Isaiah 9:6 who is the child, Jesus or Hezekiah?

Isaiah 9:6 who is the child Jesus or Hezekiah? 

 

Isaiah 9:6, (9:5 in the Jewish Tanakh), is one of the most debated verses in scripture. We have 2 main arguments when it comes to this verse: 

1) Who is the referent of the verse? (does it prove the divinity of the referent) 
2) Is the verse Messianic 

In this writing we shall deal with both arguments. 

Let’s take a look at the verse in question.  

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

There are many people, in fact it is probably more correct to say that it is the general consensus, even amongst some Christians,  that believe the “prophecy” given by Isaiah in this passage is not referring to Jesus but rather it is referring to Hezekiah. In other words this passage is not a Messianic prophecy at all. This is certainly the view held by the majority of Jews who reject Jesus as the already raised up Messiah of God.

Some Christians, who believe that the passage is about Hezekiah, also believe that this is about Jesus, and assert that this is a double fulfilment prophecy and thus includes both Hezekiah and Jesus. It reached partial fulfilment in the days of Hezekiah but was fulfilled in total through Jesus.  Double fulfilment prophecy is a common argument amongst Christians in a number of Old Testament prophecies. 

Before we address who is the referent in this passage, it is important to mention that Isaiah 9:6-7 is not directly quoted by any NT writer. This is sometimes used as evidence that the passage is not about Jesus. What must be noted is that the NT clearly does directly quote the surrounding contextual verses of Isaiah 9:6-7. 

. 

We see that Matthew quotes verses directly attributing the fulfilment of the verses by Jesus. 

Matthew 4: 12Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; 13And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim: 14That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,

Matthew 4: 15The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; 16The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

This is taken from Isaiah 9:1-2 

Isaiah 9: 1Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations. 2The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

 

Scholar Richard Hayes in his book “Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels” makes the case that often New Testament writers will cite the start of a passage without quoting the entirety of that passage bringing attention to the entire passage, in the expectancy that the reader is familiar with the full Old Testament passage. This is called Metalepsis.  A perfect example is Jesus himself who while on the cross quotes the start of Psalm 22, the crucifixion Psalm, in the expectancy that the Jews would have been aware of the entire Psalm of which Jesus was fulfilling right in front of them. 

So as Matthew attributes the start of the passage to Jesus and verses 1 and 2 are scripturally connected to the child in verses 6 and 7, it would have to be demonstrated that the child of verses 6 and 7 is not directly connected to verses 1 and 2 in order to negate this. If the child of verses 6 and 7 is, in fact, directly connected to verses 1 and 2 then Matthew would have indirectly attributed this to Jesus through the use of Metalepsis. 

 

I also believe that Luke alludes to Isaiah 9:7, although he does not directly quote the verse he does reference the kingdom of David and of that kingdom there will be no end which we find in Isaiah 9:7. 

Luke 1: 32He 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: 33And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

 

 

1) Hezekiah is not the referent of the verse, Jesus is. 

The main argument against Jesus being the referent of Isaiah 9:6(9:5) is that this actually referred to Hezekiah the son of Ahaz and in no way spoke of a child that would be born literally hundreds of years later. 

This was the view held by Rashi. Rabbi Rashi believed that Hezekiah was the child of Isaiah 9:6 (9:5), as he stated in his commentary on Isaiah. 

“and… called his name: The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah’s name, “the prince of peace,” since peace and truth will be in his days.” 

Rashi commentary on Isaiah 9:5

As you can see, Rashi also attributed the “name” in this passage to be a referent to God and only the prince of peace being the name that was attributed to Hezekiah. 

However, Hezekiah had already been born when this prophecy was given. This argument is pretty straight forward to demonstrate.

The prophecy was given in the days of Ahaz the king, the father of Hezekiah

Isaiah 7:1And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it, but could not prevail against it

Ahaz was 20 years old when he became king.

2 kings 16:1 In the seventeenth year of Pekah the son of Remaliah Ahaz the son of Jotham king of Judah began to reign.2Twenty years old was Ahaz when he began to reign, and reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem, and did not that which was right in the sight of the LORD his God, like David his father.

2 Chronicles 28:1 Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem: but he did not that which was right in the sight of the LORD, like David his father:

Ahaz reigned for 16 years, which means he was 36 years old when he died.

Hezekiah was 25 years old when he began to reign.   

2 Kings 18:1 Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign. 2 Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Abi, the daughter of Zachariah.

This means that Ahaz had to have been around 11/12 years old when Hezekiah was born. This was around 8 years BEFORE he became king. It is, therefore, IMPOSSIBLE that Hezekiah was yet to be born when Isaiah gave his prophecy.

