Question

Investigate whether the book of Isaiah anticipates a divine Davidic king

Commentary

I was nervous about this one. My first advqnced bible subject, a new campus in Ridley, studying in an asynchronous format, it was all a lot. Add to that that I am still getting my feet under me in my job which is fairly demanding and the fact that I in effect, took on three subjects this semester with an advanced professional qualification. Pretty demanding all in all. So I was gratified to received a High Distinction for this essay at 86%.

The subject itself is quite compelling. Does Isaiah explicitly prophesy a divine, Davidic king? The answer is of course nuanced and is not a simple yes or no…

Abstract

Does Isaiah anticipate a divine Davidic king?  This article examines five key texts, Isaiah 7:14; 9:6-7; 11:1-10; 16:4-5 and 32:1, against maximalist, minimalist and mid-position readings, attending especially to the theophany of Isaiah 6 and its terminological links to the Davidic material.  Against both the maximalist (ontological deity) and minimalist (ANE hyperbole) readings, it argues for a mid-position:  Isaiah presents an intensifying association between the Holy King and the Davidic king, in which the king participates in divine rule without an explicit ontological divinity claim.  This association, exceeding conventional ANE royal rhetoric, provides the textual basis later co-opted by Matthew and Nicene tradition, without supplying a doctrine of incarnation.

Introduction

Since at least the time of Matthew’s Gospel, followers of Christ have seen Messiah in Isaiah.  Matthew’s use of Isaiah 7:14 without directly pointing to Messiah, co-opts the passage and applies it to Jesus.  Handel’s Messiah quotes extensively from Isaiah.  Messiah is rightly conflated with a divine, Davidic king.  Careful use of these terms, however, cautions against reading the oracle as predicting a divine, Davidic king.  Isaiah anticipates a divine Davidic king but does not supply the doctrine of incarnation implicit in linking divinity and David’s royal son.

Framing the Question

Addressing whether Isaiah anticipates a divine Davidic king requires keeping the adjectives “divine” and “Davidic distinct. A promise of a Davidic king descending from David’s line is uncontroversial (2 Sam 7:12-16).  Isaiah 11:1-10 and 16:4-5 explicitly reference this promise and Isaiah 9:6-7 implies it.

Divinity is where the real argument lies.  There are five primary texts that might be aligned with the idea of a future, divine Davidic king in Isaiah including the three just cited and two others, Isaiah 7:14 and 32:1.[1]  Divinity in the text might be: a claim of ontological deity; powers or attributes attributable to God; or elevation of royalty to “godlike” status. 

In chapter 7:14, the Davidic claim is tenuous or absent, and divinity would be retrospective from Matthew (1:23).  In chapter 9:6-7, David is named in v7, and “Mighty God” (El Gibbor) could be either an ontological divinity claim or an elevation of royalty to divine attributes, similar to other ANE hyperbolic conventions.  In chapter 11:1-10, the Davidic claim is clear in vv1 and 10, but divinity is only implied in the power of God to renew.  In chapter 16:4-5, David is named in v5, but beyond an ideal king, divinity is absent.  In chapter 32:1, the Davidic claim is absent or unclear and there is no divine claim.

The Key Texts

Marfo makes an instructive comment: “From a prophetic point of view, the fulfilment of prophecies does not require an immediate occurrence in every single detail.  Rather, the fulfilment focuses on the Messianic realization of YHWH’s promise in the history of salvation.”[2]   It is therefore unnecessary to prove that the initial prophecy was fulfilled in Isaiah to establish that its fuller, final fulfilment lies in the Messiah.  Isaiah’s context need not exhaust the text’s meaning, nor exclude a later importance around Messiah.

Isaiah 7:14

Isaiah chapter 7 is set against the backdrop of circa 735BCE and the threat of the Syria/Ephraimite confederacy to the north with Ahaz flirting with Assyria (2 Kgs 16:7-8) as a possible ally for Judah.[3]  The sign of verse 14 is unwanted by Ahaz (v12 cf Deut 6:16), but is imposed by Isaiah in displeasure: “Is it too little for you to weary mortals, that you weary my God also?  Therefore, the Lord himself will give you a sign…”.[4]  Immanuel is a sign, not just to Ahaz, but to the whole house of David given Ahaz’s rejection.[5]  The sign of verse 11 appears to be an offer of a miraculous happening, whereas the sign of verse 14 appears to be predictive.[6]  The offer of verse 11 is Ahaz’s to choose: it could be an everyday matter (e.g. circumcision) or a miracle, with the modifier that it should be outside of normal human experience, from the world of the dead or the heavens.[7]

