Continued from Chapter 18a
Several suggestions have been proposed to identify the mother and child. Frequently, she has been identified with a present wife of Ahaz or a young woman about to be married to him and pointed out in person by the prophet. The child has been identified with one of his children, notably Hezekiah.2
Another proposal is that ha-‘almah, “the young woman,” is Isaiah’s own wife, specifically the prophetess of Isaiah 8:3, or one of several wives. A third proposal is that the young woman was betrothed to Isaiah and soon to be married to the prophet. A fourth proposal identifies the child Maher-shalal-hash-baz, born to Isaiah’s wife (Isaiah 8:3), with the child Immanuel, giving the child a double identity.3 Without any definite clue, it must be concluded that the identity of ha-‘almah remains a matter of speculation. Christians contend that the “Holy Spirit,”4 one-third of the Godhead, entered into union with a virgin so that she could conceive and bear Jesus, another one-third of the Godhead. They imagine that God not only performed the miracle of a virgin conception5 but also in the process, part of Him, became the human being so conceived.
The idea of divinity incarnate was widespread in the ancient pagan world. As a result, it is not surprising that deification of Jesus took place in the pagan environment in which the New Testament was written. It should be noted, however, that the authors of the New Testament considered Jesus to be the incarnation of an angelic being, but not God Himself. He was thought to be a god, but not the God. The trinitarian conception, which saw Jesus as the second person of the Godhead, was a later innovation. In any case, both perspectives of Jesus presently espouse the doctrine of a virgin conception.
2 Later Jewish commentators identified the “young woman” as the mother of Hezekiah (that is, the wife of Ahaz); a similar understanding may be found in the Septuagint rendering of this passage. Whereas the Hebrew text reads “and she [the mother] shall call (kar’at, 3rd sg. fem.) his name Immanuel,” the Septuagint translators read the verb as a 2nd sg. masc. (pointed kar’ata), “you [Ahaz] shall call his name Immanuel,” thereby implying that the boy would be the son of Ahaz. This translation (kaleseis) is found not only in the Septuagint but also in the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and in the Old Latin (Syriac Peshitto and Vulgate have the passive, “shall be called”).
3 The first mention of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, in the phrase, “concerning Mahershalal-hash-baz” (lsaiah 8:1), introduces not Isaiah’s son but rather a prophecy concerning the forthcoming Assyrian attack. The child’s birth occurs in Isaiah 8:3. Some commentators then assume that according to their respective commands, the mother names the child, “God is with us” (Isaiah 7:14), and the father, “Speedily to the spoil, hurrying to the plunder” (Isaiah 8:3). According to their explanation, the child’s ability to differentiate between good and evil (Isaiah 7:15-16) and ability to say “my mother” or “my father” (Isaiah 8:4) occurs simultaneously. The name Maher-shalal-hash-baz refers to God’s promise to defeat Samaria and Damascus and to send Assyria to carry off the wealth of these two nations, before turning to devastate Judah. Throughout all these vicissitudes and adversities, the name Immanuel stands as a sign to the people of Judah that “God is with us.” Thus, according to this understanding of the text, the child, Immanuel/Mahar-shalalhash-baz, is God’s assurance to Judah that He oversees history. Though plundered, pillaged, and despoiled to the point of near certain destruction they shall not be destroyed.
4 The lack of the definite article before “holy spirit” in the Greek of Matthew 1:20 (also missing in the parallel description in Luke 1:25) may simply mean “a holy spirit.” This phrase is anarthrous in the Greek of both Matthew 1:18 and Luke 1:35, that is, literally “a holy spirit” not “the holy spirit.” The phrase, “of a holy spirit,” in Greek is genitive and has no definite article. Most Christian renderings supply the definite article before “Holy Spirit,” in conformity with trinitarian belief. This should not lead the reader to assume that the respective authors of Matthew or Luke were expounding the notion of “the Spirit” as a person, much less the third person of the Trinity. The trinitarian concept of the divinity was a later Christian development.
5 “Virgin conception” should not be confused with “immaculate conception.” In 1854 Pope Pius IX proclaimed the Roman Catholic Church dogma of the “Immaculate Conception,” whereby Mary’s own conception was considered stainless so that she remained immune to what Christians refer to as original sin.
Continued