In some versions the verse in question is verse 5, in others it's verse 6.

 

First of all, the Jewish scholars who translated the Jewish scriptures into Greek (the Septuagint) rendered this passage quite differently than those Trinitarian scholars who are responsible for the above rendering and others like it. Keep in mind that, most of the time, whenever New Testament writers quote the Old Testament they are quoting the Septuagint. Thus it can be said that the Bible of the Apostles was the Septuagint. The Septuagint renders the text thusly:

 

For a Child is born to us, and a Son is given to us, whose government is upon His shoulder; and His name is called The Messenger of Great Counsel; for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to Him. His government shall be great, and of His peace there is no end; it shall be upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom, to establish it, and to support it with judgment and with righteousness, from this time forward and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this.

 

This rendition, which is the rendition available to the New Testament writers, distinguishes between the Child/Son, and the Lord of hosts from whom the Son's government, peace and health is derived. It has no hint of "Mighty God" or of "Everlasting Father." However, I will accept those two titles for the sake of argument in order to continue.

 

Secondly, this verse is not quoted by ANY New Testament writer, much less applied to Jesus. None of these titles are applied to Jesus in the New Testament. Why, if this is such an obvious reference to Jesus, is this verse not applied to him by, for instance, Mathew, who was very concerned with applying messianic passages to Jesus? Perhaps none of the New Testament writers believed this passage to be speaking of Jesus. There is a strong tradition in Jewish thought and commentary that this verse is speaking about Hezekiah. Here are a few examples from Rabbinical Jewish commentary:

 

• Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end. R. Tanhum said: Bar Kappara expounded in Sepphoris, Why is every mem in the middle of a word open, whilst this is closed? - The Holy One, blessed be He, wished to appoint Hezekiah as the Messiah, and Sennacherib as Gog and Magog; whereupon the Attribute of Justice said before the Holy One, blessed be He: 'Sovereign of the Universe! If Thou didst not make David the Messiah, who uttered so many hymns and psalms before Thee, wilt Thou appoint Hezekiah as such, who did not hymn Thee in spite of all these miracles which Thou wroughtest for him?' Therefore it [sc. the mem] was closed. (Sanh. 94) 

• The Holy One, blessed be He, said: Let Hezekiah, who hath eight [shemoneh] names, come and mete out punishment to Sennacherib, who hath [likewise] eight. Hezekiah, as it is written, For 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, Mighty, Judge, Everlasting, Father, Prince, and Peace. (Sanh. 94) 

• R. Johanan said: Since the days of Hezekiah, for it is said, Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with judgment and with righteousness for henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this. (Shab. 55)​

 

This would explain the lack of New Testament application of this verse to Jesus. In my opinion, based on the above - and more -  it's reasonable to assume that the New Testament writers, in keeping with their Jewish background and paradigm, did not believe this passage refers to Jesus. 

 

Thirdly, the common argument is that the names "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father" could not possibly refer to a mere man. The Trinitarian Jesus, who is both God and man, is the only possibility for a being who is both a Child, a Son, and also "Mighty God" and "Everlasting Father."

 

Besides the fact that the Hebraic understanding of these titles must be disregarded (by ignoring the LXX translation as well as the commas distinguishing the 8 names in Sanh. 94), this argument illustrates the chauvinism of our literalistic Greek mode of thinking. It's obvious from the above examples that the Jews DID INDEED apply these titles to mere men. This is easily provable from the Bible itself. Notice that the verse says, "And he will be called..." Other versions say, "And his name shall be called..." Just because someone is NAMED "Mighty God" doesn't mean he IS "Mighty God."

 

• The name Elihu means, "My God is He," which refers to an ordinary human being (Job 32:1, 1 Samuel 1:l, 1 Chronicles 12:21, 26:7, 27:18).

• Elijah.  This name is short for "Eli Jehovah" or "Eli Yahweh".  Eli means my GOD, and Yahweh is the name and title of GOD Almighty in the Bible.  Does "Eli Yahweh" or "Elijah" mean that the person is Jehovah Himself?

• Gabriel means "Strong God". The word "Gibor" in Isaiah 9:6 and the word "Gibor" of Gabriel have exactly the same root, and they are both the same word.  The word itself can also be translated as "Man of God".

• Joel means "The LORD God".

• Gedaliah means "Jehovah is Great".   Again, Gedaliah is short for "Gedal Yahweh".  Is the person who was called "Jehovah is Great" GOD Almighty Himself?  People before and after Jesus are given this name.  (See 2 Kings 25:22-24)

• Michael means "who is like God".​

 

I could go on and on, but the point is made. As S.I. Hayakawa said, "The name is not the thing." "Mighty God" is a title that was applied to kings and rulers in the ancient world and in no way implies an ontological relationship between the meaning of the name and the person so named. This was a throne name, or a royal title. If indeed the correct understanding is, "Mighty God" (that's a big "IF") and refers to Hezekiah, it is not saying that Hezekiah was the God of Abraham - YHWH - but rather that Hezekiah represented God as a King on Earth. In fact, this practice existed up until the 1980s in other Semitic kingdoms like Ethiopia, where the Emperor was called "Lord of Lords, King of Kings" etc. The exact same thing could be said concerning "Everlasting Father."

 

Fourthly, as we've seen above, "El" can also mean "judge". So "El Gibor" can also be translated as "Strong Judge". The Hebrew language assigns many different meanings to the same word. The content of the word is understood from the context. There is more illustration and detail on this phenomenon in the page on "worship". See also the data on "Elohim" (God or gods) in the discussion on Thomas' "My Lord and my God!" Mighty God" is but one possible meaning out of several for this phrase.

 

Fifthly, if Isaiah understood this to be a messianic reference, and that the name "Mighty God" was ontologically literal, then his other messianic references would agree with it. But they do not. In Isaiah 11:1-3 he says how the Messiah will be from the root of Jesse, how the Spirit of the LORD will rest on him, and how he will delight in the fear of the LORD. In Isaiah 53:3 the Messiah is described as "a man of sorrows". In Isaiah 49:5, the Messiah says, "And I am made glorious in the sight of the LORD, and MY GOD is my strength." In Isaiah, the Messiah has a God. One cannot BE THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY, who is one and only one, and also HAVE A GOD!

 

For me, the strongest argument against the Trinitarian understanding of this verse is the translation of the Septuagint. The Septuagint was translated by Jewish scholars, it represents the Jewish understanding and paradigm, it's the version the New Testament writers quote from most often, and Isaiah 9:5(6) is not applied to Jesus by any New Testament writer - it's not quoted at all in the New Testament.

 

Back to Arguments Index