“A Virgin Shall Conceive, and Bear a Son”: A Kerygmatic Burden Lab

In a previous post I explained how important the kerygmatic burden is for interpreting the Old Testament. The kerygmatic burden is the prophetic message that the author of the biblical text had for his specific, contemporary audience. In that post, I promised to revisit this topic, giving special attention to the implications for those Old Testament texts that we see fulfilled in the New Testament. So that’s what we will do here, using Isaiah 7:14 as a case study: “A virgin shall conceive.”

Raphael's painting of the Madonna and Child, depicting Isaiah 7:14: "a virgin shall conceive."
“Madonna and Child” by Raphael

The Traditional, Christian Interpretation of Isaiah 7:14

Just taking a look at several translations reveals different ways of interpreting Isaiah 7:14. The title of this post comes from the Douay translation, made from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate: “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel.” This is the traditional, Christian understanding of the text. In fact, the first chapter of the Gospel according to Matthew explicitly quotes this verse as a prophecy of the virgin birth:

18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit; 19 and her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. 20 But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit; 21 she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” 22 All this took place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:

23 Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emman′u-el

(which means, God with us). 24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife, 25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.

Isaiah 7:14 in the RSV

I took that translation of Matthew 1:18-25 from the Revised Standard Version (my preferred English translation). But look at how the RSV translates the source text in Isaiah 7:14: “Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son.” Obviously, though a “virgin” and a “young woman” can be the same person, they are not exactly synonyms. Not every virgin is a young woman, and not every young woman is a virgin.

Isaiah 7:14 in Modern Translations

You might suppose that this is just clumsy translation work, but scanning other translations demonstrates that the RSV is in good company. Plently of translations have something besides “the virgin shall conceive.” The New Jerusalem Bible, for instance, says, “the young woman is with child and will give birth to a son.” The 1917 Jewish Publication Society version has, “the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son.” (The reason that this is so close to the RSV has to do with their common history as revisions of the King James Version).

The 2011 Revised Edition of the New American Bible, the official Bible translation of the Catholic Church in the United States, really grabs our attention. “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign; the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel.” (The NABRE really over-translates, and creates more problems). So, let’s talk about what is going on in the original, Hebrew text of Isaiah 7:14.

The Hebrew of Isaiah 7:14

We’ll start with verse 14, and then telescope out to the broader context. The word that is causing all of the fuss is the Hebrew word “almah.” An almah, strictly speaking, is a young woman. For instance, it’s used to refer to Miriam, the young girl who watches over her baby brother Moses when he is placed in the basket on the Nile. An almah is probably a virgin, but this is not its technical sense. In fact, there is another Hebrew word that really does mean “virgin” that could easily have been used here if that had really been Isaiah’s intention, “betulah.” So, on points of technicality, these modern translations that use “young woman” or an equivalent thereof to translate almah really are more precise than “a virgin shall conceive.”

Context Is King

I’ll explain the fascinating steps that the Holy Spirit took to get us to Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7:14, with “a virgin shall conceive,” in a bit. But first, I think that it is important to properly receive Isaiah’s kerygmatic burden. If Isaiah is not prophesying the virgin birth of the Messiah, what is he prophesying?

In my biblical interpretation courses at Ozark Christian College, Mark Scott taught us that “context is king.” Most of the time that we misunderstand a text of Scripture it is because we have not given due consideration to that text’s broader context. Most of the time this is fairly innocuous. The throw pillows at Hobby Lobby or the motivational posters at your local Christian bookstore are examples of this.

Throw pillow with Exodus 14:14 on it.
Source: https://img0.etsystatic.com/076/0/7390958/il_570xN.804174718_ag2s.jpg
Philippians 4:13 on bodybuilding poster.

But sometimes taking a verse out of context is the premise for a dangerous cult.

David Koresh
Vernon Wayne Howell, better known as David Koresh, took Revelation 5:2 out of context and identified himself as the Lamb who opens the seals of Revelation. This had tragic consequences for himself and his followers in Waco, Texas.

Context Is King in Isaiah 7:14

Isaiah 7:14 has a specific textual context that does not directly have to do with the birth of the Messiah at all. Christians often forget this because of Matthew’s use of verse fourteen in isolation. If we want to know what the prophet Isaiah’s original kerygmatic burden was, we have to give due consideration to the entire chapter.

7 In the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, son of Uzzi′ah, king of Judah, Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remali′ah the king of Israel came up to Jerusalem to wage war against it, but they could not conquer it. When the house of David was told, “Syria is in league with E′phraim,” his heart and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind.

