Some Old Testament Prophecies Referred to in the New Testament

By: William Kelly

Narrator: Chris Genthree

Isaiah • 10 min. read • grade level: 11

In Matt. 1:23²³Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. (Matthew 1:23) we have Isaiah 7:14¹⁴Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14) cited, and applied to the birth of the Messiah. The facts stated prove its literal fulfillment. Now there are symbols and figures, as well as simple language, in Isaiah 7-9:7; but this does not hinder the Holy Spirit stamping the prophecy of the Incarnation, not as an “idea” or general principle, but as an objective fact. There were other children for signs and for wonders in Israel— Shear-jashub already horn, and Maher-shalalhash-baz about to be, sons of the prophet; but they are as distinct from the Virgin's Son Immanuel as Hezekiah, already a dozen years old at least, and born before Ahaz came to the throne. Neither he, nor Isaiah's children, were born of the Virgin; nor could even Hezekiah, still less a future unknown son of Ahaz, call it his land, as Immanuel can, whose name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace, the Destroyer of the last Assyrian, and the Deliverer and King on David's throne forever. Alas! there is the secret root of unbelief. He is the Great Unknown, not the writer of chaps. 40-66, though Isaiah's was indeed the pen that indited them, but Isaiah's theme, the Virgin's Son, in the striking parenthesis of his introductory chapters. Had men but seen as God reveals Him at the beginning, they had not doubted the voice of God through Isaiah at the end.

Even the chief priests and scribes (Matt. 2:4-6⁴And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born. ⁵And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judea: for thus it is written by the prophet, ⁶And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel. (Matthew 2:4‑6)) could answer unhesitatingly as to the place where Messiah should be born. It was none other than Bethlehem of Judea according to Micah 5:2²But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. (Micah 5:2). The Holy Spirit in no way discountenances, but accepts the light they saw from the lamp of prophecy. Luke 2 adds the providential ordering by which Joseph went from the north of the land to this particular spot in the south. God was taking care, we may boldly say, that the word should be fulfilled to the letter. And the true-hearted believer may see how full of instruction is the context; for the words immediately preceding declare that the Judge of Israel should be smitten upon the cheek. Then comes in the parenthetical verse 2, which reveals not only His birth as David's Son, but an everlasting kinship (for indeed He is Immanuel, God with us). And because of the Jews thus contemning their Ruler in Israel, they are themselves given up (says verse 3) till she which travaileth hath brought forth-till the birth of the divine purpose for the restitution of all things. “Then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel,” or, in the figure of the apostle, the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree. Then will the glorious hopes that follow be punctually fulfilled. Neither Satan nor the Lord will have any difficulty in finding the Assyrian who, in that day, is to perish in the land. There the Assyrian stands on the page of prophecy, as he will on the stage of the future, to perish forever. So false is it that neither the restoration itself of Israel, nor the events growing out of it can be understood according to the letter. So true is it that those who reason thus maintain that, in this sense, considerable portions of the prophetic scriptures can have no proper fulfillment. “And why, then,” they boldly ask, “should any be supposed to have?” It is systematic dishonor of God's mind through ignorance of the scriptures and of His power.

The next quotation (from Hosea 11:1¹When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. (Hosea 11:1)) is full of interest. The prophet was inspired to blend, as it were, Israel of old and Christ called out of Egypt. He, before God, was the true Israel, and their history recommenced in that blessed Person for Whose sake God had led out the ancient people at their beginning. Theirs is a sad tale of self-will, rebellion, idolatry, yet to be repented and forgiven, when the generation to come shall say, Blessed be He that cometh in the name of Jehovah. The observant reader may see a similar transfer and identification in Isaiah 49. This is not merely literal, but spiritual in the true sense, not the vague spiritualizing which fritters all away, forgets the glory and relationship of Christ, blots out Israel as such from God's mercy in the future, and lowers the church from heaven to earth.

Matthew 2:17¹⁷Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, (Matthew 2:17) exhibits a difference in the form of citing: “Then was fulfilled” Jeremiah 31:15¹⁵Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not. (Jeremiah 31:15). What can more strikingly testify how Christ is ever before the Holy Spirit, than the application here by our inspired Evangelist? A heathen, or certainly a Jew, might admire the beauty, and boldness, and elevation of the impersonation; who but God would have thought now of the mourning prophet's words, which brought His Son before Him in the Edomite's slaughter of the babes of Bethlehem? Matthew does not say that it was the object of the prophecy, as in other cases. If the evil one prompted the savage jealousy of Herod, God felt for Rachel's children afresh when shielding the Messiah, who will yet reward her work, give hope for her latter end, and bring the children again to their own border.

