The Book of Isaiah By Allen Ross, Ph.D. Introduction The Study of the Book of Isaiah The Message of Isaiah The Book of Isaiah is one of the most important books of the Old Testament. While little is known of the personal life of the prophet, he is considered to be one of the greatest of them all. The book is a collection of oracles, prophecies, and reports; but the common theme is the message of salvation. There was, according to these writings, no hope in anything that was made by people. The northern kingdom of Israel had been carried into captivity (722 B.C.), and the kingdom of Judah was in the middle of idolatry and evil. The kingdom of Assyria had dominated the Fertile Crescent and posed a major threat to both kingdoms; and the kingdom of Babylon was gaining power and would replace Assyria as the dominant threat. In view of the fast-changing international scene, the people of Israel would be concerned about their lot in life—what would become of the promises of God? How could the chosen people survive, let alone be a theocracy again? And must the remnant of the righteous also suffer with the nation that for all purposes was pagan? To these and many other questions the book addresses itself. There would be a purging of the nation because God is holy. Before the nation could inherit the promises made to the fathers, it would have to be made holy. So God would use the pagan nations to chasten Israel for its sins and cleanse it from iniquity. And even though the judgment of the captivity would punish sin and destroy the wicked unbelievers, the removal of iniquity would ultimately be the work of the Servant of the LORD, the promised Messiah. On the basis of such cleansing and purification, God would then establish the golden age, a time of peace and prosperity that the world has never known. When the holy God would make the remnant holy, then He would use them to rule over the nations rather than allow the nations again to discipline them. The messenger of the message of salvation is the prophet Isaiah, whose name means “salvation of Yahweh,” or “Yah saves.” He was the son of Amoz; he may also have been related to the royal family, perhaps King Manasseh, by whom he was believed to have been sawn asunder (see the Apocryphal literature; Heb. 11:37). He prophesied in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, and also may have lived past Hezekiah into the reign of Manasseh. Assuming that he was a young man at the death of Uzziah in 742 B.C.when his official ministry began, he might have been 70 or 80 at the time of his death (ca. 680 B.C.). Therefore, the prophet would have ministered for at least 60 years in an effort to bring the nation back to God. The collection of Isaianic oracles fits the progression of Israel’s history over this time. The prophet began preaching during the Assyrian crisis, about the time Assyria destroyed the northern kingdom and was threatening the southern kingdom. Although Hezekiah was able to survive that invasion through the help of the prophet, he foolishly allowed the ambassadors from Babylon to see all the treasures of the kingdom, a sin that brought Isaiah’s announcement of the Babylonian captivity in the future. The book includes this historical interlude before the second half which focuses on that captivity in Babylon. The prophet has no idea when that captivity would come; for him it could have come right after the death of Hezekiah, and that would mean his audience might be the people to go into the exile. And so he began to prepare them—but it would not be that generation, for the exile began about 100 years after the death of Isaiah. But the second portion of the book looks in a general way to that future time and writes his message of comfort and hope for the exiles of Judah, as well as descriptions of the restoration to Jerusalem. The hope of such a salvation issues into the glorious vision of the new heavens and the new earth in the age to come. So the setting of the first half of the book is Judah in the days of the Assyrians, and the setting of the second half of the book is Babylon, then Jerusalem again, and then beyond in the age to come. The “target audience” in the first half of the book is pre-exilic Israel; the “target audience” in the second half of the book is Israel during the exile and at the return (we know they are different; Isaiah did not). In both parts the oracles often look to the distant future for their main meaning and application. The fact that each section includes vivid descriptions as well as general and poetic descriptions has fueled controversy about the unity of the book and the prophet himself. The Assyrian Period On the one hand we have the historical background of the book during the Assyrian crisis. Here are some of the most crucial events in this period: 1. “The Young Lion Roars.” In 743 B.C. there was a coalition under Azariah against Tiglathpileser III (743, 738, 735). The important comparative material can be read in ANET, p. 282, lines 103ff. The record in 2 Kings 15:19-20 (compare ANET, p. 283, lines 150ff.) tells how Rezin, Menahem, and Hiram were put under tribute to Assyria. This may have taken place in 738 (although Young in his commentary says 735). 