Isaiah 7:14 is one of the texts that we usually classify among the so-called “messianic prophecies”—a name that has the disadvantage of making us forget that not only a handful of texts, but the entire Old Testament is “messianic.” Yet the intent is clear: We believe that in this verse the birth of Christ was foretold by God centuries in advance. We confess this based on the testimony of Scripture itself, for Matthew sees this word fulfilled in the events of Christ’s birth.

The Challenge of Interpretation⤒🔗

This text, however, is not so easy to explain. The body of literature that attempts to clarify this verse continues to grow, and the proverb almost seems true here: “so many heads, so many opinions.” A simple Bible reader might ask, “How can scholars have so much difficulty with this? Doesn’t this clearly predict the birth of Christ?”

Immediate or Mediated Fulfillment?←⤒🔗

The great question is whether we should understand this word as directly messianic or indirectly messianic. The interpretation that sees it as directly messianic takes the verse to mean that Isaiah was thinking solely of the birth of Christ. But the indirectly messianic interpretation holds that this word had an initial, provisional fulfillment in the birth of a “type” of Christ, while its final, definitive, and complete fulfillment came in the birth of Christ himself. Even with this second interpretation, the birth of Christ is still announced here; the difference being that this verse is thought to have already had a partial fulfillment in the birth of another child.

A Common Reformed Understanding←⤒🔗

Today, most Reformed interpreters favour the indirectly messianic explanation. They rightly see that such an interpretation is required in several other places in Scripture. Consider Hosea 11:1: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” Matthew applies this word to the flight into Egypt (Matthew 2:15). Everyone agrees that in Hosea 11 the “son” refers to the people of Israel, who were once delivered by God from Egypt; and what Israel experienced then is fulfilled in the child Jesus. This is therefore also an indirectly messianic text: it refers first to Israel, but ultimately to Christ. In the same way, it is quite possible that in Isaiah 7, the “son” refers fully to Christ, but also, in the first instance, to another child.

Historical Context: The Syro-Ephraimite Crisis←⤒🔗

Indeed, this is what we must conclude, based on the context in which this word appears in Isaiah 7. We are placed in the events of 735/734 BC. Ahaz has just ascended the throne and is immediately threatened by Rezin of Syria and Pekah of Israel. He is drawn into the so-called Syro-Ephraimite War. The situation looks bleak for the house of David and the people of David. What could the Southern Kingdom of Judah do against the Northern Kingdom of Israel, especially when Israel had secured the help of Syria?

God’s Sign to Ahaz←⤒🔗

But then God sends Isaiah to Ahaz with the message: What these kings are plotting against you will not come to pass (verse 7)! That sounded almost unbelievable. To help him believe, Ahaz is invited to ask for a sign, choosing whatever sign he desires. However, Ahaz refuses the sign God offers, cloaking his refusal with pious words, though it is really unbelief. But the sign will be given regardless! If Ahaz will not ask in faith, God himself will choose and give the sign: A virgin will conceive and bear a son, and before that child is grown, the threat of both kings will have been removed. The very birth of this child will be the guarantee to Ahaz that his house and his people will indeed be delivered from their peril.

An Initial Fulfillment in Ahaz’s Day←⤒🔗

This prophecy, therefore, must have had an initial fulfillment in Ahaz’s time. If this word referred only to Christ, how could his birth be a sign for Ahaz, who lived more than seven centuries earlier? It is clear that this child, in the first place, refers to a son born in the days of Ahaz; only then could his birth serve as proof to Ahaz that God’s promise would come true.

The Identity of the Child←⤒🔗

Now comes the difficult question: which child was this? Who is meant by “the virgin” and by “her son”?

There are many interpretations, too many to mention in full. I will only state what I believe is still the most likely explanation: that “the virgin” refers to Ahaz’s own bride, Queen Abi, the daughter of Zechariah (2 Kings 18:2). The son whose birth is foretold here would then be Hezekiah.

Supporting Arguments←⤒🔗

Let me briefly outline the arguments for this view. First, the text literally says: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive” (not a virgin, but the virgin). When Ahaz is told about “the virgin,” a specific young woman is clearly meant. Who else could that be but his own bride? Some suggest it refers to an unnamed woman. But how could the pregnancy of a woman not specifically identified to Ahaz serve as a sign for him? How could the birth of an unspecified child be a guarantee to him?

Further, in Isaiah 8:8 the prophet says that the Assyrians “will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel.” Here Judah is called Immanuel’s land. This makes sense only if Immanuel is a royal child, someone who will one day call this land his own. Only a king—not an ordinary subject—can speak of a land as “his.”

Thus, the immediate meaning of the prophecy is this: Isaiah tells Ahaz that his wife Abi will bear him a son, and in this son she will see the sign that God is with Judah in this dark time. She will express this in the child’s name: “God-with-us,” Immanuel. And the birth of this son will be proof to Ahaz that God’s promise will indeed be fulfilled: that the threat of Syria and Ephraim will be removed. Before Hezekiah grows up—or even before he knows right from wrong—the two enemies will already be gone, and Judah will be delivered.

The birth of a prince is the guarantee of the deliverance of the dynasty, the kingdom, and the people.

The Jewish Understanding←⤒🔗

This is also how the Jews have traditionally understood this prophecy. That is not in itself proof, but it is striking that they consistently associate Immanuel with Hezekiah. For example, a saying from Johanan ben Zakkai has been preserved: “At the hour of his death, he said to them (his disciples): ‘Place a seat for Hezekiah, King of Israel, who is coming.’”

It is clear that he also understood this prophecy as referring to the Messiah, who had his type in Hezekiah.¹

Fulfillment in Christ←⤒🔗

This understanding gives depth to Matthew’s use of the prophecy, and in fact, only in this way does it come into full focus.