The prophecy in Isa 7: 14 is a clear sign for every sincere seeker that Jesus is the Messiah. The same thing can be said about the prophecy of the Seventy Weeks in the book of Daniel. Jewish scholars reject this interpretation alleging that the Hebrew word from which our word "virgin" is translated could mean both: "a young lady" and "virgin".
    Some "brilliant" linguists and "experts", who teach in Christian seminars, use this same argument.  They are really more interested in showing adulation to rabbis and ayatollahs , and in demonstrating to others that they are not "fanatics" than in seeking the truth of God. Let's read that verse.

            "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall
        conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." ( Isa 7: 14 )

    If the word used in Hebrew could really mean either "young lady" or "virgin", then it is evident from the context that the meaning to be translated has to be "virgin".  Why?
    The verse we read says that God Himself was going to give a sign.  A sign is something marvelous, something different from the usual.  If a young lady has a child this is no sign at all.  Almost all young ladies have children.  But if a virgin has a son, this of course, is a marvelous sign.  So, even, if the word in Hebrew can be translated either way, our common sense tells us that "virgin" is the right choice.  We don't have to be "scholars", "linguists", "experts" or seminary professors; nor even have to know any Hebrew; we just have to use our common sense.
    Then why do scholars, experts, Christian seminary professors, and so on, accept and spread such a mistake?  Do they not have common sense , or do they want to confound Christianity?
    There are others who reject this prophecy by saying that verses 14-17 refer to Isaiah's son, of whom is spoken in Isa 8: 3- 4.  This is another manifestation of flippancy or dishonesty from these "experts".  If the sentence "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son" refers to Isaiah's wife, then they are accepting for her the virginal conception that formerly they did not accept for the Virgin Mary.
    If on the other hand, they do not say that Isaiah's wife gave birth to a child being a virgin, then they have to conclude that God offered a sign, but it never took effect.  It wouldn't be a sign that Isaiah's wife conceived a child; it is natural for most wives.
    Another argument against this twisted interpretation of Muslims, Jews and some scholars of Christian seminaries is that even though both cases look alike, they are not the same.  In the first case the son to be born (chapter 7 ) would be named  "Immanuel",  and in the second case (chapter 8 ) the son to be born would be named Mahershalalhashbaz .  Also both names have very different meanings. The name "Immanuel" means "God with us", while the name "Mahershalalhashbaz" means "haste ye to the spoil".  The spirit of the first prophecy is peace; the spirit of the second is punishment.  They are two different prophecies.
    There are also seminary professors and  "Christian" scholars who say that they are in doubt whether this 7:14 prophecy refers to Virgin Mary or not.  Evidently they are scholars in everything else but the Bible, because  Matt  1: 21-23 says clearly that it refers to Virgin Mary.   I don't think that these scholars know better than Matthew or than the Holy Spirit who inspired him.

            "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he
        shall save his people from their sins.  Now all this was done, that it might be
        fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying:  Behold,
       a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his
        name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."
                                                                                                        ( Matt  1: 21-23 )

    What are those seminary professors and scholars up to?  Are they ignoramus or are they trying to confound Christians, and destroy Christianity from inside out?  If Matthew says that this prophecy refers to  Virgin Mary, who are those arrogant and foolish scholars and professors to cast doubts on it?
    It is interesting to think that Muslims and Jews do not want to admit that this prophecy refers to Mary and Jesus, the Messiah, nevertheless, based on this truth one of the world's major religions, Christianity, came about.  This is the same case with the prophecies in Isa 52:13- 53:12;  Dan 9: 24 - 27 and  Hag 2: 6 - 9.