2. “The Smoking Firebrand and the Trembling Heart.” The Syro-Ephraimite war took place in 735-733 B.C. According to 2 Kings 15, 16, there was an attempt to set up Ben Tabil on the throne when Ahaz of the Davidic dynasty did not go along with the treaty. Ahaz appealed to Tiglathpileser of Assyria for help, but this was a mistake (see ANET, pp. 283,4). Pekah was removed and Hoshea put in power in Israel; Ahaz became a “son of Pul,” a political vassal of Tiglathpileser. 3. “Silly Dove without Understanding.” Hoshea’s revolt and call to Egypt took place in 722 B.C. The accounts can be read in 2 Chronicles 28:21 and ANET, p. 284, lines 23ff. It was in 722 that Samaria finally fell to Sargon II, the general under and successor to Shalmaneser (the first king started the siege of Samaria and died during the time; his successor finished off the kingdom of Israel). 4. “The Bird in the Cage.” There were rebellions during the reign of Hezekiah in Judah in 713, 705, and 701. In 713 Ashdod rebelled against Sargon (Isa. 20). In 705 Hezekiah rebelled against Sennacherib (Isa. 30, 31). And in 701 Assyria invaded the land in what has become one of the most frequently described invasions of Israel’s history—Sennacherib’s own account says, “I shut up Hezekiah the Jew (or Judean) like a bird in a cage.” Isaiah 10 describes the invasion of the army from the north; Micah, a contemporary, describes the invasion of another part of the army from the lowlands (Micah 1), and the Book of Kings describes the historical event, as do sections of Isaiah. Since Tirhaqah of Ethiopia was involved, the literature also includes the Ethiopian records. Of course, only the Bible tells of the destruction of the Assyrian army by the Angel of Yahweh. So there is a major section of the book written against the backdrop of the Assyrian crisis. The Babylonian Period On the other hand we have the apparent setting of the circumstances of the Babylonian captivity, 586-536 B.C. Actually, the passages do not include very specific details and descriptions of Babylon or the exile in the oracles—not anything like the Assyrian background—there are not the firsthand, eye-witness accounts of life and circumstances in Babylon one would expect if the author had lived thee. The most specific reference comes with the mentioning of the name of the king of Persia, Cyrus, who would conquer Babylon (Isa. 44, 45). The presence of this name in the book has prompted many to see the second part of the collection as the work of another prophet, one who lived closer to the events and could reasonably be expected to use a name like Cyrus since he would be more of an eye-witness. In other words, this other prophet saw Cyrus coming against Babylon, and so “predicted” that he would destroy Babylon and free Israel. The Persian Deliverance What can we make of the use of the name of Cyrus in the oracles? Critical scholarship finds it too difficult to accept that a prophet could predict the name of a king some 175 years before he came on the scene. But was the Persian empire or such a name that obscure? It is helpful to have the history clear in our minds before discussing the critical issues. The royal line of which Cyrus was a part was founded by Achaemenes, who ruled from 700-675 (contemporary with Isaiah). It was he whose name was taken for the empire, the Achaemenid Empire. His son was Teispes (675-640); he expanded the boundaries of Parsa (Persia) as far south as Pasargadae. Because his empire was so great, he divided it between his two sons, Ariaramnes in the south and Cyrus I in the north. This division meant that there was a ruler known as Cyrus around 70 years before Israel went into captivity. Teispes also regained independence from the Medes, who had made Parsa a vassal in 670. The line of Cyrus I produced Cambyses I (600-559) and Cyrus II (559-530). Cambyses was placed over the empire when Persia became a Median province again; he married the daughter of Astyages. Cyrus II, being the offspring of that marriage, thereby uniting in himself the royal houses of the Medes and the Persians. Cyrus’ grandfather on his mother’s side was the great Cyaxares who overthrew the Scythians and the Assyrians, establishing control over all northern Mesopotamia and Iran. Cyrus was in fact a vassal of his grandfather in the State of Persia. He organized the Persian states and made a pact with Nabonidus of Babylon—against the law of Astyages. When he was summoned to Ecbatana to answer for this, he refused to go. Astyges then attacked his willful grandson, but was defeated and taken prisoner. Cyrus took Ecbatana and made Media a province of Persia. Thus began his great empire. When it came time to take Babylon, the people were eager