Isaiah 7:14 and the Virgin Birth: How the Prophecy Points to Jesus

Published On: October 9, 2025

“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14).

When Matthew declares this prophecy fulfilled in Jesus (Matthew 1:23), sceptics often cry foul. “Wasn’t Isaiah’s prophecy fulfilled in his own time? Besides, aren’t you just retrofitting an ancient text to fit your narrative?”

The answer is no—and understanding why reveals something beautiful about how God speaks through Scripture.

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT: A CRISIS IN JUDAH

Around 735 BC, King Ahaz of Judah faced a terrifying military coalition. Syria and Israel were marching on Jerusalem, intent on forcing Judah into their anti-Assyrian alliance. God sent Isaiah with a message: Don’t be afraid. Trust me.

God offered Ahaz any sign he wanted—”as deep as Sheol or as high as heaven” (Isaiah 7:11). When Ahaz refused, God gave a sign anyway: a young woman would conceive and bear a son named Immanuel, and before that child could distinguish right from wrong, the threatening kings would be gone.

The immediate fulfilment likely came through Isaiah’s own family (Isaiah 8:3-4). Within a few years, exactly as promised, both threatening kings were dead and the crisis passed.

So why does Matthew see Jesus here? Wasn’t the prophecy “used up”?

A PATTERN WOVEN THROUGHOUT SCRIPTURE

The Reformed tradition recognises what Scripture itself demonstrates: God often works through dual fulfillment. A prophecy addresses an immediate situation while simultaneously pointing to something greater.

Consider 2 Samuel 7:12-16, where God promises David his son will build a temple and establish an eternal kingdom. Solomon built the physical temple, but only Christ establishes the eternal reign. Or Hosea 11:1—”Out of Egypt I called my son”—which originally described Israel’s exodus, yet Matthew applies it to Jesus returning from Egypt (Matthew 2:15).

This isn’t creative reinterpretation. It’s how prophetic Scripture works. The near fulfillment operates as a type—a living preview—of the ultimate fulfillment. As Hebrews 1:1-2 explains, “God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.”

THE LINGUISTIC EVIDENCE

Here’s what sceptics often miss:

The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament completed around 250 BC—long before Jesus—translated the Hebrew almah as parthenos, meaning virgin. Jewish scholars, with no Christian agenda, chose language emphasising virginity.

Why? Because almah, while meaning “young woman of marriageable age,” carried the cultural assumption of virginity in ancient Israel. Isaiah could have used betulah, the standard Hebrew term that unambiguously means ‘virgin.’ His choice of almah—a word meaning ‘young woman’ that assumes but doesn’t technically require virginity—allowed the prophecy to work on both immediate and ultimate levels.

Matthew wasn’t inventing a new interpretation—he was following an established Jewish understanding, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

WHY IMMANUEL DEMANDS MORE

The name itself—”God with us”—hints at the prophecy’s greater dimension.

Ahaz was offered any sign imaginable. Would a normal birth really constitute such a cosmic sign? The magnitude of the offer suggests something unprecedented. Moreover, the name Immanuel makes a claim too grand if it meant temporal deliverance alone. Only in the Incarnation does God genuinely dwell “with us” (John 1:14).

Look at Isaiah’s broader vision. Chapter 9 announces a child whose titles include “Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father” (9:6). Chapter 11 describes a shoot from Jesse’s stump who will reign in perfect righteousness (11:1-10). Chapter 53 reveals a suffering servant who bears our sins (53:4-6). The book builds systematically toward a Coming One who is human, yet simultaneously divine.

Chapter 7’s Immanuel introduces themes that Isaiah develops throughout his prophecy. The immediate sign to Ahaz participates in a pattern that finds its fullest expression only in Christ.

THE REFORMED DOCTRINE OF SENSUS PLENIOR

Reformed Christians recognise what’s called sensus plenior—or ‘fuller meaning’: God often builds richer meaning into Scripture than the human author fully grasped at the time. This doesn’t mean we’re inventing meanings—it means we trust that the Holy Spirit, who inspired the text, could see the full picture of redemptive history ahead of the human author.

As Peter writes, “prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21). God orchestrates language, timing, and circumstances to create layers of meaning that unfold across redemptive history.

The near fulfillment doesn’t compete with the far fulfillment—it prepares for it. Just as a child’s shadow cast on a wall precedes the child entering the room, so Isaiah’s contemporary sign foreshadowed the Virgin Birth.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Isaiah 7:14 isn’t retrofitted to Jesus—it’s designed for Him. The immediate historical fulfillment established the pattern; the virgin birth completed it. The Jewish translators saw it. The apostolic writers confirmed it. The church has recognised it for two millennia.

