The Virgin Birth, Isaiah 7.14

Isaiah 7.14

The Hebrew word rendered “virgin” is almah. It is the only biblical word that truly signifies a virgin. Prof. William Beck, who researched this matter with great precision, declared1:

I have searched exhaustively for instances in which almah might mean a non-virgin or a married woman. There is no passage where almah is not a virgin. Nowhere in the Bible or elsewhere does almah mean anything but a virgin.”

Robert Dick Wilson, the incomparable Hebrew scholar who was proficient in forty-five biblically-related languages, declared that almah “never meant ‘young married woman,’” and that the presumption of common law is that every almah is virtuous, unless she can be proved not to be2.

Even the Jewish scholar, Cyrus H. Gordon, who made some of the archaeological discoveries at Ras Shamra, conceded3 that recent archaeological evidence confirms that almah means “virgin.”

The notion that almah merely signifies a “young woman” was first argued4 by the anti-Christian Jew, Trypho, in the mid-second century A.D.

Background

When the kingdom of Judah was threatened by a confederation of enemies from the north, King Ahaz was terrified. God sent the prophet Isaiah to calm the king. The prophet declared that the evil forces would not prevail. Ahaz was encouraged to “ask for a sign” documenting this word of consolation, but the stubborn king refused.

Isaiah then directed his attention to the “house of David.” He promised a much greater “sign,” namely “the virgin” would conceive and bear a son, whose name, Immanuel, would signify “God is with us.” The time-frame that it would take for the Immanuel-child to reach the age of accountability was used as a chronological measurement. Before that time-span would expire, Judah’s current threat would dissipate (which reality came to pass).

More importantly, however, was the fact that a much greater deliverance was needed in Israel, and such would be provided by the actual arrival of Immanuel—who is Jesus Christ.

I always had a question about that actually. Never with whether or not Mary was actually a virgin, but why only two of the gospels mention it.

Does anyone have an explanation for why neither Mark nor John mentioned anything about it?

Off the top of my head, I think it is because Mark is basic only 16 chapters. I know these are 4 independent Gospels because they are by 4 individuals, but the first one, Mark, is like the first draft so it doesn't include all the details.

And John's objective is not just repeat what was already said in Matthew and Luke, but to set down many words not found in the other Gospels. The 4 Gospels are very efficient in their allocation of information by pen and paper. Information included in one and not another shows the independent accounts. The Gospel of John is the most profound of all the Gospels as well as the last written. It was written after most of the rest of the New Testament was composed.

Other Gospels and many Epistles had already appeared, but at the very last, John came forth to present his Gospel. In it there is finally shown to us what God's estimate of Christ is and in it we are told how we ought to know Christ as God knows Him deeply. We see that Christ is all these things-lamb, bread of life, the way, the truth, the life, power, and more. That He is not simply going to give us these things. He says He is these things. So John's Gospel is even more profound with different emphasis. It really rounds out the 4 Gospels I feel and feels intuitively appropriate the virgin birth is not included. Besides, you don't want everything repeated verbatim.