for Cyrus the Great to do it, for they were bitter against their king Nabonidus who rejected their worship of Marduk and kept them exploited as slaves. Cyrus’ general Gubaru (“Darius” in the account of Daniel) took the city without a battle; a few days later Cyrus could march in triumphantly. We shall return to this issue later. But it is important to realize that the movements of these world powers were well-known in the various courts, including Jerusalem. And the Book of Isaiah gives sufficient evidence that the prophet knew international affairs. The growth and influence of the Persian empire was not hidden from the rest of the world; this state and its kings were not non-existent until 536 B.C. And a name “Cyrus” was associated with this rising power as early as 670, 660 B.C. or thereabouts. For the prophet, Persia seems to be the next major power after Assyria. Babylon has a brief interlude when she destroys Nineveh, but the rising power is beyond Babylon. The prophet Isaiah was certainly inspired by God; but he probably knew a great deal too. God revealed to him that Babylon would take Judea into captivity, and that a Persian king would allow them to come back. The Outline of the Book The following outline of the contents of the book will enable us to gain a quick overview and see how the different parts fit together. I. The Book Of Judgment (1:1—35:10) The Message of Rebuke and Promise (1:1—6:13) Israel’s ungrateful rebellion and the LORD’s gracious invitation (1:1-31). Israel’s prospect of glory through Messiah after the chastening for sin that will make them holy (2:1—4:6). Israel’s swift and complete judgment in exile (5:1-30). Isaiah’s cleansing of unholiness and calling to the ministry to the unholy nation that faces desolation (6:1-13). The Message of Immanuel (7:1—12:6) The sign of the birth of Immanuel and the judgment to come by Assyria (7:1-25). The judgment on the nation and the deliverance by the birth and reign of the Son (8:1—9:7). The doom of Samaria for its perversion of justice (9:8—10:4). The destruction of the pride of Assyria to Israel’s satisfaction and the ushering in of Messiah’s great kingdom of peace through the Branch of the root of Jesse (10:5—12:6). The Burden upon the Nations (13:l—23:18) Babylon will be made desolate (13:l—14:27). Philistia will howl over its calamity (14:28-32). Moab is lamented for her doom (15:l—16:14). Damascus and Samaria will be plagued (17:1-14). Ethiopia will be destroyed but left an access to God (18:1-7). Egypt will be confounded but in the future will be part of the covenant with access (19:1—20:6). Babylon’s fall is reiterated (21:1-10). Edom is threatened (21:11,12). Arabia has a set time for calamity (21:13-17). Jerusalem will be invaded (22:1-25). Tyre will be overthrown (23:1-18). The Message of Judgment and Promise, the “Little Apocalypse” (24:1—27:13) Judgment for sin will fall on the land, but a remnant shall rejoice at the advancement of the kingdom (24:1-23). Praise is offered to the LORD for His judgments and His deliverance of the believing remnant (25:1-12). A song of rejoicing in the consolation of Judah in the time of trouble, and an exhortation to faith (26:1-21). As with a vineyard, the LORD cares for His own and so His discipline on them differs from His judgment on the pagans: they will be preserved to worship in Jerusalem (27:1-13). Woes upon Unbelievers in Israel (28:1—33:24) The self-indulgent and scoffing Israel will be judged, but the remnant will advance the kingdom as it will be securely founded in the laying in Zion of the stone (28:1-29). The blind souls of Jerusalem who deceive will be turned over to the insatiable enemies so that the nation may be sanctified for a blessing (29:1-24). The rebuke is given for trusting in allies rather than in the LORD in the time of chastening, which is designed to bring about faith (30:1-22). The people should turn from allies and trust in God who alone can bring down Assyria (31:1—32:20). Judgment will fall on the enemies of Israel but there will be great privileges for the believers in Israel (33:1-24). Further Messages of Judgment and Promise (34:1—35:10) The destruction of Gentile power will certainly come to pass (34:1-17). The blessing of the redeemed is to see the kingdom of peace and prosperity, physically and spiritually (35:1-10). The Book Of Hezekiah (36:l—39:8) The Deliverance of Judah (36:1—37:38) The invasion of Assyria and the blasphemy of Rabshekah challenges their faith (36:1-22). The encouragement of Isaiah in the time of mourning at the reception of the letter from Sennacherib prompts a prayer that leads to victory (37:1-38). The Deliverance of Judah’s King (38:1-22) The king’s life is extended through prayer. The king offers a song of praise for his deliverance. The Deliverance of Judah into Babylon’s Hands (39:1-8) The pride of Hezekiah displays the treasures to the king of Babylon. The prophet announces the Babylonian captivity. The Book Of