The last verse of chap. 2 gives another variety that differs not only in the form, but in the general reference: so that (ὄπως, not ἴνα) it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets. It was their scope. He was to be despised of men. So His residence accorded. “Can any good come out of Nazareth” There Joseph took Mary and the Heir of all the promises of God. Such was the scope of the prophets.

“Isaiah the prophet” is said, in Matthew 3, to have predicted John as “the voice of one crying in the wilderness” (Isaiah 40:3³The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. (Isaiah 40:3)). This would be decisive if higher criticism consisted with the fear of God—if it trembled at His word. How came men to set themselves above apostolic authority? Because they must otherwise, accepting prophecy, give up their skepticism and bow to God's revelation. If Isaiah wrote this wondrous moral pleading to the end, he clearly predicts Cyrus by name and character, by mission and work, and graphically foretells Babylon's fall, and the return to Jerusalem; nor this only, but the rejection of the Messiah and His atoning death, by the faith of whom the people, no longer impenitent, become God's servants through Jehovah's Righteous Servant, who appears at length for their final deliverance and everlasting joy, and the destruction of enemies within and without. As to the bearing of the words quoted by the Baptist, they must be childish indeed who fail to see that they describe the service of John as Messiah's herald, a moral work set out in material figures, as is common in the New Testament. Never have I heard a whisper of future “engineering” intended, save by believers in human progress, and in a millennium brought about by man's instrumentality rather than by Christ's advent. But there may be souls no less simple and rash on the other side.

“Isaiah the prophet” is cited again (9:1,2) in Matt. 4:14-16¹⁴That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, 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. (Matthew 4:14‑16), and with marked propriety. Just so much of the prophecy is used as bears on the first advent of Christ, the great light that shone on her that was distressed, “the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles,” etc. The figurative language of the former quotation in no way forbade its literal accomplishment in John the Baptist, without a vague series of heralds to bring in the Lord. So equally bold figures here only render vivid testimony to that True Light which Christ was, not to His forerunner who bore Him witness. They are both definite and accomplished prophecies. Only the very next words of Isaiah 9 open the unfulfilled coming glory of Messiah here below. “Thou hast multiplied the nation, thou hast increased their joy. They joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, as men rejoice when they divide the spoil": words alien from gospel blessing and from heavenly glory, but perfectly expressive of the world-kingdom of our Lord at the end of the age. Hence the flash which shines next, lighting up the judgment which brings it in. “For the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, thou hast broken, as in the day of Midian. For all the armor of the armed man in the tumult, and the garments rolled in blood shall even be for burning, for fuel of fire. For unto us a child is born,” etc. (R.V.). This ought surely to be unmistakable. It is the Second Advent, not the first. In the perspective of the prophet the one is followed by the other. Christ's death separated them; the New Testament, and its special work and heavenly relationships with the exalted Head of the body, come between. But the one is as literal and distinct as the other, though figures cluster round both to enlighten faith, not to wrap in mist and cloud as men wish.

The next quotation of prophecy is from “Isaiah the prophet” (53:4): “Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases” (Matthew 8:17¹⁷That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses. (Matthew 8:17)). The Evangelist applies it to Messiah's removal of disease. Atoning work is distinguished, and even contrasted, with the latter half of verse 4, in verses 5, 6, 8 (last clause), 10, 11, 12, though there is more than atonement. And so the New Testament cites these, not verse 4, for atonement. Thus all is precise and definite in the prophecy, as well as in apostolic citation. It is scientific theology which produces darkness, of which it is equally unconscious and vain, with which it would, if it could, envelop the divine word. It really deceives itself. The prophecy is luminous throughout, opening and closing with Messiah's exaltation in His kingdom to come; but almost all between is the inimitable portrait of His humiliation and death in man's rejection and God's atonement. It is not surprising that those who love to regard the prophets as dwelling in their own fog are shy of a chapter which is not more sharply defined than it is momentous and humbling. Nor is it that figures are lacking, but that simple language pervades it from first to last. Symbol is wholly absent, and all excuse for allegorizing; and the rather, as there is most needed yet spiritual food already prepared of God for the spiritual.