immanuel" was given to the child. It was a
common thing to give two names to children, especiallywhenone name was
symbolic, as Immanuel was. Jesus Christwas never calledImmanuel as a
proper name, though almost all scholars agree thatthe prophecy referred to
Him in some sense.
(D. M. Sweets.)
A double tolerance in Isaiah's prophecies

D. M. Sweets.
The careful, critical student of Isaiahwill find this thing common in his
writings, namely, that he commences with a prophecy having reference to
some remarkable delivery which was soonto occur, and terminates it by a
statementof events connectedwith a higher deliverance under the Messiah.
His mind becomes absorbed;the primary object is forgottenin the
contemplation of the more remote and glorious event.
(D. M. Sweets.)
The virgin
Prof. A. F. Kirkpatrick., Speaker'sCommentary., Prof. W. J. Beecher, D. D.
The Hebrew word rendered "virgin" in the A.V. would be more accurately
rendered "damsel." It means a young womanof marriageable age, andis not
the word which would be naturally used for virgin, if that was the point which
it was desired to emphasise.
(Prof. A. F. Kirkpatrick.)Our English word "maiden" comes as near,
probably, as any to the Hebrew word.
(Speaker's Commentary.)The Hebrew lexicons tell us that the word almah,
here translated virgin, may denote any mature young woman, whether a
virgin or not. So far as its derivation is concerned, this is undoubtedly the
case;but in Biblical usage, the word denotes a virgin in every case where its
meaning can be determined. The instances are, besides the text, that in the
accountof Rebekah(Genesis 24:43), thatof the sisterof Moses(Exodus 2:8),
the word used in the plural (Psalm 68:25, 26;Song of Solomon 1:3; Song of
Solomon6:8), its use in the titles of Psalms (Psalm46; 1 Chronicles 15:20),
and its use in Proverbs 30:19. The last passageis the one chiefly relied on to
prove that the word may denote a woman not a virgin; but, "the wayof a man
with a maid" there spokenof is something wonderful, incapable of being
tracedor understood, like the way of an eagle in the air, a serpent on a rock, a
ship in the sea, and it is only in its application to that wonderful human

experience, first love betweena man and a virgin, that this description can
find a full and complete significance. The use of the word in the Bible may not
be full enough in itself to prove that almah necessarilymeans virgin, but it is
sufficient to show that Septuaginttranslators probably chose deliberately and
correctly, when they chose to translate the word, in this passage, by the Greek
word that distinctively denotes a virgin, and that Matthew made no mistake in
so understanding their translation.
(Prof. W. J. Beecher,D. D.)
Deliverance by a lowly agent
Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.
Not Ahaz, not some high-born son of Ahaz's house, is to have the honour of
rescuing his country from its peril: a "nameless maiden of lowly rank"
(Delitzsch) is to be the mother of the future deliverer. Ahaz and the royal
house are thus put aside;it is not till Isaiah 9:7 — spokenatleasta year
subsequently — that we are able to gatherthat the Delivereris to be a
descendantof David's line.
(Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
God's sign to Ahaz
J. A. Alexander.
The king having refused to ask a sign, the prophet gives him one, by renewing
the promise of deliverance (vers. 8, 9), and connecting it with the birth of a
child, whose significantname is made a symbol of the Divine interposition,
and his progress a measure of the subsequent events. Instead of saying that
God would be present with them to deliver them, he says the child shall be
calledImmanuel (God with us); instead of mentioning a term of years, he
says, before the child is able to distinguish goodfrom evil; instead of saying
that until that time the land shall lie waste, he represents the child as eating

curds and honey, spontaneous products, here put in opposition to the fruits of
cultivation. At the same time, the form of expressionis descriptive. Instead of
saying that the child shall experience all this, he represents its birth and
infancy as actually passing in his sight; he sees the child brought forth and
named Immanuel; he sees the child eating curds and honey till a certainage.
But very different opinions are held as to the child here alluded to. Some think
it must be a child about to be born, in the course of nature, to the prophet
himself. Others think that two distinct births are referred to, one that of
Shear-jashub, the prophet's son, and the other Christ, the Virgin's Son. Yet
others see only a prophetic reference to the birth of Messiah.
(J. A. Alexander.)
A prediction of the miraculous conceptionof Jesus Christ
J. A. Alexander.
While some diversity of judgment ought to be expectedand allowed, in
relation to the secondaryquestion(of the child of the period that is referred
to), there is no ground, grammatical, historical, or logical, fordoubt as to the
main point, that the Church in all ages has beenright in regarding this
passageas a signal and explicit prediction of the miraculous conceptionand
nativity of Jesus Christ.
(J. A. Alexander.)
The figure of Immanuel an ideal one
Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.
The language ofIsaiah forces upon us the conviction that the figure of
Immanuel is an ideal one, projectedby him upon the shifting future — upon
the nearerfuture in chap. 7, upon the remoter future in chap. 9, but grasped
by the prophet as a living and real personality, the guardian of his country
now, its deliverer and governorhereafter. The circumstances under which the

announcement is made to Ahaz are such as apparently exclude deliberation in
the formation of the idea; it is the unpremeditated creationof his inspired
imagination. This view satisfies allthe requirements of the narrative. The
birth of the child being conceivedas immediate affords a substantial ground
for the assurance conveyedto Ahaz; and the royal attributes with which the
child speedily appears to be endued, and which forbid hit identification with
any actualcontemporary of the prophet's, become at once intelligible. It is the
Messianic King, whose portrait is here for the first time in the Old Testament
sketcheddirectly.
(Prof. S. R. Driver, D. D.)
Immanuel, the Messiah
F. Delitzsch.
It is the Messiahwhomthe prophet here beholds as about to be born, then in
chap. 9 as born, and in chap. 11 as reigning.
(F. Delitzsch.)
What sign could the distant birth of Christ be to Ahaz
F. T. Bassett, M. A.
? — The answeris plain, as evidenced by the prophet turning away from the
king who repudiated, his privileges to the "house of David," to which in all its
generations the promise was given. The king was endeavouring to bring about
the destructionof "the land," but his efforts in that direction would be useless
until the destiny of the house of David was fulfilled. The virgin must bear the
promised Son; Judah is immortal till that event is accomplished. It matters
not whether it is near or far, the family and lineage of David must survive till
then. Hence the signwas plain enough, or ought to have been, to Ahaz and the
people in general. The closing portion of this sectionof Scripture fully

disclosesthe destruction that should befall Judah as well as Israel, but the
final fall of Judah is after the birth of Immanuel.
(F. T. Bassett, M. A.)
The virgin mother
F. H. Woods, B. D.
To maintain that Isaiahdid not mean to saythat a certain Personin the future
was to be born of a virgin, is not the same thing as to hold that Christ was not
so born as a fact.
(F. H. Woods, B. D.)
The mystery of the sign
F. Delitzsch.
The "sign" is on the one side a mystery staring threateningly at the house of
David, and on the other side it is a mystery rich in comfort to the prophet and
all believers; and it is couchedin such enigmatic terms in order that they who
harden themselves may not understand it, and in order that believers may so
much the more long to understand it.
(F. Delitzsch.)
A new thing in the earth
Anon.
(vers. 10-16):—
I. THE PLEDGE PROPOSED.

1. The condescensionwhich God displayed on this occasionwas very
remarkable.
2. There may be a semblance of regard for the honour of God, while the heart
is in a state of hostility againstHim.
3. God may sustain a certain relationship to those who are not His in reality.
II. THE INDIGNANT REBUKE ADMINISTERED. (Ver. 13.)
1. The persons to whom it was addressed. Notthe king only, but the whole
nation; which shows that they, or a large portion of them, were like-minded
with their ungodly ruler. They are called"the house of David," a designation
which was doubtless intended to remind them of his character, andthe great
things which God had done for him. Well would it have been if he by whom
David's throne was now occupiedhad been imbued with David's spirit, and
walkedin David's ways;and that his influence had been exerted in inducing
his subjects to do so likewise.
2. The feeling by which it was prompted. It was evidently that of holy
indignation.
3. The grounds on which it rested. There were two things especiallyby which
God was dishonoured on this occasion.(1)Unbelief. Nothing casts a greater
indignity upon the Divine characterthan for His word to be distrusted.(2)
Hypocrisy. Far better to bid open defiance to the MostHigh, and saywith
Pharaoh, "Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice?" than pretend to
serve Him while we are resolvedto actin opposition to His will.
III. THE GLORIOUS EVENT PREDICTED.As to this striking prediction, in
itself considered, there are severalparticulars which it sets before us —
1. The miraculous conceptionof Christ.
2. The essentialDeity of Christ.
3. The design of the coming of Christ. For Him to be called "Immanuel, God
with us," shows that He appearedto espouse ourcause.
4. The lowly condition of Christ. "Butter and honey shall He eat," etc.

