Historical Background.

In order to follow along with the next segment, it is vital that Isaiah chapters 7 and 8 be read. The author of the Gospel of Matthew was a Jew writing in the latter half of the first century A.D. He used the Hebrew Scriptures[1] (Old Testament) to show passages he interpreted to have a semblance of the Messiah, Jesus. It is important to understand the context of this passage, without it, this passage will not be understood correctly. It appears that the NT writers saw 7:14 as a far off prophecy concerning “the Messiah”, not just a messiah. But what was it he saw as pertaining to the birth of Jesus? Comparably, there seems to be a duality in other prophecies as well.[2]

The historical background is a must for understanding the relevant “sign” of this passage. This prophecy takes place during the reign of perhaps one the most aggressive kings to rule Assyria, Tiglath-pileser III. His dominion began in 745 B.C.E., during the 8th century. This king like many others had the desire to extend his empire, his objective stretching from modern day Egypt to the Persian Gulf; complete domination of the Middle East. Thus, the context of Isaiah 7 happens during the Syro-Ephraimite war. Israel, as a natural highway between the north and the south was literally at the center of the conflict, and in order for Tiglath-pileser to bring about his world dominance, he needed to bring Israel under subjection. At this time, Israel was not Israel as thought of today, but rather only the northern territory, with Samaria as her capital. Judah was the southern nation, under the rule of different kings and Jerusalem as her capital.

Like other ancient governments, Assyria had a system of governors who were set over specific regions to carry out the needs and desires of Assyria (e.g. militarily — food, slaves, soldiers etc.). In the provinces set-up/conquered by Assyria, each person became a citizen of Assyria. So whenever Assyria by nature of conquest added a territory and set up its governing body, the citizens of that region became Assyrian and had to pay tax to their new lords. Assyria was quite ruthless in their tactics of enforcement; revolution was not tolerated. Pain, suffering, death and deportation were among the penalties for revolting against the state. Will Durant states, “To avoid these recurrent rebellions Tiglath-Pileser III established the characteristic Assyrian policy of deporting conquered populations to alien habitats, where, mingling with the natives, they might lose their unity and identity, and have less opportunity to rebel.”[3] This was a phenomenon well known to the other regions of that world not yet inhabited by her, and therefore fostered within them a strong fear. Israel, the northern kingdom had for many years been in a subordinate relationship, keeping tensions at bay by paying an annual tribute and in a sense subjecting themselves to Assyrian kings as militarily dominant.

In 746 B.C.E., Zechariah became king of Israel (the north), due to the death of Jehu (his father). According to 2 Kings 15, he only ruled for six months (15:8–10). He was assassinated in 745 B.C.E. (the same year Tiglath pileser III became king) by Shallum. Shallum however only lasted for one month (15:13–15), most likely because of distaste for Assyrian rule. He was murdered the same year (745) by Menahem (15:14), who took the northern throne with the aid of Tiglath pileser (15:19), who then in turn imposed a 1000 silver talent tribute for the rebellion, resulting in 60,000 of Israel’s wealthiest having to give up 50 silver shekels in order to maintain their “freedom” (15:20).

In 738 B.C.E, Pekahiah took the throne upon his father’s (Menahem) death. He maintained the vassal relationship with Assyria, but as was often the case, discontentment with the bully was brewing and many revolutionaries were ready to be free of the Assyrian yoke. In 737 B.C.E., Pekah, the leader of a revolution to rid the kingdom of Israel of Assyrian tyranny along with the support of any who were advocates of cooperating with Syria, assassinated Pekahiah and assumed the throne.

It was then that Rezin, king of Syria along with Pekah, the newly installed king of Israel, prepared for war against Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria by forming an alliance to oppose him. In order to muster as much military might as possible, Israel (under the leadership of Pekah, king the northern kingdom) and Syria (Rezin) turned to the southern kingdom (Judah) with her kings Jotham (740–735)and his son Ahaz (735–715). Judah refused to partake and was subsequently invaded by the Pekah-Rezin (Israel-Syria/Syro-Ephraimite) coalition, in hopes that upon defeat, Tabael (cf. Isa. 7:6), who was friendly to their cause, would be placed in control and aid in the alliance against Assyria.

1 He quoted from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.

2 Example: Hos. 11:1 was relevant in its contemporary time, but also contained reference to what NT authors (Matt. 2:15) saw as prophecy fulfilled in Jesus. In context (of Hosea 11), it is obvious that God had called his “son”, Israel, out of Egypt Exodus 4:22–23). The Matthean author does not make mention of this passage blindly or in an unjustifiable out-of-context use, he is far more sophisticated than that. Matthew (and other gospels) makes it clear that Jesus undeniably is the prophet like Moses from Deut. 18. The details given (even numbers) of how Jesus did almost exactly as Moses did, even down to the way he divided the people to feed them (which is also something Moses did in the wilderness), are to take the reader back to the Torah in subtle ways. Most of what he did and said comes right out of the Hebrew Scriptures. We have (in general) failed to recognize it or make the connections because we don’t know our “Old Testament” nor what it teaches. As the “new Moses” and ultimate representative of Israel, Jesus relives many of the same experiences described in the Torah that happened to Israel (God’s first-born: Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the LORD, Israel is my firstborn son” Ex. 4:22): Jesus survives a gruesome infanticide by a wicked king, has compassion on the people, divides them in groups of hundreds and fifties, in the wilderness alone for 40 days (Israel 40 years), instructed people on a mountain, climbs a mountain with only his closest companions and has visions of glory and light, chooses twelve disciples (12 tribes), offers himself in the peoples stead among many other nuances. In this knowledge it should not be surprising that Matthew makes Jesus appear as the ultimate son who is a firstborn, as he does with Mary as the ultimate “virgin Israel”.

3 Durant, Will, Story of Civilization: Part I, Our Oriental Heritage, Simon and Schuster, New York: 1954, pg. 270

The next segment will continue with more historical details.