And the Lord said to Isaiah, “Go forth to meet Ahaz, you and She′ar-jash′ub your son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool on the highway to the Fuller’s Field, and say to him, ‘Take heed, be quiet, do not fear, and do not let your heart be faint because of these two smoldering stumps of firebrands, at the fierce anger of Rezin and Syria and the son of Remali′ah. Because Syria, with E′phraim and the son of Remali′ah, has devised evil against you, saying, ‘Let us go up against Judah and terrify it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the son of Ta′be-el as king in the midst of it,’ thus says the Lord God:

It shall not stand,
    and it shall not come to pass.
For the head of Syria is Damascus,
    and the head of Damascus is Rezin.

(Within sixty-five years E′phraim will be broken to pieces so that it will no longer be a people.)

And the head of E′phraim is Samar′ia,
    and the head of Samar′ia is the son of Remali′ah.
If you will not believe,
    surely you shall not be established.’”

10 Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, 11 “Ask a sign of the Lord your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven.” 12 But Ahaz said, “I will not ask, and I will not put the Lord to the test.” 13 And he said, “Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman′u-el. 15 He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. 16 For before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted.”

Ahaz’s Crisis

Isaiah 7 is about a crisis facing Ahaz, the king of the Southern Kingdom of Judah. He has just found out about a conspiracy between two of his most dangerous enemies, Syria and the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Usually these two powers were too occupied with their own personal feuds to bother with Judah. Ahaz had real cause for concern. These were not empty threats. He desperately needed encouragement, so God sent Isaiah to him with just that.

There are two messages in this portion of Isaiah 7. The first is recorded in verses 3-9. It is very clear: Ahaz has no cause to worry. Their conspiracy will not come to pass. Evidently Ahaz was not very reassured by this message, because God sends Isaiah back to him with another one, and this one is accompanied by a prophetic sign.

Isaiah’s Kerygmatic Burden

Pay attention to the meaning of the sign of the birth of this “Immanuel.” “Before the child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted.” In other words, the birth of this child establishes a timeline for Ahaz. Before the child in question has reached the age of moral accountability, these foreign powers will have suffered their own disasters, and will no longer pose a threat to Judah. It is easier to exercise the virtue of hope when their is an end in sight. The prophetic sign is not that a virgin shall conceive, but that the child of this young woman will still be quite young when Rezin and Pekah will meet their demise.

So, this is the kerygmatic burden of Isaiah: Ahaz, have hope in God’s managing of this difficult political situation! And here is a sign to build hope on, a child named Immanuel, “God is with us.”

The Problem

Here’s the problem for traditional Christian readings of this text. Isaiah had to have delivered these messages before 715 BC, the year that King Ahaz died. How could the promise that a virgin shall conceive the Messiah 700 years later possibly provide any perceptible hope for doubtful Ahaz’s immediate situation? (NB: I am not saying that the promise of the Messiah’s birth is irrelevant to Ahaz. More on that in a bit). If the only proper interpretation of Isaiah’s Immanuel prophecy is the Christian one, it raises difficult questions. Sure, 700 years after the prophecy, Rezin and Pekah were no longer troubling Ahaz! But Ahaz wasn’t worried about them anymore for quite other reasons!

The point is, the birth of Jesus 700 years in the future couldn’t possibly bear any kerygmatic burden for Ahaz.

Isaiah’s Intent-Not “A Virgin Shall Conceive”

So, if Isaiah is not intending to predict that a virgin shall conceive the Messiah in Isaiah 7:14, what is his intent? It really does seem as though he is predicting the conception and birth of a child in months immediately following his message to Ahaz. Unfortunately, we don’t know exactly who the young woman in verse fourteen is. Some commentators have suggested that it is Isaiah’s own wife, or perhaps a wife or concubine of Ahaz. Personally, I think that Isaiah is pointing to a young woman serving in the palace of Ahaz when he says these words.

Ultimately, it doesn’t matter. At this stage in the prophetic message, the real point of the sign has little to do with the identity and career of little Immanuel. His name is the most important thing about him. “God is with” Ahaz and the people of Judah. Before Immanuel is old enough to eat solid food and be held accountable for wrong choices, Rezin and Pekah will disappear.

What Isaiah’s Kerygmatic Burden Means for Us Today

The Holy Spirit has a whole lot more to say here. But let’s pause and resist the temptation to rush on to greater things. Because the Holy Spirit has plenty to say in this original, literal sense of the text as Isaiah originally conceived of it. Let’s consider what Isaiah’s kerygmatic burden has to teach us today.

The immediate message of Isaiah 7 to Ahaz and Judah has a lot to say to us today. In texts like this, the literal sense is not aimed directly to us. Instead, it invites us to overhear it, and the indirect message has immense benefit. God is telling Judah that no matter what the political circumstances seem to indicate, He is with them. He is directing history to a certain goal. Ahaz and his people can trust God to accompany them through this crisis and protect them from every threat. Paranoia and despair are not an option for God’s people.

