Filled Full, Not Fulfilled (1:18–25)
They Shall Call His Name
“All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: ‘Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel’ (which means, God with us)” (Matt 1:22–23, quoting Isa 7:14).
“And he called his name Jesus” (Matt 1:25).
Many Christians think about the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament, especially as it pertains to Jesus, through a lens of prophecy and fulfillment. We are taught that there are numerous predictions about the Messiah in the OT, and, as proof of his Messiahship, Jesus shows up and fulfills those prophecies.
Matthew’s frequent use of πληρόω, usually translated as “fulfilled” as it is in verse 22, would seem to confirm this understanding
But that’s not how the OT is actually being used in the NT, and there are far fewer prophecies about the Messiah in the OT than we have been led to believe. How Jesus fulfills, or rather, “fills full” the OT is far more interesting than mere prophecy-fulfillment language. Take this scene at the beginning of Matthew’s Gospel, for example.
Matthew says quite explicitly, “All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet,” and then he quotes Isa 7:14. It’s worth noting that Matthew could easily have stopped his quotation after the reference to the virgin birth, but he doesn’t He carries the quotation all the way through to “and they shall call his name Immanuel (which means, God with us).”
And then what happens?
Joseph awakes from the dream, and Matthew writes, “And he called his name Jesus.”
If Matthew were operating on a simple prophecy-fulfillment model, that paragraph should have ended differently. He quotes the Isaianic text that says the child born to the virgin shall be named Immanuel. He says the text was fulfilled. And then Joseph gives the child a different name.
Matthew isn’t being careless; he just isn’t using the model we think he is.
The Greek word πληρόω does not mean “a prediction came true.” It means to fill something up, to bring something to its complete and full expression. Matthew isn’t saying Isaiah predicted Jesus. He is saying that Jesus “fills full” the story that Isaiah was telling.
Isaiah 7:14 was not a prediction about a future messiah. It was a sign given to King Ahaz in an acute political crisis. The Syro-Ephraimite coalition was threatening Jerusalem. Isaiah came with a word: trust the promises of God. A young woman would conceive and bear a son, and before the child was old enough to know good from evil, the threat would be gone. The child’s name — Immanuel, God with us — was the theological ground of the deliverance. Divine presence was the answer to the crisis.
That story had a specific meaning in the eighth century BC. Matthew knows this, and he’s not pretending otherwise.
What Matthew sees is that the same pattern has arrived at a greater destination. Once again, a son of David faces fear and uncertainty. Once again, a child is born as the sign of divine presence. But now the sign is not merely a sign. The child born to Mary does not point to God's presence. He is the presence. Immanuel announced that God was with his people. Jesus — from the Hebrew יְשׁוּעָה (yeshûʿâ), the Lord saves — is what that presence does.
For Matthew (and the other NT authors), the model for understanding Jesus in relation to the OT isn’t prophecy and fulfillment. It’s “fill-fullment.” The great story of God, Israel, and creation is being filled full in the life of this child.
“The Book of the Genealogy” (1:1–17)
If you’ve been around St. Dunstan’s for a while, you’ve probably heard me talk about Matthew’s genealogy. In short, Matthew points out three key figures or moments in Israel’s history, with Jesus as the culmination of that story.
So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations (Matt 1:17, ESV).
Abraham, David, Exile, Jesus—this shapes Israel’s story as Matthew sees it. But what if I told you there’s an even deeper, older story hidden in plain sight in the first two words of Matthew’s Gospel?
The book of the genealogy (Βίβλος γενέσεως, biblios geneseōs) of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matt 1:1).
This is the book of the origin (βίβλος γενέσεως, biblios geneseōs) of heaven and earth, when it originated, on the day that God made the heaven and the earth (Gen 2:4, NETS).1
Notice the identical Greek phrase—Matthew is intentionally echoing the Septuagint’s language for creation itself. Even the term biblios geneseōs alone may be a reference to the name of the book of Genesis.
Matthew mainly writes to a Jewish audience, highlighting Jesus as the climax of the stories of Abraham, David, and the Exile. However, he also hints at the deeper story of creation and Adam, recognizing that what Jesus did was for more than just one nation and family. What Jesus accomplished was for the whole world.
If Genesis is the book of the origin of creation and the people of God, it’s not a stretch to say that Matthew views his Gospel as the account of the beginning of the new creation and the formation of the new people of God around Jesus Christ.
So, yes, to understand who Jesus is, what he did, and what he said, we must see him as the culmination of Israel’s story. But he is also the climax of a different, older story—the story of creation—and what he accomplishes will benefit the cosmos and all the people within it. Jesus isn’t just Israel’s Messiah; he’s also the one through whom God is making all things new.
NETS stands for New English Translation of the Septuagint, the standard academic translation of the Greek Old Testament.
As a woman, I am always fascinated by the inclusion in Jesus’ genealogy of Tamar (Judah’s daughter-in-law, whom Judah impregnated thinking she was a temple prostitute), Rehab (a Gentile who hid the spies), and Ruth (a Gentile Moabitess, who marries Boaz, a picture of Jesus as our kinsman-redeemer!). Also, “the wife of Uriah the Hittite (Bathsheba) — who is often referred to in this manner rather than by name! Women were of no particular consequence or value in these ancient cultures so their inclusion is significant in the Biblical text.
I love the connection here to creation and the eschaton. Thank you!