| UP |
"Fulfill," Matthew 1:22, and Isaiah 7:14
July 15, 2017
Copyright © 2002 Ronald W. Leigh
Bible quotations are from the New International Version unless otherwise noted.
A. The Problem B. The Word "Fulfill" and its Usage in the New Testament C. Examples of Case One – "Fulfill" as Strict Fulfillment D. Examples of Case Two – "Fulfill" as Parallel E. An Example Combining Case One and Case Two F. Matthew 1:22-23 and the Context of Isaiah 7:14 G. The Difference between Double Fulfillment and Double Meaning ——————————————————————————————— |
A. The Problem
The New Testament contains two accounts of the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. One is found in Luke, where an angel informs the virgin Mary that she will have a child from the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:34-35). The other account is found in Matthew where Mary is said to be "with child through the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 1:18) and an angel explains to Joseph that the conception is "from the Holy Spirit" and that Joseph should name the boy "Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins" (verses 20-21). Matthew then uses the word fulfill and quotes Isaiah 7:14.
All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" – which means, "God with us." (Matthew 1:22-23)
The problem is that many interpreters have misunderstood the meaning of the word fulfill in this passage. They have assumed that Matthew is saying, in effect, that Isaiah 7:14 predicted the virgin birth of Christ. This has caused much confusion over Matthew's intended meaning and has distorted the real nature of Isaiah's prophecy.
We need to examine the usage of the word fulfill in the New Testament. Such a word study can show us the range of meanings for the word. Then, of course, the particular meaning the word has in any specific passage will need to be determined by examining that passage.
B. The Word "Fulfill" and its Usage in the New Testament
The English word fulfill, in Matthew 1:22 and many other passages, is translated from the Greek word plēroō (πληροω). This Greek word is used approximately 90 times in the New Testament and is a rather general word meaning to fill or complete. It is used to describe a wide variety of situations as illustrated in the following passages:
Matthew 13:48 – "When it [the net] was full, the fishermen pulled it up"
Matthew 23:32 – "Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!"
Mark 1:15 – "the time has come"
Luke 2:40 – "he was filled with wisdom"
Luke 3:5 – "every valley shall be filled in"
Luke 7:1 – "When Jesus had finished saying all this"
Luke 9:31 – "his departure, which he was about to bring to fulfillment"
Luke 21:24 – "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled"
John 12:3 – "the house was filled with the fragrance" (compare Acts 2:2)
John 15:11 – "that your joy may be complete" (compare Philippians 2:2)
John 16:6 – "you are filled with grief"
Acts 5:3 – "Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit"
Acts 5:28 – "you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching"
Acts 7:23 – "When Moses was forty years old"
Acts 7:30 – "After forty years had passed" (compare Acts 9:23)
Acts 12:25 – "When Barnabas and Saul had finished their mission
2 Corinthians 10:6 – "once your obedience is complete"
Ephesians 5:18 – "be filled with the Spirit"
2 Thessalonians 1:11 – "by his power he may fulfill every good purpose of yours"
These last three usages of plēroō are typical especially in the epistles.
Then, of course, there are those New Testament passages, found mostly in the gospels, which use the word plēroō when they speak of Old Testament passages being "fulfilled." But here too there is more than one possible meaning. In some cases plēroō refers to a strict fulfillment, in other cases it simply refers to a parallel, as described in the following table:
Case One: |
"fulfill" (πληροω) as strict fulfillment |
First passage (often in Old Testament) The O.T. passage predicts some future event, but does not record the occurrence of the event. |
Second passage (often in New Testament) The N.T. passage records the occurrence (fulfillment) of the predicted event and cites the O.T. passage as being fulfilled. This N.T. occurrence is the very thing referred to ahead of time in the O.T. passage. |
Case Two: |
"fulfill" (πληροω) as parallel |
First passage (often in Old Testament) The O.T. passage records an event or states a principle, but does not predict any long range future event (although it may record both a short range prediction and the occurrence of that predicted event.) |
Second passage (often in New Testament) The N.T. passage points out a parallel or similarity between a N.T. event and the O.T. event, or points out that a N.T. event illustrates and thus confirms a principle stated in the O.T. |
In Case One, the prophet is speaking about the future event identified in the New Testament passage. The event was not yet true (that is, it had not yet taken place) when predicted, but it would come true at a future time. It is not just that the New Testament writer points out some parallel, but that the event recorded in the New Testament is the very thing spoken of in the Old Testament prediction.