5. The moral purity of Christ. Although the expression, "before the child shall
know to refuse the evil, and choosethe good," has literal reference to His
attaining the age of discernment, yet it may be applied with specialpropriety
to the spotless sanctityof His character. He knew, in a sense in which no one
else ever knew, how to refuse the evil and choose the good.
(Anon.)
The birth of Christ
I. THE BIRTH OF CHRIST.
1. We see here a miraculous conception.
2. Notice next, the humble parentage. Thoughshe was not a princess, yet her
name, Mary, by interpretation, signifies a princess;and though she is not the
queen of heaven, yet she has a right to be reckonedamongstthe queens of
earth; and though she is not the lady of our Lord, she does walk amongstthe
renowned and mighty women of Scripture. Yet Jesus Christ's birth was a
humble one. Strange that the Lord of glory was not born in a palace!Let us
take courage here. If Jesus Christwas born in a manger in a rock, why should
He not come and live in our rockyhearts? If He was born in a stable, why
should not the stable of our souls be made into a habitation for Him? If He
was born in poverty, may not the poor in spirit expect that He will be their
Friend?
3. We must make one more remark upon this birth of Christ, and that remark
shall be concerning a glorious birthday. With all the humility that surrounded
the birth of Christ, there was yet very much that was glorious, very much that
was honourable. No other man ever had such a birthday as Jesus Christ had.
Of whom had prophets and seers everwritten as they wrote of Him? Whose
name is graven on so many tablets as His? Who had such a scrollof prophecy,
all pointing to Him as Jesus Christ, the God-man? Then recollect, concerning
His birth, when did God ever hang a fresh lamp in the sky to announce the
birth of a Caesar? Caesars maycome, and they may die, but stars shall never
prophesy their birth. When did angels ever stoopfrom heaven, and sing

choralsymphonies on the birth of a mighty man? Christ's birth is not
despicable, evenif we consider the visitors who came around His cradle.
II. THE FOOD OF CHRIST. "Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may
know to refuse the evil, and choosethe good." Our translators were certainly
very goodScholars, and God gave them much wisdom, so that they craned up
our language to the majesty of the original, but here they were guilty of very
greatinconsistency. I do not see how butter and honey can make a child
choose good, andrefuse evil. If it is so, I am sure butter and honey ought to go
up greatly in price, for goodmen are ver much required. But it does not say,
in the original, "Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse
the owl, and choose the good," but, "Butter and honey shall He eat, till He
shall know how to refuse the evil, and choosethe good," or, better still,
"Butter and honey shall He eat, when He shall know how to refuse the evil,
and choose the good." We shall take that translation, and just try to elucidate
the meaning couchedin the words. They should teach us —
1. Christ's proper humanity. When He would convince His disciples that He
was flesh, and not spirit, He took a piece of a broiled fish and of a honeycomb,
and ate as others did.
2. The butter and honey teachus, again, that Christ was to be born in times of
peace. Suchproducts are not found in Judea in times of strife; the ravages of
war sweepawayall the fair fruits of industry.
3. There is another thought here. "Butter and honey shall He eat when He
shall know how to refuse the evil, and choosethe good." This is to teachus the
precocityof Christ, by which I mean that, even when He was a child, even
when He lived upon butter and honey, which is the food of children, He Knew
me evil from the good.
4. Perhaps it may seemsomewhatplayful, but I must say how sweetit is to my
soul to believe that, as Christ lived upon butter and honey, surety butter and
honey drop from His lips. Sweetare His words unto our souls, more to be
desired than honey or the honeycomb.

5. And perhaps I ought not to have forgottento say, that the effectof Christ's
eating butter and honey was to show us that He would not in His lifetime
differ from other men in His outward guise. Butter and honey Christ ate, and
butter and honey may His people eat;nay, whatsoeverGodin His providence
gives unto them, that is to be the food of the child Christ.
III. THE NAME OF CHRIST. "And shall call His name Immanuel."
1. The Virgin Mary called her son Immanuel that there might be a meaning in
His name
2. Would you know this name most sweetlyyou must know it by the teaching
of the Holy Spirit.
( C. H. Spurgeon.)
The responsibility of revelation
E. T. Marshall, M. A.
1. This Annunciation to Ahaz was a great opportunity for him — a crisis in
his spiritual life. He was getting entangledin idolatrous ways, involved in
disloyal relations with the Assyrian monarchy, and had alreadyseriously
compromised himself in sacrilegious appropriationof temple treasure. And
here was a goldenopportunity to break through his bends, and casthimself
loose, once forall from his unworthy associations. He was only askedto trust
on for a little while longer, to watch events, and, as they fell out in a certain
direction, to recognise thatthey were of God's specialordering, and that they
constituted a claim on his obedience and trust in God. But he was incapable of
profiting by God's goodwilltowards him. He rejectedthe Divine overtures of
prosperity and peace;and, while Godstill carried out the dictates of His
purpose, they came to Ahaz without blessing and without relief. His enemies
were removed, but a direr foe stoodin their place;he could not but learn that
God was faithful, but the word that he compelledGod to keepwas a word of
retribution.

2. And if we were capable of the combined mental and spiritual effort that
such a course would require, and were to sit down calmly and without
prejudice to dissectour past lives, and with unerring judgment were to
separate cause fromeffect in every case, andto trace eachimportant issue of
life to its true turning point, how often, probably, should we find that the
unsatisfactoryfeatures of the pastwere largely due to our neglectof some
revelation — some annunciation — of God! By experience, by example, by
warning, by discipline; by difficulties significantly placed in our path, or by
clearancesunexpectedlybut unmistakably made; by words in season, out of
season;by a thousand things, and in countless ways, we have had
annunciations from God — plain indications of His will and pleasure
concerning us, and no indistinct prophecies of things that shall be hereafter.
And our judgment upon a review of the whole is this — that our true
happiness and our genuine successhave been in very exactproportion to our
faithfulness or our unfaithfulness in reading the signs of God.
(E. T. Marshall, M. A.)
The mercy of God
J. Donne.
The first word of this text joins the angerof God and His mercy together. God
chides and rebukes the king Ahaz by the prophet; He is angry with him, and
therefore" He will give him a sign — a sealof mercy.
I. GOD TAKES ANY OCCASION TO SHOW MERCY.
II. THE PARTICULAR WAY OF HIS MERCYDECLARED HERE. "The
Lord shall give you a sign."
III. WHAT THIS SIGN WAS. "Behold a virgin," etc.
(J. Donne.)
Miracle of miracles

King Ahaz saith, I will not tempt God, and, making religionhis pretence
againstreligion, being a most wilful and wickedman, would not. We may
learn by this wretched king that those that are leastfearful before danger are
most basely fearful in danger (ver. 2). We may see the conflict betweenthe
infinite goodnessofGod and the inflexible stubbornness of man; God's
goodness striving with man's badness. When they would have no sign, yet God
will give them a sign. Behold.
(1)As a thing presented to the eye of faith.
(2)As a matter of greatconcernment.
(3)As a strange and admirable thing.It is atheisticalprofaneness to despise
any help that God in His wisdom thinketh necessaryto support our weak faith
withal. The house of David was afraid they should be extinct by these two
greatenemies of the Church; but, saith Isaiah, "A virgin of the house of David
shall conceive a son," and how then can the house of David be extinct? Heaven
hath said it; earth cannot disannul it. God hath said it, and all the creatures in
the world cannot annihilate it. How doth friendship betweenGodand us arise
from hence, that Christ is Godin our nature?
1. Sin, the cause ofdivision, is taken away.
2. Our nature is pure in Christ, and therefore in Christ Godloveth us.
3. Christ being our head of influence conveyeththe same Spirit that is in Him
to all His members, and, little by little, by that Spirit, purgeth His Church and
maketh her fit for communion with Himself.
4. The secondperson is God in our nature for this end, to make God and us
friends.
( Sibbes, Richard.)
Christ in prophecy
H. L. Hastings.

You will find that the presence ofone Personpervades the whole book If you
go into a British navy yard, or on board a British vessel, and pick up a piece of
rope, you will find that there is one little red thread which runs through the
whole of it — through every foot of cordage which belongs to the British
government; so, if a piece of rope is stolen, it may be cut rote inch pieces, but
every piece has the mark which tells where it belongs. It is so with the Bible.
You may separate it into a thousand parts, and yet you will find one thought
— one greatfact running through the whole of it. You will find it constantly
pointing and referring to one greatPersonage. Around this one mighty
Personagethis whole book revolves. "To Him give all the prophets witness."
(H. L. Hastings.)
Immanuel
Shear-jashub; Maher-shalal-hash-baz;Immanuel
F. H. Woods, B. D.
The three names taken togetherwould mean this — the Assyrians would spoil
the countries of Syria and Ephraim, and though they would threaten Judah,
God would be with His people, and save them, and so a remnant would For
left which would return at once to religious faith and to national prosperity.
For these two lastare almostalways associatedin the prophet's view.
(F. H. Woods, B. D.)
A prophecy of the Messiah
Canon Ainger.
When Jesus claimed to be the Sonof God, the Jews saw quite clearlythat this
was indeed nothing less than the claim to be Divine, and they cried out that
this was blasphemy. And what was His reply? Jesus reminded His hearers
that the earliestjudges and leaders of the people of Israel, as testified by the
language oftheir Scriptures, had been calledgods. "Jesus answeredthem, Is it

not written in your law, I said, ye are gods? If He called them gods, unto
whom the Word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of
Him, whom the Fatherhath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou
blasphemest;because I said, I am the Son of God?" The judges and rulers of
the early days of Israelhad been calledgods because their office and function
was just this — to representGod on earth to men, to reflectHis character,
and do His will, and lead His people. They often failed to do this because they
were merely human. In some cases they were false to their trust, and then
God's vengeance overtook them. Yet they pointed to that one far-off Divine
event when One who should perfectly fulfil that name was to interpose for the
world's deliverance. And thus, just as the implied prophecy in calling men
gods was to be one day fulfilled, so the prophecy of Isaiahbefore us was also a
prophecy of that same later far-off event, when one who was in every sense
"Godwith us" should come to satisfythe needs and the longings of the human
heart.
(Canon Ainger.)
Immanuel, the Sympathiser
Canon Ainger.
"Godwith us." This means omnipotence with us, omniscience with us,
perfection with us, and the love that never fails. Some of us, perhaps, have
tried, in conformity with the passionfor getting rid of the supernatural that
marks the lateststruggle of the scientific world, to construct a new religion
out of the old, in which the same pathetic and lovely figure as before shall be
placed beside us for our example, but from whom the aureole of Deity has
been takenaway; they have been trying to find all that life needs in the
presence only of a fellow man, howeversuperior to ourselves in holiness and
purity. There are moments in our lives when we feel ourselves face to face
with sin, in the presence ofsorrow or of death from which no man candeliver
us. In the sad hours of your life, it has been said, the recollectionofthat Man
you read of in your childhood, the Man of sorrows, the great Sympathiser
with human woes and sufferings, rises up before you. I know it is a reality for