The sign is that a child would be born to a young woman (^₍almāh עַלְמָה rather than the LXX Parthenos παρθένος which explicitly means virgin) within Ahaz’s lifetime signalling that destruction was coming.[8] The child’s promise is both judgement and salvation to the house of David rather than to Ahaz specifically.[9] The warning is that within about twelve years, when the child reaches legal age (vv15-16), the Syro/Ephraimite lands will be deserted (v16).[10]  Ahaz chose to be saved by Assyria rather than by God, and so would indeed be “saved” but at the cost of Judah being ravaged.[11]  The wider sign to the house of David is therefore one of judgement on Ahaz’s faithlessness, God being with him but not to his benefit and one of hope in that the house of David itself rather than Ahaz, becomes a bearer of that hope.[12]

Matthew clearly co-opts Isaiah 7:14 in Matthew 1:23 as expressing a sign of virgin birth.[13]  Felber argues that ^₍almāh as “virgin” is a reasonable reading, that the sign can be both near and distant in fulfilment, that the name Immanuel is a title, rather than just a name (related in Isaiah 8:8 to ownership of the land), and that the child is God-given and son of the house of David pointing toward the divine realm in fulfilment of the “divine sonship of the king” foundation and so foretelling the birth of a divine son of David.[14] Smith concurs that “this will be a godly king who will bring God’s blessing on the nation…”.[15]

The promise is made to the house of David (v13) though the etymology of Immanuel does not directly suggest divinity.  The text therefore suggests a divine and Davidic king without stating it expressly.  The temporal referent of 7:16 and 8:4 points to near future fulfilment, but in the larger context of Isaiah 7-12, there is a more universal, Messianic aspect, particularly as chapters 9 and 11 build on this initial prophecy of a Son who is Divine and Davidic.[16]

Isaiah 9:6-7

Isaiah 9 introduces another son, this time with four descriptive phrases: Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, as a climax to the oracle begun with the Immanuel prophecy in Chapter 7.[17]  Medieval Jewish commentators ascribe these verses to a hymn of the birth of Hezekiah.[18]  Jerome, among others, takes it as is usual to read these phrases as describing the Messiah incarnate in Jesus while Jewish exegetes take the first three phrases as referring to God, who is naming the “prince of peace”.[19]  Skarsaune references “pre-Christian Jewish Texts” linking Isaiah 9:5 (Isa 9:5 MT equivalent is 9:6 ESV) with Isaiah 11 as the same future Davidic Messiah.[20] 

El Gibbor (the Mighty God) is one of two elements central to whether the Davidic king (v7) is also divine, the other being “Everlasting Father”.  Goldingay notes that describing a king as mighty God is not parallelled precisely in other ANE literature.[21]  YHWH, however, explicitly describes himself as El Gibbor (10:21) and Smith, therefore, the title must be closely aligned with God himself.[22]  Royal titulary elsewhere in the ANE occasionally borrows divine epithets without implying ontological identity, which complicates Smith’s claim; Oswalt, however, counters Wildberger’s argument that the titles are merely hyperbolic in the style of Egyptian throne names, pointing to differences in the numbers of titles (four not the traditional Egyptian five), the genre (a birth announcement rather than a coronation hymn), and the Hebrew prohibition on the Egyptian God-King belief.[23]  Motyer argues convincingly that El Gibbor is a noun rather than an adjective meaning something like “Godlike Warrior”.[24] 

The title “Everlasting Father” recalls YHWH’s commitment to David’s line as a Father forever (Ps 89:27, 28) and Isaiah’s own description of God as a Father who has raised children only to watch them rebel (Isaiah 1:2-4).[25]  Kings were not typically described as Everlasting Father in ANE literature.[26]  As Goldingay puts it, “Traditional Christian exegetes are right in holding that [these phrases] constitute the child’s name.  Traditional Jewish exegetes are right in maintaining that they refer to God.”[27]  Isaiah 9 therefore seems to point to a Davidic king (v7) who is divine (v6), though whether the claim is ontological or an assertion of God working through the Child remains open.  The divinity claims appear to exceed ANE rhetoric without fully escaping it.

