Isaiah 7

[Elizabeth]

I'm confused by Isaiah 7; specifically how the Immanel passage (7:14) relates to the rest of the chapter.

The context is hard for me to grasp because He is giving Ahaz a sign that will take place thousands of years later according to our understanding, and then after the passage about Immanuel (verse 14) it seems we have to make another leap back to Ahaz time. How do Jewish people understand this verse related to that time and context - who is "the child". Also, I need more context and understanding for my own sake because I am not seeing how our understanding relates to the rest of the passage.

[alon]

Sept 13, 2018 9:07:21 GMT -8 Elizabeth said:

I'm confused by Isaiah 7; specifically how the Immanel passage (7:14) relates to the rest of the chapter.

The context is hard for me to grasp because He is giving Ahaz a sign that will take place thousands of years later according to our understanding, and then after the passage about Immanuel (verse 14) it seems we have to make another leap back to Ahaz time. How do Jewish people understand this verse related to that time and context - who is "the child". Also, I need more context and understanding for my own sake because I am not seeing how our understanding relates to the rest of the passage.

The chapter deals with an historical event, well documented (2 Kings 16:2, Chron 28, and many historical documents). The Northern Kingdom (Ephraim) joined a coalition of city-states who came together to throw off the Assyrian occupation. Judah did not join the conspiracy, so the coalition marched on Judah to try and depose Ahaz and replace him with someone more agreeable to their own way of thinking. Isaiah was told to give a message of hope in the Lord to Ahaz, but he rejected God in favor of trusting the Assyrians:

Isaiah 7:10-13 (ESV)  Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz: “Ask a sign of the Lord your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven.” But Ahaz said, “I will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test.” And he said, “Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also?

The alliance failed, and Judah became dependent on Assyria. But meantime, since Ahaz refused to ask for a sign from God, He gave one to Ahaz, a messianic prophecy:

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

Immanuel means "God is with us," a clear statement that the Messiah will be God who will dwell here with us on earth. The term "virgin" is not however so clear. The Hebrew is "almah," which can mean a virgin, a maiden, or a marriageable young woman.

The rest of the prophecy just says that God is with Judah, both to protect her and to punish her.

It is not unusual for prophecy to jump ahead like that, then come back to the more immediate future. Just look at Isaiah 53, for example.

Dan C

[Elizabeth]

Thanks for the help and information. Im still struggling with it. Isaiah 53 doesn't seem out of context to me at all. It builds from Isaiah 52, which mentions "in that day" and is developed into a clear picture and elaborated upon.

Something is different to me about this one. For some reason it doesn't flow as naturally for me. For one thing, I don't see how it could mean much for Ahaz as a sign from G-d because it's won't take place even in his lifetime. So it leaves me wondering how it would have been interpreted and understood fulfilled at that time on his account. How is G-d giving Ahaz a sign if he won't see it?

Beyond that, I still don't see how the Immanuel reference ties into the passage. It just seems to be a sentence that kind of comes out of no where. It doesn't really seem tied in to my understanding of that verse even as a believer when I read it in Isaiah. Then, even within Isaiah, it doesn't really seem to develop beyond that one statement. That's how it comes across to me, and I'm having a hard time getting passed it. So I guess I'll just read and study it more, and ya know....(insert sigh here).....work.   

Honestly, the thought is tiresome cause I'm chronically mentally exhausted. I also feel guilty and intimidated cause Matthew makes it sound so obvious. (Matthew 1:23) Truthfully, I'm just not seeing it as clearly as he makes it sound when I read the passage in it's original Isaiah context. Yet, even within that context it doesn't make much sense to me.

[Elizabeth]

I guess there's not a clear answer and there is some question how it applied also within Judaism.     

One thing that helps to consider is that Ahaz refusal to ask for a sign was essentially refusing G-d so perhaps G-d shifts His attention to the House of David more broadly and kind of let's things with Ahaz be. That understanding explained the shift I was having difficulty following.      
    
There are different interpretations. Judausm isn't exactly sure what to make of this verse either based on what I've read, but another possibility helpful to consider regards the second part. Some have said that the before the child knows to refuse evil and choose good the land will be forsaken prophecy, serves as the more short-term sign and applies to Isaiah's own son. There are other guesses who it may apply to, but this is the one I found most helpful and understandable.

