All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching and reproof. But some passages are “zingers.” They stick out and whack your conscience, or flood you with joy, or they do as Isaiah 7:14 does and unveil a theological gem that outshines all the neighboring verses.

The theological gem of Isaiah 7 is verse 14: “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.”

No true Christian doubts that this passage predicts the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, as Matthew so clearly points out in Matthew 1:23. But many saints within the ranks of Christian orthodoxy differ on the application of this passage in Isaiah’s day. Was there really a virgin birth during the life of Isaiah? Or should we translate almah (the Hebrew word for “virgin” in this passage) as “maiden” instead of “virgin”? And who was this child? King Hezekiah? Another child of Isaiah’s prophetess wife?

The Backstage

It’s absurd to try and interpret any passage outside of its context, so the historical backdrop of Isaiah’s prophecy must be understood. Pekah, king of Israel, and Rezin, king of Aram (Syria), attack Ahaz, king of Judah, because he won’t join their united league against Tiglath-pileser, the dreaded king of Assyria. The mission? Conquer Ahaz, replace him with the son of Tabeel, and enjoy the power of a three-king-league united against the tyrant of Assyria (vss 5-6).  

King Ahaz and the land of Judah shake like leaves on the trees when they hear that Pekah and Rezin are on their way (vs 2), but God sends His prophet Isaiah to reassure Ahaz that the enemy’s plan will fail (vss 3-9). Isaiah then tells Ahaz to ask God to perform any sign he requests as proof of the fulfillment of God’s promise of protection (vss 10-11), but in his pompous arrogance, Ahaz feigns humility and says, “I will not ask, nor will I test the Lord!” (vs 12). Ahaz knows Deuteronomy 6:16, but uses it as a cover for rejecting God’s suggestion for a sign, because he plans on trusting Tigalth-pileser, king of Assyria instead. Ahaz will later trade all the silver and gold from God’s house in return for the king of Assyria’s protection (2 Chron 28:16-18).

So Isaiah counters with, “Listen now, O house of David! Is it too slight a thing for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God as well? Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14).

No place in Scripture is this word “virgin” (almah in the Hebrew) used where so much theology rests on how it is translated. And here is the challenge: almah can be translated as “young woman” or “virgin.” So which is it?

How almah is Used in Other Parts of the OT

Almah is found only six other times in the Old Testament:

• Genesis 24:43. Here it refers to Rebekah, Isaac’s future wife. Clearly, it means a virgin in this context.
• Exodus 2:8. Here it points to Moses’ sister (Miriam, most likely) who waited to see what would happen to the baby Moses. Again, it appears to refer to a virgin since Miriam was likely a very young girl when Moses was only a three-month-old-baby. 
• Psalm 68:25. The maidens beat on the tambourines in the song procession. The context gives us no indication whether it means virgin or young maiden. 
• Proverbs 30:19. Here Solomon talks about “the way of a man with a maid.” This could be a virgin or not one, but either way, the woman is most likely young. 
• Song of Solomon 1:3. The passage says, “…the maidens love you” referring to their infatuation with King Solomon. It seems most unlikely that “maidens” is used generically of both married and non-married women infatuated with King Solomon in all his splendor. Thus, I conclude that it refers to the virgins—the young unmarried women, looking for a husband and dreaming wishfully if they could only have Solomon as their spouse. 
• Song of Solomon 6:8. Referring to the royal procession of Solomon and all his attendants, the text says, “There are sixty queens and eighty concubines, and maidens without number.” Since queens are not virgins and neither are concubines, the most natural way of translating almah here would be “virgins” just as the NIV, KJV and the ESV translate it.

What We Can Glean From OT Uses of almah

As you can see, the usage of this word in the Old Testament does not single-handedly solve the question of how it should be translated in Isaiah 7:14. However, one conclusion can be gleaned from its usage in the above passages: almah always refers to a young woman, and usually to one who has not yet birthed any children. (In the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, John Walton comes to the same conclusion in his article on the same word). This may mean true virginity and it may not. However, it should be understood that in ancient Hebrew culture, to be a virgin was sometimes very close to the same thing as not having any children, since from the moment of marriage it was normal to have children as soon as possible. Thus almah is better translated as “unmarried woman” than “woman who has never copulated.”