There is an argument seeing that Ahaz was so young when Hezekiah was born that Ahaz was not in fact the literal father of Hezekiah but rather became his legal parent at a later stage.  This argument, although has no actual evidence to support it, does not affect the fact that when Isaiah gave his prophecy Hezekiah had indeed already been born.

The counter argument to this is that the verse isn’t looking to the future at all, to a child that WOULD be born but rather to the past and to a child that HAS already been born. Therefore, the verse is referring to Hezekiah. 

It must be noted that many scholars believe that the child in Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 9:6 are the same child. In my writing on Isaiah 7:14 I put forth my argument as to how Hezekiah could NOT be the child in reference and that it is the general belief, even by Jews that Hezekiah is not the child of Isaiah 7:14. Therefore, IF the child of Isaiah 7:14 and the child of Isaiah 9:6 are indeed the one and same child then it would not be possible that the child in Isaiah 9:6 could be Hezekiah (Most Jews do not believe that the two verses refer to the same child). 

We do need to look at whether this verse is in fact looking back into the past and referring to a child that has already been born. 

The argument is made that the Hebrew verbs Yalad, (is born) and Nathan (is given) are both in the perfect tense, indicating a completed action.  The child in reference has already been born and the child has already been given. This will usually be supported by a number of proof verses where Yalad and Nathan in the perfect tense do demonstrate a completed action.

This is true, both verbs are in the perfect tense. The verses that are often used as support are also correct. The fact that Yalad and Nathan are in the perfect tense DOES infer a completed action. This point is conceded. However, to state that this proves the child in Isaiah has already been born is a very simplistic argument and could even be construed as being slightly disingenuous. It certainly gives a very biased and one sided argument that does not give the full facts. 

When it comes to prophetic language it is not unique to find a perfect form of a verb used to denote a completed action that had not yet come to pass. This is because a prophecy that is given about an event that was going to happen could be recorded as if it had already come to completion to denote the prophecy would indeed come to fruition. The prophet who is obviously prophesying looks back at the event from the future as if it has already happened.  The recording of prophecies in the perfect form is simply known as “prophetic perfect”. This is something that is either dishonestly ignored, or simply unknown by those that make the claim regarding the perfect tense found in Isaiah 9:6. 

Hebrew Scholar Friedrich Gesenius wrote:

To express future actions, when the speaker intends by an express assurance to represent them as finished, or as equivalent to accomplished facts: (b) To express facts which are undoubtedly immanent, and, therefore, in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished. This use of the perfect occurs most frequently in prophetic language (perfectum propheticum [Latin for “prophetic perfect”]). The prophet so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him, e.g., Isaiah 5:13 , therefore my people are gone into captivity; 9:1; 10:23; 11:9; 19:7; Job 5:13; 2 Chronicles 20:37. Not infrequently the imperfect [i.e., the actual future tense] interchanges with such perfects either in the parallel member or further on in the narrative.
E. Kautzsch, ed., Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1910), pp. 312,13.

Biblical Scholar C. L Seow Who is a Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University wrote:

In some instances, the certainty of an immanent event in the mind of the speaker is enough to justify the use of the perfect. This usage of the perfect is especially common in prophecies, promises, and threats. In such cases, one should render the Hebrew perfect by the English present or even future.
C. L. Seow, A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew (Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN, 1987), p. 93.

An example of this prophetic perfect can be found in Genesis 6:18 BEFORE the Ark had been built, God tells Noah that “though shall come into the Ark”.

Genesis 6:18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee KJV

However, despite the English here presenting the prophecy as something that will happen in the future but has not yet happened, the Hebrew verb, bo, (to come) is in the perfect tense. It literally reads you have come into the Ark, a completed action. 

Youngs literal translation even translates the verse as such: 

Genesis 6:18 And I have established My covenant with thee, and thou hast come in unto the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy son’s wives with thee; YLT

Isaiah himself used the perfect tense when he prophesied that’s Gods people would go into captivity. He records that Gods people had GONE into captivity despite the fact that they had not yet succumbed to that captivity but this would eventually become reality. 

Isaiah 5:13 Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge: and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude dried up with thirst.  Kjv 

Even the JPS Tanakh 1917 translates this with GONE, as if it is an already completed action. 

Isaiah 5:13 Therefore My people are gone into captivity, For want of knowledge; And their honourable men are famished, And their multitude are parched with thirst. JPS

The Hebrew verb Galah (gone/removed) is in the perfect tense. 