Here is an example of strict fulfillment. Jesus, talking about John the Baptist and his ministry in the desert, says
This is the one about whom it is written: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you." (Matthew 11:10, quoting Malachi 3:1)
Malachi records the Lord's prediction that he will send his messenger, and Jesus indicates that this prophecy was written about John the Baptist (notice the phrase "This is the one about whom it is written"). This is the essence of strict fulfillment.
The above pair of passages, like most of the pairs of passages examined in this paper, involve one passage from the Old Testament and another passage from the New Testament. However, there are also helpful examples of strict fulfillment in which both passages are located in the same book. We will briefly look at one such example in Luke, and another example in John.
Luke's example – Gabriel's pronouncement to Zechariah: The angel Gabriel had just given Zechariah the prediction that his wife Elizabeth would bear him a son, but Zechariah questioned this prediction on the basis of his age and his wife's age. So Gabriel responded, spelling out clearly the concept of strict fulfillment. When Luke records this event he uses the word plēroō which is translated in the NIV with the phrase "come true."
And now you will be silent and not able to speak until the day this happens, because you did not believe my words, which will come true at their proper time. (Luke 1:20)
John's example – Jesus' prediction regarding his manner of death: John uses "fulfill" in the strict sense when he comments on Jesus impending crucifixion.
This happened so that the words Jesus had spoken indicating the kind of death he was going to die would be fulfilled. (John 18:32, compare Matthew 16:21)
John clearly points out here that when Jesus spoke these words he was speaking about something future, not something current.
And this is the nature, and the test, of true predictive prophecy as described repeatedly in the Old Testament.
If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come
true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken
presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:22)
But the prophet who prophesies peace will be recognized as one truly sent by the LORD
only if his prediction comes true. (Jeremiah 28:9)
When all this comes true – and it surely will – then they will know that a prophet has
been among them. (Ezekiel 33:33)
Thus the essence of Case One is that it involves a prophet speaking about a future event which comes true only when that future event occurs. Each true prediction foretells a particular event or a particular sequence of events which is, strictly speaking, the fulfillment of that prediction.
In contrast, Case Two involves an Old Testament prophet speaking about a current or past event, or stating a principle, which is true at the time it is spoken and does not need a future event to make it true. Later, when the New Testament writer quotes this Old Testament prophet, he is in essence borrowing a phrase or sentence and placing it in a different historical and literary context, and thus making a somewhat different point. The later idea is similar and parallel to the earlier idea, but not identical. It is as though the New Testament writer is pointing out that, just as the prophet said "such-and-so" in his circumstances, we can now say the same thing in our circumstances. It was true then; and it is true now. But the different circumstances mean that the same words are being applied differently and thus the meaning is somewhat different.
In Case Two there is also the possibility of a short-range prediction with its strict fulfillment forming the historical basis for a parallel which is pointed out in the New Testament, showing God's consistency. The parallel New Testament event may be spoken of as a “fulfillment,” but it is a fulfillment in a different sense than the strict fulfillment. The strict fulfillment is the short-range event that is referred to ahead of time in the prediction. The parallel event (if one exists) is not referred to ahead of time in the prediction. Rather, the parallel event is referred to only after the parallel event takes place and the parallel can be pointed out.
Note Mickelsen's distinction between direct and typological prediction, which is the same distinction we are making here between strict fulfillment and parallel.
