Understanding Isaiah (Lesson 5: The Coming Immanuel)

The Promised Immanuel, Israel’s Hope (Isaiah 7:14-15):

The sixth chapter of Isaiah left us with an account of Isaiah’s commission as a prophet, and a concise distillation of his essential prophetic message. As we move into chapter seven, we can begin to see how Isaiah reiterates and elaborates upon that same basic message in response to specific current events, addressing specific Jewish leaders. As pressing national events warrant, God sees fit to provide a more detailed glimpse of certain prophetic themes that he has already revealed to Isaiah: but no matter how much more detailed these later revelations are, they are still organically connected to, and in fact founded upon the kernel message laid out in the book’s introduction. Although this method of development is not consistent throughout the book of Isaiah (many of his prophecies are laid out thematically, with no historical context given), yet it is probably fair to say that the progression of prophetism in Israel as a whole unfolded along those basic lines: as events related to the impending exile of Israel and Judah arose, God provided an inspired interpretation of those events that would place them in the context of the movement of redemptive history, and use them to point the way to the glorious future restoration that the Messiah would effect. This general characteristic of the development of Jewish prophetism is seen as clearly in Isaiah chapter seven as anywhere.

At the beginning of this chapter, we find Judah in a desperate situation: Israel and Syria have made a league against Judah and are attempting to destroy it; and King Ahaz, together with all the people, is terrified. In response to this situation, God sends Isaiah and his young son to meet Ahaz in the way with a comforting message: the plan of Israel and Syria will utterly fail, and the two nations opposing Israel will soon come to naught. In order to affirm the validity of his promise, God graciously invites Ahaz to ask for a sign of confirmation. Wicked Ahaz, hypocritically citing concerns founded upon a false piety, rejects the Lord’s invitation. It is at this point that God takes upon himself to confirm his promise; which consideration leads us to our first text.

The sign that God unilaterally undertakes to perform is wondrous beyond any sign or miracle or mighty act of God throughout all of history. It is a sign that will serve as the fulfillment and consummation of every great promise made to Adam and Noah and Abraham and Moses and David. It is a sign that embodies the very essence of the covenant blessings, holds forth the answer to the great paradox of Divine mercy, and stands at the heart of history as the pivotal moment of God’s great work of redemption. It is the unfathomably deep and rich and comforting and awesome reality of God himself taking on human flesh and dwelling among his people. It is the sign of Immanuel, God with us.

The promise of the coming of Christ is here made more explicit than it ever had been before. He would be truly human, conceived of the seed of the woman (as prophesied in Genesis 3:15); and yet he would have no human Father, being born of a virgin. That God himself would be his Father, and that Christ himself would be God, is made clear from his name, Immanuel. And that, even though fully God, he would also be really human is emphasized in the following verse. He would eat butter and honey – his physical growth and human need for nourishment thereby established – until he became able to discern between good and evil – his intellectual and moral growth as a human thereby established. In other words, he would be fully God and fully man: and because of this, he would be fitted to fulfill the oft-repeated promise of God that he would dwell among his people – the promise at the very heart of the covenant of grace.

Objections to this understanding of the passage frequently arise at this point, so it would not be superfluous here to deal with them in brief. In the first place, some have said that, because the Hebrew word almah is broad enough in its range of possible meanings that it may be used simply to refer to a young woman; therefore, the sign promised has nothing to do at all with a virgin birth. However, this objection is without warrant for two reasons: first, given the context of God’s proffering to Judah a miraculous sign, it is absurd to think that he could be referring to the fact of a young woman’s giving birth. There is nothing miraculous or out of the ordinary about a young woman’s conceiving that would make it a sign of confirmation, as God had promised to give. Second, and most tellingly, when Matthew later quotes this passage in his gospel, he chooses the word parthenos to translate almah – a word which invariably means virgin. And this of course under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

In the second place, many have objected, “How can this be a sign, when it would not occur until long after Ahaz was already dead?” Those who object on that basis miss the nature of how this promise was to serve as a sign. It was to be a sign, one must remember, that Jerusalem would not here be destroyed. How could a believing Jew know that the Jews must not be utterly destroyed? Because the foundation of God’s covenant was that Messiah must be born of the Jewish line. “This is my sign that I will not permit Judah to be destroyed,” God says in effect: “I still have to fulfill my intention of sending a Redeemer, born of a Jewish virgin.” The promise of God born of woman, our Immanuel, is the foundation upon which rests every promise of God ever given (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:20). Therefore, this explicit prophecy of the way in which the Messiah would come, although meaningless to an unbeliever like Ahaz, would serve as an unshakeable confirmation to all those Jews who hoped in the Covenant. And it was indeed for these Jews (“you” is plural in the Hebrew), and not to Ahaz, that the sign was intended.

Finally, we have heard some object to our understanding because of the following verse, “For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that you abhor shall be forsaken of both her kings.” It would be no comfort and no sign to say that Syria and Israel would be forsaken by her kings before Christ was grown, they tell us, because that would not happen for several hundred years, by which time any king would obviously long have been dead. Although this may be a valid point, it assumes a connection between verse fifteen and verse sixteen which does not necessarily have to be there. By “the child” Isaiah may well intend his young son, Shearjashub. This in fact may be the reason that God commands him in verse three to take his son with him when he went to meet Ahaz. But the fact that this verse seems to be speaking of Isaiah’s son, or at least some young child at the time of the encounter, does not necessitate that the previous two verses must be about him as well. In fact, it is impossible that they should be about him: Immanuel is a title too weighty for anyone but Christ, fully God and fully man, to bear.