One thing that struck me as I began to understand Judaism isn't sure what this prophecy means, is that maybe G-d gave them the Immanuel sign in the way He did simply as a means to encourage seeking. The difficulty of the verse serves a purpose in and of itself to keep us looking, seeking, and expecting. I had never considered how necessary that is, but it's obvious. We can see this in ourselves in such places as applying and understanding Revelations. We know what to look for, but have a vague idea what it looks like because G-d acts in ways we can't imagine. So until it happens, we can't clearly see it because it's just beyond us at this point. It keeps us closer and more dependent on G-d to not completely grasp it till it's done, yet we can seek and identify truth regardless of how well we can visualize it. 

Anyway, when Yeshua was born, people "saw" it, Immanuel, but they had to have been looking for it to see it.  Furthe and similarly to us, they had to see it to really be able to identify it. This verse is a way to encourage seeking and seeing like the prophecies we wait for, which is beautiful to know because we are continuing in that. It's the same as its always been, I just hadn't applied the same concept as we do to the prophecies we await in our life to prophecies people of that time were waiting on in theirs. I think it will just help me understand and deal with the complexity of prophecy to keep that in mind.

It's amazing what one verse brings up past, present, and future; and how it takes generations of people and so much time for it to develop. All the while it teaches and guides. It's the living word of G-d, and there's a sense of continuity to remember they were seeking this sign the same way we are seeking future signs.  We know what to look for, but until it's done, we really can't identify it. We have to look for it. 

I don't  know, just amazes me how perfect He is, and how much we have in common with His people across time. We are waiting,and seeking,and wondering, but in faith.  That makes me feel like a part of the people of G-d because that's what they did and that's the only people I've found to identify with.

So centuries of debate and wonder, then when He acts it's so exact that even to those of us watching we'll praise Him that we still couldn't have seen that coming just in its magnitude of purity and perfection. It just reminds me not to add to or take away from His word. We cause so much confusion because G-d is so simple in His honesty and purity, we can't understand it all the way around till He shows it.  Then it's obvious because there's so much power in His purity, which is one reason why we are commanded to
come to Him as little children I Think. 

[Questor]

I find it interesting that for centuries, other Jews simply yelled back at the Catholic Church, and said, 'She's not a VIRGIN'...which, with Miriam, the Church was very much concerned that Miriam be an immaculate Virgin in the Word as well as in fact.

Since she was young and well thought of enough to be recently betrothed, it seems to me odd that Miriam's perfection be emphasized, when the poor darling merely had to be chaste and well-behaved, which Miriam was obviously considered to be by those who knew her until she announced her miraculous pregnancy...she would have been stoned had she been lying with every stray man in the vicinity, as was later claimed. Nazareth was a small village where everyone knew everyone else. Then, being betrothed, it was Yosef who had to decide her actual state of virginity through the dream he was given so that he would stand by her.

But of course, no one foresaw in Isaiah's day that the Virgin would be under attack as actually being virgin many years after the writing of the gospels and rumor abounded, or that she would be hailed as Virgin by non-Jews so that they, the Romans, might enshrine her as a goddess in her own right.

It is a difficult passage...I am puzzled by the timing cue of the child being able to discern and choose between good and evil...how old do you need to be to choose good or evil, or be able to do so? And how does that work within the timeline of Ahaz? Or does it even apply to the time of Ahaz?

[Elizabeth]

I think G-d kind of wrote Ahaz off when he refused to ask for a sign. He didn't want a sign because he would then be obligated to G-d through it. Meanwhile, he knew G-d well enough to know that He could give the sign. At that point I think G-d turned more broadly to the House of David and possible to Isaiah. It could be that the child choosing good and evil reference is about Isaiah's son. There are different guesses about who the child in that present time was, but many of them seemed to think that it relates to that time. The most helpful realization for me, was that perhaps G-d simply quit addressing Ahaz, and gave a sign addressing the House of David more broadly.

I don't know about the age for choosing good and evil and how that fits or it it fits Isaiah's son. I don't know if curds and honey relates to the age you eat solids, something else, or both. I know the book goes on to discuss Immanuel more. That's where I'm currently seeking more understanding, but it's slow going because I'm trying to tie stuff together as I go.

That's an unpredictable process because sometimes I'll get hung up on a passage, then once I figure my way through and read on, I find it's already later clarified. So I don't have new information to offer, but I personally have a deeper understanding. In these cases, at least I stayed in the book though, because most often, I get diverted to another passage trying to figure and cross reference, and that continues to the point where I forget where I actually began.

