ARC Wiki

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.Isaiah 7:14 (KJV)

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.Isaiah 7:14 (NRSV)

Isaiah 7:14 is the most debated verse in the bible. Christians hold it as a lynchpin prophecy of Jesus, Jewish sources claim that Christians edited their bible and intentionally mistranslated the verse in order for it to appear Christological.

The Christian position is beautifully illustrated by this passage from CARM:

“Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel,” (Isaiah 7:14).

Isaiah 7:14 says that a virgin will bear a son. The problem is dealing with the Hebrew word for virgin, which is almah. According to the Strong's Concordance it means, “virgin, young woman 1a) of marriageable age 1b) maid or newly married.” Therefore, the word almah does not always mean virgin. The word “occurs elsewhere in the Old Testament only in Genesis 24:43 (maiden); Exodus 2:8 (girl); Psalm 68:25 (maidens); Proverbs 30:19 (maiden); Song of Songs 1:3 (maidens); 6:8 (virgins).”1 Additionally, there is a Hebrew word for virgin: bethulah. If Isaiah 7:14 was meant to mean virgin instead of young maiden, then why wasn't the word used here?

The LXX is a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek. This translation was made around 200 B.C. by 70 Hebrew scholars. In Isaiah 7:14, they translated the word almah into the Greek word parthenos. According Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature,2 parthenos means virgin. This word is used in the New Testament of the Virgin Mary (Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:27) and of the ten virgins in the parable (Matt. 25:1, 7, 11). If the Hebrews translated the Hebrew word almah into the Greek word for virgin, then they understood what the Hebrew text meant here.

Why would Isaiah choose to use the word almah and not bethulah? It was probably because he wanted to demonstrate that the virgin would also be a young woman. Is it still a prophecy? Of course.https://carm.org/isaiah-7-14-virgin

However, there are some initial problems with this approach which do not require a deep dive into Isaiah. Initially we see that a) absolutely, from the text, the messiah must be a physical descendant of David:

• Psalm 132:11
  • The Lord swore to David a sure oath from which he will not turn back: “One of the sons of your body I will set on your throne.

• Psalm 89:34-36
  • I will not violate my covenant or alter the word that went forth from my lips. Once for all I have sworn by my holiness; I will not lie to David. His offspring shall endure forever, his throne as long as the sun before me.

(and many others).

Also include: laws of tribal inheritance, ex. father only; ex. cannot be both levite and judah; through the woman may allow two fathers; so jewish status only is through the mother so as not to confuse tribal inheritance.

another;

11 from the time that I appointed judges over my people Israel. And I will give you rest from all your enemies. Moreover, the Lord declares to you that the Lord will make you a house. 12 When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men, 15 but my steadfast love will not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. 16 And your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me. Your throne shall be established forever.’” 2 Samuel 7:11-16 (ESV)

Not to mention the problems with The Genealogy of Jesus. Link to article – a whole other can of worms!

And even if everything else could be passed, we still have a multitude of verses such as

• Psalm 118:8-9
  • 8 It is better to take refuge in the Lord, than to trust in man.
  • 9 It is better to take refuge in the Lord, than to trust in princes.

However, the intent is not merely regarding the taking of refuge, but the very concept of salvation itself:

• Psalm 146:3
  • Do not put your faith in Kings, or in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation (who cannot save).

Jesus is referred to as the “Son of Man” 88 times in the New Testament. For example, Acts 7:56 where Stephen refers to Jesus as a son of man (“And he said, 'Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.'”) In fact, Son of Man is the primary title Jesus used when referring to Himself (e.g., Matthew 12:32; 13:37; Luke 12:8; John 1:51).

This alone should be enough, however, alone it leave the mystery of who in fact is the child, and what is the fulfillment of the prophecy. To complete our understanding of the matter let us deeply examine Isaiah and discover what is the intent of the author.

If we are going to examine an issue of this magnitude fairly we need to get all the information on the table. So before we begin the actual analysis, let us present the original Hebrew scripture alongside a standard KJV/Septuagint-based translation of the verse, then examine several competitive English translations (ESV, NASB, NIV, RSV, etc). Then everyone we will be well-equipped to discuss the verse and to understand the important aspects of this debate.

We immediately note that there are two main approaches to the translation of Isaiah 14, based around the translation of the word 'ha-almah' (the maiden/the virgin).

In contrast to the first list, this one is probably complete in the sense that it is standard Christian doctrine to translate the passage 'virgin' in comport with Matthew 1:23.

We know what biblical hebrew means because of how it is used in the bible.

The word Almah (ha-Almah) is a special biblical Hebrew word that appears only four times in the entire Bible (and as almot [plural] an additional three times).

14 I will say to a young woman, ‘Please lower your jar so I may drink.’ May the one you have chosen for your servant Isaac reply, ‘Drink, and I’ll give your camels water too.’ In this way I will know that you have been faithful to my master.”
15 Before he had finished praying, there came Rebekah with her water jug on her shoulder. She was the daughter of Bethuel son of Milcah (Milcah was the wife of Abraham’s brother Nahor). 16 Now the young woman was very beautiful. She was a virgin; no man had ever had sexual relations with her. She went down to the spring, filled her jug, and came back up.Genesis 24:14-17 (NET)

The first time it appears is in Genesis 24, where Rebeccah is refereed to as an almah and then also described secondarily as a betulah (the actual word for 'virgin' in Hebrew). This shows us that while almah can refer to virgin, it generaly does not imply so one way or another much the same way that “young woman” does not necessarily refer to a virgin. In this particular case it was necessary for God to specifically inform us she was a betulah; as almah would not have been sufficient for us to understand her situation.