Isaiah also prophesied about a saviour who would deliver Gods people: 

Isaiah 19:20 And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the LORD of hosts in the land of Egypt:
for they shall cry unto the LORD because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them.

While the English of the KJV here reads “shall deliver them” The Hebrew Natsal is in the perfect form, “has delivered them”. The action of deliverance is recorded as if it is an already completed action as the prophet who is looking back upon the event from the point of prophesying records the event from the perspective of it having already come to pass rather than looking forward to the event. 

There are numerous other occasions where the Prophetic Perfect is used that could be cited. 

I shall give just one more, Isaiah 11:1-2. This is another prophetic passage about the future Messiah that was to come. 

Isaiah 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: 2And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;

Here, Isaiah again used the prophetic perfect to indicate the certainty of the prophesy. 

The verb, yatsa, to come out,found in verse 1 is perfect, indicating that the rod has already “come forth”. In verse 2 the Hebrew states that the spirit of the LORD has already rested upon him. The verb, nuach, to rest, is again perfect indicating already completed actions. 

Isaiah 9:6 has a mixture of perfect and imperfect verbs. The verbs in the latter part of the Isaiah 9:6, “will be on” (hayah) and “will be called” (qara) are both imperfect. 

When we correctly understand prophetic language, the argument regarding the tense of the verbs just does not hold as much weight in support of the verse referring to an already born child as it is asserted that it does.  The child being referred to as already having been born and given, is perfectly inline with the prophetic perfect and so in no way negates the referent being a future child. Only if this passage could be demonstrated as not being a prophetic passage could it be argued that the use of the perfect tense would indicate the referent was a child physically already born. However, it would become an argument using circular reasoning to claim that the evidence that the passage is not prophetic is based upon the use of the perfect tense. 

An argument that is given against Jesus being the child of Isaiah 9:6-7 is regarding the “names” given to the child. It is claimed that Jesus was never called any of the names included in the verse. 

“When was Jesus ever called a Wonderful Counselor, or a Mighty Gd, or an Everlasting Father, or a Prince of Peace? Jesus was never called by any of these names anywhere in the Christians’ New Testament and not at all in his own lifetime.”
Whatjewsbelieve.org Copyright held by Rabbi Stuart Federow 2013

Yet in the VERY same writing on the website the writer claims that the verse refers to Hezekiah. 

According to Judaism, the answer is in the names chosen. The name ‘Hezekiah’ which in Hebrew is ‘Chizkiyah’ comes from the words ‘chazak’ and ‘Ya.’ ‘Chazak’ means ‘strong’ or ‘mighty’ and ‘Ya’ is the shortened name for Gd used as a suffix. Many might recognize the Ya’ in the word, ‘halleluyah’ which means,’praise Gd.’ Judaism believes that Isaiah 9:6-7 refers to Hezekiah, who reigned for almost 30 years. The name Hezekiah, Chizkiyah, is the same name in meaning, as one finds in the verses from Isaiah 9:6-7, a ‘Mighty Gd.’

When was Hezekiah called by any of these names? The fact is, he wasn’t. If Jesus not being literally called by these names is evidence that Jesus is not the child of the verse then the EXACT same argument proves that Hezekiah is not the child. 

The writer even argues that Hebrew names have meanings. 

Hebrew names sometimes say something about Gd. The name Michael means ‘who is like Gd.’ The name Elihu means ‘my Gd is He,’ or ‘He is my Gd.’ The name Immanuel means ‘Gd is with us,’ just to give a few examples. If someone has the name, Elihu, (again, meaning ‘He is my Gd’) would that mean that the human being known as Elihu is Gd? These names say something about Gd, even though they are the names of ordinary human beings. A better translation to the verse in question might be:

…and his name will be called, ‘A wonderful counselor is the mighty Gd, an everlasting father is the ruler of peace.’

So having argued that Hebrew names have meanings and then continue to argue that Hezekiah fulfils the names given to the child through meaning rather than literally being called by those names it is simply dishonest to argue that Jesus was not literally called by any of the names and thus is evidence that he cannot be the child in reference. This is a perfect example of a self defeating argument. 

So let’s have a look at the names given to the child in the verse. 

The first thing we need to see is that his NAME shall be called, NOT that HE shall be called or his name shall be.

The child was not going to be literally named any of these things. In order to understand what this meant we are going to have to delve a little deeper into the scriptures.

We shall start with his name. Name is the hebrew word שֵׁם shem. While it can refer literally to a person’s name it can also mean their fame or what they are known FOR rather than what they are known BY.
In Genesis 6:4 the word is translated as renown (their fame).

Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Clearly this name cannot be a literal name as neither Hezekiah nor Jesus were called these names as already correctly stated.