you then, for you feelit to be not only beautiful but true. In such moments
does it seemto you as if Christ were merely a personwho eighteenhundred
years ago made certain journeying betweenJudea and Galilee? Cansuch a
recollectionfill up the blank which some present grief, the loss of some friend,
has made in your heart? It does not. It never did this for you or for anyone.
But the comfort that came to you from the thought of Him may be safely
trusted not to betray you, for that voice that came to you in your anguish says,
"You may trust Me, you may lean upon Me, for I know all things in heaven
and earth. I and My Father are one."
(Canon Ainger.)
Immanuel
Evan Lewis, B. A.
Nature, God, and Jesus are words often used to designate the same power or
being, but are suggestive ofvery different associations. The word "nature"
veils from our view the glory of the Godhead, and removes His personality
from our consciousness.It removes the Deity to a distance from us, but Jesus,
the newerand better name, the latestrevelation, brings Him nearer to us. The
associationsofthe name Jesus, as a name of God, are most tender and
endearing. Jesus does not remind us of blind poweror unfeeling skill, as the
word nature does;nor yet of overwhelming greatness,distant force and vast
intelligence, the conceptionof which strains our faculties, and the realisation
of which crushes our power, as the word God does. The name of Jesus
reminds us chiefly of sympathy, kindheartedness, brotherly tenderness, and
one-ness with ourselves. The word God presents a picture of the Deity to the
mind, in which those attributes of the Divine characterwhich are in
themselves most removed from us, occupy the most prominent position, and
are bathed with a flood of light, while those features of character, by which
the Divine Spirit touches the delicate chords of human affections, are dimly
seenamid the darkening shadows of the background. The picture is reversed
in Jesus. The greatattributes are buried in the light of love, as the stars are
coveredby the light of day.

(Evan Lewis, B. A.)
"Immanuel," a stimulus to the prophet himself
"Niger" in Expositor.
Isaiahmay have meant the Name to speak to him as wellas to the nation. He
may have desired to bring the messageofthe Name into his personaland
family life. For, after all, a prophet is but a man of like passions with"
ourselves, subjectto the same infirmities and fluctuations of spirit, "warmed
and cooled, by the same winter and summer." There were times, no doubt,
when even Isaiah lostfaith in his own function, in his own message,whenthe
very man who had assureda sinful nation that God was with them could
hardly believe that God was with him or could even cry out, "Departfrom
me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man!" And in such moments as these, when,
wearyof the world and weary of himself, he lostcourage and hope, he may
have felt that it would be well for him to have that in his very household which
would help to recallthe truths he had recognisedandtaught in hours of
clearerinsight, help to restore the faith with which he had first sprung up to
greetthe Divine message.We may believe that there were many darkened
hours in his experience, hours of broken faith and defeatedhope, when he
would fall back on his earlier faith and brighter hopes; when he would call his
little son to him, and, as he fondled him, would repeat his name, Immanuel,
Immanuel — God-with-us, God-with-us, — and find in that Name a charm
potent to restore his waning trust in the gracious presenceand gracious willof
Jehovah.
("Niger" in Expositor.)
The child Immanuel
Isaiahmay have felt, as we feel, that Godis with a little child in quite another
sense, in a more pathetic sense, than He is with grownmen. To him, as to us,

their innocence, their loveliness, and, above all, their love, may have been the
most exquisite revelation of the purity and love of God. "Heaven lies about
their infancy"; and in this heaven the prophet may often have taken refuge
from his cares, despondencies,and fears. Every child born into the world
brings this message to us, reminds us that God is with us indeed and of a
truth; for whence did this new, pure, tender life come if not from the central
Fountain of life and purity and love? And from this point of view Isaiah's
"Immanuel" is but the ancientanalogue of our Lord's tender words:Of such
is the kingdom of heaven."
Immanuel
T. H. Barnett.
The text is prophecy of the Messiah(Matthew 1:23).
I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH IT WAS SPOKEN.
II. ITS FULFILMENT. Formore than seven hundred years devout Jews
waited for the Divinely predicted sign. Then came the day which Christmas
commemorates,
III. ITS PRACTICAL IMPORT. To Christians this prophecy is significant of
those blessings which are pledged to us in Christ. In Him we have the
assurance ofGod being —
1. With us in the sense ofon our side. Nature shows us God as above us; law
shows us God as againstus, because we have made ourselves His enemies;but
the Gospelshows us God with us to defend us from the. powerof sin and to
deliver us from the penalty of sin.
2. With us in the sense ofin our nature. "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us"; became one of ourselves, sharedwith us —(1) The trials of a
human life;(2) The temptations which assailus;(3) The penalty of sin — death
of the body, the hiding of God's countenance. And so in Christ Jesus we the

pledge of the three cardinal blessings ofall Divine revelation —(a) The Divine
sympathy, because He is "touchedwith the feeling of our infirmities."(b) The
Divine salvation, because He has "put awaysin by the sacrifice ofHimself."(c)
The Divine succour, because He "ever liveth to make intercession" forus; and
His parting word to His Church is, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the
end of the world."
(T. H. Barnett.)
God with us, though His presence is not always realised
ProfessorTyndall has told us how, as he wandered through the higher Alpine
pastures in the earliermonths of the present summer (1879), he was often
surprised to find at evening lovely flowers in full bloom where in the morning
he had seenonly a wide thin sheetof snow. Struck with the strange
phenomenon, unable to believe that a few hours of even the most fervent
sunshine had drawn these exquisite flowers to their full maturity, he carefully
scrapedawaythe snow from a few inches of pasture and examined the plants
that were growing beneath it. And, to his surprise and delight, he found that
the powers of life had been with them even while they seemedwrapped in
death; that the sun had reachedthem through the snow;that the snow itself
had both held down the rising warmth of the earth upon them, and sheltered
them from the cold biting winds which might else have destroyedthem. There
they stood, eachfull grown, every flowermaturely developed, though the
greencalyx was carefully folded over the delicately colouredpetals;and no
soonerwas the snow removed, no soonerdid the rays of the sun touch the
greenenfolding calyx, than it openedand revealedthe perfectbeauty it had
shrouded and preserved. And so, doubtless, we shall one day find that God,
our Sun, has been with us even during the winter of our self-discontent, all
through the hours of apparent failure and inertness, quickening in us a life of
which we gave but little sign, maturing and making us perfect by the things
we suffered; so that when the hindering veils are withdrawn, and the full light

of His love shines upon us, at that gracious touch we too may disclose a beauty
of which we had not dreamed, and of Which for long we gave no promise.
Life's best amulet
Christian Endeavor.
A Mohammedan in Africa was once takenprisoner in war. He wore
suspended around his neck an amulet or charm. When this was takenfrom
him he became almost frenzied with grief, and beggedthat it be returned to
him He was willing to sacrifice his right hand for it. It was his peculiar
treasure, which he valued as life itself. It was a very simple affair — A little
leather case enclosing a slip of paper on which was inscribed in Arabic
characters one word — "God." He believed that the wearing of this charm
securedfor him a blessedimmunity from ill. When it was returned to him he
was so overjoyed that the tears streamedfrom his eyes, and falling to the
ground he kissedthe feet of the man who restored to him his treasure. That
poor man had but the bare name — we have God! Not a distant monarch
seatedlonesomelyawayfrom any human voice or footstep. There is one name
that ought to be dearestof all to every Christian — "Immanuel." It means not
a Deity remote or hidden, but "Godwith us."
(Christian Endeavor.)
God with us
Gates of Imagery.
An old poet has representedthe Son of God as having the stars for His crown,
the skyfor His azure mantle, the clouds for His bow, and the fire for His
spear. He rode forth in His majestic robes of glory, but one day resolvedto
alight on the earth, and descended, undressing Himself on the way. When

askedwhatHe would wear, He replied, with a smile, "that He had new clothes
making down below."
(Gates of Imagery.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(14) Behold, a virgin shall conceive, andbear a son . . .—Better, behold, the
young woman, or perhaps the bride, shall conceive. The first noun has the
definite article in the Hebrew, and the word, though commonly used of the
unmarried, strictly speaking denotes rather one who has arrived at
marriageable age. “Bride,” in the old English and German sense ofthe word
as applied to one who is about to become a wife, or is still a young wife, will,
perhaps, best express its relation to the two Hebrew words which respectively
and distinctively are used for “virgin” and for “wife.” In Psalm68:26, the
Authorised Version gives “damsels.” The mysterious prophecy which was
thus delivered to Ahaz has been very differently interpreted.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
7:10-16 Secretdisaffectionto God is often disguisedwith the colourof respect
to him; and those who are resolvedthat they will not trust God, yet pretend
they will not tempt him. The prophet reproved Ahaz and his court, for the
little value they had for Divine revelation. Nothing is more grievous to God
than distrust, but the unbelief of man shall not make the promise of God of no
effect;the Lord himself shall give a sign. How greatsoeveryour distress and
danger, of you the Messiahis to be born, and you cannotbe destroyedwhile
that blessing is in you. It shall be brought to pass in a glorious manner; and
the strongestconsolationsin time of trouble are derived from Christ, our