Where fulfillment of prophecy is found in the New Testament, differentiate for the sake of clarity between direct and typological prediction. Both are equally valuable. Direct prediction consists of an Old Testament prophetic statement which refers to nothing prior to the New Testament times and which has its fulfillment solely in New Testament times. The birth of Christ at Bethlehem is an example of this kind of prediction (Matt. 2:5-6; Micah 5:2 ...). A typological prediction is an Old Testament prophetic statement that does refer to something prior to New Testament times although it finds its highest application of meaning in the events, people, or message of the New Testament. The betrayal of Christ for thirty pieces of silver is an example of this kind of prediction (Matt. 27:9-10; Zech. 11:12-13). In Zechariah, it was the prophet himself, acting as a shepherd for his people in Jehovah's place, who was evaluated for thirty pieces of silver. Since Zechariah was Jehovah's representative, this was also the value which the people of Israel put upon God himself. Stephen's words show why what happened to Zechariah was applicable to Jesus: "As your fathers did, so do ye" (Acts 7:51 ASV). Typological prediction is very common and is extensively distributed throughout the New Testament. To interpret it properly we must become involved in the Old Testament context and application as well as in the New Testament context and application. (A. Berkeley Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible, Eerdmans, 1963, pages 300-301)
Below are several additional examples of the use of "fulfill" in the New Testament, all relating to Jesus Christ. This is not an attempt to present all the prophecies fulfilled by Christ. There are many Old Testament predictions whose fulfillment (in the strict sense) is recorded by the New Testament but the word fulfill is not used. One of the most remarkable of these is Daniel 9:24-27. But here the purpose is only to illustrate the New Testament writers' usage of the word "fulfill" in connection with references to the Old Testament, and the fact that sometimes "fulfill" represents strict fulfillment and other times it represents mere parallel.
C. Examples of Case One – "Fulfill" as Strict Fulfillment
Example 1 – Matthew 4:14 and Isaiah 9:1-2
When Jesus heard that John had been put in prison, he returned to
Galilee. Leaving Nazareth, he went and lived in Capernaum, which was by the lake in the area of
Zebulun and Naphtali – to fulfill what was said through the prophet Isaiah: "Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali, the way to the sea, along the Jordan,
Galilee of the Gentiles – the people living in darkness have seen a great
light; on those living in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned." (Matthew 4:12-16)
Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he
humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will
honor Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan – The
people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the
land of the shadow of death a light has dawned. ... For to us a child is born, to us a son is
given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and
peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his
kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that
time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish
this. (Isaiah 9:1-2, 6-7)
Matthew records that, after the temptation of Jesus, and after John the Baptist was put in prison, Jesus returned to Galilee and moved from the town of Nazareth to live in the town of Capernaum. Galilee is located between, on the east, the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River and on the west, the Mediterranean Sea. It includes the regions originally inhabited by two of the tribes of Israel, Zebulun and Naphtali. Nazareth is in the southern portion of the ancient region of Zebulun, and Capernaum is in the southern portion of the ancient region of Naphtali and on the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee. Thus the towns that Matthew identifies as Jesus' two residences correspond closely with the regions mentioned by Isaiah. Also, Matthew clearly sees Jesus as a great light – as one who, in the words of John, "gives light to every man" (John 1:4-9). So Matthew makes the point that this is a fulfillment of a prophecy made by Isaiah about the light coming to this region.
Isaiah's prediction was clearly a reference to the future (as it turned out, over 700 years later). The prediction was not speaking of any events that were current or soon to happen. Isaiah had predicted that "in the future" (future to Isaiah) the people of Zebulun and Naphtali, which, although under gentile control, will see a great light. Clearly, the events recorded by Matthew are a strict fulfillment of the prediction made by Isaiah, making this an example of Case One.
More is said about Isaiah 9 below.
Example 2 – Matthew 8:16-17 and Isaiah 53:4
When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and
he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to
fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities
and carried our diseases." (Matthew 8:16-17)
Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows .... (Isaiah 53:4a)
Matthew records Jesus' healing of the man with leprosy, then the centurion's paralyzed servant, then Peter's mother-in-law who had a fever, then many others. He then states that these healings fulfilled Isaiah's prediction and cites Isaiah 53:4. This passage in Isaiah is part of the "Suffering Servant" passage (Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12) which conservative Christian commentators apply to Jesus Christ.
It is interesting that Matthew interprets the "infirmities" of Isaiah 53:4 literally. This accords with the fact that the Hebrew word literally means sickness, disease, or pain; not "griefs" as is found in some translations.
Some have taken the "infirmities" (or "sickness") of Isaiah 53:4 as a figurative reference to sin. It is true that the following verses of Isaiah 53 repeatedly speak of Christ taking the punishment for our sin. It is also true that there is a logical connection between healing and salvation – Jesus used his ability to heal as reason to believe that he could also forgive sin (Mark 2:10-11). Nevertheless, we defer to Matthew's usage of the Isaiah passage and favor the literal interpretation of "infirmities" as the primary meaning, making this another example of Case One.