It therefore would be more logical to understand that this refers to the persons fame, what the person would be known for.

So we need to look more closely at what these names actually mean in the context of the fame for which the child would be known.

Wonderful.

This did not mean that the child would literally be called or be wonderful. The Child would be known by the name wonderful.  Wonderful is the Hebrew פֶלֶא Pele, this means wonders. The fame of the person in question would be connected with wonders.

Hezekiah though, performed no wonders. Jesus on the other hand is recorded as having performed many wonders.

Throughout the Bible we see that the Jews required wonders as evidence of who a person was, Moses needed to change his  staff into a serpent and his hand was made leprous in order for the people to believe that he had been sent by God.

The Pharisees even asked Jesus what signs he would show that they would believe.

John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

Jesus had already told them that without signs and wonders they would not believe.

John 4:48 Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

But Jesus DID do many wonders as the Bible attests to.

Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

The Jews of the time it would seem understood that the Messiah would in fact perform Miracles. They asked when the Messiah would come would he perform more miracles than what Jesus had done.

John 7:31 And many of the people believed on him, and said, When Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath done?

Jesus performed many miracles, including turning water into wine, walking on water, raising the dead and healing the sick.

Many christian websites claim that it was understood by the Jews that the Messiah would perform 3 Messianic miracles. 

Written on the website Messianicassociation.org for instance we find: 

“Some time prior to the coming of Yeshua (Jesus), the ancient rabbis separated miracles into two categories. First were those miracles anyone would be able to perform if they were empowered by the Spirit of God to do so. The second category of miracles were called “messianic miracles,” which were miracles only the Messiah would be able to perform. Yeshua did miracles in both categories: general miracles and also messianic miracles. So because of the rabbinic teaching that certain miracles would be reserved only for the Messiah to do, whenever He performed a messianic miracle it created a different type of reaction than when He performed other types of miracles.”
http://www.messianicassociation.org/ezine48-af-three-messianic-miracles.htm

Len Holzapfel on the website, fellowship-in-god.org records the 3 messianic miracles that only the Messiah could perform 

“However, one of the rabbinical teachings of that day was that there were three types of miracles that only the Messiah himself could perform. The three Messianic miracles were said to be:
First the healing a Jewish leper – the healing of any other leper would not count – the leper had to be a Jew
Second the healing a man who had been born blind.
Again, the Rabbinical law, which went back hundreds of years was specific, the person had to be born blind, not born and then later in life becoming blind.
And the third is the casting out a dumb demon.
The rabbinical law clearly stated that the demon had to be dumb, and by being dumb
would mean that this particular type of demon could not be cast out of a person unless
the person who was casting out the demon first knew it’s name.”
http://www.fellowship-in-god.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Leonard-Holzapfel-The-Three-Messianic-Miracles.pdf

However, none of the websites that I looked at give the source of where we can find this claim made regarding the 3 Messianic miracles in any Rabbinic writings.  I have not, at the point of writing this (subject to change), found any actual supporting evidence in rabbinic writings for the claim. 

However, what we do have is a manuscript fragment found amongst the dead sea scrolls. In cave 4 there was a manuscript now titled 4Q521 or “messianic apocalypse”. 

[the hea]vens and the earth will listen to His Messiah, and none therein will stray from the commandments of the holy ones.
Seekers of the Lord, strengthen yourselves in His service!
All you hopeful in (your) heart, will you not find the Lord in this?
For the Lord will consider the pious (hasidim) and call the righteous by name.
Over the poor His spirit will hover and will renew the faithful with His power.
And He will glorify the pious on the throne of the eternal Kingdom.
He who liberates the captives, restores sight to the blind, straightens the b[ent]
And f[or] ever I will cleav[ve to the h]opeful and in His mercy . . .
And the fr[uit . . .] will not be delayed for anyone.
And the Lord will accomplish glorious things which have never been as [He . . .]
For He will heal the wounded, and revive the dead and bring good news to the poor
. . .He will lead the uprooted and knowledge . . . and smoke (?)

As we can see, it is written that “he” which is likely to be a reference to the Messiah who has already been mentioned, will heal the wounded, revive the dead and bring good news to the poor. 

The dead sea scrolls come from a specific sect of Jews, the Essenes. This is not rabbinic literature. I would recommend people to take a deeper look at the beliefs of the Essenes as much of what they believed it would not be considered, orthodox Judaism. 

This manuscript doesn’t actually show that it was believed that ONLY the Messiah could perform these miracles, only that the Messiah would perform them when he would come. Other prophets most certainly performed these miracles also. 

