THE ORGANIZATION OF ISAIAH 7:1-17

There are a number of equally good ways (and a few bad ways) to study the Bible. In a previous post simply entitled “Isaiah 7,” I conducted a very brief verse-by-verse exposition of this chapter. This is how we generally encounter the biblical text, but even it is subject to abuse.

For example, as I have probably mentioned before, years ago I visited the Sunday school class of a church I was checking out after moving to a new town. The “teacher” was more like a vote counter since he would read the first verse of a passage and then poll us one at a time to see what sense we each could make out of that one verse taken in isolation from the context. He would then count up the votes and announce our consensus understanding.

At one point in the proceeding I rebelled by pointing out that the meaning of the particular verse we were discussing was clearly explained in the very next verse. He patiently explained to me that as a newcomer I obviously didn't understand that I was violating the rules of the class by jumping ahead in the text. He apparently felt that the verse numbering, which didn't come about until the late Middle Ages, was part of the holy text and was equally sacred. Each and every verse had its own independent meaning not to be confused with any other verse. Needless to say, I did not visit that congregation again.

But the opposite extreme can be just as faulty as the sole method to approach the Bible. Isaiah 7 is a good example of that since, as I shall show below, just taking the broader context of the passage into account can also be misleading and gloss over points of extreme interest to today's reader. This is especially true when a Christian studies the Old Testament passages. To demonstrate this point, let me first present a broad overview of the flow of thought in Isaiah 7 in diagram form:

                                                Figure 1: The Organization of Isaiah 7

1. Initial Historical Conditions (vv. 1-2)

        2. The LORD said to Ahaz through Isaiah (vv. 3-6)

                3. Central Poem (vv. 7-9)

                    a. “It shall not stand, and it shall not come to pass” (v. 7)

                        b. “The head of Aram is, etc.” (v. 7:8a)

                            c. Prophecy regarding the fall of Ephraim (7:8b)

                        b'. “The head of Ephraim is, etc.” (v. 9b)

                    a'. “If you do not stand firm, you shall not stand” (v. 7b)

        2'. The LORD spoke to Ahaz (vv. 10-16)

1'. Predicted Future Conditions (v. 17)

Thus, this passage takes the very common biblical symmetrical pattern known as an inclusio. And as such, the stressed central portion of the organization is to be found in Isaiah 7:8b. But in this case there is a minor problem with that analysis in that not all scholars believe that 7:8b was part of Isaiah's original writing.

For example, Blenkinsopp labels 8b “a gloss, perhaps referring to further deportations from Ephraimite (central and northern) territory about the time of the accession of the Assyrian king Asurbanipal (Ezra 4:9-10).”

Let's assume for the purpose of argument that this prophecy of Ephraim's doom is spurious and should be omitted. In that case, there is no real center to Figure 1, so that the emphasis of the passage falls on the introduction and conclusion (1 and 1') instead. If that is so, then the main point of this part of the chapter is the great contrast in Judah's position before and after their northern foe (the alliance of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, typified by Ephraim, and the Assyrians) disappears. Note that this is exactly the same point emphasized by 7:8b itself. So either way, that is how the original Jewish audience would have read Isaiah 7:1-17.

But a modern Christian audience would read these verses in an entirely different manner and instead emphasize the verses hidden in Section 2' in which God assures Ahaz that his foes will not be a problem in the fairly near future. The sign that the king is given involves the birth of a child from a young woman (or virgin) and the boy's early maturation. If that sounds familiar to you, it should since it was quoted in quite a different context by Matthew in Matt. 1. The similar language employed in each passage is demonstrated below:

Wording                                                    Isaiah 7                Matthew 1

“The LORD said”                                     14a                          22

“Behold”                                                   14b                          20

“young woman/virgin is with child”        14c                           18

“she will give birth to a son”                   14d                           21

In addition is the fact that the name Jesus (Matthew 1:21) means “Yahweh is salvation” while the theme of Isaiah 7 is the announcement of the salvation of God's people from danger. Also, Blomberg points to the very next chapter of Isaiah for another correspondence:

“Immanuel / God is with us”                  Isaiah 8:8,10            23

Derek Kidner elaborates on the connection between these two remote passages: “How the sign fits the crisis is much debated. As a straight prophecy of Christ (cf. Mt. 1:22f) it may seem too remote to speak to Ahaz; yet the sign was for the threatened house of David (vv. 6, 13), and the very vision of a coming prince was itself a reassurance. Cf. 37:30; Ex. 3:12; Rom. 4:11, for signs to confirm faith rather than compel it...But God may have unveiled the distant scene by way of the near. Some suggest that the sign had immediate value in (a) the time it indicated (the few years from the conception of a child – any child – now, to his reaching the age of conscious choice: v. 16); or (b) the name ('God (is) with us') which a contemporary mother would be moved to give her son – the opposite of Ichabod (cf. 1 Sa. 4:21); or (c) the rank, if it announced a royal birth, which tends to be a harbinger of hope. (But on any reckoning this child could not be Hezekiah, born some years before.) These possibilities are not necessarily in conflict with each other, nor with the long-term prediction of Christ.”

And David Payne adds several more points including:

“No Christian who takes Mt. 1:20-23 seriously can deny an ultimate fulfillment in Christ; but two options still remain open, namely a single fulfillment, in Christ, or else a double fulfillment; one in the lifetime of Ahaz, the other the Messianic fulfillment. The latter option in fact seems preferable...”

“Despite several attempts to demonstrate otherwise, it remains very doubtful whether the Hebrew word 'almah signified only a 'virgin'. Certainly it was a term which included virgins; but it cannot be restricted to them.”

In conclusion, we see that as in many Old Testament prophecies, they speak just as well to the immediate situation of the Jews at the time of writing as to events discussed in New Testament times.