Now would be a good time to pause. Go back to the beginning of Isaiah 7 and read through the text again. Then read my brief interpretation of the literal sense of that text. Does that original sense of Isaiah 7 bear any relevance to our own life in the midst of today?

A Virgin Shall Conceive

This would be a gift on its own, but the Holy Spirit had more to say. About 200 years before the birth of Jesus, Greek-speaking Jews living in Alexandria produced a translation of Isaiah. This was later incorporated into the Greek version of the Old Testament. We call this translation the “Septuagint.” When those translators came to verse fourteen, they made an interesting choice. They translated almah with the Greek word parthenos. Unlike almah, parthenos technically does mean “virgin.” “A virgin shall conceive” is properly a translation of the Septuagint text of Isaiah 7:14.

What “A Virgin Shall Conceive” Meant for the Early Church

It is difficult to conceive of what the human translators had in mind when they did this. But for Matthew and the rest of the Christian community, the Holy Spirit’s intent is obvious. Beyond the political context of Ahaz’s day, God is sending another Child as a sign. This Child really is Immanuel, “God with us,” and not just named Immanuel. And this child, born miraculously of the Virgin Mary, in fact is the goal of history. He is the One who delivers God’s people through every crisis and from every threat. And yet again, paranoia and despair are not an option for God’s people. How can they be, when “God is with us” in Jesus?

Isaiah’s Kerygmatic Burden: “A Virgin Shall Conceive” and Its Ultimate Fulfillment in Jesus

Though Ahaz and Isaiah could not possibly know it, Jesus is the answer to the crises of their own day. The real problem with human history is that bullies like Rezin and Pekah keep showing up. One generation of political threats moves on only to have another, even more threatening one replace it. Our human existence is fraught with this recurring trope of conflict and anxiety. Peace is hard-won and ephemeral. This is true of the cheaper version of peace that our political commentators refer to. Think of all of the reporting on “peace talks” between warring factions. The more substantial peace referred to in the Hebrew word shalom is even more elusive. This is the real flourishing of a culture and the individuals who live in it,

A Virgin Shall Conceive “God with Us”

All of this is the result of sin, our rebellion and alienation from God. That is the real problem that Jesus comes to solve. But Christians know that just because we experience redemption does not mean that suddenly we become impervious to bullying. From the very beginning the Church has produced an army of martyrs. The machinery of coercion and violence has mutilated and mangled their bodies. Still, they have triumphed spiritually over these political forces. Rezin and Pekah are always with us. And yet, Christians know a “peace that passes understanding” because of Immanuel. God, in Jesus, is also always with us. And this is never so true as when we suffer, taking our place of fellowship with Jesus on His cross.

Somehow, the peace that Isaiah proclaims to Ahaz draws mysteriously from the peace offered by the second Immanuel. The Immanuel born of the Virgin truly is “God with Us.” Isaiah’s kerygmatic burden is blind to the greater intent of the Holy Spirit. And yet, it depends upon it for its full force. Christians can read the story of Ahaz and Immanuel with the eyes of faith. We can thank God that in our current political anxieties, Jesus is still “God with us.”

The Kerygmatic Burden of Old Testament Texts

Old Testament interpretation is difficult. Something that has helped me has been the recognition of the “kerygmatic burden of the Old Testament.” In this article, I will share this concept with you, so that you can use it in your own biblical study.

When reading any text, it is important to establish as nearly as possible what the author’s intent with that text is. It is very true that the text may bear more personal meanings for you that the author could never have imagined, but if you completely disregard what she was trying to say and what motivated her to write in the first place, you have not honored her as the author who has gifted you with the text. A great deal of the authorial intent is dictated by the audience to whom the text is addressed. The author has a message which she wishes a particular set of people in a particular time and a particular place to receive. This is true of poems, novels, newspaper stories … and the Bible.

For Old Testament texts, I call this dynamic relationship of author, message, and original audience the “kerygmatic burden of Old Testament texts.”

“Kerygma”

“Kerygma” is a Greek word meaning “proclamation.” It only shows up a few times in the Septuagint. An important example is Proverbs 9:3-4, where Lady Wisdom sends out a proclamation to the simple: “She has sent out her maids to call from the highest places in the town, ‘Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!'”

Icon of Hagia Sophia. The kerygmatic burden of the Old Testament is a distillation of the wisdom conveyed in a text.
Icon of Holy Wisdom. Note the resemblance to Christ.

In the New Testament, “kerygma” was used to describe the act of heralding the Gospel message that God’s Kingdom had been established by the coming of Jesus the Messiah. Romans 16 is a beautiful example, where Paul says this:

25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages 26 but is now disclosed and through the prophetic writings is made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory for evermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

Some New Testament theologians over the course of the last century proposed that the Gospel was itself a new genre, which they labeled “kerygma.” They said that before the Gospels were written down, their contents were formalized in the oral presentation of Jesus’ ministry and teachings. The distilled core of this Gospel message is also referred to as kerygma.

