When Rezin, King of Syria, and Pekah, King of Israel, were confederates in arms together, against Ahaz, King of Judah, Isaiah the prophet was sent by God, first to comfort Ahaz and the nation, and then to assure them by a sign, that his enemies should in a little time be confounded.—­But Ahaz refusing a sign at the prophet’s hand, the prophet said (see the chapter,) “The Lord shall give you a sign.  Behold a virgin, or ‘young woman’ (for the Hebrew word means both as was truly and justly asserted by the Jews in the primitive ages against the Christians, and is now acknowledged, and established beyond dispute by the best Hebrew scholars of this age,) shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.  Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good.  For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land which thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.”  And this sign is accordingly given Ahaz by the prophet, who, ch. viii. v. 2, 18, took two witnesses and went to the said young woman, who in due time conceived, and bare a son, after whose birth the projects of Rezin and Pekah were, it appears, soon confounded, according to the prophecy and sign given by the prophet.

And the prophet himself, puts it beyond dispute, that this is the proper interpretation of the prophecy, by express words, as well as by his whole narration; for he says, “Behold I, and the children whom the Lord hath given me, are for signs, and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of Hosts, that dwelleth in mount Zion.”  Isaiah viii. 19.

This is the plain drift and design of the prophet, literally, obviously, and primarily understood; and thus he is understood by one of the most judicious of interpreters, the great Grotius.  Indeed, to understand the prophet as having the conception of Mary, and the birth of her son Jesus from a virgin mother literally, and primarily in view, is a very great absurdity, and contrary to the very intent and design of the sign given by the prophet.

For the sign being given by Isaiah to convince Ahaz that he brought a message from God to him, to assure him that the two kings should not succeed in their attempt against him, how could a virgin’s conception, and bearing a son seven hundred years afterwards, be a sign to Ahaz, that the prophet came to him, with the said message from God?  And how useless was it to Ahaz, as well as absurd in itself for the prophet, to say, “Before the child, born seven hundred years hence, shall distinguish between good and evil, the land which thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings,” which would be a banter, instead of a sign.

But a prophecy of the certain birth of a male child, by a particular female within a short time, seems a proper sign, as being not only what could not with certainty, be foretold, except by a person inspired, but considered as soon coming to pass, it, consequently, evidences itself to be a divine sign, and answers all the purposes of a sign.  And such a sign is agreeable to God’s conduct on like occasions; witness his conduct to Gideon and Hezekiah.  Jud. vi.; 2 Kings xx.