THE IDENTITY OF IMMANUEL: WHO IS THE MESSIAH?

THE IDENTITY OF IMMANUEL: WHO IS THE MESSIAH?

By: Daniel McMillin 

“As epitomized in Isaiah 7:14,” Daniel Treier writes, “the Old Testament anticipated the first advent of Jesus Christ as Immanuel, God with us, incarnate in a fully human life. This incarnate state began with the Holy Spirit overshadowing Jesus’s virginal conception in Mary. Returning God's redemptive presence to the covenant people, the eternal Son thus assumed a fully human nature and identified impeccably with humanity’s fallen history.”[1] Unknowingly, the prophet Isaiah sees a glimpse of the Messiah in view of the virgin birth. Later, the evangelist Matthew views this text as a prophecy that is fulfilled by Jesus of Nazareth, who was born of a virgin. Most interpreters would appeal to Matthew and assume that the debate is over concerning the identity of Immanuel since the New Testament affirms that this is Jesus. However, in light of recent scholarship, Immanuel’s identity appears to be unclear. Some skeptics accuse Matthew, along with the other Gospel writers, of misusing or misinterpreting the Old Testament. Before moving to the New Testament and arguing the identity of the Messiah is Jesus, it may be appropriate to begin with Isaiah’s writings within its own context and then move to the New Testament and see how it informs our understanding of Immanuel.

There are seven major interpretations that are offered for the identity of Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14: (1) An unidentified child born from the house of David, (2) King Hezekiah (3) Maher-shalal-hash-baz, (4) an anonymous prophet, (5) A collective remnant in Israel, (6) a dual prophecy that is fulfilled by a figure that lived during Isaiah’s time and the future Messiah, and (7) an exclusively Messianic interpretation where Jesus is the only candidate that fulfills this role.

The prophet writes, “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” (Is. 7:14). In Isaiah, Immanuel is viewed as a “sign” of divine judgment over Ahaz as well as a deliverance of Israel. At this point, the sign will be something that reveals how God will be with His people. Of course, this was not fulfilled during the time of Isaiah. Thus, it speaks to a future figure that will be a sign and will proudly wear the name Immanuel. “Ultimately, the sign anticipates the virginal conception of Jesus Christ, even if there was a proximate referent that is canonically obscure.”[2] Immanuel is viewed as a reminder of God’s presence— “God with us” (Is. 7:14; 8:8; 10)—and the fulfillment of God’s promises.

According to Isaiah, Immanuel will be born of a virgin maiden. The word “virgin” (alma) is heavily debated in scholarship concerning the translation of this word. Significantly, Isaiah does not use the words naara (“young woman”) or batula (“virgin”) but instead uses an unusual or ambiguous term to describe the woman in 7:14. Oswalt suggests that Isaiah uses the more ambiguous word “precisely because the significance of this sign that God was with his people would not be exhausted in the deliverance from Syria and Israel that Isaiah was predicting. In the future, Immanuel would be truly present with his people in their human flesh as a result of a virgin birth.”[3] The Septuagint (LXX) translates this word parthenos (“virgin”) rather than using a less ambiguous word for “young woman.” This suggests that the Jewish interpreters who translated Isaiah 7 from Hebrew to Greek believed that the word Isaiah used could mean “virgin.” If that is the case, then Matthew would not be misusing or distorting the Old Testament but would align himself with the prophet Isaiah.[4] Blomberg notes that “this would suggest that already before the NT [New Testament] age at least some Jews had come to link the passages in Isa. 7-9 together and to deduce that there would be an additional, longer-term fulfillment of the birth of a messianic king, portended by more supernatural conception.”[5]

In Matthew 1:22, Matthew suggests that the birth of Jesus “took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet” before quoting Isaiah in verse 23. Matthew sees the birth of Jesus as the ultimate fulfillment of the virgin birth prophesied in Isaiah 7:14. As Chisholm has noted, “Jesus the Messiah is the fulfillment of the Davidic ideal prophesied by Isaiah, the one whom Immanuel foreshadowed.”[6] By the incarnation (hypostatic union), Jesus rightly wears the name “Immanuel” as He literally walks the earth as “God among us.”

END NOTES

[1] Daniel J. Trier, Lord Jesus Christ (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2023), 131.

[2] Treier, Lord Jesus Christ, 137.

[3] John Oswalt, “Isaiah, Book of” in Dictionary of the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Ed. G.K. Beale, D.A. Carson, Benjamin L. Gladd, and Andrew David Naselli (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2023), 355.

[4] Oswalt, “Isaiah,” 355.

[5] Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Ed. G.K. Beale and D.A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 4.

[6] Robert B. Chisholm Jr., Handbook on the Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 34.