when, in the words of Ahaz, it seemed to renounce the very foundation of its claim to
continuance; never had the fortunes of the house of David fallen lower, than when a
Herod sat on its throne, and its lineal representative was a humble village carpenter, from
whose heart doubts of the Virgin-Mother had to be Divinely chased. And never, not even
when God gave to the doubts of Moses this as the sign of Israel's future deliverance, that
in that mountain they should worship62 - had unbelief been answered by more strange
evidence. But as, nevertheless, the stability of the Davidic house was ensured by the
future advent of Immanuel - and with such certainty, that before even such a child could
discern between choice of good and evil, the land would be freed of its dangers; so now
all that was then prefigured was to become literally true, and Israel to be saved from its
real danger by the Advent of Jesus, Immanuel. 63 And so it had all been intended. The
golden cup of prophecy which Isaiah had placed empty on t he Holy Table, waiting for the
time of the end, was now full filled, up to its brim, with the new wine of the Kingdom.
59. Haupt (Alttestam. Citate in d. vier Evang. pp. 207-215) rightly lays stress on the
words, 'all this was done.' He even extends its reference to the threefold arrangement of
the genealogy by St. Matthew, as implying the ascending splendour of the line of David,
its midday glory, and its decline.
60. The correct Hebrew equivalent of the expression 'that it might be fulfilled'
ινα πληρωθη is not, as Surenhusius (Biblos Katallages, p. 151) and other writers have it,
ρµ)ν# ηµ Μψψθλ, still loss (Wünsche) βψτκρ )ωη )ρη, but, as Professor Delitzsch
renders it, in his new translation of St. Matthew, ψψρβδ ρ#) τ) τω)λµλ. The difference is
important, and Delitzsch's translation completely established by the similar rendering of
the LXX. of 1 Kings ii. 27 and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22.
61. Is. vii. 14.
62. Ex. iii. 12.
63. A critical discussion of Is. vii. 14 would here be out of place; though I have attempted
to express my views in the text. (The nearest approach to them is that by Engelhardt in
the Zeitschr. für Luth. Theol. fur 1872, Heft iv.). The quotation of St. Matthew follows,
with scarcely any variation, the rendering of the LXX. That they should have translated
the Hebrew ηµλ( by παρθενος, 'a Virgin,' is surely sufficient evidence of the
admissibility of such a rendering. The idea that the promised Son was to be either that of
Ahaz, or else of the prophet, cannot stand the test of critic al investigation (see Haupt,
u.s., and Böhl, Alttest. Citate im N.T. pp. 3-6). Our difficulties of interpretation are, in
great part, due to the abruptness of Isaiah's prophetic language, and to our ignorance of
surrounding circumstances. Steinmeyer ingeniously argues against the mythical theory
that, since Is. vii. 14 was not interpreted by the ancient Synagogue in a Messianic sense,
that passage could not have led to the origination of 'the legend' about the 'Virgin's Son'
(Gesch. d. Geb. d. Herrn, p. 95). We add this further question, Whence did it originate?
Meanwhile the long- looked- for event had taken place in the home of Zacharias. No
domestic solemnity so important or so joyous as that in which, by circumcision, the child
had, as it were, laid upon it the yoke of the Law, with all of duty and privilege which this
implied. Even the circumstance, that it took place at early morning64 might indicate this.
It was, so tradition has it, as if the father had acted sacrificially as High-Priest,65 offering
his child to God in gratitude and love;66 and it symbolised this deeper moral truth, that