Different Views on the Meaning of almah in Isaiah 7:14

1. A virgin gave birth to a child in Isaiah’s day. Challenge: If this really happened then one would think the Jews would have written about this event, or at least interpreted this passage as referring to an actual virgin birth in Isaiah’s day—but none of their writings imply anything of the sort. And more importantly, if a virgin birth really did happen in Isaiah’s day, we have bigger theological hurdles to master than we began with. Is not the virgin birth of Jesus a distinct miracle that points to His godhood? If the baby was born of a virgin, who was the father? God? Then would the child not be divine? I am convinced that The only virgin who ever birthed a baby apart from man’s intervention such as vitro fertilization, was Mary.

2. No virgin gave birth to a child in Isaiah’s day, this prophecy pointed only to Christ’s birth. The sign would be fulfilled in the future. Challenge: Isaiah says, “The Lord Himself will give you a sign” (7:14). How can a sign happening over 700 years after Ahaz dies be a sign to Ahaz? Additionally, Isaiah prophecies that before this child knows the difference between good and evil (probably around the age of three or four) “the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken” (7:16). This prophecy required that a child be born in Ahaz’ day.

3. The virgin is a young woman who, still a virgin, marries Ahaz and the Immanuel child is Hezekiah. Challenge: King Hezekiah was already ten years old at the time of this prophecy. I think the temptation here for many students of the Scriptures is to attach the prophecy to someone already named in Scripture instead of being silent where the Bible is silent.

4. The prophecy points to a woman who was a virgin during the time the prophecy was made, but who would no longer be a virgin when she conceived the child. Challenge: Then what is so miraculous about this birth? How is it a “sign”? Counter-challenge: There was nothing miraculous about the birth of Isaiah’s two other sons, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (Is 7:3; 8:3) who were also signs to the nation of Judah, so why must 7:14 point to a miraculous birth? Not all of God’s signs that accompanied direct revelation were miraculous in nature. In 1 Samuel 2:34, God uses the death of Hophni and Phinehas as a sign that Eli’s house is judged, but two sons dying on the same day is not entirely miraculous. In Isaiah 20:2-3, Isaiah must walk around naked for three years as a sign, but again, there is nothing miraculous about walking around in the buff—though a little shocking!

5. “Virgin” refers to Isaiah’s wife. Challenge: At the least, almah refers to a young woman who has had no children, but Isaiah’s wife had already given birth to Shear-jashub as a child.

In Conclusion

It is important to realize that commentators and theologians would not debate the meaning of “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14 had Matthew not called it prophetic of Jesus’ virgin birth. But Matthew did not depend on Isaiah’s Hebrew meaning of almah to establish the doctrine of the virgin birth, any more than he depended on Jeremiah’s meaning of “Rachel weeping for her children” (Jer 31:15) to apply it to Herod the Great’s murder of every two-year-old child and younger in Bethlehem (Matt 2:18).¹
Because…

1. We have no evidence that Jewish scribes interpreted Isaiah 7:14 as an actual virgin birth.
2. The most natural interpretation of almah is a young, childless woman who is probably still a true virgin.
3. The LXX² translates the Hebrew almah into the Greek parthenos, a Greek word that always means “virgin”³…

I am convinced that position #4 is correct: A virgin got married, conceived, and gave birth to a child whom she named “Immanuel.”

It should be noted too that Isaiah could have used the Hebrew word betulah, which distinctly means “virgin”, but he did not. I believe that Isaiah was being intentionally vague, because the focus was not on the fact that this woman was a virgin, but that she would give birth to a child whose very name would be a rebuke to Ahaz’ lack of belief in God’s Word.

Endnotes

1. In his article in NIDOTTE on almah, John Walton observes that, “We are not obliged to find the meaning 'virgin' in the lexical profile of alemah in order to justify the NT or our theological creeds.

2. The LXX is the Greek Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament that Christ and His apostles quoted from frequently.

3. Every time the Greek New Testament uses parthenos, the NASB translates it as “virgin.” Thayer’s lexicon, Louw-Nida’s lexicon, UBS’ Greek dictionary, Friberg’s lexicon, Liddell-Scott’s lexicon, and the Arndt-Gingrich-Danker-Bauer lexicon all confirm parthenos to mean a virgin.