A Simple Answer

One of the most confusing and biggest argument-starting passages in the Bible is Matthew's "wrong" interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 "Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel". I found a website, linked at the bottom, which explains this concept in detail. I will only give a basic overview and my opinion on it.

To be perfectly honest, it really doesn't matter whether Jesus was born of a virgin or not, because it is a minor prophecy and He fulfilled the 600-something other prophecies that are directly linked to Him, including Abraham's near-sacrifice of Isaac, the first twelve fathers' names in English (which I will discuss in a later post), and God covering Adam and Eve's sins by shedding blood.

First, I will deal with the term "Emmanuel". This Hebrew word is exactly translated as 'God IS with us', not "God with us" as usually explained. One of Jesus' many descriptions is Emmanuel, or God is with us. If Jesus really was both a man and God, then this description fits.

Second, the verse states He will be called Emmanuel, not named. Neither verse says His name will be Emmanuel, only that some people will call Him this, but not as a name either.

The third and fourth points are dangerous and could completely unravel Christian theology, but they must be addressed for it is nothing compared to all the other evidence that proves God is real and Jesus was God.

Third, the verse in Isaiah is not a prophecy of Jesus. Rather, Isaiah is talking about his own son in the present time. Makes sense. This book, while heavily used to identify prophecies of Jesus, also majorly deals with Isaiah's own future as well as the near-future of Israel (not the 500 years later when Jesus was born). This fact, however, does not refute anything about Jesus. It only simplifies and disproves Atheists' arguments.

Fourth, the term "virgin" in Isaiah means something different in Hebrew than it does in English. The original word, 'almah' simply means young woman or maiden. Mary was certainly a very young woman. It is the word 'be’tulah' which explicitly means 'no sexual experience'. Mary was definitely a be'tulah, but the woman described in Isaiah was simply an almah, a maiden.

While this passage can certainly be a reference to Jesus' birth, it is not a direct prophecy. If anyone is basing their faith or church on this prophecy alone, they are incorrect and need to learn much more. While it is still a valid claim, be careful with this one around Atheists. Arm yourself with knowledge and know the Bible well, for failing to defend this misinterpretation can lead to disastrous results.

Here are the links:
Messiah Truth
Isaiah's Virgin