Isaiah 11:1-10

A key question in defining the Davidic king in Isaiah 11 is the juxtaposition between verse 1, “a shoot… from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots…” and verse 10, “… the root of Jesse…”: does the text signal something different between the “branch” and the “root”?  Sumner argues that verse 1 references Jesse, rather than David to mark a new or second David.[28]  Some scholars take v10 as a later editorial revision, imprecise in its terminology.[29]  Other hold that the different terminology in v10 is deliberate, with “root” signalling community, a reference to exilic or post-exilic Israel, expanding on the earlier “branch from [Jesse’s] roots” (v1).[30]  Stromberg argues, from sources including Ben Sira and the Ugaritic  ̉Aquat legend that “root” can refer to a descendant.[31]  He concludes, “it seems most probable that the ‘root of Jesse’ refers to a human king from the line of David’s father, and hence, by virtue of its context, to a future Davidic king.”[32] 

Goswell points out that a messianic figure in Isaiah is not necessarily on show in Isaiah 11, since the future Davidic ruler depicted here does not perform the acts of a deliverer, YHWH does (Isa 10:33-34).[33]  Indeed, the very fact that the “root of Jesse” is endowed by the Spirit of God with fear and knowledge, makes it difficult to assert divinity for the Davidic King who is instead “… the regent of the divine sovereign, participating in what is ultimately the divine rule.”[34]  Therefore, it can be reasonably argued that Isaiah 11 speaks of a Davidic King who is “deputised” to divinity without holding it himself.

Isaiah 16:4-5 and 32:1

Isaiah 16 references David directly, while 32 references only “a King”.  Smith argues that “there is no question that a faithful Davidic king will establish himself on Judah’s throne and rule with faithfulness, truth, justice and righteousness.” (Isa 16:5)[35], a claim standing at the centre of the oracle against Moab spanning chapters 15-16.[36]  Motyer notes that the kings of Israel were known for their ḥeseḏ (steadfast love) (1 Kg 20:31)[37] and that its use here points to the mercy of the coming Davidic king.[38]  Nothing in this passage that a divine king. 

Ch 32:1 does no more than imply the Davidic king referenced in the chapters already examined.  Smith notes that the king here is unidentified, contrasted with Judah’s current rulers and presented as an ideal king following David’s example (2 Sam 8:15) who does what God desires (Jer 22:3, 15).[39]  Neither chapter references divinity though Motyer notes that the term “righteousness” applied to the king here links him terminologically to the kings of chapters 9 and 11.[40]

The Holy King of Isaiah’s Oracles

Isaiah 6 opens with a vision of the  ̉ӑdōnāy (Lord) “sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up”.  God is enthroned throughout Isaiah’s oracles.  Abernethy notes that this is unusual in that YHWH would usually be the name used for the one on the throne, and that the passage also links justice and the throne of the Davidic king to chapters 9 and 16.[41]   

The introduction of the Holy King in chapter 6 is therefore very significant as a contrast with the human kings Ahaz, Rezin, Pekah and others.  Isaiah 7-8 offer the hope of God with us, and a king who will destroy these unjust and failing kings appears in chapter 9:1-7 and 11:1-10, “thrice holy” and unable to tolerate sin and injustice.[42]  This holy king is introduced particularly across the first twelve chapters, but more broadly across the first thirty-nine, the Assyrian era, as a whole.[43]  Chapters 24-27 look to an eschatological time when this holy king establishes rule in Zion,[44] and chapter 33 returns to YHWH’s exaltation as king in judgement and hope, a theme that permeates the rest of the book.[45]

Beuken observes that these references to the divine king share significant terminology with the Davidic king (Isa 11:1-9; 9:1-7; 7-8).[46]  Therefore, whilst an outright statement of a divine, Davidic king does not explicitly appear in Isaiah, it is clear that Isaiah promises a divine king of David’s line, from the root of Jesse.

Assessing “Divine”

There are three ways to read the evidence for a divine Davidic king in Isaiah.  A proto-trinitarian reading emphasises the term El Gibbor and the divine language of Isaiah 11 as claims to ontological deity, supported by the New Testament use of the texts; on this reading, Isaiah anticipates, at some level, what Matthew and Nicene tradition makes explicit.  A minimalizing reading, such as Wildberger’s[47], treats the language as conventional ANE hyperbole, kings across the ANE being routinely styled in divine language, and argues that Isaiah’s court poetry does no more than that.  The mid-position is closer to Goswell’s “root of Jesse” reading[48], where a regent participates in YHWH’s rule rather than possessing deity, the Davidic king as the visible instrument of God’s holy reign.

The minimalist reading struggles most against Oswalt’s textual pressures[49], particularly the absence in Israelite tradition of any tolerance for a “god-king”.  Wildberger’s hyperbole theory[50] explains the language’s form, but not why Israel would import it against its own tradition against such hyperbole.  The proto-trinitarian reading, meanwhile, outruns the evidence: the text does not, of itself, draw the ontological distinction required.  Chapter 11:1-10 is explicit that the Spirit rests on the shoot from Jesse, rather than ascribing to Jesse the Spirit’s source.

