The Immanuel in Isaiah 7:14

[sk0rpi0n]

The virgin/young woman will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
-Isaiah 7:14

A lot of times I see this verse being referred as a prophecy of Jesus.

But does Immanuel = Jesus??

The verses before and after 7:14 might give a clearer picture...



Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, "Ask the LORD your God for a sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights."
But Ahaz said, "I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the test."
Then Isaiah said, "Hear now, you house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God also?
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. He will eat curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right. But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. The LORD will bring on you and on your people and on the house of your father a time unlike any since Ephraim broke away from Judahâ€â€he will bring the king of Assyria."
- Isaiah 7:10-17



What we can gather is this...

1. That the sign is meant for Ahaz, who is being spoken to.
2. That these verses are prophetic, but only for the immediate future.
3. That the boy was only a sign for the the land of the two kings dreaded by Ahaz to be laid to waste.

(Am I interpreting these verses out of context, people???)



Now, I've often heard the argument that

Immanuel = "God is with us" = Jesus was with us = therefore God is with us = so Immanuel = Jesus

But the NT does not draw a connection between Immanuel and Jesus.

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
-Luke 1:35

Being called "son of God" is not the same as being called Immanuel. (God is with us)
Immanuel is an actual name, like Ezekiel, Daniel, Samuel etc. and NOT a title. So, I conclude that Immanuel of Isaiah 7:14 is different from Jesus.

No matter how you interpret it, it does not change the fact that....

1. That the sign is meant for Ahaz, who is being spoken to.
2. That these verses are prophetic, but only for the immediate future.
3. That the boy was only a sign for the the land of the two kings dreaded by Ahaz to be laid to waste.

Discuss.

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.


Mat 1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,


Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.


Mat 1:24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:


Mat 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Isa 7:17 The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; [even] the king of Assyria.


Isa 7:18 ¶ And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the LORD shall hiss for the fly that [is] in the uttermost part of the rivers of Egypt, and for the bee that [is] in the land of Assyria.

It was future and ahaz was told it would be future and matt 1 shows it was about Jesus and quotes the direct scripture.

 

[sk0rpi0n]

It was future and ahaz was told it would be future and matt 1 shows it was about Jesus and quotes the direct scripture.

Matthew may have quoted it, but the verses surrounding Isaiah 7:14, shows that the future referred to this -

But before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
-Isaiah 7:16

How do you read the above verse to conclude that its about the messiah?
It has nothing to do with the messiah, but its about the 'land of two kings being laid to waste'.

The boy is not Jesus....or Mary would have named him Immanuel.

 

[Tina]

^

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.


A sign was normally fullfilled within a few years.

The virgin may refer to a young woman bethrothed to Isaiah (vs 8:3), who was to become his second wife (his first wife presumably having died after Shear-Jashub was born). In Genesis 24:43, the same Hebrew word "almah" refers to a woman about to be married (Proverbs 30:19 - "the way of a man with a virgin"). Matthew 1:23 apparently understood the woman mentioned here to be a type (a foreshadowing) of the Virgin Mary.

The name “God is with us†– Immanuel – was meant to convince Ahaz that God could rescue him from his enemies. The Hebrew for “Immanuel†is used again in Isaiah 8:8 and Isaiah 8:10 , and it may be another name for Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz (Isaiah 8:3). If so, the boy’s names had complementary significance.

“Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz†is a symbolic name which means Ahaz’s enemies would be plundered (Isaiah 8:4), but it also implied that Judah would suffer (Isaiah 8:7-8).

Jesus was the final fulfillment of this prophecy, for He was “God with us†in the fullest sense (Matthew 1:23).

.