There is no biblical teaching that the Messiah would perform 3 miracles that nobody else could do. This rather seems more to align with a passage found in Isaiah 35.

Isaiah 35: 5Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. 6Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.

Jesus read this in the synagogue and proclaimed that these scriptures were fulfilled (by him).

Luke 4:16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. 17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

Now what needs to be noticed is that neither in the passage in Isaiah nor in the DSS manuscripts do we find anything regarding the healing of lepers, or the Messiah will perform the healing of a leper as evidence that he is the Messiah. 

This seems more likely to have been a much later claim, that someone has constructed based on an interaction between Jesus and John the Baptist. John had sent messengers to Jesus to ask if he was the one that should come (the Messiah) or should they look for another. 

Luke 7: 19And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another? 20When the men were come unto him, they said, John Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?

Jesus answers John that he is the one who was to come, the Messiah, by appealing to the miracles that he was performing. 

Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

Here Jesus while referring to the blind that see, the lame that walk, the deaf that hear, the dead raised the poor receiving the gospel, Jesus also refers to the lepers that are cleansed. So Jesus did include the healing of lepers as evidence that he was the Messiah but there isn’t any specific biblical prophecy that can be used to support the claim regarding this being a miracle that the Messiah would perform and only the messiah could perform it. 

As evidence, the fellowship-in-god website appealed to Leviticus chapters 13 and 14: 

“There are two complete chapters written within the Law of Moses – Leviticus Chapters 13 and 14 – which instruct the Levitical priests and religious leaders abut how they were to respond in the case of a leper, and about the offering that a leper was to offer once he had been healed. Apart from Miriam, Moses sister, from the giving of the law at Mt Sinai until the coming of Messiah, not one single case of an Israelite or Jewish leper who had been
healed or cured of Leprosy, had ever been reported or recorded. So, for about 1500 years, these detailed, exhaustive and specific instructions had never been used, because no Jew had ever been healed of leprosy.”
http://www.fellowship-in-god.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Leonard-Holzapfel-The-Three-Messianic-Miracles.pdf

Many other websites make this same claim and also appeal to Leviticus chapters 13 and 14

Now these two chapters do give instructions regarding the healing of a leper and what should be done if a leper should be healed. I would recommend reading those two chapters. There most certainly is no teaching here that only the Messiah could perform the healing of a leper. 

What is true is that NO Israelite was ever cured of leprosy in the entire Bible by someone else. Miriam, the sister of Moses,  was punished with Leprosy (Numbers 12) but she was also healed of that leprosy by God. Naaman, is the only person in the entire OT that is recorded as having been healed of leprosy by someone else, he was healed by Elisha , was in fact not an Israelite. He was a Syrian army general. 

So it is not hard to see why it would be claimed that only the messiah could cure an Israelite of leprosy, as it was never actually done by anyone else, but again the claim, which isn’t found in any Jewish source,  seems to be based on the fact no Israelite was cleansed of leprosy and Jesus including it amongst the “proof” evidences that he was the Messiah, rather than having any basis in scripture. This claim can only be found in writings AFTER the NT period and so is likely a later construction. 

We must also notice that False prophets and Christs will perform wonders

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Mark 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

They will do these sonders to seduce, even those who believe. Wonders are what the Messiah would be known for.

Counsellor.

Again the child would not be named counselor, the child would be known for being a counsellor. This is the Hebrew יָעַץ Yaats and means to council or advise.

Hezekiah was not an advisor but Jesus was.

Jesus constantly gave wisdom and counsel.

He gave advice to the rich young ruler

Matthew 16:16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.22But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

We see Jesus giving counsel elsewhere.

Luke 12: 13And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.14And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you? 15And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. 16And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: 17And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? 18And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. 19And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. 20But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? 21So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.

Jesus gave counsel to Nicodemus

John 3:1There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? 5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. 8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? 10Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? 11Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. 12If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Mighty God

This is a “name” that is often used to prove the trinity or at least the deity of Jesus, Mighty God. Mighty God is the Hebrew גִּבּ֔וֹר אֵ֣ל El Gibbor.

Again this wasn’t going to be a literal name or what he would literally be, rather what he would be known FOR.

Jesus would not literally be mighty God but just as his fame his renown was to be to perform wonders and to counsel, he would be mighty God in his representation in his authority.
Jesus came IN his father’s name. He came in the Name of God

John 5:43 I am come in my Father’s name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

He represented God as his agent. He was GIVEN all authority by God.

Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Jesus forgave sins in the authority of God.