The mid-position best accounts for the pattern across the five texts: divinity language is absent in 16:4-5 and 32:1, implied in 7:14, asserted but ambiguous in 9:6-7 and present but derived in 11:1-10.  There is then, no single, stable claim taken text by text.  What, though, can be made of Isaiah’s theophany in chapter 6?  This is not an isolated piece but shares terminology with the thrice-holy King and the Davidic king, recurring in the eschatology of chapters 24-27 and YHWH’s exaltation in chapter 33, evidence of a different order from the comparative material found in the Davidic-focussed texts.  The argument here is one of Isaiah’s composition: why does Isaiah keep drawing the Davidic king back into the orbit of the enthroned, thrice-holy God?  Read this way, the Davidic figure of chapters 7-11 is not merely subject to hyperbolic language but positioned across the book with a human throne aligned to a divine one, strengthening the case for a divine Davidic king without explicitly stating it.  What does not vary, in the individual texts or the broader oracle, is the human figure portrayed as sharing in, rather than substituting for, YHWH’s sovereignty.

Conclusion

Isaiah does not offer ontological Christology.  The texts examined resist an unambiguous claim that the promised Davidic king is God incarnate in the Nicene sense.  Instead, Isaiah offers a clear association between the promised son of David and the Holy King of chapter 6, an association exceeding the conventions of ANE royal rhetoric without becoming explicit ontological deity.  The “Mighty God” of chapter 9:6 and the Spirit endowed root of 11:1 present a regent, deputised and participating in divine rule, not a hyperbolic court title or a divine Son, an ambiguity later readers such as Matthew could draw upon.  Isaiah anticipates a divine Davidic king without supplying the doctrine of incarnation that exists today.

---

[1] Andrew Abernethy, Discovering Isaiah: Content, Interpretation, Reception, 1st Ed. (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2021), 97.

[2] Elisha Kwabena Marfo, “FULFILMENT AND APPLICATION OF ISAIANIC PROPHECIES,” Valley View University Journal of Theology 5 (2018): 4–5.

[3] John H Walton, Victor H Matthews, and Mark W Chavalas, IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament (Oaktree Software, 2000), 592; Derek Kidner, New Bible Commentary (IVP-NB Commentary) (1953; University and Colleges Christian Fellowship, 1994), OakTree Software, Inc, 637; George Arthur Buttrick et al., eds., The Interpreter’s Bible: Isaiah, vol. Vol V of The Interpreter’s Bible (Pierce and Washabaugh, 1956), 216; Stefan Felber, “The Immanuel Prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 at the Crossroads of Exegesis, Hermeneutics, and Bible Translation,” Unio Cum Christo 5.1 (2019): 126; Todd Bolen, “THE MESSIAH IN ISAIAH 7:14: THE VIRGIN BIRTH,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 33.2 (2022): 275.

[4] J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (InterVarsity Press, 1993), 84.

[5] Felber, “Immanuel,” 127.

[6] Gary V Smith, Christian Standard Commentary: Isaiah 1-39, 2nd Ed. (Holman Reference, 2021), 235.

[7] Buttrick et al., Interpreter’s Isaiah, 217.

[8] Bolen, “Virgin,” 272 (Note that Bolen seeks to argue against this proposition p273); Note that Almah does not explicitly exclude virgins but generally does seem to exclude married women. Felber, “Immanuel,” 130.

[9] Felber, “Immanuel,” 128.

[10] Felber, “Immanuel,” 128.

[11] Bolen, “Virgin,” 275–76.

[12] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 237.

[13] Felber, “Immanuel,” 130.

[14] Felber, “Immanuel,” 131–32.

[15] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 237.

[16] Marfo, “Fulfillment,” 5–6.

[17] John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–39, The Book of Isaiah (Eerdmans, 1986), §III comm on 9:6.

[18] John N. Oswalt, Isaiah, §III comm on 9:6.

[19] John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6).,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61.2 (1999): 239.

[20] Oskar Skarsaune, “Jewish and Christian Interpretation of Messianic Texts in the Book of Isaiah as Jewish/Christian Dialogue–from Matthew to the Rabbis,” Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 77 (2012): 33.

[21] Goldingay, “Compound,” 239.

[22] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 272.

[23] John N. Oswalt, Isaiah, §III.

[24] Motyer, Prophecy, 104–5.

[25] Goldingay, “Compound,” 239.