relation to him, our interest in him, our expectations ofhim and from him. He
would grow up like other children, by the use of the diet of those countries;
but he would, unlike other children, uniformly refuse the evil and choosethe
good. And although his birth would be by the power of the Holy Ghost, yet he
should not be fed with angels'food. Then follows a sign of the speedy
destruction of the princes, now a terror to Judah. Before this child, so it may
be read; this child which I have now in my arms, (Shear-jashub, the prophet's
own son, ver. 3,) shall be three or four years older, these enemies'forces shall
be forsakenof both their kings. The prophecy is so solemn, the sign is so
marked, as given by God himself after Ahaz rejectedthe offer, that it must
have raisedhopes far beyond what the present occasionsuggested. And, if the
prospectof the coming of the Divine Saviour was a never-failing support to
the hopes of ancient believers, what cause have we to be thankful that the
Word was made flesh! May we trust in and love Him, and copy his example.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Therefore - Since you will not "ask"a pledge that the land shall be safe,
Yahweh will furnish one unasked. A sign or proof is desirable in the case, and
Yahweh will not withhold it because a proud and contemptuous monarch
refuses to seek it. Perhaps there is no prophecy in the Old Testamenton which
more has been written, and which has produced more perplexity among
commentators than this. And after all, it still remains, in many respects, very
obscure. Its generaloriginal meaning is not difficult. It is, that in a short time
- within the time when a young woman, then a virgin, should conceive and
bring forth a child, and that child should grow old enough to distinguish
betweengoodand evils - the calamity which Ahaz fearedwould be entirely
removed. The confederacywouldbe brokenup, and the land forsakenby both
those kings. The conceptionand birth of a child - which could be knownonly
by him who knows "all" future events - would be the evidence of such a result.
His appropriate "name" would be such as would be a "sign," oran indication
that God was the protectorof the nation, or was still with them. In the
examination of this difficult prophecy, my first objectwill be to give an
explanation of the meaning of the "words and phrases" as they occurin the
passage, andthen to show, as far as I may be able, what was the designof the
passage.

The Lord himself - Hebrew, 'Adonai;' see this word explained in the the note
at Isaiah 1:24. He will do it without being askedto do it; he will do it though it
is rejectedand despised;he will do it because it is important for the welfare of
the nation, and for the confirmation of his religion, to furnish a demonstration
to the people that he is the only true God. It is clearlyimplied here, that the
sign should be such as Yahweh alone could give. It would be such as would be
a demonstration that he presided over the interests of the people. If this refers
to the birth of a child, then it means that this was an event which could be
known only to God, and which could be accomplishedonly by his agency. If it
refers to the miraculous conceptionand birth of the Messiah, then it means
that that was an event which none but God could accomplish. The true
meaning I shall endeavorto state in the notes, at the close ofIsaiah 7:16.
Shall give you - Primarily to the house of David; the king and royal family of
Judah. It was especiallydesignedto assure the government that the kingdom
would be safe. Doubtless, however, the word 'you' is designedto include the
nation, or the people of the kingdom of Judah. It would be so public a sign,
and so cleara demonstration, as to convince them that their city and land
must be ultimately safe.
A sign - A pledge; a token;an evidence of the fulfillment of what is predicted.
The word does not, of necessity, denote a miracle, though it is often so applied;
see the notes at Isaiah 7:11. Here it means a proof, a demonstration, a certain
indication that what he had saidshould be fulfilled. As that was to be such a
demonstration as to show that he was "able" to deliver the land, the word
"here" denotes that which was miraculous, or which could be effected"only"
by Yahweh.
Behold - ‫ענע‬ hinnêh. This interjection is a very common one in the Old
Testament. It is used to arrestattention; to indicate the importance of what
was about to be said. It serves to designate persons and things; places and
actions. It is used in lively descriptions, and animated discourse;when
anything unusual was said, or occurred;or any thing which especially
demanded attention; Genesis 12:19;Genesis 16:16;Genesis 18:9;Genesis
1:29; Genesis 40:9;Psalm 134:1. It means here, that an event was to occur
which demanded the attention of the unbelieving monarch, and the regard of

the people - an event which would be a full demonstration of what the prophet
had said, that God would protectand save the nation.
A virgin - This word properly means a girl, maiden, virgin, a young woman
who is unmarried, and who is of marriageable age. The word ‫המלע‬ ‛almâh, is
derived from the verb ‫המע‬ ‛âlam, "to conceal, to hide, to cover." The word ‫המע‬
‛elem, from the same verb, is applied to a "young man," in 1 Samuel17:56; 1
Samuel 20:22. The word here translateda virgin, is applied to Rebekah
Genesis 24:43, and to Miriam, the sisterof Moses, Exodus 2:8. It occurs in
only sevenplaces in the Old Testament. Besides those alreadymentioned, it is
found in Psalm68:25; Sol1:3; Sol6:8; and Proverbs 30:19. In all these places,
except, perhaps, in Proverbs, it is used in its obvious natural sense, to denote a
young, unmarried female. In the Syriac, the word alĕm, means to grow up,
juvenis factus est; juvenescere fecited. Hence, the derivatives are applied to
youth; to young men; to young women - to those who "are growing up," and
becoming youths.
The etymologyof the word requires us to suppose that it means one who is
growing up to a marriageable state, orto the age of puberty. The word
maiden, or virgin, expresses the correctidea. Hengstenberg contends, that it
means one "in the unmarried state;" Gesenius, that it means simply the being
of marriageable age, the age ofpuberty. The Hebrews usually employed the
word ‫התומע‬ bethûlâh, to denote a pure virgin (a word which the Syriac
translation uses here); but the word here evidently denotes one who was
"then" unmarried; and though its primary idea is that of one who is growing
up, or in a marriageable state, yetthe whole connectionrequires us to
understand it of one who was "not then married," and who was, therefore,
regardedand designated as a virgin. The Vulgate renders it 'virgo.' The
Septuagint, ἡ παρθένος hē parthenos, "a virgin" - a word which they use as a
translation of the Hebrew ‫התומע‬ bethûlâh in Exodus 22:16-17;Leviticus 21:3,
Leviticus 21:14; Deuteronomy22:19, Deuteronomy 22:23, Deuteronomy
22:28;Deuteronomy 32:25; Judges 19:24;Judges 21:12;and in thirty-three
other places (see Trommius' Concordance);of ‫נהעע‬ na‛ărâh, a girl, in Genesis
24:14, Genesis 24:16, Genesis 24:55;Genesis 34:3 (twice); 1 Kings 1:2; and of
‫המלע‬ ‛almâh, only in Genesis 24:43;and in Isaiah7:14.

The word, in the view of the Septuagint translators, therefore conveyedthe
proper idea of a virgin. The Chaldee uses substantially the same word as the
Hebrew. The idea of a "virgin" is, therefore, the most obvious and natural
idea in the use of this word. It does not, however, imply that the person
spokenof should be a virgin "when the child" should be born; or that she
should everafter be a virgin. It means simply that one who was "then" a
virgin, but who was of marriageable age, shouldconceive, and bear a son.
Whether she was "to be" a virgin "at the time" when the child was born, or
was to remain such afterward, are inquiries which cannot be determined by a
philologicalexamination of the word. It is evident also, that the word is not
opposedto "either" of these ideas. "Why" the name which is thus given to an
unmarried woman was derived from the verb to "hide, to conceal,"is not
agreedamong lexicographers. The more probable opinion is, that it was
because to the time of marriage, the daughter was supposedto be hidden or
concealedin the family of the parents; she was kept shut up, as it were, in the
paternal dwelling. This idea is given by Jerome, who says, 'the name is given
to a virgin because she is said to be hidden or secret;because she does not
expose herselfto the gaze of men, but is kept with great care under the
custody of parents.' The sum of the inquiry here, into the meaning of the word
translated "virgin," is, that it does not differ from that word as used by us.
The expressionmeans no more than that one who was then a virgin should
have a son, and that this should be a sign to Ahaz.
And shall call his name - It was usual for "mothers" to give names to their
children; Genesis 4:1; Genesis 19:37;Genesis 29:32;Genesis 30:18. There is,
therefore, no reasonto suppose, as many of the older interpreters did, that the
fact that it is said the mother should give the name, was a proof that the child
should have no human father. Such arguments are unworthy of notice; and
only show to what means people have resorted in defending the doctrines, and
in interpreting the pages ofthe Bible. The phrase, 'she will name,' is,
moreover, the same as 'they shall name,' or he shall be named. 'We are not,
then, to suppose that the child should actually receive the name Immanuel as
a proper name, since, according to the usage ofthe prophet, and especiallyof
Isaiah, that is often ascribedto a personor thing as a name which belongs to
him in an eminent degree as an attribute; see Isaiah9:5; Isaiah61:6; Isaiah