Mark 2:1And again he entered into Capernaum, after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house. 2And straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door: and he preached the word unto them. 3And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. 4And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay.5When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. 6But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, 7Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? 8And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? 9Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? 10But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) 11I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. 12And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

The Jews recognised he spoke with authority.

Matthew 7:28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:29For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

He was mighty God in authority and representation. This is prophecied in Deuteronomy 18:18 

Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

I go into this in more detail in my writing on Jesus as the agent of God 

Everlasting father.

“Everlasting Father” — What Does Isaiah 9:6 Really Mean?

Few titles in Isaiah 9:6 generate more debate than the phrase traditionally translated “Everlasting Father.” For many readers, this sounds like a direct identification of the Messiah with God the Father. But is that what the Hebrew text actually says?

Let’s slow down and examine it carefully.

---

The Hebrew Expression

The phrase in Hebrew is:

אֲבִי־עַד (ʾavi-ʿad)

Literally translated, this means:

“Father of eternity”
or
“Father of everlasting.”

This is a construct phrase — a common Hebrew grammatical form where one noun describes another (like “king of Israel” or “mountain of God”).

Importantly, it does not say:

• “He is the Father”

• “He is God the Father”

• “He is the first person of the Trinity”

Instead, it describes the coming ruler as the “father of” something — in this case, eternity or the everlasting age.

---

---

So What Does “Father of Eternity” Mean?

There are several historically and grammatically legitimate possibilities:

1️⃣ The Source of the Everlasting Age

The Messiah inaugurates the age to come.
He brings eternal life.
He establishes an everlasting kingdom.

In this sense, he is the “father” (originator or founder) of the eternal order.

This fits naturally with passages like:

• Daniel 7 — the Son of Man receives an everlasting dominion.

• John 17:2 — Jesus gives eternal life.

• 1 Corinthians 15 — Christ ushers in immortality.

2️⃣ The Everlasting Protector

The title may describe a king whose fatherly care never ends — an enduring guardian of his people.

In the ancient Near East, ideal kings were often portrayed as perpetual protectors of their subjects.

3️⃣ The Possessor of Enduring Rule

The phrase may simply emphasize that his rule, authority, and covenant care are everlasting.

---

What the Title Does Not Necessarily Mean

Even within classical Trinitarian theology, Isaiah 9:6 is not usually interpreted as saying Jesus is the Father person of the Trinity. Rather, it is taken to describe his eternal fatherly care.

Therefore, the verse does not require:

• That the Messiah is God the Father.

• That the Messiah is identical to YHWH in person.

• That Isaiah is making a metaphysical statement about divine ontology.

Instead, it reads naturally as royal throne language — a cluster of exalted titles describing the character and reign of the coming Davidic king.

---

The Bigger Picture

Isaiah 9:6 is filled with throne names — royal designations meant to describe the greatness of the coming ruler. In the ancient world, such titles were often expansive and exalted.

When read in its Hebrew context, “Father of Eternity” fits comfortably within that pattern:

• A king who protects

• A ruler who sustains

• A Messiah who inaugurates everlasting life

In that sense, calling the Messiah “Father of everlasting” beautifully expresses this truth:

Through him, the everlasting age comes.
Through him, eternal life is secured.
Through him, covenant protection endures forever.

Rather than collapsing the distinction between the Messiah and God the Father, the title highlights the Messiah’s role as the author and guardian of the age to come.

 

Prince of peace.

Prince is שַׂר Sar and peace is שָׁלוֹם shalom

Yet again the child was not literally called Prince of peace. Hezekiah certainly was no prince of peace. In fact it was because of his act of showing off his riches that would eventually lead to the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah.

However, Jesus did bring peace. However it was not a peace that the Jews understood. It was an inner peace, a peace not of the world.

John 14:27Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

John 16:33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

It was a peace with GOD which is given THROUGH Jesus.

Romans 5:1Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

The peace OF God through Jesus.

Phillipians 4:7And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

When we look at Isaiah 9:6 we CANNOT ignore verse 7. Verse 7 is a continuation of verse 6 

Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Hezekiah DID NOT establish the kingdom of David forever.

In verse 7 of Isaiah 9 we are told that the child would establish the throne of David henceforth for ever and ever

However Hezekiah did not establish the throne of David from that moment on forever. There is no literal physical human king on the throne of David today.  

Zedekiah was the LAST king of Judah in 586 BC. He was a descendent of Hezekiah however he is not recorded in the genealogy of Jesus and it is recorded that ALL his sons were killed by the king of Babylon.

Jeremiah 5:10 And the king of Babylon slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes: he slew also all the princes of Judah in Riblah.