The Kerygmatic Burden of the Old Testament

The kerygma is rightly associated with the New Testament. But I believe that a similar phenomenon already occurred in the Old Testament. These texts, after all, formed the basis for the revelation that came in Jesus. Even texts that do not formally fall into the category of “prophecy” assume a prophetic character. This is by virtue of their inclusion in the Old Testament Canon. That prophetic character is the message that the authors and editors of the Old Testament were struggling to convey. This strikes close to what I mean by “kerygmatic burden.”

Another approach is to consider something my Bible college professor Mark Scott taught me to look for. This is the “A.I.M.” of the text. A.I.M. stands for the “Author’s Intended Meaning.” The kerygmatic burden of the Old Testament also considers the original audience. This is particular to a specific time and place.

Last week I shared my interpretation of the story of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11. An old friend of mine, Jason Shaver, chimed in with some excellent questions in the comments. He asked why most scholars no longer accept the traditional view that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. Personally, I am partial to those traditional perspectives. But the biggest reason that I believe someone else composed Genesis 11 is this kerygmatic burden of the Old Testament. Genesis 11 makes most sense as a prophetic message to the Jewish people in exile under Nebuchadnezzar.

Cyrus the Great in Isaiah 40-55

I began to think this way years ago. I was desperately trying as a Fundamentalist to defend the original authorship of Isaiah the Prophet for Isaiah 40-55. Biblical scholars call these chapters “Deutero-Isaiah.” This is because they mention Cyrus the Great by name. He lived more than a century after the original Prophet Isaiah. Here is one example, from chapter 45:

1Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus,

    whose right hand I have grasped,

to subdue nations before him

    and ungird the loins of kings,

to open doors before him

    that gates may not be closed:

“I will go before you

    and level the mountains,

I will break in pieces the doors of bronze

    and cut asunder the bars of iron,

I will give you the treasures of darkness

    and the hoards in secret places,

that you may know that it is I, the Lord,

    the God of Israel, who call you by your name.

For the sake of my servant Jacob,

    and Israel my chosen,

I call you by your name,

    I surname you, though you do not know me.’

In Sunday School and Bible college, I was taught that this was an amazing prediction on the part of Isaiah. Consequently, it was a manifest demonstration of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Any argument for later authorship was part of a nefarious effort to chip away at faith in the Bible. Unfortunately, the original arguments for Deutero-Isaiah do have roots in a post-Enlightenment dismissal of the possibility of predictive prophecy.

The Kerygmatic Burden of Deutero-Isaiah

I studied these chapters of Isaiah in graduate school. There I became aware that the arguments for Deutero-Isaiah were much more sophisticated than I had been led to believe. This greatly contributed to a crisis of faith that I was suffering through at the time. (I will probably write about that later. Suffice it to say that personal experience of Jesus and His mercies in my life secured me in my faith). And that’s when, by God’s grace, the kerygmatic burden of Deutero-Isaiah came in to save the day.

Consider. Isaiah receives a prophetic word about Cyrus in 700 BC, let’s say. (That’s exactly 100 years before the birth of Cyrus the Great!). He comes before King Hezekiah with this word of encouragement. What could Hezekiah’s response be other than, “Who the @#$ is Cyrus?” In other words, this message would have absolutely no kerygmatic burden for Isaiah and the people to whom he ministered.

Prophecy, Not Prediction

The Holy Spirit could have predicted Cyrus the Great by name a full 100 years before he was born. After all, I joyfully attempt from day to day to be a faithful, practicing Catholic. Catholics believe in far greater miracles of Grace than a simple bit of predictive prophecy. (Come to Mass with me sometime, and you can see for yourself). The real question is why the Holy Spirit would have predicted Cyrus the Great by name to that audience. They could derive absolutely no spiritual benefit from this revelation. That’s what I mean by the kerygmatic burden of the Old Testament.

The Holy Spirit does not do the Nostradamus shtick. He speaks clearly to His people in ways that will challenge and comfort them where they are. He directly addresses the trials and temptations of their particular experience. Today I recognize that another author besides Isaiah wrote these chapters about Cyrus the Great. But that does not mean that God did not inspire these texts. On the contrary, this has actually helped me contemplate how God speaks to His people in an even more profound manner.

Of course, the Scriptures speak beyond their original audience. Often they do so in amazing ways that the original authors could never have imagined. Isaiah 7:14 and Psalm 22 immediately come to mind. In these texts, the original kerygmatic burden has developed into an even greater message, precisely because these are inspired Scriptures. Those texts can indeed speak to us at a deeper level. But first we must see what they originally meant for their human authors and the audiences that received them. I hope to write more about that in the future.