62:4.' - "Hengstenberg."The idea is, that that would be a name that might be
"appropriately" given to the child. Another name was also given to this child,
expressing substantially the same thing, with a circumstantialdifference; see
the note at Isaiah8:3.
Immanuel - Hebrew 'God with us' - ‫הלנואמ‬ ‛immânû'êl - from ‫אמ‬ 'ĕl, "God,"
and ‫הלנע‬ ‛ı̂mmânû, "with us." The name is designedto denote that God would
be with the nation as its protector, and the birth of this child would be a sign
or pledge of it. The mere circumstance that this name is given, however, does
not imply anything in regard to the nature or rank of the child, for nothing
was more common among the Jews than to incorporate the name, or a part of
the name, of the Deity with the names which they gave to their children. Thus,
"Isaiah" denotes the salvationof Yahweh; "Jeremiah," the exaltationor
grandeur of Yahweh, eachcompounded of two words, in which the name
Yahweh constitutes a part. Thus, also in "Elijah," the two names of God are
combined, and it means literally, "Godthe Yahweh." Thus, also "Eliab," God
my faather; "Eliada," knowledge ofGod; "Eliakim," the resurrectionof God;
"Elihu," he is my God; "Elisha," salvationofGod. In none of these instances
is the fact, that the name of God is incorporatedwith the proper name of the
individual, any argument in respectto his rank or character.
It is true, that Matthew Mat 1:23 uses this name as properly expressing the
rank of the Messiah;but all that can be demonstrated from the use of the
name by Matthew is, that it properly designatedthe nature and rank of the
Lord Jesus. It was a pledge, then, that God was with his people, and the name
designatedby the prophet had a complete fulfillment in its use as applied to
the Messiah. Whetherthe Messiahbe regarded as himself a pledge and
demonstration of the presence and protectionof God, or whether the name be
regardedas descriptive of his nature and dignity, yet there was an
"appropriateness"in applying it to him. It was fully expressive of the event of
the incarnation. Jerome supposes that the name, Immanuel, denotes nothing
more than divine aid and protection. Others have supposed, however, that the
name must denote the assumption of our nature by God in the person of the
Messiah, that is, that God became man. So Theodoret, Irenaeus, Tertullian,
Lactantius, Chrysostom. Calvin, Rosenmuller, and others. The true
interpretation is, that no argument to prove that canbe derived from the use

of the name; but when the factof the incarnation has been demonstrated from
other sources, the "name is appropriately expressive ofthat event." So it
seems to be used by Matthew.
It may be quite true, that no argument canbe founded on the bare name,
Immanuel; yet that name, "in its connectionhere," may certainly be regarded
as a designedprediction of the incarnation of Christ. Such a design our author
allows in the prophecy generally. 'The prophet,' says he, 'designedly made use
of language which would be appropriate to a future and most glorious event.'
Why, then, does he speak ofthe most pregnant word in the prophecy as if
Matthew had accidentallystumbled on it, and, finding it would appropriately
express the nature of Christ, accomodated it for that purpose? Having
originally rejectedthe Messianic reference, andbeen convinced only by a
more careful examination of the passage, thathe was in error, something of
his old view seems still to cling to this otherwise admirable exposition. 'The
name Immanuel,' says ProfessorAlexander, 'although it might be used to
signify God's providential presence merely Psalm46:8, 12; Psalm89:25;
Joshua 1:5; Jeremiah1:8; Isaiah43:2, has a latitude and pregnancy of
meaning which canscarcelybe fortuitous; and which, combined with all the
rest, makes the conclusionalmost unavoidable, that it was here intended to
express a personal, as well as a providential presence ... When we read in the
Gospelof Matthew, that Jesus Christwas actually born of a virgin, and that
all the circumstances ofhis birth came to pass that this very prophecy might
be fulfilled, it has less the appearance ofan unexpectedapplication, than of a
conclusionrendered necessaryby a series ofantecedentfacts and reasonings,
the lastlink in a long chain of intimations more or less explicit (referring to
such prophecies as Genesis 3:15;Micah 5:2).
The same considerations seemto show that the prophecy is not merely
accommodated, whichis, moreover, clearfram the emphatic form of the
citation τοῦτο ὅλονγέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ touto holon gegonenhina plēroothē,
making it impossible to prove the existence ofany quotation in the proper
sense, if this be not one.'But, indeed, the author himself admits all this,
though his language is less decidedand consistentthan could be wished on so
important a subject.

Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
14. himself—since thou wilt not ask a sign, nay, rejectestthe offer of one.
you—for the sake ofthe house of believing "David" (God remembering His
everlasting covenantwith David), not for unbelieving Ahaz' sake.
Behold—arresting attentionto the extraordinary prophecy.
virgin—from a root, "to lie hid," virgins being closelykeptfrom men's gaze in
their parents' custody in the East. The Hebrew, and the Septuagint here, and
Greek (Mt 1:23), have the article, the virgin, some definite one known to the
speakerand his hearers;primarily, the woman, then a virgin, about
immediately to become the secondwife, and bear a child, whose attainment of
the age ofdiscrimination (about three years)should be preceded by the
deliverance of Judah from its two invaders; its fullest significancyis realized
in "the woman" (Ge 3:15), whose seedshould bruise the serpent's head and
deliver captive man (Jer 31:22; Mic 5:3). Language is selectedsuchas, while
partially applicable to the immediate event, receives its fullest, most
appropriate, and exhaustive accomplishment in Messianic events. The New
Testamentapplication of such prophecies is not a strained "accommodation";
rather the temporary fulfilment of an adaptation of the far-reaching prophecy
to the present passing event, which foreshadowstypically the greatcentral
end of prophecy, Jesus Christ (Re 19:10). Evidently the wording is such as to
apply more fully to Jesus Christthan to the prophet's son;"virgin" applies, in
its simplest sense, to the Virgin Mary, rather than to the prophetess who
ceasedto be a virgin when she "conceived";"Immanuel," God with us (Joh
1:14; Re 21:3), cannot in a strict sense apply to Isaiah's son, but only to Him
who is presently called expressly(Isa 9:6), "the Child, the Son, Wonderful
(compare Isa 8:18), the mighty God." Localand temporary features (as in Isa
7:15, 16)are added in every type; otherwise it would be no type, but the thing
itself. There are resemblances to the greatAntitype sufficient to be recognized
by those who seek them; dissimilarities enough to confound those who do not
desire to discoverthem.
call—that is, "she shall," or as Margin, "thou, O Virgin, shalt call;" mothers
often named their children (Ge 4:1, 25;19:37; 29:32). In Mt 1:23 the

expressionis strikingly changedinto, "Theyshall call"; when the prophecy
receivedits full accomplishment, no longer is the name Immanuel restrictedto
the prophetess'view of His character, as in its partial fulfilment in her son; all
shall then call (that is, not literally), or regard Him as peculiarly and most
fitly characterizedby the descriptive name, "Immanuel" (1Ti 3:16; Col 2:9).
name—not mere appellation, which neither Isaiah's sonnor Jesus Christ bore
literally; but what describes His manifested attributes; His character(so Isa
9:6). The name in its proper destination was not arbitrary, but characteristic
of the individual; sin destroyed the faculty of perceiving the internal being;
hence the severance now betweenthe name and the character;in the case of
Jesus Christ and many in Scripture, the Holy Ghosthas supplied this want
[Olshausen].
Matthew Poole's Commentary
Therefore;because youdespise me, and the sign which I now offer to you,
God of his own free grace will send you a more honourable messenger, and
give you a nobler sign, to try whether that will cure you of your infidelity. Or,
nevertheless, as this particle seems to be understood, Isaiah 30:18 Jeremiah
16:14 30:16. Although you deserve no sign nor favour, yet, for the comfortof
those few believers which are among you, and to leave you without excuse, I
shall mind you or another and a greatersign, which God hath promised, and
will in his due time perform; which also is a pledge of the certain
accomplishmentof all God’s promises. Or, surely, as this particle is sometimes
used, as Genesis 4:15 Jeremiah2:33 5:2 Zechariah11:7.
A sign, to wit, of your deliverance.
Quest. How was this birth of a virgin, which was not to come till many ages
after, a sign of their deliverance from the present danger?
Answ.

1. Becausethis was a cleardemonstration of God’s infinite power, and
goodness,and faithfulness, and consequently of the certain truth of all God’s
promises from time to time, which can never fill so long as those attributes of
God stand; and men’s faith is either strong or weak, as they believe them or
doubt of them; of which see Psalm77:8 78:19,20 Ro 4:20,21. And so this was a
proper remedy for Ahaz’s disease,whichwas a secretsuspicionthat God
either could not or would not deliver them.
2. Becausethatpromise, I say not only the actualgiving, which was long after,
but even the promise, of the Messiah, whichhad been made long since, and oft
renewed, and was universally believed by all the people, was the foundation of
all God’s mercies and promises unto them, 2 Corinthians 1:20, and a pledge of
the accomplishmentof them.
3. Becausethis promised birth did suppose and require the preservationof
that city, and nation, and tribe, in and of which the Messiahwas to be born;
and therefore there was no cause to fear that utter ruin which their enemies
now threatened to bring upon them.
4. This is one, but not the only sign here given, as we shall see at Isaiah7:16.
Behold; you who will not believe that God alone is able to deliver you from the
united force of Syria and Israel, take notice, for your full satisfaction, that
God is not only able to do this work, but to do far greaterand harder things,
which he hath promised, and therefore both can and will accomplish.
A virgin; strictly and properly so called. The Jews, that they may obscure this
plain text, and weakenthis proof of the truth of Christian religion, pretend

that this Hebrew word signifies a young woman, and not a virgin. But this
corrupt translation is easilyconfuted,
1. Becausethis word constantlysignifies a virgin in all other places of
Scripture where it is used, which are Genesis 24:43, comparedwith Isaiah
7:16 Exodus 2:8 Psalm 68:25 Song of Solomon 1:3 6:8; to which may be added
Proverbs 30:19, The way of a man with a maid, or a virgin: for though it be
supposedthat he did design and desire to corrupt her, and afterwards did so;
yet she may well be called a virgin, partly because he found her a virgin, and
partly because she seemedand pretended to others to be such, which made
her more carefulto use all possible arts to preserve her reputation, and so
made the discoveryof her impure conversationwith the man more difficult,
whereas the filthy practices ofcommon harlots are easilyand vulgarly known.
2. From the scope ofthis place, which is to confirm their faith by a strange
and prodigious sign, which surely could not be not a young woman should
conceive a child, but that a virgin should conceive, &c.
Beara Son; or rather, bring forth, as it is rendered, Matthew 1:23, and as this
Hebrew word is used, Genesis 16:11 17:19 Judges 13:5.
And shall call; the virgin, last mentioned, shall call;which is added as a
further evidence of her virginity, and that this Son had no human father,
because the right of naming the child (which, being a sign of dominion, is
primarily in the husband, and in the wife only by his consentor permission, as
is evident from Genesis 5:29 35:18 Luke 1:60,63, and many other places of
Scripture) is wholly appropriated to her.

