Why Is The Son Called ‘everlasting Father’?

Every Christmas, churches around the world celebrate the incarnation of the Son using titles taken from Isaiah 9:6: “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” But why should the birth of a son be celebrated with the title “Everlasting Father,” and why does this Son bear this title?

While no one assumes confusion between the first and second persons of the Trinity, the answers often given provide little clarity. Some take the expression “Everlasting Father” to mean something akin to “the father of time.” Accordingly, much like Micah 5:2, “Everlasting Father” would then describe the Son’s eternality. While this is certainly a truth of orthodox Christianity, it doesn’t appear to be the main point of the title.

Most commentators rightly examine the context and argue the title “Father” is related to kingship in the ancient Near East (ANE), given the other titles and the kingship themes in the chapter. Still, these explanations are often expressed with a degree of uncertainty as to how this title, in connection with ANE kingship, should be understood in more concrete terms.

Some have connected the title to one used by ANE kings to describe the king as the “father” of his people. Others simply affirm that kingship is in view while acknowledging the difficulty and ambiguity.

Based on the passage’s immediate context and the ANE background, I believe that “Everlasting Father” deliberately evokes covenantal kingship language from the ANE. In doing so, the announcement of the Son’s birth declares he’s the King of kings and his kingdom has no end.

Broader Context

In Isaiah 7:1–9, Rezin (king of Syria) and Pekah (king of Israel) joined forces against Ahaz (king of Judah). The purpose of this attack was to set a ruler of their choosing over Judah. The prospect of fighting two kings was terrifying to Ahaz, but the prophet Isaiah emphasized the importance of trusting in the Lord despite the threat (vv. 4–9).

To bolster the king’s faith, God invites Ahaz to request a sign “deep as Sheol or high as heaven” (vv. 10–11). When Ahaz refuses, Isaiah rebukes him, and the prophet announces the sign: A virgin will conceive and bear a son whose name will be called “Immanuel” (vv. 12–14). While Ahaz is told that Rezin and Pekah will soon no longer be a threat (vv. 15–16), he’s also warned of the devastation that Assyria will bring on Judah (vv. 17–25).

‘Everlasting Father’ is deliberately evoking covenantal kingship language from the ancient Near East.

Isaiah 8:1–4 returns to the theme of children and the downfall of Syria and Israel before describing the Assyrian threat (vv. 5–15). The chapter concludes with an expression of Isaiah’s trust in YHWH and with Isaiah’s children as signs that stand in stark contrast to Ahaz’s lack of trust (vv. 16–22).

As seen in 2 Kings 16, Ahaz fails to trust the Lord. Instead, he appeals to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, declaring him to be master and father—a suzerain king over Judah and over himself. A suzerain was a king of one nation that had some measure of control and authority over another king and his kingdom. This meant Ahaz was ceding authority over his kingdom to the foreign power of Assyria. Rather than trusting in YHWH, Ahaz trusted in princes. It’s important, therefore, to consider the nature of the covenant Ahaz made with Tiglath-pileser.

Ancient Near Eastern Covenants

Covenants in their broader historical and cultural context intersect with treaties, laws, and royal grants, and often involve rituals, oaths, and other aspects of ANE society. In the broadest terms, covenants may be divided into those between parties of equal status and those hierarchical in nature.

Parity treaties are well attested in the ANE. Unlike treaties between parties of unequal status, parity treaties refer to the parties as “brothers.” Old Testament examples include the covenants between Jonathan and David (1 Sam. 20) and Hiram and Solomon (1 Kings 5).

Hierarchical treaties, by contrast, use terms such as “father and son” or “master and slave” to formalize the superiority of one king over another. The most relevant example is the treaty between Ahaz and Tiglath-pileser (2 Kings 16:5–9).

This passage is significant. When Ahaz says “your servant and your son” (v. 7) to refer to himself, he’s declaring fealty to Tiglath-pileser and recognizing him as master and father. This declaration is further underscored by the tribute Ahaz offers, alongside his plea for deliverance from Syria and Israel. The historical situation in 2 Kings 16 lies in the background of Isaiah 7, which in turn sets the context for the declaration of Isaiah 9.

The point is that Ahaz placed his trust in the wrong covenantal father.

Isaiah 9 returns to the theme of kingship and the birth of a child. By calling the son in verse 6 “Everlasting Father,” the prophet deliberately evokes ANE covenantal language in which greater kings are called “father” over lesser kings. The point is that Ahaz placed his trust in the wrong covenantal father. While Tiglath-pileser’s kingdom would rise and fall, the Son’s kingdom will have no end.

So, this Christmas, when you sing that Jesus, the Son, is “Everlasting Father,” remember that his kingdom has no end. The title challenges you to ask, Where will you place your trust? Will you declare fealty to the princes of this world, or will you hope in the Son alone?