D. Examples of Case Two – "Fulfill" as Parallel
Example 3 – Matthew 2:15 and Hosea 11:1
So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for
Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the
Lord had said through the prophet: "Out of Egypt I called my son." (Matthew 2:14-15)
When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. (Hosea 11:1)
Hosea 11:1 is historical, not predictive. After recalling Israel's exodus from Egypt, the rest of the chapter goes on to condemn its current idolatry and then, starting in verse 5, predicts that Israel will refuse to repent and will be ruled by Assyria for a time. However, the event mentioned in verse 1 ("out of Egypt I called my son") is already ancient history at the time Hosea speaks, rather than any sort of prediction about a future messiah. The description of disobedience, starting in verse 2, makes it obvious that the "son" of verse 1 is Israel rather than Jesus.
Hosea 11:1 does not contain any prediction about Jesus coming out of Egypt, so this is clearly an example of Case Two. Matthew is using the word "fulfill" here to refer to a parallel between ancient history (Israel's stay in Egypt) and recent history (Jesus' stay in Egypt).
Example 4 – Matthew 2:16-18 and Jeremiah 31:15
When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious,
and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who
were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned
from the Magi. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was
fulfilled: "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel
weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no
more." (Matthew 2:16-18)
This is what the LORD says: "A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great
weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because
her children are no more." (Jeremiah 31:15)
Here again, Jeremiah 31:15 is historical, not predictive. There is a prediction in the next two verses, that the children will return to their own land. However, that prediction is the Lord's response to Israel's present distress, which is described in verse 15.
Rachel was the mother of Joseph and Benjamin (Genesis 35:24) and Joseph was the father of Ephraim and Manasseh, both of whom received allotments as though they were Jacob's sons. (Genesis 48:5) These three tribes, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh, were allotted land to the north of Jerusalem. When the kingdom divided, Ephraim and Manasseh made up a major part of Israel. Ramah was just a few miles north of Jerusalem in the region originally allotted to the tribe of Benjamin (Joshua 18:25). At the time of Jeremiah, Israel had already fallen to the Assyrians, and Judah was in the process of falling to the Babylonians. (Some commentators, based on Jeremiah 40:1, suggest that Ramah was a staging area for the deportations to Babylon.) The imagery is very appropriate, Rachel is weeping for her descendants.
Matthew points out the parallel between the past and the present – the past: the mothers of Israel and Judah, represented by Rachel, weeping for their killed and deported children; the present: the mothers of Bethlehem weeping for their killed infants. This is clearly another example of Case Two, "fulfill" being used to describe a parallel.
Example 5 – Matthew 13:34-35 and Psalm 78:2
Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say
anything to them without using a parable. So was fulfilled what was spoken
through the prophet: "I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter
things hidden since the creation of the world." (Matthew 13:34-35)
O my people, hear my teaching; listen to the words of my mouth. I
will open my mouth in parables, I will utter hidden things, things from of
old .... (Psalm 78:1-2)
The first two verses of Psalm 78 serve as part of a four verse introduction to the remainder of the psalm. It is an historical psalm written by Asaph, and covers the period from the exodus (verse 5, 12-13) to king David (verse 70-72). The psalm recounts God's constant goodness to the Israelites and their constant disobedience. The Hebrew word translated "parables" in verse 2 is a rather general term meaning comparison or likeness. Besides the common translation of "parables" it is sometimes translated "theme" or "instruction."
One important observation is the fact that, unlike prophecies, verse 2 is in the first person using I. Prophecies, in which a human prophet predicts something about another person or group or event would, of course, be in the third person using he or it. Clearly, this verse is not a prediction in this sense. The psalmist is not speaking about Jesus. So when Matthew speaks of it as being fulfilled he is merely pointing out a similarity between the psalmist's method of instruction and Jesus' method of instruction.
Example 6 – John 13:18 and Psalm 41:9
Just before Jesus announced that one of his disciples was going to betray him he said,
I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is
to fulfill the scripture: "He who shares my bread has lifted up his
heel against me." (John 13:18)
Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel
against me. (Psalm 41:9)
The verses that precede Psalm 41:9 contains a number of statements of the negative treatment David received from his enemies. Then verse 9 says he received the same from his close friend. The speaker is David, using first person and thus speaking about himself rather than the future Christ. This is also obvious from the fact that the confession in verse 4, "I have sinned," is also in first person and refers to David, not Christ.
A similar example of the use of "fulfill" and the Psalms is found by comparing John 15:25 with Psalm 35:19 and 69:4.