Immanuel; which signifies, God with us; God dwelling among us, in our
nature, John 1:14, God and man meeting in one person, and being a Mediator
betweenGod and men. For the designof these words is not so much to relate
the name by which Christ should commonly be called, as to describe his
nature and office; as we readthat his name shall be called Wonderful,
Counsellor, &c., Isaiah9:6, and that this is saidto be his (the Messiah’s)name
whereby he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness,Jeremiah23:6,
although he be never called by these names in any other place of the Old or
New Testament;but the meaning of these places is, He shall be wonderful, and
our Counsellor, &c., and our Righteousness;for to be calledis oft put for to
be, as Isaiah 1:26 4:3, &c.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign,.... Whetherthey would ask
one or not; a sign both in heaven and earth, namely, the promised Messiah;
who being the Lord from heaven, would take flesh of a virgin on earth; and
who as man, being buried in the heart of the earth, would be raised from
thence, and ascendup into heaven; and whose birth, though it was to be many
years after, was a sign of present deliverance to Judah from the confederacy
of the two kings of Syria and Israel;and of future safety, since it was not
possible that this kingdom should cease to be one until the Messiahwas come,
who was to spring from Judah, and be of the house of David; wherefore by
how much the longeroff was his birth, by so much the longer was their safety.
Behold, a virgin shall conceive, andbear a son; this is not to be understood of
Hezekiah, the sonof Ahaz, by his wife, as some Jewishwriters interpret it;
which interpretation Jarchi refutes, by observing that Hezekiahwas nine
years old when his father beganto reign, and this being, as he says, the fourth
year of his reign, he must be at this time thirteen years of age;in like manner,
Aben Ezra and Kimchi objectto it; and besides, his mother could not be
calleda "virgin": and for the same reasonit cannot be understood of any
other son of his either by his wife, as Kimchi thinks, or by some young
woman; moreover, no other sonof his was ever lord of Judea, as this
Immanuel is representedto be, in Isaiah 8:8 nor can it be interpreted of
Isaiah's wife and son, as Aben Ezra and Jarchi think; since the prophet could

never call her a "virgin", who had bore him children, one of which was now
with him; nor indeed a "young woman", but rather "the prophetess", as in
Isaiah8:3 nor was any son of his king of Judah, as this appears to be, in the
place before cited: but the Messiahis here meant, who was to be born of a
pure virgin; as the word here used signifies in all places where it is mentioned,
as Genesis 24:43 and even in Proverbs 30:19 which is the instance the Jews
give of the word being used of a woman corrupted; since it does not appear
that the maid and the adulterous womanare one and the same person; and if
they were, she might, though vitiated, be calleda maid or virgin, from her
own professionof herself, or as she appeared to others who knew her not, or
as she was antecedentto her defilement; which is no unusual thing in
Scripture, see Deuteronomy22:28 to which may be added, that not only the
EvangelistMatthew renders the word by "a virgin"; but the Septuagint
interpreters, who were Jews, so renderedthe word hundreds of years before
him; and best agreeswith the Hebrew word, which comes from the root which
signifies to "hide" or "cover";virgins being coveredand unknown to men;
and in the easterncountry were usually kept recluse, and were shut up from
the public company and conversationof men: and now this was the signthat
was to be given, and a miraculous one it was, that the Messiahshould be born
of a pure and incorrupt virgin; and therefore a "behold" is prefixed to it, as a
note of admiration; and what else could be this sign or wonder? not surely
that a young married woman, either Ahaz's or Isaiah's wife, should be with
child, which is nothing surprising, and of which there are repeatedinstances
every day; nor was it that the young womanwas unfit for conceptionat the
time of the prophecy, which was the fancy of some, as Jarchi reports, since no
such intimation is given either in the text or context; nor did it lie in this, that
it was a male child, and not a female, which was predicted, as R. Saadiah
Gaon, in Aben Ezra, would have it; for the sign or wonder does not lie in the
truth of the prophet's prediction, but in the greatness ofthe thing predicted;
besides, the verification of this would not have given the prophet much credit,
nor Ahaz and the house of David much comfort, since this might have been
ascribedrather to a happy conjecture than to a spirit of prophecy; much less
can the wonder be, that this child should eat butter and honey, as soonas it
was born, as Aben Ezra and Kimchi suggest;since nothing is more natural to,

and common with young children, than to take down any kind of liquids
which are sweetand pleasant.
And shall call his name Immanuel; which is, by interpretation, "God with us",
Matthew 1:23 whence it appears that the Messiahis truly God, as well as truly
man: the name is expressive of the union of the two natures, human and
divine, in him; of his office as Mediator, who, being both God and man, is a
middle personbetweenboth; of his converse with men on earth, and of his
spiritual presence with his people. See John 1:14.
Geneva Study Bible
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall
conceive, and beara son, and shall callhis name Immanuel.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
14–16.The sign of Immanuel. See Additional Note at the end of this chapter.
14. Therefore]because ofthis actof unbelief. the Lord himself] The word is
Adonai, as ch. Isaiah6:1.
Behold, a virgin] (LXX. ἡ παρθένος, other Greek versions νεᾶνις.) The
Hebrew word (‘almâh) means strictly “a young woman of marriageable age.”
Both etymology and usage (cf. esp. Proverbs 30:19; Song of Solomon6:8) are
adverse to the opinion, once prevalent among Christian interpreters and
maintained by a few in recent times, that virginity is necessarilyconnoted(see
RobertsonSmith, Prophets, Revd. Ed. pp. 426 f.). To express that idea a
different word (běthûlâh) must have been employed, although evenit might
not be wholly free from ambiguity (? Joel1:8). It is, of course, notdisputed
that ‘almâh may be used of a virgin (as Genesis 24:43;Exodus 2:8); but even
if this usage were more uniform than it is, it would still be far from proving
that virginity was an essentialofthe notion. It would appear, therefore, that
the idea of a miraculous conceptionwas not present to Isaiah’s mind at this
time, since a prediction of such astounding import must surely have been

clothed in unambiguous language. Nordoes the def. art., which is used in the
original, necessarilydenote a particular individual. (Cf. 2 Samuel 17:17, and
see Davidson, Synt. § 21 e.)So far as grammar and context go, the expression
may mean any young woman, fit to become a mother, whether as yet married
or unmarried.
shall conceive, and bear a son]The same phrase in Genesis 16:11;Jdg 13:5. In
the passage before us the verbs in the original are both participles, and might
refer either to the present or the future. But it is doubtful if we canfairly
apply one to the present and the other to the future, translating “is with child
and shall bear.” Since the birth is certainly future, it seems natural to take the
first verb in a future sense also.
and shall call] An archaic form, easilymistakenfor 2nd pers. (so LXX. &c.).
The mother names the child, as in Genesis 4:1; Genesis 4:25;Genesis 19:37 f.;
Genesis 29:32, &c. An instructive parallel is the naming of the child Ichabod,
born to Eli’s daughter-in-law on the dark day when the ark of God was taken
and the glory departed from Israel(1 Samuel 4:19-22).
Immanuel] “With us is God.” The battle-cry of Gustavus Adolphus in the
Thirty Years War, “Gottmit uns,” was also Isaiah’s watchwordfor the
coming crisis (cf. ch. Isaiah8:8; Isaiah 8:10); and like other greatthoughts of
his ministry he as it were gives it personaland concrete actuality by
conceiving it as embodied in the name of a child.
Additional Note on Chap. Isaiah 7:14-16Probablyno single passageofthe Old
Testamenthas been so variously interpreted or has given rise to so much
controversyas the prophecy contained in these verses. The difficulties arise
mainly from the fact that while the terms of the prediction are so indefinite as
to admit a wide range of possibilities, we have no recordof its actual

fulfilment in any contemporary event. The purpose of this note will be to
indicate the chief lines along which a solution has been soughtfor, and to
considerhow far they satisfy the conditions of a reasonable historicalexegesis.
But before entering on this survey, it will be well to enquire what sort of
fulfilment the context would lead us to expect, or in other words what kind of
sign would serve the immediate objects of the prophet’s missionto Ahaz.
We are not entitled to assume as a matter of course that the sign here given
will be in all respects sucha sign as Ahaz might have askedat an earlier stage
of the interview (Isaiah 7:11). In the first place it need not involve an objective
miracle, although a miracle of the most stupendous order was originally put
within the option of Ahaz. Any of the senses in which the word “sign” is used
(see on Isaiah 7:11) in connexion with a prediction, would satisfy the
requirements of Isaiah7:14. But further there is a presumption that the
import of the sign will have been changedby what has taken place in the
interval. Isaiah’s first message to Ahaz is an unqualified assurance of
deliverance from the designs of Rezin and Pekah, and the sign first offered
would be a sign of that and that alone. The prospectof an Assyrian invasion
was no doubt in the background of the prophet’s horizon, but his messageto
Ahaz is complete in itself and takes no accountof that final catastrophe. It is
manifest, however, that in Isaiah’s mind the whole aspectofaffairs is altered
by the king’s refusal. The Assyrian invasion is brought into immediate
connexion with the attack of the allies, and a new forecastofthe future is
presentedby the prophet in which three greatevents follow closelyon one
another: (1) the collapse ofthe project of the allied princes, (2) the total
destruction of Syria and Ephraim by the Assyrians, and (3) the devastationof
Judah by the same ruthless conquerors. And the most natural supposition is
that the new sign will be an epitome of this new and darker outlook, that is to
say it will be a pledge at once of the immediate deliverance and of the
judgment that lies behind it. Indeed this view is so obviously implied by Isaiah
7:14-16 that we are shut up to it unless, with some critics, we remove Isaiah
7:15 as an interpolation.

