Wife of Isaiah and A Type and Shadow

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Hi E____,
Thank you for your question.
I am encouraged that you are profiting spiritually from our efforts to bring light to the darkness which has been cast over God’s Word in the churches of Babylon.
You ask:

“To be consistent, wouldn’t the meaning of the verse in Isaiah have to be the same as the meaning when Messiah was born, which would suggest that the child born in Isaiah was also born of a virgin?  Wouldn’t the circumstances surrounding the fulfillment of both the child in Isaiah and of Jesus need to be the same in order for the dual nature of the prophecy to be fulfilled?

The answer to your question is, no, it is not necessary for Isaiah’s son to be born of a virgin in the same sense as Christ who had no earthly father.
Is it necessary that the dual fulfillment of the prophecy “I have called my son out of Egypt” have similar circumstances? If that were true then Christ would need to be offering incense to Baalim:

Hos 11:1  When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.
Hos 11:2  As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.
Mat 2:15  And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son. 

Perhaps Isaiah’s son, who was born as a sign to King Ahaz, was Isaiah’s first son. Perhaps that child’s mother, Isaiah’s wife, was a virgin before she had this child. But the birth of Christ could not be “the same” simply because, other than Adam himself, Christ is the only person in the history of all mankind, who was not fathered by a physical son of Adam. Christ had Adam’s blood in Him through His mother, but not through a physical Father:

Luk 1:30  And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luk 1:31  And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32  He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33  And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
Luk 1:34  Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Luk 1:35  And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

On the other hand, Isaiah’s son, whose birth was a sign to King Ahaz, and all of Isaiah’s children were Isaiah’s children:

Isa 8:18  Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

It was not required that either Isaiah or his children be conceived of a virgin, of God’s Holy Spirit, in order to serve as signs and shadows of either physical or or spiritual matters.
Your question insinuates that Isaiah’s son would have to be conceived of the Holy Spirit through a physical virgin in order for this birth to be a type of Christ’s birth. That reasoning would have us to believe that for any of the bullocks, lambs and doves to typify Christ, they would also have to be born of virgin animals and birds and conceived of the Holy Spirit before they could typify Christ.
The birth of Isaiah’s son, like all of the events of the Old Testament, was but a shadow of the spiritual birth of Christ. No ‘shadow’ is the real thing. My shadow is not me. The truth is that we could take things that are not at all like me and make a shadow of me. It’s been a long time since I’ve done so but I can remember showing my children how to use their fingers to make the shadow of a dog on the wall.
Christ is the only person in the history of mankind who was born of the Spirit from His mother’s womb without the need of a ‘road to Damascus’ repentant experience. Christ, being “born of the Spirit from birth, never sinned even though being flesh by his connection to Adam through His mother He “was made sin.”

Psa 51:5  Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Jer 18:4  And the vessel that he made of clay [ Christ’s physical ” body of sin… sinful flesh”] was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.
2Co 5:21  For he hath made him [ to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Leave out the words ‘to be’ as they are not in the original Greek. ” He made Him sin for us… in sin did [ His] mother conceive [ Him].” Even Christ’s physical body is but a shadow of “another vessel.”

Heb 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

What kind of  flesh was “the same… flesh and blood?”

Rom 8:3  For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Rom 7:18  For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh ,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how] to perform that which is good I find not. 

All physical things foreshadow “another vessel, as seems good to the Potter to make it.” In the very same chapter where we are told that Christ was “made sin for us…” we are also told this:

2Co 5:16  Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more [ after the flesh].

This next verse was true of Christ from His birth:

Joh 3:34  For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

I hope this helps you to see that a shadow does not need to be like the spiritual reality of which it is a mere outline. Isaiah’s son did not need to be “conceived of the Holy Spirit” of a virgin in order to typify Christ. A “damsel” was indeed sufficient to serve as a shadow of Christ’s coming of a virgin in “sinful flesh.”

Other related posts