E. An Example Combining Case One and Case Two
Example 7 – John 19:36 and Exodus 12:4
John records that a Roman soldier pierced Jesus' side rather than breaking his legs because he was already dead. Then he adds:
These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken," and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced." (John 19:36-37)
John's two quotations are from Exodus and Zechariah.
It [the Passover] must be eaten inside one house; take none of the meat outside
the house. Do not break any of the bones. (Exodus 12:46)
And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem
a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they
have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child,
and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son. (Zechariah 12:10)
Exodus 12:46 contains regulations for the Passover. It is speaking about the lamb to be slaughtered, not about the future crucifixion of Christ. Thus the first quotation is an example of Case Two.
Zechariah's prediction about Israel (probably spiritual Israel, compare Romans 9:6) receiving a spirit of grace and supplication is difficult to interpret. However, notice from the context that it is God who will pour out the spirit of grace and supplication, and it is this same one who is pierced. So the primary reference here may be to Jesus Christ, and if so, this is an example of Case One.
If our interpretation is correct, it is remarkable that John uses the single word "fulfill" to cover both of these quotations, one that is merely a parallel, the other that is a strict fulfillment.
F. Matthew 1:22-23 and the Context of Isaiah 7:14
Now we can return to the problem with which we began. What is Matthew really saying in 1:22-23 of his gospel, and what was really being prophesied in Isaiah 7:14. Is this an example of Case One or Case Two?
All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
"The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they
will call him Immanuel" – which means, "God with us." (Matthew 1:22-23)
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with
child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14)
Many interpreters identify the “virgin” of Isaiah 7:14 with Mary, and the "child" and "son" with Jesus, making this passage a prediction of the virgin birth of Christ over 700 years ahead of time. This is a very common view among conservative Christians. However, Matthew is using the word "fulfill" to identify a parallel, not a strict fulfillment. In order to see that this is the case, we will follow the same pattern used in the above illustrations and look at Isaiah 7:14 in its context.
If you read the two verses following Isaiah 7:14, you will see immediately that there is a problem with the identifications mentioned above. Certainly the “He” at the beginning of verse 15 and the “boy” of verse 16 refer to the “child” / “son” / “Immanuel” of verse 14. But who are the two kings at the end of verse 16? While these two kings have no counterpart in the time of Christ, they have an obvious counterpart in the time of Isaiah, as can be seen from the context which includes at least 7:1 - 9:7. We will see that Isaiah himself states that the prediction starts being fulfilled almost immediately, and also tells us what the sign is.
The historical situation is as follows: The Jewish nation is no longer united. In 930 BC the Northern Kingdom (Israel) had split from the Southern Kingdom (Judah). The time is around 735 BC, during the reign of the evil king Ahaz of Judah. Still in the future are the Assyrian captivity of Israel in 721 BC and the Babylonian captivity of Judah in 586 BC. The background story of king Ahaz is recorded in 2 Kings 16 and 2 Chronicles 28.
We will summarize and comment on each of nine sections in Isaiah 7:1 - 9:7. As you read through these sections, you should refer to the above map. Also, the following groupings of names may be helpful:
| Nation: Assyria Capital: Nineveh King: Tiglath-pilezar III |
| Nation: Aram (Syria) Capital: Damascus King: Rezin |
| Nation: Israel = Northern Kingdom (Ephraim is the leading tribe) Capital: Samaria King: Pekah, son of Remeliah |
| Nation: Judah = Southern Kingdom (the "house of David") Capital: Jerusalem King: Ahaz, son of Jotham, son of Uzziah |
Section 1, The Alliance and the Fear (7:1-2). Rezin and Pekah form an alliance against Ahaz. When Ahaz and the people of Judah hear about it, they are terribly afraid.
Section 2, God's Encouragement (7:3-9). The Lord sends Isaiah to Ahaz to give him a message. The heart of the message is that, even though Rezin and Pekah plan to invade Judah, it will never happen. Rather, within sixty-five years Israel will be destroyed.
Section 3, God's Sign to Ahaz Predicted (7:10-16). After Ahaz refuses to request a sign, Isaiah says that the Lord will give a sign. The sign includes three key elements.
(1) A young woman will have a boy called Immanuel
(which means “God with us”).
(2) The boy will live to the age of accountability (able to
distinguish right from wrong).