I don't know the last time I just read strait through a book except with my kids. I'm trying to read through Isaiah on my own, but that may take a while. Lately, the more I try to understand the more confused I get. I end up with not only more questions, but with fewer answers then I had to begin with. Things used to resolve more easily, but now I just feel buried with confusion and possibilities.

I'm in this weird place where G-d speaks to things I'm not necessarily looking for, so it's interesting and nice but I don't really see where He's going or what He wants from me. Meanwhile the things I feel I need the most help with, the obvious issues, He doesn't address. I need help, direction, and answers cause it's an issue that I don't know how to deal with, and it's so obvious, but He's just quiet about it. He doesn't ignore it but just doesn't deal with it. It makes me laugh, cause it's like we're going for a walk in the same place but seeing completely different things. I'm seeing a big deal and He's just casual, barely noting it.

Anyway, the experience I described above is happening on almost every spiritual level in my life. Circling around, which I'm used to, but usually we get back to it sooner or later. I don't really know anything I'm doing lately or where I'm really going. I'll learn something, but I'm not sure if it will relate to anything I actually began looking for.

[alon]

Oct 1, 2018 7:38:38 GMT -8 Elizabeth said:

I think G-d kind of wrote Ahaz off when he refused to ask for a sign. He didn't want a sign because he would then be obligated to G-d through it. Meanwhile, he knew G-d well enough to know that He could give the sign. At that point I think G-d turned more broadly to the House of David and possible to Isaiah. It could be that the child choosing good and evil reference is about Isaiah's son. There are different guesses about who the child in that present time was, but many of them seemed to think that it relates to that time. The most helpful realization for me, was that perhaps G-d simply quit addressing Ahaz, and gave a sign addressing the House of David more broadly.

I don't know about the age for choosing good and evil and how that fits or it it fits Isaiah's son. I don't know if curds and honey relates to the age you eat solids, something else, or both. I know the book goes on to discuss Immanuel more. That's where I'm currently seeking more understanding, but it's slow going because I'm trying to tie stuff together as I go.

That's an unpredictable process because sometimes I'll get hung up on a passage, then once I figure my way through and read on, I find it's already later clarified. So I don't have new information to offer, but I personally have a deeper understanding. In these cases, at least I stayed in the book though, because most often, I get diverted to another passage trying to figure and cross reference, and that continues to the point where I forget where I actually began.

I don't know the last time I just read strait through a book except with my kids. I'm trying to read through Isaiah on my own, but that may take a while. Lately, the more I try to understand the more confused I get. I end up with not only more questions, but with fewer answers then I had to begin with. Things used to resolve more easily, but now I just feel buried with confusion and possibilities.

I'm in this weird place where G-d speaks to things I'm not necessarily looking for, so it's interesting and nice but I don't really see where He's going or what He wants from me. Meanwhile the things I feel I need the most help with, the obvious issues, He doesn't address. I need help, direction, and answers cause it's an issue that I don't know how to deal with, and it's so obvious, but He's just quiet about it. He doesn't ignore it but just doesn't deal with it. It makes me laugh, cause it's like we're going for a walk in the same place but seeing completely different things. I'm seeing a big deal and He's just casual, barely noting it.

Anyway, the experience I described above is happening on almost every spiritual level in my life. Circling around, which I'm used to, but usually we get back to it sooner or later. I don't really know anything I'm doing lately or where I'm really going. I'll learn something, but I'm not sure if it will relate to anything I actually began looking for.

Since almah can mean young woman or virgin, the prophetic sign could apply to either the Messiah in the lineage of Melech Dovid, or to a more contemporary child like Isaiah's son. Scholars tend to argue things like this as an "either-or" proposition. But the fact is we are dealing with an infinite God, so it can and usually does mean both. Most prophecy, like the entire Book of Revelation, is given to immediately inform, encourage, or help His people. But very often it has a long range historical or even eternal message as well. I don't know who the child in that time might have been. It is enough that those the prophecy was given to knew. What we do know is it is also a Messianic prophecy which points directly to HaMoshiach Yeshua, and this is what directly effects us. So that is the part we need to know. Past that, I'm not sure what good would come from getting bogged down in the academic debates, which usually only try to resolve which Dr or prof can best justify his over-large ego at the other's expense.

Very good insight about the fact if God had given Ahaz the sign, he'd be obligated to act; and that is why he didn't ask for it when told to do so.

Dan C

[Elizabeth]

It seems likely to me that the child of the prophetess discussed in chapter 8 served as the fulfillment of the sign for that present time.