Zedekiah was the uncle of the previous king Jehoiachin. Jehoiachin was dethroned by Nebuchadnezzar who then installed Zedekiah as the king.

Not only did Hezekiah not establish the throne of David forever, in fact it is impossible for him to do so as when the destruction of Judah at the hands of the Babylonians was foretold by Isaiah, Isaiah also foretold that the sons of Hezekiah would be Eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.

Isaiah 39:3Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What said these men? and from whence came they unto thee? And Hezekiah said, They are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon. 4Then said he, What have they seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All that is in mine house have they seen: there is nothing among my treasures that I have not shewed them.5Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of the LORD of hosts: 6Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the LORD. 7And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon. 8Then said Hezekiah to Isaiah, Good is the word of the LORD which thou hast spoken. He said moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in my days.

Obviously if Hezekiah’s sons were to be Eunuchs they would not be able to continue his lineage. By way of God’s decree, the throne of David CANNOT be continued through Hezekiah

Less than 100 years after Isaiah prophesied about the sons of Hezekiah, as a result of the evil of Jehoiachin, who was a descendant and so a son of Hezekiah, the king of Babylon came against Judah and they were taken into captivity.

2 Kings 24:12 And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign.

ALL the line of Hezekiah was taken into captivity as foretold by Isaiah.

Jehoiachin was cursed and it was stated that no man from his seed would sit upon the throne.

Jeremiah 22:30 Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.

Jehoiachin’s uncle Zedekiah, who was also a descendent of Hezekiah would take his place as king but as we already saw he would be the last king of Judah and all his children were killed

Isaiah 9:6-7 CANNOT be a reference to Hezekiah as NO son Of Hezekiah did or can establish the throne of David forever. The kingly line through Hezekiah ended and was not and will not be reinstated.

It is also important to notice that Hezekiah did not nor ever will reign over the kingdom of David, David reigned over the 12 tribes of Israel. Hezekiah only reigned over the kingdom of Judah, a divided kingdom. A kingdom that has not yet been reunited under one king.

Also Hezekiah did not (and will not ever) establish a government and peace of which there is no end.

Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

In fact it was quite the opposite. With the eventual destruction of the kingdom by the hands of the Babylonians.

Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.

Hezekiah’s kingdom not only came to an end, it certainly did not end peaceably.

2) the Verse IS Messianic

It is often claimed that Christians interpret Isaiah 9:6 to force a messianic reading into the text and that the verse is not in any way a Messianic prophecy. 

However, it is evident that ancient Jews, or at least some ancient Jews,  did in fact hold to the understanding that Isaiah 9:6 was indeed a Messianic verse. 

Targum Jonathan calls the child in Isaiah 9:6 (9:5 Jewish Bible) the Messiah. 

“The prophet said to the house of David, For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it. His name is called from eternity wonderful, the mighty God who liveth to eternity, the Messiah whose peace shall be great upon us in his days.

Rabbi Hose the Galilean said:

Also the name of the Messiah is called Peace, for it is written (Isaiah 9:6): ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Babylonian Talmud (Tract Derech Erez Zutha

“

God named Him (the Messiah) with six names as He says concerning Him: ‘For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, God, Mighty, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace’. That He calleth Him God in a distinctive manner, is to say with it, that His glory surpasses that of all other children of men.

Iggereth Teman (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon writes to Jacob Alfajumi)

Rabbi Samuel, the son of Nachman, said, ‘When Esau met Jacob he said unto him, “My brother Jacob, let us walk together in this world. Jacob replied: Let my Lord, I pray thee, pass over before his servant” (Genesis 33:14) What is the meaning of, “I pray thee, pass over? Jacob said to him; I have yet to supply the Messiah, of whom it is said: “Unto us a child is born” Midrosh (Deuteronomy 2:4 ) 

“Unto us a child is born” is found in Isaiah 9:6 which clearly identifies the Messiah who was to come as being the child referenced in Isaiah 9:6 .

As is evident , Jews believed that the verse was about Hezekiah and that it was a Messianic verse. This then by default would make Hezekiah the Messiah. 

As is evident , Jews believed that the verse was about Hezekiah and that it was a Messianic verse. This then by default would make Hezekiah the Messiah. 

Rabbi Hillel even stated that there would be no future Messiah as he had already come.

“Rabbi Hillel says: There is no Messiah coming for the Jewish people, as they already ate from him, as all the prophecies relating to the Messiah were already fufilled, during the days of Hezekiah.”
Sanhedrin 99a

Rabbi Hillel equated Hezekiah as being the Messiah.

Hezekiah is not the Messiah. Neither could he be. 