(3) Before the boy reaches the age of accountability, Aram and
Israel will be destroyed.
This is not the first time a newborn is given a name that would remind people of historical events. In 1 Samuel 4:19-22 we read of the wife of Phineas who, just before she died, named her son "Ichabod," meaning that the glory had departed from Israel. This was a reference to the sound defeat of Israel by the Philistines and the fact that they had captured the ark of God.
By the way, the word translated “virgin” in verse 14 is the Hebrew word almah, which can be translated either “maiden” (young woman) or “virgin”. In this context (see section 5) the mother turns out to be Isaiah's wife (who, we assume, was the mother of Isaiah's previous son Shear-Jashub), so almah is most appropriately translated “young woman.” This wording "might be the better option linguistically, contextually, and theologically" (John R. Kohlenberger III, Interlinear NIV Hebrew-English Old Testament, Zondervan, 1987, page xii). Also see notes 24 - 29 on Isaiah 7:14 in the net.bible (net.bible.org).
It is evident in the context that the sign has to do with how quickly Judah's enemies to the north will be destroyed. It only takes a few years (perhaps less than six or seven) for a child to be conceived, be born, and grow up to the point where he can tell the difference between right and wrong. (Some scholars think that at this time the legal age of accountability was 12 and that this legal age is in view in this passage.)
Section 4, The Assyrian Devastation of the Land (7:17-25). The Lord will use Assyria to devastate both Israel and Judah, resulting in complete economic ruin.
Section 5, Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz, the Child of the Sign (8:1-4). The Lord instructs Isaiah to write down the name Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz, which means “quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil” (a reference to the impending destruction of Aram and Israel and a constant reminder of God's presence with Judah). Then Isaiah's wife has a son and he is given this name. Perhaps a year or less has taken place since the first giving of the sign, and the sign is now given a second time with a slight variation. The sign is that Israel and Aram will be destroyed before the boy can say “My father” and “My mother” (note the "My"), which will probably be another two or three years. The destruction of Aram and Israel are recorded in 2 Kings 16:9 and 17:5-6 respectively.
Section 6, God's Message to Isaiah about the Siege and His Presence (8:5-10). It is significant that God's presence is stated twice in this section (end of verses 8 and 10), reflecting the name given to the boy ("Immanuel") when the sign was first given.
Section 7, God's Message to Isaiah to Fear Him (8:11-15). The point of this message seems to be that Judah should fear the Lord rather than any human foe.
Section 8, Isaiah's Response (8:16-22). Significantly, in this section Isaiah identifies himself and his children as God's “signs and symbols” (8:18). The Hebrew word translated "sign" here is the same word translated "sign" in chapter 7, verses 11 and 14.
Section 9, Future Light, Another Child, and God's Presence (9:1-7). This section is the one that predicts the coming of Christ, not the earlier sections. Here is a chart which contrasts the earlier predictions and this prediction.
| Isaiah 7 - 8 | Isaiah 9 |
| A definite time period (“within 65 years,” “before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong”, and “before the boy knows how to say 'My father'”) | No time limit, simply “in the future” |
| Clear connection to current events, namely, the alliance between Aram and Israel | No connection to current events |
| Israel is intact (at least the names Zebulun and Naphtali are still applicable) | The same territory is referred to as “Galilee of the Gentiles” |
| Predicted events occurred at the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz and the destruction of Aram (731 BC) and Israel (721 BC) | Predicted events occurred at birth of Christ |
| Isaiah's interpretation given: “I ... and the children ... are signs” (8:18) | No interpretation from Isaiah |
In spite of these differences, there are two important similarities. Both involve the birth of a child and God's presence.
Thus, the child in 7:14 is actually Isaiah's son Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz. This, along with the swift destruction of Aram and Israel, was the sign to Ahaz and the people of Judah that they should fear the Lord more than any earthly alliance.
So Matthew 1:22-23, which says that the virgin birth of Jesus as the Savior “took place to fulfill” Isaiah 7:14, is using the word "fulfill" in the sense of a parallel. The real emphasis of Matthew is on the presence of God. Both the uniqueness of this virgin pregnancy caused by the Holy Spirit and the emphasis on the presence of God fit perfectly with the New Testament teaching on the deity of Christ.
