I will try and make this last post a short one and do apologize for breaking up my answer into a number of posts, but I do hope it makes it easier to read
In this final post, I will address the context that Isaiah 9:6 was written in, both historically and spiritually.
When interpreting and discussing the bible text there are some important principles which must be taken into consideration to understand them.
1) the original meanings of the text when read in their historical
backgrounds;
2)Remember, the Bible is concerned with God's dealings with mankind to bring them back to Himself, from start to finish. Always underscoring the biblical text is the covenant theologies of Genesis 12 and Samuel God would bless Abraham and His offspring in order that the whole world would be blessed. All the writings of the prophets must be read with the understanding of the promises and purposes of God They are not individual actions that just happened, but are all part of a plan and purpose of God from before creation.
When the prophets speak, as Isaiah does now in 9:6, they use both their historical settings and also in the same context, prophesy of how this relates to the events of the future and the final culmination of the prophecies and plans of God.
Isaiah 9:1-7 seems to be a recapitulation of the Davidic covenant
announced in 2 Samuel 7. The King who is to come is to be part of David's dynasty as he promised David and then Solomon. This King would be like no other king and would be raised up by God Himself.
So in these verses and remembering the rules of complete and incomplete tense the immediate reference is to the Davidic king born in the prophet's own day, (ie Hezekiah) and the future prophetic fulfilment which as with all the prophets, he wouldn't necessarily have understood , but prophetic reference to another king who was to come in ultimate and complete fulfillment of the pronounced hope
As Daniel Schibler writes,
Philip E. Satterthwaite, Richard Hess, and Gordon Wenham, eds., The Lord’s Anointed ( Grand Rapids: Baker Books,
1995), 97-104.
“What is important is to realize that messianism in general and messianic
prophecies in particular all had a beginning, a terminus quo. and an end, a
terminus ad quem., and in between a whole range or history of fulfillment.
But when Jesus of Nazareth had come, the early church and generations of
Christian following it have believed that, ultimately speaking, every
messianic prophecy, every messianism even, found its fulfillment in Jesus,
the ‘Christ’ which... means the Messiah.”
I hope this keeps the discussion open and explains some of the problems with the arguments you have all introduced in this thread. I'll wait for some replies before posting again.