What do you think? Did the Jews believe when the Messiah would come that he would be Virgin-Born? If not, is the virgin birth a correct interpretation of the Scriptures? Many think that if the Jews couldn’t imagine something to be true, how could they have understood the thing to be true once it occurred? In other words, if they weren’t expecting a Messiah like Jesus, how could they be judged for not receiving him?
First of all, let me say from the beginning that Christian preachers rightly teach that the virgin birth was predicted by Isaiah in the Old Testament. However, are we Monday morning quarterbacking here? In other words hind sight is 20/20, and the real question is: could the Jews have understood Isaiah’s message and looked for a virgin-born Messiah? Did the people of Nazareth think of Isaiah’s prophecy when pregnant Mary returned from her 3-month visit with Elizabeth? Was this the first thing Joseph had in mind when he saw the condition of his promised bride? Of course we must answer “No!” to these questions, but was it impossible for Jews to actually expect a virgin-birth?
Certainly, Zechariah’s example with the angel in the Temple shows that, just because the Scriptures tell us about the miracle birth of Isaac, the similar situation in his own life didn’t help him believe the angel. Certainly, Mary did not understand how she could bear a child without the benefit of a relationship with a man. Therefore, we know she wasn’t expecting a virgin-birth as a vehicle to bring the Messiah into the world, and, therefore, a rabbinical teaching at the time would have probably been a very strange teaching. The fact is, the implication surrounding John 8:41 is that the Jewish authorities knew of the scandal surrounding Mary’s pregnancy and were throwing this in Jesus’ face. The pronoun “we” is emphatic in the Greek, implying they but not Jesus had a righteous birth. So, if the doctrine of a virgin-birth existed, it certainly was not believed by many Jews; nor was it generally taught concerning the Messiah. So, what’s the deal, could the Jews have understood the prophecy?
Personally, I believe they could have understood. Understanding this doctrine is not like trying to understand a new prime color that no one has ever seen. Trying to visualize a color that has no blue, no red and no yellow in it would be an impossible task. Who could visualize such a thing? Nevertheless, this is not the case with a virgin-birth. One could be wrong about the details, but one could successfully visualize what a virgin-birth would entail. The fact that it was not generally looked for is beside the point of whether or not the Jews could have understood the concept and looked for the Messiah to be virgin-born.
The facts are that the Jews toyed with several concepts about the Messiah that given enough time may have become the general understanding. For example, the Jewish Targum seems to indicate that at least some Jews believed the Messiah would be the Angel of the Lord and that his name is YHWH. I have a blog concerning this proposition HERE. Moreover, one or two of the books found in the Dead Sea Scrolls have the Messiah created and living before anything else was created. If the Messiah was so ancient, how did the Jews understand how he would be born into their nation? It is only logical that, if he was alive before Abraham, but was to be born of David, some kind of miracle birth would have to occur.
The Jews also understood the spiritual concept of typology. For example, at times when the Scriptures speak of the Messiah, he is called David, showing they understood that David was a type of the Messiah who was to come. Another example would be Moses. Moses claimed God would send them a Prophet who would be like him (Moses), and Israel would have to obey him. Therefore, if they understood there was often a near end fulfillment of prophecy which was a type of the later fulfillment, then the virgin-birth, promised in Isaiah 7:14 (though having a type of fulfillment in Isaiah 8:3-4), should be seen as having a later and greater fulfillment in the Messiah (cp. Isaiah 9:6-7). There is enough data in this prophecy (Isaiah 7:14) that was not fulfilled on the near end (Isaiah 8:3-4) that should have alerted pious Jews to expect something great in the Messiah’s birth even though the details might have been too fantastic to put together properly.
In any case, when Jesus was crucified, even his closest friends lost heart. No one believed until Jesus was resurrected. It was the Jews’ response to the later Gospel that was preached to the whole nation, both near and around the Empire that was judged by God. God didn’t judge anyone’s unbelief concerning Jesus before the resurrection. He allows all of us to do a little bit of Monday morning quarterbacking when it comes to understanding and believing the Gospel. Everyone, including the Jews, have the opportunity to look back over what was done, read the pertinent Scriptures and decide for ourselves if the witness it true. Therefore, it makes no difference what one expects to be true; the real question is: what are we going to do once the truth is shown to us—all of us?

5 responses to “Did the Jews Expect the Virgin Birth?”
If so many of the Patriarchs and leaders of Israel, like Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Samson, and Samuel, were the result of a miraculous conception, with a barren womb being opened, why should it surprise us that the Holy One would “one up” the miracle in the Messiah by causing a virgin’s “barren” womb to conceive?
Shalom
Greetings, and thank you for stopping by to read and especially to offer an opinion of your own.
Lord bless,
Eddie
I don’t believe the Hebrews of the Tenach looked for a Messiah born of a virgin. Neither do they interpret Isaiah 7 in this day and time, to mean a virgin conception.
Isaiah 7 was directed toward King Ahaz of Judah. It was fulfilled in his day. The boy that was born of a maiden was Immanuel, the prophet Isaiah’s son. This scripture was misappropriated in an attempt to substantiate the virgin birth doctrine. A doctrine which is really a re-telling of the Greek mythological story of the demi-gods.
I don’t believe the Hebrews of the Tenach looked for a Messiah born of a virgin. Neither do they interpret Isaiah 7 in this day and time, to mean a virgin conception.
Whatever they may or may not have expected in the first century CE cannot be judged by what they believe today. Only one school of thought survived the destruction of the Temple. Jewish history was written by the Pharisees of the first century. There was a lot of mystery surrounding the expected birth of the Messiah. For example, I pointed out that the Targumist interpreted Genesis 4:1 as Eve believing the Messiah was born to her and that Cain was the Angel of the Lord in the flesh. Whether or not there was a tradition that Eve actually thought this is beside the point. The Targumist put that thought in her mouth. This was first century thinking; it may not have been of the school of the Pharisees, but it was Jewish. The expected birth of the Messiah was shrouded in mystery, and the miraculous was expected.
Isaiah 7 was directed toward King Ahaz of Judah. It was fulfilled in his day. The boy that was born of a maiden was Immanuel, the prophet Isaiah’s son.
The problem with this line of thinking is that Mahershalalhashbaz, Isaiah’s son by the prophetess, was never called Immanuel. Moreover, the sign was to be on the house of David (Isaiah 7:13-14), and the Judah was Immanuel’s land (Isaiah 8:8). The prophecy continues into chapter 9 saying: “…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, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 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 forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this” (Isaiah 9:6-7 KJV). There was a near end fulfillment, but Mahershalalhashbaz was never known by these names. Therefore, the near end fulfillment was the surety that the greater fulfillment would take place in the Lord’s time.
This scripture was misappropriated in an attempt to substantiate the virgin birth doctrine. A doctrine which is really a re-telling of the Greek mythological story of the demi-gods.
I don’t believe ‘misappropriation’ can be leveled at the Christian interpretation, and no one ever accused the 1st century evangelists of preaching Greek mythology. This is a modern accusation. As for the virgin birth doctrine is concerned, the Jews themselves looked for something like this as Josephus shows in his account [JOSEPHUS: Antiquities of the Jews: Book 17; Chapter 2; Paragraph 2]. They didn’t understand it quite correctly, believing the coming Messiah would heal a eunuch and be born through him (a male virgin?).
Thank you, you have helped me for a talk I am preparing.