On the one hand, there is a sense in which Isaiah's prediction is much larger than Matthew's parallel, for Matthew includes only one part of the prediction (there are no allied nations that are destroyed by Assyria during the boyhood of Jesus). And this, of course, is why Matthew quotes only that part of the prediction. On the other hand, there is a sense in which Isaiah's prediction is much smaller than Matthew's parallel. The birth of Jesus is the ultimate expression of God's presence. Matthew could have said, “Now God is really with us!, Immanuel!” Thus, Christ's birth, while in a certain way paralleling the birth of Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz, is far more significant for mankind. In the time of Ahaz, God gave a sign which reminded them that God was present with them, if they would only follow God and avoid destruction. But, of course, they did not respond to God's sign as they should have. In a more complete or final sense, Jesus is God's sign to us that he has come to us and expects us to respond positively to him.
Those who take the view that Isaiah 7:14 predicts the virgin birth of Christ and that Christ's virgin birth was a strict fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14 have some major questions to answer. For example, how was Christ's birth a sign for Ahaz or Judah? And how was Christ's virgin birth a sign for his contemporaries? (While other signs are visible to the masses, this was hidden. And when Christ set about to demonstrate his deity, he demonstrated his divine power through miracles rather than appealing to his virgin birth.)
Important: The interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 suggested above should not be misunderstood as a denial of the virgin birth of Christ. (Christ's virgin birth is clearly taught in Matthew 1:18-21 and Luke 1:30-35.) We are simply saying that Isaiah 7:14 refers to events that occurred during the lifetimes of Isaiah and Ahaz, rather than to the birth of Christ over 700 years later.
For a similar interpretation see John H. Walton's article "Isaiah 7:14: What's in a Name?" in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, vol. 30, no. 3 (Sept. 1987). Walton favors the idea that the young woman may have been in king Ahaz's harem, and that the sign may have been limited to the giving of the child's name. Nevertheless, he agrees that the prophetic sign refers to events in the time of Isaiah and king Ahaz. Regarding Matthew's quotation of Isaiah 7:14, Walton appeals to an "Appropriateness Model" which is similar to what we have described above as Case Two – Parallel.
G. The Difference between Double Fulfillment and Double Meaning
According to the Bible's test of a true prophet, when a prediction is made, it must come true. But will it come true a second and perhaps a third time? Conservative scholars give various answers. Some claim that certain predictive passages have double senses or double meanings. Some speak of literal and deeper meanings. Some speak of "typological" predictions. Some refer to multiple fulfillments. And some speak of near and distant fulfillments, or partial and complete fulfillments. We will try to sort this out by noting where the duality lies – at the point (or points) of fulfillment, or at the point of prophecy. Keep in mind that, unlike above, here we are limiting our discussion to predictive passages and their fulfillments.
There is an important distinction to be made between "double fulfillment" (or "multiple fulfillment") on the one hand, and "double meaning" (or "multiple meaning") on the other. The first is legitimate, the second is not. We will contrast these two ideas in the next two tables.
Double Fulfillment |
The predictive passage has a single meaning. | There may be double fulfillments because, besides the strict fulfillment, there may be one or more additional fulfillments (parallels or applications). Here, the duality is at the points of fulfillment. |
The concept of double fulfillment is legitimate as long as the additional fulfillments are parallels, as illustrated above in the discussion of Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:22-23.
However, some claim that the additional "fulfillments" are also strict fulfillments. They maintain that some predictive passages refer to two different and separate future events. This requires that the prophetic passage itself have more than one meaning.
Double Meaning |
The predictive passage itself has more than one meaning, or more than one sense. The predictions refer to two distinct events. Here the plurality is at the point of prophecy. | Each of the meanings has its own strict fulfillment. |
For example, Strong affirms double meaning when he says that
Certain prophecies apparently contain a fulness of meaning which is not exhausted by the event to which they most obviously and literally refer. A prophecy which had a partial fulfilment at a time not remote from its utterance, may find its chief fulfilment in an event far distant. ... Instances of the double sense of prophecy may be found in Is. 7:14-16 ... Hos. 11:1 .... (Augustus H. Strong, Systematic Theology, Revell, 1907, page 138)
Regarding Matthew 2:15 (see "Example 3" above), Scofield has the following note which clearly affirms the concept of double meaning.