Now there are three features of the prediction in which the import of the sign
may be lookedfor: (i) the birth of the child, (ii) his name, and (iii) his history.
And of these three the last is certainly an essentialelementof the prophecy, as
is shewn by Isaiah7:15-16. With regard to the other two we canonly say that
it is antecedentlyimprobable that either of them should be without some
specialsignificance.
(i) If the import of the sign be soughtmainly in the birth of the child it
becomes almostnecessaryto assume that the terms of the prophecy point to
something extraordinary and mysterious in the circumstances ofthe birth.
This is the case withthe traditional Christian interpretation, which finds in it
a direct prediction of the miraculous conceptionof the Virgin Mother of our
Lord. The chief support of this view has always been the authority of the
EvangelistMatthew, who cites Isaiah 7:14 in relating the birth of Jesus (Isaiah
1:22-23). But it must be observedthat such a citation is not decisive as to the
original sense ofthe passage, anymore than Matthew 2:15 determines the
original sense ofHosea 11:1. The greatdifficulty of the interpretation is that
such an event could by no means serve the purpose of a sign to Ahaz. It may
be freely admitted, in view of Isaiah7:11, that the expectationof a
parthenogenesis is not too bold to be attributed to Isaiahin this moment of
ecstatic inspiration. But if this be granted on the one hand it must be conceded
on the other that he expectedthe miracle to be wrought in the immediate
future; his language (“a virgin is about to conceive”)implies that the
prediction is on the eve of fulfilment, and the assurance in Isaiah7:16 is
nugatory if the promised sign was not to happen for more than 700 years.
Moreover, suchan idea would require to be unambiguously expressed, and we
have seenthat the word ‘almâh does not connote virginity in the strict sense.
Whateverelement of truth, therefore, may underlie this exegesis, it can
scarcelybe held to afford an adequate solution of the problem presented by
the oracle in its primary and historical application.

(ii) Another class ofexplanations regards the event as a sign to Ahaz and
nothing more, and of these we may examine first those which find the chief
significance ofthe sign in the naming of the child. Perhaps the most
persuasive presentationof this view is that given by Duhm. According to that
expositor, the ‘almâh is any young mother who may give birth to a child in the
hour of Judah’s deliverance from Syria and Ephraim. “God(is) with us” will
be the spontaneous exclamationof child-bearing women in that time; and to
such utterances at the moment of birth a certainoracular significance was
attached, which causedthem to be perpetuated in the name of the child. The
child (or children) bearing the name Immanuel will grow up as a sign to Ahaz,
first of the genuineness ofIsaiah’s inspiration, who foretold the event, and
secondof the yet future judgment threatened on the same occasionand his
own rejectionby Jehovah. To this theory no exception canbe takenon
grammaticalor historicalgrounds. It is undoubtedly rendered easierby the
excisionof Isaiah 7:15, which Duhm advocates. Ifthat verse be retained one
feels that the sign is rather overloadedby a circumstance which is directly
opposedto the meaning of the name. And apart from this there will perhaps
remain an impression that justice has not been done to the emphasis with
which the birth is announced. Why, on this view, should the mother be an
‘almâh—a young woman?
(iii) A third view (not to be sharply distinguished from ii) lays stress not so
much on the birth or the naming as on the history of the child, which becomes
a sort of chronologicalthreadon which political events are strung. The
meaning is: before the birth of a certain child Judah will have experienceda
greatdeliverance (Isaiah 7:14), before he has emergedfrom infancy, Syria
and Ephraim will have disappeared(Isaiah 7:16) and at a later stage ofhis
development the land of Judah will be reduced to a pastoralwilderness
(Isaiah 7:15). An interesting parallel is found in the child Pollio in Vergil’s
fourth Eclogue,and another from the life of Mohammed has been lately
pointed out by Mr Bevan[33]. And as in these two casesa particular child is
the subjectof the sign, so here expositors have hazarded severalguesses as to
the identity of the ‘almâh. She has been supposedto be (a) the wife of Isaiah,
either the mother of Shearjashub, or a secondwife (some identifying

Immanuel with Maher-shalal-hash-baz, ch. Isaiah8:3), (b) a damsel in the
harem of Ahaz (the mother of Hezekiahis excluded by the chronology), or (c)
a young woman among the bystanders, indicated by a gesture. None ofthese
conjectures canbe pronounced altogetherhappy. They are all alike
discredited by a certain touch of vulgarity implied in the designationof some
known individual as “the damsel.”
[33] JewishQuarterly Review, Oct. 1893, pp. 220 ff. The incident is that of a
Jew who was discoursing to an Arab tribe at Medina about the resurrection
and the last judgment. “ ‘But,’ said they, ‘what is the sign (âyat, Hebr. ‫)אֹות‬ of
this?’ ‘A prophet,’ he answered, ‘sentfrom that country yonder,’ pointing
with his hand towards Meccaand Yemen. ‘But when,’ they asked, ‘do you
think he will come?’Then he lookedatme and said, ‘If this boy reaches the
full term of life, he will see him.’ And in factbefore another day had passed
God sent His Apostle to dwell among us, and we believed on him, &c.”
An ingenious modification of the last two theories recently propounded by an
American writer[34], differs from all others in excluding the prospect of
deliverance from the import of the sign, whose significanceis found in the
contrastbetweenthe name of the child and his history. The name Immanuel
embodies the religious optimism of the king and nation, their false trust in the
protection of Jehovah;the hardships through which the child passes
symbolise the providential course of events under which this delusive
confidence must collapse. This interpretation, however, requires the excision
of at leastthe latter part of Isaiah 7:16, and also the rejection of ch. Isaiah8:9-
10 as spurious.
[34] F. C. Porter, in the Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. xiv. 1895, pp. 19–
36.

(iv) Another line of exegesis whichhas commended itself to a large number of
modern expositors starts from the idea that here for the first time the figure of
the personalMessiahis flashed on Isaiah’s mind. On this view the prophecy is
invested with profound religious significance, whichis not the case with the
two last-mentioned theories. Face to face with the craven-heartedmonarch
who had betrayed his trust as guardian of the liberty and independence of
Judah, the prophet receives this revelation of the true King, as one born to his
people in the hour of danger, sharing their poverty and affliction in his youth
and waiting the time when “the government shall be upon his shoulder” and
the perfectkingdom of God shall be established(Isaiah 9:6). The attention is
concentratedon the mysterious personality of the child, that of the mother
falls into the background. She may be some unknown daughter of the royal
house, or a nameless maiden of lowly rank; the essentialfactis that in the
speedy advent of Immanuel, in his name, in his experience, men will recognise
the God-given“sign” of the truth of the prophet’s words. This on the whole
seems to be the theory which affords the most adequate solution of the
complex difficulties of the passage.It satisfies tie claims of a truly historical
interpretation, and at the same time it accounts, as none of the other modern
theories do, for the impassionedfervour, the indefinable atmosphere of
mystery and emotion with which the words are surrounded. It is no objection
to it that the anticipation remained an unrealisedideal long after the
opportunity for a sign to Ahaz had passedaway;for a similar remark applies
to the whole conceptionof a personalMessiah, whose appearance Isaiah
certainly expectedto synchronise with the Assyrian invasion. Not the leastof
its recommendations, indeed, is the factthat it brings this prophecy into line
with the other greatMessianic propheciesofch. Isaiah 9:1-7 and Isaiah11:1
ff.; and if the last words of ch. Isaiah8:8 are rightly rendered “thy land, O
Immanuel” (which howeverhas been disputed, see on the verse below)a link
would be supplied which would make the proof almostirresistible, since no
ordinary child, born or unborn, could be naturally apostrophisedas the
ownerof the land.
(v) An allegoricalinterpretationof the prophecy has been advanced by a few
scholars, the “virgin” being takenas a personificationof the Davidic house, or