[26] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 273.

[27] Goldingay, “Compound,” 239.

[28] Stephen T Sumner, “The Genealogy and Theology of Isaiah 11:1,” Vetus Testamentum 68.4 (2018): 646.

[29] Hans WIldberger quoted in Jake Stromberg, “The’ Root of Jesse’ in Isaiah 11:10: Postexilic Judah, or Postexilic Davidic King?,” Journal of Biblical Literature 127.4 (2008): 656.

[30] Stromberg, “Root,” 658–59.

[31] Stromberg, “Root,” 663 (really the entire thesis, but note this location especially).

[32] Stromberg, “Root,” 665.

[33] Greg (Gregory Ross) Goswell, “MESSIANIC EXPECTATION IN ISAIAH 11,” The Westminster Theological Journal 79.1 (2017): 123.

[34] Roberts quoted in Goswell, “Expectation,” 124–28.

[35] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 386.

[36] Barnabas Aspray, “‘A Throne Will Be Established in Steadfast Love’: Welcoming Refugees and the Davidic Kingdom in Isaiah 16:1-5,” Open Theology 7 (2021): 433.

[37] Motyer, Prophecy, 152.

[38] Motyer, Prophecy, 152.

[39] Smith, Isaiah 1-39, 637.

[40] Motyer, Prophecy, 257.

[41] Andrew Abernethy, The Book of Isaiah and God’s Kingdom: A Thematic-Theological Approach, New Studies in Biblical Theology, ed. D. A. Carson (InterVarsity Press, 2016), 15.

[42] Abernethy, Thematic, 27–28.

[43] Abernethy, Thematic, 28.

[44] Abernethy, Thematic, 31.

[45] Abernethy, Thematic, 41.

[46] quoted in Abernethy, Thematic, 41.

[47] see n30

[48] see n34 and n35

[49] see n24

[50] see n30

Bibliography

Abernethy, Andrew. Discovering Isaiah: Content, Interpretation, Reception. 1st Ed. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2021.

———. The Book of Isaiah and God’s Kingdom: A Thematic-Theological Approach. New Studies in Biblical Theology. Edited by D. A. Carson. InterVarsity Press, 2016.

Aspray, Barnabas. “‘A Throne Will Be Established in Steadfast Love’: Welcoming Refugees and the Davidic Kingdom in Isaiah 16:1-5.” Open Theology 7 (2021): 426–44.

Bolen, Todd. “THE MESSIAH IN ISAIAH 7:14: THE VIRGIN BIRTH.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 33.2 (2022): 271–95.

Buttrick, George Arthur, Walter Russell Bowie, John Knox, Paul Scherer, Samuel Terrien, and Nolan B. Harmon, eds. The Interpreter’s Bible: Isaiah. Vol. Vol V of The Interpreter’s Bible. Pierce and Washabaugh, 1956.

Felber, Stefan. “The Immanuel Prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 at the Crossroads of Exegesis, Hermeneutics, and Bible Translation.” Unio Cum Christo 5.1 (2019): 121–36.

Goldingay, John. “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6).” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61.2 (1999): 239.

Goswell, Greg (Gregory Ross). “MESSIANIC EXPECTATION IN ISAIAH 11.” The Westminster Theological Journal 79.1 (2017): 123–35.

John N. Oswalt. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–39. The Book of Isaiah. Eerdmans, 1986.

Kidner, Derek. New Bible Commentary (IVP-NB Commentary). 1953. Repr., University and Colleges Christian Fellowship, 1994. OakTree Software, Inc.

Marfo, Elisha Kwabena. “FULFILLMENT AND APPLICATION OF ISAIANIC PROPHECIES.” Valley View University Journal of Theology 5 (2018): 1–14.

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary. InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Skarsaune, Oskar. “Jewish and Christian Interpretation of Messianic Texts in the Book of Isaiah as Jewish/Christian Dialogue–from Matthew to the Rabbis.” Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok 77 (2012): 25–45.

Smith, Gary V. Christian Standard Commentary: Isaiah 1-39. 2nd Ed. Holman Reference, 2021.

Stromberg, Jake. “The’ Root of Jesse’ in Isaiah 11:10: Postexilic Judah, or Postexilic Davidic King?” Journal of Biblical Literature 127.4 (2008): 655–69.

Sumner, Stephen T. “The Genealogy and Theology of Isaiah 11:1.” Vetus Testamentum 68.4 (2018): 643–59.

Walton, John H, Victor H Matthews, and Mark W Chavalas. IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Oaktree Software, 2000.