In Christ, “God with us” moved from prophetic hope to incarnate reality. The sign given to a faithless king in crisis ultimately pointed to the King who’d save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21).

That’s not manipulation of the text. That’s the beautiful architecture of divine revelation—and exactly how we’d expect God to speak if Scripture truly is His Word.

ISAIAH 7:14 AND THE VIRGIN BIRTH: RELATED FAQS

Did the Jews before Jesus interpret Isaiah 7:14 as messianic? The evidence is fascinating. When Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek (called the Septuagint) around 250 BC , they chose the word parthenos, which specifically means “virgin,” rather than a more general term. This suggests they saw something special in this prophecy. The Targums—which are Aramaic paraphrases that Jewish teachers used in synagogues—don’t explicitly call it messianic, but they don’t limit it to Isaiah’s time either. Scholars like EJ Young point out that after Christians began claiming Isaiah 7:14, Jewish interpretations became more restrictive—possibly as a reaction against Christian claims rather than reflecting the original Jewish understanding.

How do we respond to the claim that Matthew misused Jewish interpretive methods? Matthew was actually using standard Jewish methods of his day. At Qumran (where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found), Jewish interpreters practiced what’s called pesher interpretation—reading ancient prophecies as having contemporary fulfillment. John Calvin, the Reformer, explained Matthew wasn’t claiming Isaiah consciously wrote down every detail about Jesus. Rather, the Holy Spirit designed a pattern in Isaiah’s time that would be fulfilled more completely in Christ. Scholar Meredith Kline emphasised that seeing “types” (previews) fulfilled later was completely normal in Jewish Scripture reading—Christians didn’t invent this method.
What about the Hebrew grammar? Doesn’t “the virgin” (ha-almah) suggest a specific woman Isaiah already knew? In Hebrew, adding “the” (the definite article) can mean different things depending on context. Scholar CF Keil argued “the virgin” here points to “the virgin par excellence”—meaning the ideal virgin mother—rather than necessarily pointing to someone standing nearby. Think of how we might say “the president” without naming which one—context determines meaning. Geerhardus Vos noted that when prophets use “the” with special theological significance, it often signals something beyond the immediate situation. So the grammar actually allows for both a near reference (someone in Isaiah’s time) and an ultimate reference (Mary).

Why would God give Ahaz a sign about something 700 years in the future? The short answer is that the sign worked on both levels at once. God gave Ahaz an immediate sign (a child born in his lifetime) that proved God keeps His promises—that built trust. But the ultimate sign—God literally becoming “God with us” in human flesh—addressed a much bigger problem: humanity’s broken relationship with God. John Calvin pointed out every time God rescued His people in the Old Testament, it was like a “down payment” or preview of the ultimate rescue through Christ. Ahaz got practical help for his crisis, while only future generations would get the full meaning.

How does this fit with Reformed views on progressive revelation? Progressive revelation simply means God reveals truth gradually over time, like a teacher starting with simple lessons before advancing to complex ones. Reformed theologian Herman Bavinck taught that earlier revelations contain “seeds” that grow and blossom later. Isaiah 7:14 plants a seed, which grows through chapters 9 and 11 (the child who is “Mighty God”), and finally blooms fully when Matthew announces Jesus’ virgin birth. BB Warfield explained this step-by-step approach shows God’s wisdom—He taught people gradually rather than overwhelming them with the full mystery of God becoming man all at once.
What did the early church fathers say about Isaiah 7:14? The earliest Christian leaders after the apostles—called the “church fathers”—all agreed Isaiah 7:14 predicted Jesus’ virgin birth. Justin Martyr, writing around 150 AD, defended this interpretation against Jewish critics in his work Dialogue with Trypho. Irenaeus argued that a sign from God magnificent enough to span heaven and earth (Isaiah 7:11) demanded something as extraordinary as a virgin conception. What’s important here is that this wasn’t a later invention—these leaders lived close to the apostles’ time, and their unanimous agreement suggests they received this teaching directly from apostolic sources.

If the prophecy had dual fulfillment, does that mean there were two virgin births? No—and this is key to understanding how dual fulfillment works. The first fulfillment (in Isaiah’s time) was a normal birth that served as a preview or pattern of what was coming. Think of it like a movie trailer showing themes that the full movie develops. The child born in Ahaz’s time represented God’s promise to be present and deliver His people—that’s the pattern. With Jesus, every element intensifies: not just a promised child, but a virgin-born child; not just God’s symbolic presence, but God actually “with us” in flesh. Scholar Herman Ridderbos explained it this way: the pattern gets repeated, but the ultimate fulfillment takes it to a level the preview could only hint at.

ISAIAH 7:14 AND THE VIRGIN BIRTH: OUR RELATED POSTS