of the religious community, and the child either as the Messiah, oras a figure
of the new generation;or else the birth is explained as merely a general
symbol of deliverance. But all this is purely fanciful.
A few words may be added in conclusionon the pre-Christian acceptationof
the passage.Froma very early time it seems to have been recognisedthat a
certain mystery clung to the words, that their significance was notexhausted
by the circumstances in which they were originally spoken, but that they had
an eschatologicalreference,pointing forward to the birth of the Messiah, as
the wonderful event on which all the hope of the future hung. The first trace
of this tendency is found in Micah5:3 : “therefore will he (Jehovah)give them
up until the time when a (certain) travailing woman hath brought forth, &c.”
These words canhardly be explained otherwise than as a reference to Isaiah
7:14; and if it were certain that they were written by a contemporaryof Isaiah
they would go far to determine the sense in which the earlierprophecy should
be understood. Since, however, they belong to a part of the book of Micah
whose age is disputed, they may possibly representa secondaryapplication of
Isaiah’s prophecy rather than its primary intention. A further advance in the
same direction appears to be indicated by the rendering of our passagein the
LXX. It is almost incredible that the use of the word παρθένος for ‘almâh in so
important a connexionshould be due to mere laxity on the part of the
translator. More probably it expresses a beliefcurrent in Jewishcircles that
the Messiahwas to be born of a virgin. A good dealof evidence has been
adduced to shew that such an expectationactually prevailed amongstboth
Alexandrian and PalestinianJews [35], and if it existed it could hardly fail to
influence the exegesisofthis prophecy. It was only when the prophecy was
appealedto by the Christians in proof of the Messiahshipof Jesus that the
Jewishexegetesseemfinally to have repudiated the Messianic interpretation.
They refused to admit that the word ‘almâh could properly be translated
“virgin” and fell back on one or other of the theories mentioned under (iii).
The Christian Fathers on the other hand resolutely upheld the correctnessof
the LXX., although the post-Christian Greek versions ofAquila, Theodotion
and Symmachus agree in rendering the word by νεᾶνις. The patristic view
maintained an all but unquestioned ascendancywithin the Church till the

dawn of historical criticism in the eighteenthcentury, when it began to be
recognisedthat on the philologicalquestion the Jews were right.
[35] See Mr F. P. Badham’s letter in the Academy of 8 June, 1895.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 14. - Therefore. To show that your perversity cannot change God's
designs, which will be accomplished, whetheryou hear or whether you
forbear. The Lord himself; i.e. "the Lord himself, of his own free will,
unasked." Will give you a sign. "Signs" were ofvarious kinds. They might be
actualmiracles performed to attest a Divine commission(Exodus 4:3-9); or
judgments of God, significative of his power and justice (Exodus 10:2); or
memorials of something in the past (Exodus 13:9, 16); or pledges of something
still future. Signs of this last-mentioned kind might be miracles (Judges 6:36-
40; 2 Kings 20:8-11), or prophetic announcements (Exodus 3:12; 1 Samuel
2:34; 2 Kings 19:29). These lastwould only have the effectof signs on those
who witnessedtheir accomplishment. Behold. "A forewarning of a great
event" (Cheyne). A virgin shall conceive. It is questioned whether the word
translated "virgin," viz. 'almah, has necessarilythat meaning; but it is
admitted that the meaning is borne out by every other place in which the
word occurs m the Old Testament(Genesis 24:43;Exodus 2:8; Psalm 68:25;
Proverbs 30:19; Song of Solomon1:3; Song of Solomon 6:8). The LXX.,
writing two centuries before the birth of Christ, translate by παρθένος. The
rendering "virgin" has the support of the bestmodern Hebraists, as Lowth,
Gesenins, Ewald, Delitzsch, Kay. It is observedwith reasonthat unless 'almah
is translated "virgin," there is no announcement made worthy of the grand
prelude: "The Lord himself shall give you a sign - Behold!" The Hebrew,
however, has not "a virgin," but "the virgin" (and so the Septuagint, ἡ
παρθένος), which points to some specialvirgin, pro-eminent above all others.
And shall call; better than the marginal rendering, thou shalt call. It was
regardedas the privilege of a mother to determine her child's name (Genesis
4:25; Genesis 16:11;Genesis 29:32-35;Genesis 30:6-13,18-21,24;Genesis
35:18, etc.), although formally the father gave it (Genesis 16:15;2 Samuel

12:24;Luke 1:62, 83). Immanuel. Translatedfor us by St. Matthew (Matthew
1:23) as "God with us" (μεθ ἡμῶνὁ Θεός). (Comp. Isaiah8:8, 10.)
Isaiah7:15 Verse 15. - Butter and honey shall he eat. His fare shall be of the
simplest kind (comp. ver. 22). That he may know;rather, till he shall know
(Rosenmüller); i.e. till he come to years of discretion. (The rendering of the
Revisers of1885, "whenhe knoweth," is less satisfactory.)
- Note on the generalpurport of the Immanuel prophecy. Few prophecies
have been the subjectof so much controversy, or calledforth such a variety of
exegesis, as this prophecy of Immanuel. Rosenmüllergives a list of twenty-
eight authors who have written dissertations upon it, and himself adds a
twenty-ninth. Yet the subject is far from being exhausted. It is still asked:
(1) Were the mother and sonpersons belonging to the time of Isaiahhimself,
and if so, what persons? Or,
(2) Were they the Virgin Mary and her Son Jesus? Or,
(3) Had the prophecy a double fulfillment, first in certain persons who lived in
Isaiah's time, and secondlyin Jesus and his mother?
I. The first theory is that of the Jewishcommentators. Originally, they
suggestedthat the mother was Abi, the wife of Ahaz (2 Kings 18:2), and the
son Hezekiah, who delivered Judah from the Assyrian power (see Justin,
'Dial. cum Tryphon.,' p. 262). But this was early disproved by showing that,
according to the numbers of Kings (2 Kings 16:2; 2 Kings 18:2), Hezekiahwas
at leastnine years old in the first yearof Ahaz, before which this prophecy

could not have been delivered (Isaiah 7:1). The secondsuggestionmade
identified the mother with Isaiah's wife, the "prophetess" ofIsaiah8:3, and
made the sona child of his, calledactually Immanuel, or else his son Maher-
shalal-hash-baz(Isaiah 8:1) under a symbolical designation. But ha-'almah,
"the virgin," would be a very strange title for Isaiah to have given his wife,
and the rank assignedto Immanuel in Isaiah8:8 would not suit any son of
Isaiah's. It remains to regard the 'almah as "some young woman actually
present," name, rank, and position unknown, and Immanuel as her son, also
otherwise unknown (Cheyne). But the grand exordium, "The Lord himself
shall give you a sign- Behold!" and the rank of Immanuel (Isaiah 8:8), are
alike againstthis.
II. The purely Messianic theoryis maintained by Rosenmüllerand Dr. Kay,
but without any considerationof its difficulties. The birth of Christ was an
event more than seven hundred years distant. In what sense and to what
persons could it be a "sign" ofthe coming deliverance of the land from Rezin
and Pekah? And, upon the purely Messianic theory, what is the meaning of
ver. 16? Syria and Samaria were, in fact, crushed within a few years of the
delivery of the prophecy. Why is their desolationput off, apparently, till the
coming of the Messiah, andeven till he has reacheda certain age? Mr. Cheyne
meets these difficulties by the startling statement that Isaiah expectedthe
advent of the Messiahto synchronize with the Assyrian invasion, and
consequentlythought that before Rezin and Pekahwere crushedhe would
have reachedthe age ofdiscernment. But he does not seemto see that in this
case the sigma was altogetherdisappointing and illusory. Time is an essential
element of a prophecy which turns upon the word "before" (ver. 16). If this
faith of Isaiah's disciples was arousedand their hopes raised by the
announcement that Immanuel was just about to be born (Mr. Cheyne
translates, "A virgin is with child"), what would be the revulsion of feeling
when no Immanuel appeared?

III. May not the true accountof the matter be that suggestedby Bishop Lowth
- that the prophecy had a double bearing and a double fulfillment? "The
obvious and literal meaning of the prophecy is this," he says:"that within the
time that a young woman, now a virgin, should conceive and bring forth a
child, and that child should arrive at such an age as to distinguish between
goodand evil, that is, within a few years, the enemies of Judah should be
destroyed." But the prophecy was so worded, he adds, as to have a further
meaning, which wan even "the original designand principal intention of the
prophet," viz. the Messianic one. All the expressions ofthe prophecy do not
suit both its intentions - some are selectedwith reference to the first, others
with reference to the secondfulfillment - but all suit one or the other, and
some suit both. The first child may have receivedthe name Immanuel (comp.
Ittiel) from a faithful Jewishmother, who believed that God was with his
people, whatever dangers threatened, and may have reachedyears of
discretion about the time that Samaria was carried awaycaptive. The second
child is the true "Immanuel," "Godwith us," the king of Isaiah 8:8; it is his
mother who is pointed at in the expression, "the virgin," and on his accountis
the grand preamble; through him the people of God, the true Israel, is
delivered from its spiritual enemies, sin and Satan - two kings who continually
threaten it.
Keil and DelitzschBiblical Commentary on the Old Testament
"Forhead of Aram is Damascus,and head of Damascus Rezin, and in five-
and-sixty years will Ephraim as a people be brokenin pieces. And head of
Ephraim is Samaria, and head of Samaria the son of Remalyahu; if ye believe
not, surely ye will not remain." The attempt to remove Isaiah7:8, as a gloss at
variance with the context, which is supported by Eichhorn, Gesenius, Hitzig,
Knobel, and others, is a very natural one; and in that case the train of thought
would simply be, that the two hostile kingdoms would continue in their former
relation without the annexation of Judah. But when we look more closely, it is

Jesus was immanuel

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Semelhante a Jesus was immanuel

Semelhante a Jesus was immanuel (20)

Mais de GLENN PEASE

Mais de GLENN PEASE (20)

Último

Último (20)

Jesus was immanuel