“CONTENT ESSAY: ISAIAH” 1
Introduction
The Immanuel sign that was mentioned in Isaiah 7:1-9:7 (Nelson, 2018)1 is the primary
topic of research. The historical context of the Immanuel sign will be analyzed with the
consideration of the specific political elements, and the historical figures involved. The children
who were addressed in Isaiah 7:1-9:7 (Nelson, 2018) will be identified. The theological
importance of the names of the children will be examined in the context of Isaiah’s message to
Ahaz and the house of David. The theological message of the Immanuel sign will be examined
as well as its modern application. Research will be followed by a conclusion which will include a
brief summary as well as further commentary.
Immanuel Sign: Historical Context
According to Robert B. Chisholm (2009)2, the historical context of Immanuel’s sign
occurred after King Ahaz refused to ask Isaiah for a sign. Although King Ahaz refused to request
a sign, God still insisted on giving him one because King Ahaz decided to keep company with
the Assyrians rather than trust in God’s initial message to defend Judah from outsiders. Isaiah
addressed the house of David collectively as a reminder of King Ahaz’s heritage in order to warn
them all that they were testing the Lord’s patience as well as his own. Chisholm (2009) stated,
“the sign involved a series of events outlined in [Chapter 7] verses 14-25 (Chisholm, 2009).”
Isaiah prophesied of the woman who would ultimately give birth to the boy named Immanuel.
Isaiah’s message included the warning that Syria and Israel would both be defeated in battle.
1 The Holy Bible: Containing Old and New Testaments (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2018).
2 Robert B. Chisholm, Handbook on the Prophets (Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Academic, 2009).
“CONTENT ESSAY: ISAIAH” 2
Chisholm (2009)3 also addressed Isaiah’s prophetic message that God would eventually
signal a time period where Judah would go on to become the primary target of the Egyptians and
the Assyrians. Isaiah 7:18 (Nelson, 2018)4 made an analogy which compared the Egyptians to
flies and the Assyrians to bees. Chisholm (2009) addressed Isaiah’s constant references to sour
milk and honey. Chisholm (2009) also addressed the message of Immanuel eating the sour milk
and honey, in which Judah would be forced to admit that the Lord was present with them.
According to Jaime L. Waters (2019)5, the symbolic Child, Immanuel, is a reference from that
particular era. Waters (2019) stated that the Gospel of Matthew links Jesus Christ to the
Immanuel prophecy by interpreting the prophecy’s completion through the virgin birth.
Isaiah’s Message
Immanuel’s message was prophetic in the sense that it spoke of the coming Messiah as
well as Israel’s impending defeat. The message of the Immanuel prophecy also included the
names of various children and the theological messages behind each name. Immanuel is the
name of one of the children who were mentioned in Immanuel’s message. The names of the
other two children include the following: Shear-Jashub, and Maher-shalal-hashbaz. According to
Waters (2019), Immanuel means “God is with us”, Shear-Jashub means “a remnant will return”,
and Maher-shalal-hashbaz means “quick spoils, speedy plunder” (Waters, 2019).
Immanuel Sign: Theological Message
3 Robert B. Chisholm, Handbook on the Prophets (Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Academic, 2009).
4 The Holy Bible: Containing Old and New Testaments (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2018).
5 Jaime L. Waters, “Increasing Knowledge, Decreasing Uncertainty,” America 221, no. 13 (December 9, 2019),
https://doi.org/https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=BIC&u=vic_liberty&id=GALE|
A608889167&v=2.1&it=r&sid=summon.
“CONTENT ESSAY: ISAIAH” 3
According to Murray R. Adamthwaite (2000)6, the theological message encompasses
Isaiah’s change in the context of the sign after Ahaz refused to listen. Adamthwaite (2000) stated
that the pronouns of Isaiah’s audience changed from singular to plural when Isaiah changed from
addressing King Ahaz individually to addressing the house of David collectively. Adamthwaite
(2000) also stated that the Immanuel sign was a reference to the ‘almah. The term naturally
refers to a married woman and that no expecting mother was authorized to name her child
Immanuel without a personal epiphany from the ‘almah. According to Stefan Felber (2019)7, the
term ‘almah also implied a compilation of the terms “youthful” and “single”, both of which
directed to virginity. Women who became pregnant outside of the boundaries of marriage or
through the act of adultery were threatened with execution or banishment during that era.
Matthew placed a strict emphasis on Mary’s virginity as part of the completion of
Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy. This personal epiphany is not distinct from Mary’s encounter with
the angel Gabriel when he informed her that she was going to conceive a Son. The theological
meaning and significance of the Immanuel sign can be divided into two separate elements, in
which one element is very optimistic while the other is very pessimistic. The pessimism of
Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy addressed Israel’s impending defeat at the hands of the Assyrians
and the Egyptians. The year that Assyria and Egypt conquered Israel was approximately dated
back to 720 B.C. The optimistic element of Isaiah’s prophecy is the strong reference to the
6 Murray R. Adamthwaite, “Isaiah 7:16 Key to the Immanuel Prophecy,” The Reformed Theological Review 59
(January 1, 2000): 65–83, https://doi.org/https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=0&sid=d0e9dc2c-af12-4fff-8a96-e3e939ccfae6%40redis.
7 Stefan Felber, “The Immanuel Prophecy at the Crossroads of Exegesis, Hermeneutics, and Bible Translation,”
UNIO CUM CHRISTO (2019): 121–136, https://doi.org/10.35285/ucc5.1.2019.art8.
“CONTENT ESSAY: ISAIAH” 4
coming Christ. The modern application of the Immanuel sign can be described according to the
following details: The Immanuel sign predicted a Child from the bloodline of King David who
would be born of a virgin.
Isaiah 9:6 stated, “For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; And the
government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor,
Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace (Nelson, 2018)8.” This passage contains strong
similarities to the passage in Luke 2:1-20 (Nelson, 2018). Jesus Christ lived a sinless life, then
He died on the cross as a debt payment for all sin and He rose again to life on the third day.
Those who repent and put their trust in Jesus Christ will be saved and His salvation is available
for everybody today.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the historical context of the Immanuel sign provided details which include
Isaiah’s audience, the reason why Isaiah spoke about the Immanuel sign, and the prophetic
implications. The Immanuel sign also included the names of Shear-Jashub, and Maher-shalal-
hashbaz. Each of the three names had significant meanings in both the historical and prophetic
contexts. The theological analysis of the Immanuel sign included Isaiah’s change in context after
Ahaz rejected his offer for a sign from the Lord. The Immanuel prophecy referred to Judah’s
impending defeat as well as the coming of Jesus Christ. In addition, the Immanuel prophecy is
another example of the presence and involvement of Jesus Christ in Old Testament events.
8 The Holy Bible: Containing Old and New Testaments (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2018).
“CONTENT ESSAY: ISAIAH” 5
Bibliography
The Holy Bible: Containing Old and New Testaments. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2018.
Chisholm, Robert B. Handbook on the Prophets. Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Academic, 2009.
Waters, Jaime L. “Increasing Knowledge, Decreasing Uncertainty.” America 221, no. 13
(December 9, 2019).
Adamthwaite, Murray R. “Isaiah 7:16 Key to the Immanuel Prophecy.” The Reformed
Theological Review 59 (January 1, 2000): 65–83.
Felber, Stefan. “The Immanuel Prophecy at the Crossroads of Exegesis, Hermeneutics, and Bible
Translation.” UNIO CUM CHRISTO (2019): 121–136.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
