In reading Isaiah 9, I’ve always snagged on this third name: “Everlasting Father.” For one thing, you’d think Isaiah’s contemporaries must have had trouble with that one, too. A child is born to us, a son is given to us, and he will be called Everlasting Father. Putting those two things together, the fatherhood of a child, seems odd. If the people of Judah and Israel had been in the habit of using “Father” as a title for their kings, that would have been one thing—they would have been used to seeing that sort of name hung on baby boys—but that had never been the case. God was described as the Father of his people, and he didn’t even share that title with David. To have this baby called “Father” is unprecedented. To have him called “Everlasting Father,” one who will be the Father of his people for eternity, is even more so. This is a title which could only be given to God—and here God’s prophet is using it as a name for a human baby boy.
Now, this looks less strange to us, since we know “the rest of the story,” as Paul Harvey would say; we know how Isaiah’s prophecy was fulfilled. But is Jesus ever called “Father” in the New Testament? No—he’s the Son, Son of Man and Son of God. If we were to call him “Father,” wouldn’t that make God the Father our grandfather? But Jesus doesn’t teach us to pray, “Our Grandfather,” he tells us to pray, “Our Father,” to see God the Father as our Father as well as his. So how does it make sense to call Jesus “Everlasting Father”?
To understand this, we need to hold fast to the first principle of biblical interpretation: let Scripture interpret Scripture. In particular, we need to learn from the great rabbis, such as Gamaliel who taught the Apostle Paul: if you want to know how to understand a word, go see where it’s used elsewhere in Scripture. So when the Old Testament calls God Father, what does it say?