The words quoted are in Hos. 11:1, and the passage illustrates the truth that prophetic utterances often have a latent and deeper meaning than at first appears. (The Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford University Press, 1909. A nearly identical note accompanies Matthew 2:15 in The New Scofield Reference Bible, 1967, edited by E. Schuyler English)
After describing the historical situation at the time Isaiah spoke to king Ahab as recorded in Isaiah 7, Gray adds the thoughts below. By referring to the two events as blended in one, he places the duality at the point of prophecy.
But while this is the historical setting of the prophecy, the Holy Spirit uses it, as we see from Matthew 1:23, as applicable in a higher sense to the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This is in accordance with a "law of double reference" frequently employed in the Word of God, by which two events are blended in one, having a near and partial, and also a remote and complete fulfillment. (James M. Gray, Bible Problems Explained, Revell, 1913, page 30)
Ramm, in his widely used textbook on hermeneutics, states a similar view. Notice the phrase "in the same words."
In an Old Testament passage the near meaning and the remote meaning for the New Testament so compenetrate that the passage at the same time and in the same words refers to the near and the remote New Testament meaning. (Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation, 3rd Revised Ed., Baker Books, 1970, page 253, italics in original)
Richards also accepts double meaning. Commenting on Isaiah 7:14, he details the historical setting in the time of Isaiah and King Ahab, then describes something additional – a reference to Christ "embedded in the text."
All this came to pass. The fulfillment of this prediction served to authenticate the long-range prophecy embedded in the text: At some time in the future a virgin would have a child who would actually be God with us in human form ... Jesus the Messiah, God the Son, truly one with us in an incarnation foreshadowed and foretold by the prophet of old. (Larry Richards, Bible Difficulties Solved, Revell, 1993, page 166)
Similarly, Morey claims that Isaiah 7:14 is one example of Isaiah's
prophetic visions of God coming to earth in human form. ... How are we to interpret this passage? However we interpret it ... the birth must be so unusual that it is a sign, i.e., a miracle. A normal birth will not do. (Robert Morey, The Trinity: Evidences and Issues, World Bible Publications, 1996, pages 182-183)
But such double meaning, no matter how creative or noble its description, causes a serious problem. It is difficult to reconcile it with a very basic hermeneutical principle, the principle of singularity of meaning. Perhaps the most concise statement of this principle is found in the Westminster Confession:
... the true and full sense of any scripture ... is not manifold, but one (The Confession of Faith, Chapter 1, Paragraph 9)
Mickelsen evaluates the two options as follows:
A multiple fulfillment is a better descriptive label than "double sense." Double sense would imply two meanings for a statement. Multiple fulfillment refers to one meaning applied in two or more ways. (A. Berkeley Mickelsen, Interpreting the Bible, Eerdmans, 1963, page 300)
Conservative Bible scholars have long emphasized the importance of singularity of meaning and go to great lengths to point out the dangers of any scheme of interpretation which allows various meanings.
It has been alleged by some that as these oracles are heavenly and divine
we should expect to find in them manifold meanings. They must
needs differ from other books. Hence has arisen not only the doctrine
of a double sense, but of a threefold and fourfold sense .... We may
readily admit that the Scriptures are capable of manifold practical applications;
otherwise they would not be so useful for doctrine, correction, and
instruction in righteousness (2 Tim. iii, 16). But the moment we admit the
principle that portions of Scripture contain an occult or double sense we
introduce an element of uncertainty in the sacred volume, and unsettle all
scientific interpretation. "If the Scripture has more than one meaning,"
says Dr. Owen, "it has no meaning at all." "I hold," says Ryle, "that
the words of Scripture are intended to have one definite sense, and that
our first object should be to discover that sense, and adhere rigidly to it
.... " This [double sense] scheme of interpretation," says Stuart,
"forsakes and sets aside the common laws of language." (Milton S.
Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, n.d., originally written in the
late 1800's, Reprinted by Zondervan, 1964, pages 493-494)
There are, indeed, manifold applications of certain prophecies which may
be called generic, and some events of modern history may illustrate
them, and in a broad sense, fulfil them as truly as the events to which they
had original reference. ... But such allowable applications of prophecy are
not to be confounded with grammatico-historical interpretation. (op.
cit. page 498)
For more discussion of the importance of single meaning over double meaning, see J. Barton Payne, Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy, Harper & Row, 1973, pages 121-140. Payne also explains such topics as developmental fulfillment and prophetic telescoping within the principle of single meaning.