Immanuel, a Stone of Stumbling (Isaiah 8:13-15)

The remainder of Isaiah chapter seven indicates that, although utter destruction would not overtake Jerusalem (because of the coming of Christ), yet Judah would be devastated so that only a remnant would be left. Although Syria and Israel would not be successful in their war against Judah, the very nation to whom Ahaz was looking for help would eventually cause massive difficulties as a far more successful enemy. Ahaz was looking for security in Assyria, and not in the Lord. But Assyria would soon decimate the people of Judah.

Chapter eight begins with another sign that Syria and Israel would pose no threat to Judah, because they would be conquered by Assyria; however, Assyria would also severely afflict Judah, as waters overflowing the land and reaching up to the neck, that is, to the very verge of utterly drowning it. The sign was to be Isaiah’s son, named “Hasten to the plunder; rush to the spoil”. As in the case of Hosea, the naming of the child had prophetic significance. The meaning here is that, before the child grew old enough to call upon his parents, Syria and Israel would be spoiled. At this point, the subject of Immanuel is again brought up in verse eight. The comforting promise of Immanuel would hold forth no comfort to Ahaz, who, because of his disbelief would be handed over to Assyria. And here we find, moreover, that Immanuel, although by his very nature a sanctuary for those who fear him, would rather be a cause of destruction than deliverance to the Jewish nation as a whole.

The prophecy of verses 13-14 drives home the blessed result of the Immanuel prophecy. Jehovah of hosts himself will be a sanctuary for those who sanctify him. He will be a dwelling place for those who ascribe all glory to his name. However, the common Jewish notion that, when Messiah came he would deliver all the Jewish people simply by virtue of their being descended from Abraham is here utterly undone. Unless they believe as Abraham believed, this chief corner stone of the habitation of God among men would be a stumbling stone to crush them for their unbelief. Christ quotes a parallel passage from the psalms (Psalm 118:22), applying it to himself and to how the Jews stumbled at his claims, to their own destruction (Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:10); and Peter quotes this passage from Isaiah, once again applying it to Christ (1 Peter 2:4-8).

The remainder of the chapter gives us a glimpse of Immanuel speaking, saying that the children whom the Father would give to him would be a sign to Israel, but a sign at which they would stumble and hence be overcome with darkness. This prophecy came true when God gave many Gentiles to Christ, a reality which, although often indicated in the prophets, yet served as a cause for stumbling to many of the Jews (cf. Hebrews 2:10-13).

Immanuel, the Light of the Gentiles (Isaiah 9:1-7)

Although the promised arrival of Immanuel would have the adverse effect of darkness and stumbling for most of Israel, yet for the Gentiles as a whole, the result would be precisely the opposite. Accordingly, chapter nine opens up with one of the most comforting prophecies to the Gentile peoples ever recorded: although darkness would overtake Israel once again, as it previously had by the multiple afflictions of the Assyrian empire; yet this darkness would not be without hope, for it would be the occasion for a great light to spring forth to the hopeless, blinded Gentiles. This coming darkness is not without purpose: it is a concluding of all in unbelief, so that mercy might shine forth upon all by the advent of Immanuel (cf. Romans 11:32). This prophecy began to be fulfilled when Christ walked among the Gentiles of Galilee, causing the light of the gospel to dawn upon them (Matthew 4:14-17). In a broader sense, it is still being fulfilled even today, among us.

Verse three emphasizes the joy that would overflow to those whose eyes have been opened to the light of Immanuel. Although some translations render the second phrase, “not increased the joy,” the correct reading is most likely, “increased its joy.” In Hebrew, the word “not” is nearly identical to the word meaning “to it,” or “its.” In the context of the verse, only the latter reading makes sense.

In verse four, Isaiah compares the coming victory to be wrought by Christ with that of Gideon over the Midianites, because both of these victories are clearly shown not to be on the basis of human might, but by the miraculous power of God alone. Just as God delivered his people from their burdens and oppressions under Midian, so he will do again in a vaster and more glorious way when, through Immanuel, he delivers his people from the burdens and oppression of their sin. Verse five is a little more difficult, but it is most likely emphasizing, again, the difference between a victory in battle by normal human means and the victory that would be wrought by Christ. This would be no victory won by bloodshed and the tumult of battle, but would be as a fire, utterly and unstoppably consuming all resistance. Christ’s victory over the powers of darkness would be like a fire’s consuming of dry tinder.

Finally, in verses six and seven, we have the promises of the coming Immanuel laid out in perhaps the most well-known prophecy of the advent of Christ in all of scripture. This passage is justly famous. It contains one of the fullest and clearest formulations of the person and work of Christ anywhere in the bible. An eternity of meditation would not exhaust the rich depths of meaning and Christological significance found in these two verses. Who Christ is – born as a man, and yet the Almighty God – fast gives way to what he was born for: to fulfill the promises of all the covenants, reigning forever upon the throne of David, the central figure in the great epic story of redemption for which God created all of history, the King whose kingdom will forever increase. God grant that we may rejoice at these glorious truths, and worship the King with grateful hearts of wonder and awe!

Leave a Reply