Rav Yosef argued against Rabbi Hillel’s understanding that Hezekiah had fulfilled the prophecies relating to the Messiah,  highlighting that Hezekiah lived during the first temple period while the prophet Zechariah, who wrote during the second temple period, continued to prophesy about the coming Messiah. 

Rav Yosef says: May the Master forgive Rabbi Hillel for stating matters with no basis. With regard to Hezekiah, when was his reign? It was during the first temple period. Whereas Zechariah ben Berechiah, the prophet, prophesied during the Second Temple period and said: “Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion; shout, daughter of Jerusalem; behold, your king will come to you; he is just and victorious; lowly and riding upon a donkey and upon a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9). In the generations after Hezekiah, there are prophecies about both redemption and the coming of the Messiah.”
Sanhedrin 99a

Rav Yosef referenced Zechariah 9:9 in particular. 

Zechariah 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Rabbi Rashi stated that it was impossible to interpret Zechariah 9:9 except as referring to the King Messiah

Behold! Your king shall come to you: It is impossible to interpret this except as referring to the King Messiah, as it is stated: “and his rule shall be from sea to sea.” We do not find that Israel had such a ruler during the days of the Second Temple.

Rabbi Rashi commentary on Zechariah 9:9

Rabbi Tanḥum says that bar Kappara taught in Tzippori that Hezekiah, indeed, could have been the Messiah but God did not make him so because he did not recite praise before him and so the opportunity for redemption was prevented. 

“The attribute of justice said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, and if with regard to David, king of Israel, who recited several songs and praises before You, You did not designate him as the Messiah, then with regard to Hezekiah, for whom You performed all these miracles, delivering him from Sennacherib and healing his illness, and he did not recite praise before You, will You designate him as the Messiah? It is for that reason that the mem was closed, because there was an opportunity for redemption that was thwarted.”

Sanhedrin 94a

It is clear that Hezekiah could not have been the promised Messiah and so could not have been the child of Isaiah 9:6 which is a Messianic verse. The Jewish belief that Hezekiah was the Messiah has mainly been rejected, in light of the evidence against him being the Messiah and the fact that Messianic prophecies continued on after he had died. Jews are then left with two possibilities. Either Isaiah 9:6 (5)  is not about Hezekiah and so has not been fulfilled but will be fulfilled by a future Messiah yet to come which actually nullifies the argument that Jesus cannot be the referent of this verse due to it already being fulfilled. Or secondly, the verse is not in fact a messianic verse at all. It would seem evident that most would claim the latter, contrary to the evidence that it is, and the fact that Jews have held to this understanding in the past,  probably due to the implications of what accepting this as a Messianic verse would entail. 

When the scriptures are examined they disprove the claim that Hezekiah was the child in Isaiah’s prophecy. Also when understood properly the names simply refer to the fame of the child not what the child would literally be.

What about the LXX ? 

Some Trinitarians argue that Jesus is the angel of the Lord and appeal to the LXX reading of this verse as evidence. 

The Greek “Septuagint” reads: 

ὅτι παιδίον ἐγεννήθη ἡμῖν, υἱὸς ἐδόθη ἡμῖν, οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ, καὶ καλεῖται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος· ἄξω γὰρ εἰρήνην ἐπὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας καὶ ὑγείαν αὐτῷ.

As you can see the Greek includes ἄγγελος (angelos) It is claimed that this shows the child of Isaiah 9:6 is being called angel, thus, this is evidence that Jesus is called an angel, being the angel of the LORD.  

Angelos does not necessarily mean angel.

It is used in many places to denote a human messenger, I shall just give an example: 

Genesis 50:16 And they sent a messenger unto Joseph, saying, Thy father did command before he died, saying,

In fact, many trinitarians will argue specifically that angelos does not in anyway demand that the referent be an angel, a non human messenger. They will argue that the Angel of of the LORD is not an actual angel. 

Exodus 3:2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.

The inconsistency is there for all to see.

The English word Angel, does, however, refer to a heavenly, non human messenger and always refers to such. It is when angelos is rendered messenger it refers to a human messenger. The English words angel and messenger are used to denote the difference and show when and where a non human or human messenger is in reference. 



Brentons Septuagint does not render angelos as Angel but rather messenger in Isaiah 9:6. 

Isaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him. Brentons Septuagint LXX


So even in the English angelos has not been translated as angel. 


It must also be noted that none of the major modern versions of the Bible follow the LXX reading in this verse which again shows the inconsistency and cherry picking that has to be done. 

 

 

If you liked this study please subscribe here

You can buy my books on Amazon there is a link here 

Join our Patreon membership here or you can buy me a coffee through paypal