NET was chosen here for readability, but it is important to note that the translators of the KJV, and many other popular versions such as NIV, NKJV, NASB, etc. translate almah here as young woman twice, and betulah as virgin. So, based on it's own best evidence from this passage, almah does not mean virgin. no matter if you consult the Septuagint or the Hebrew.

7 Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for thee?
8 And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother.Exodus 2:8 (KJV)

The second time is in Exodus 2:8 where Moses' older Sister is described as an almah. It would not make sense to assume that this passage making a statement regarding her virginity, only that she was a young woman. In the same way, the following uses of almah (or the plural, almot) are referring to people as young ladies and not necessarily to virgins:

• “The singers went before, the players on instruments followed after; among them were the damsels playing with timbrels.” (Psalm 68:25)
• “See, I am standing beside this spring. If a young woman comes out to draw water and I say to her, …” (Genesis 24:43)
• “Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes; your name is like perfume poured out. No wonder the young women love you!” (Song of Solomon 1:3)

“There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and maindens without number.” (Song of Solomon 6:8)

None of the above require ha-almah to refer to a virgin, they are just referring to a group of young women.

The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid.Proverbs 30:19 (KJV)

In the third case the word almah is used, it is used with the word ha-rah which is the past tense for conception – the woman is pregnant, not “will conceive”. Saying “will conceive” is a gross translation error. Of course this is kind of like cheating because this is the verse in question – but we are examining the verse in usage here, so we must mention all cases and how they read in the original Hebrew.

This is the fourth case. In this case the commonality with all four is that they are traceless; they have no trace or evidence left behind. In this case almah specifically cannot mean Virgin, because there is a sign that a woman is no a virgin (her blood).

Isaiah is not part of the Septuagint. We do not know who translated Isaiah, and even the introduction to the Septuagint explains how we do not know who translated Isaiah and notes that Isaiah is perhaps one of the worst anonymous translations the modern Septuagint contains. It is written in a form of Greek one might liken to street vernacular.

But even considering the Septuagint, “parthenos” does not always mean virgin either. It is well known that parthenos can mean a non-virgin as well; the translators referred to Dinah after she was raped as a 'parthenos' – after-the-fact. Therefore even if for some reason we simply did not have the Hebrew and we had to use the Septuagint, Isaiah isn't even part of the Septuagint and even then the higher quality translation of Genesis (which *is* part of the actual Septuagint) considers the word parthenos to be young woman.

Even though we must conclude the word doesn't always mean virgin, we must also allow that it might mean virgin. After all, (the young woman) might have been a virgin (it still might refer to someone who was a 'virgin') – because after all, almah can also mean virgin even if it is not explicitly stated. After all, many young women are indeed virgins so it wouldn't have been unusual.

Granted!

But the word ha-Almah is not used in isolation in Isaiah 7:14. It is defined by it's context:

• the hā in hā·‘al·māh means “the”, referring to someone who was known to King Ahaz.
• hā·rāh is a past tense verb; the woman is already pregnant.
• Ahaz is commanded to 'Look'; hin·nêh means 'to look; to observe; to behold'. He was to see the woman as it was being spoken to him.

As a result of pointing out the fact that the woman in his presence was already pregnant, and that there was nothing unusual about this situation in and of itself, it can be concluded that here 'almah' does not refer to a virgin.

In any case where almah is used, the meaning of ha-almah does not imply the woman is a virgin or not, or is pregnant or not, but merely that she is a young woman. Therefore the surrounding context must be taken into account if it becomes important whether or not she is pregant or a virgin (or both).

In the case of Isaiah 7:14 the surrounding context states that the woman is already pregnant, and that she is a woman in Ahaz's presence. Further, the actual prophecy as stated is that Ahaz's enemies will fall before the child grows up. Therefore we must reject the idea that it is a prophecy about an unknown woman in the future who will have a virgin birth.

The fact is, the Isaiah 7 prophecy doesn't even have anything to do with the birth or pregnancy, or conception of a child! It has nothing to do with the woman or the existence of the child, per-se, at all. Something else is going on here which is not discussed in Christian circles. Let's work it out:

Upon analysis, the prophecy is not that a child will be born, but that the age of the child shall be a marker (Isaiah 7:15) for the actual prophecy, which is given in Issiah 7:16-25! Yes, the birth (7:14) and age (7:15) are sunset clauses for the prophecy in 7:16-25.

But it gets better.

As we all know there were originally no chapter or verse marks in the Hebrew bible. If we continue reading in Chapter 8, we see something truly fascinating:

• 1 Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Ma′her-shal′al-hash′baz.
• 2 And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.
• 3 And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the Lord to me, Call his name Ma′her-shal′al-hash′baz;
• 4 For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.

As it turns out, the woman and the son are explicitly mentioned and named in the text! They are Isaiah's Wife and Isaiah's son! This is the fulfillment of the birth and age prophecies from Isaiah 7:20 (see Rashi on 7:20 for a detailed analysis).

• Isaiah 7:14: Translation Issues (by Dennis Bratcher)
• Isaiah Part 5: Isaiah 7:14 with Rabbi Tovia Singer