A Major
Historical Mistake
Despite Spencer’s admonition that Isaiah 6–12 needs
to be read in context, the reading he presents is neither close nor careful. In
fact, it is an impossible reading. To understand why, we need to look more carefully at the historical context
that Spencer commends to us. We can do so by noting two overlooked passages.
The first of these is in 2 Kings:
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. 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. (2 Kings 18:1–2)
The
second passage is slightly earlier in 2 Kings:
Ahaz … 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 Kings 16:2)
If Ahaz
ruled for sixteen years and his son Hezekiah took over at the age of
twenty-five, then Hezekiah was born before Ahaz began to rule, before he was
king. So when Isaiah prophesied to Ahaz, while he was king, about the birth of
a child, if there is one person the prophecy cannot be about, it is
Hezekiah. With that, Spencer’s entire case for Isaiah 6–12 being about Hezekiah
collapses; his reading of Isaiah as prophesying about Hezekiah makes no sense
in the historical context.
There
are clearly aspects of the historical context that we do not fully understand,
such as what Ahaz may have thought the sign meant and how it may have been
meant to persuade him. At the very least Ahaz would have known that he needed
at least nine months plus however long it took a child to “know to refuse
the evil, and choose the good” (Isaiah 7:16) before he could expect the
threat to be completely removed. Yet, since Ahaz’s son Hezekiah was past that
point, Ahaz would not have been expecting the prophecy to refer to Hezekiah,
and neither would have Isaiah.
Ignoring Hebrew
Again
Of course, Spencer brings in other arguments against
understanding the chapters as referring to a Messiah. He argues that the
translation “the mighty God” in Isaiah 9:6 is in error. He prefers “Hero
Warrior” or “one Mighty in Valor.” This enables him to claim
that “Isaiah may not exactly have meant to indicate that anyone about to be
enthroned was fully divine.” The
problem is that without having examined the original Hebrew himself, Spencer is
left at a disadvantage, with no option but to uncritically accept other translations as accurate.
But because “we believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is
translated correctly” (Articles of Faith 1:8), Latter-day Saints do not
need to accept bad translations. In this case the King James version is
superior to the more recent translations cited by Spencer. The Hebrew term in
question is ʾēl gibbôr.
However one chooses to translate gibbôr (strong,
mighty, etc.), the term ʾēl does
not mean hero, or one mighty, but God.
Still,
we should look at how Isaiah uses the term. This is the textual context that
Spencer says is critical. According to Isaiah, the Egyptians are men and not ʾēl (Isaiah 31:3).
Men make an ʾēl when they make a graven image
(Isaiah 44:17; 46:6), and they pray to that ʾēl (Isaiah 45:20).
The stars belong to ʾēl (Isaiah 14:13). The Lord says: “I am
ʾēl, and there is no
other” (Isaiah 45:22; 46:9; 43:12). Isaiah also points out that ʾēl is “holy
and will be sanctified in righteousness” (Isaiah 5:16). And, of course,
“thus saith YHWH, the ʾēl” (Isaiah 42:5). Isaiah never uses the term ʾēl to mean
something that is not claimed to be divine. Spencer has made an assertion
completely backwards precisely because he did not and cannot look at the Hebrew
and, as a result, completely ignored the textual context.
Another
error relating to Hebrew is Spencer’s allegation that “the Hebrew word translated
as ‘virgin’ doesn’t, strictly speaking, mean ‘virgin’; it means ‘young woman.’” Here
again, though, a close examination of that Hebrew word weakens his claim.
The term used in Isaiah 7:14, ʿalmāh, is a lesser used, more poetic synonym for
a young woman or virgin. The term is also used in the meaning virgin in
Proverbs 30:19 (translated in the King James Version as “maid”), as also
is arguably the case in Genesis 24:43. In all uses of the term, and
especially given the cultural context of the Hebrew Bible, the notion of virgin is in
the very least implied. (John Gee, How Not
to Read Isaiah)