Comfort (40:1—66:24) The Promise and Purpose of Peace (40:1—48:22) The prologue of the Book of Comfort announces the coming of God to Zion and the encouragement that that brings to the people (40:1-31). The exhortation of God over the raising of the Persian deliverer, over His promises, and over the folly of idols (41:1-29). The Servant of the LORD is raised up by the incomparable God, causing praise to Him (42:1-25). The Servant of the LORD will be regathered because they are His people and all will see His sovereign acts (43:1—44:5). The ability of God over idols to control history because He is the living God: the establishment of Cyrus as His shepherd and anointed servant, bringing the Gentiles into submission (44:6—45:25). Because of the weakness of the gods of Babylon, that power will be destroyed (46:1—47:15). Based on these prophecies, the LORD exhorts Israel to note the oracles, remember His love, and prepare to flee from the captivity (48:1-21). The Prince of Peace (49:1—57:21) Messiah brings light and restoration: light to the Gentiles when Israel rejects; restoration to Israel at the appointed time (49:1-26). Israel is put away over her sins, but the Servant of the LORD is obedient and by His suffering can comfort the weary (50:1-11). Chosen Israel, the promised nation, should look in faith to the LORD for another return to the land (51:1-16). Israel should awake because dominion will replace slavery since God has come to rule in Zion (51:17—52:12). The Suffering Servant: blessings of redemption come to the nation and grace for the Gentiles (the next two sections) because (in this section) the Servant will be exalted from the lowly place by His death on behalf of the sins of the people as a reparation offering (52:13—53:12). The people of God, therefore, will be blessed with redemption and dominion (54:1-17). Grace will be extended to all (Gentile) sinners who trust in the LORD (55:1—56:8). Among the redeemed in the kingdom, wicked leaders and corrupt idolaters will not be found (56:9—57:21). The Program of Peace (58:1—66:24) In view of the false and ritualistic worship in his day, the prophet looks to the coming of Messiah in light and the turning of people to Him (58:1-14). Israel, condemned for her depravity and sinfulness, will be converted by the Redeemer in Zion with the covenant through the Spirit (59:1-21). There will be blessings of glory for Israel and access for the Gentiles—following a short period of affliction (60:1-22). Messiah will be filled with the Spirit of the LORD to fulfill the work of redemption and deliverance in the Messianic age (61:1-11). The prophet, wishing to see the promises of glory fulfilled, prepares and calls the people to God, who will defeat all enemies (62—63). In response to the mercies of God for His people Israel, the nation will confess its sin, calling for a demonstration of God’s power (64). In response to the prayer of Israel, judgments will purge the rebels from Israel and prepare the remnant for the consummation of the ages with a new heaven, new earth, and new Jerusalem, in all its peace and prosperity (65:1-25). The LORD God will be worshipped in sincerity and shall comfort the remnant in the great day of redemption (66:1-24). The Text of the Book of Isaiah The Hebrew Text The Masoretic Text of the book is by far the superior text type, even though it retains the difficulties and archaisms of the language. The major concern has been the relationship of the Qumran material to the MT. There are about twelve fragments of Isaiah in the Qumran scrolls, the main one being 1QIsaa (Qumran, cave 1, Isaiah scroll A). This scroll is dated about 200-175 (early second century B.C.) by Birnbaum, which is supported by the study of other Isaiah scripts and from paleography. Since the Masoretic Text was finalized around 900 A.D., one can see the importance of these early scrolls. In studying the material, Orlinsky concluded that the Qumran scroll of Isaiah was closer to the MT of Isaiah than to its contemporary Greek version of the book (the so-called Septuagint, abbreviated LXX). Millar Burroughs notes that there are thirteen major variants from MT in 1QIsaA, but many of them are wrong and should be rejected in favor of the MT readings. The scroll 1QIsab is the Hebrew University manuscript of Isaiah. It covers from chapter 38 to the end of the book, with a few gaps, and other fragments. This manuscript is even closer to the MT. It dates from before 70 A.D. at least. It appears also to have been corrected to bring it into conformity to the MT. The Greek Text The Greek translation of the Isaianic material was not done all that well, probably not because the translator(s) did not know the language, but because there was a preference for smoother readings. Ziegler tried to produce an eclectic text, which is readily available to students in the standard edition of the LXX edited by Rahlfs (the Goettingen edition). The Cambridge Septuagint on the other hand (eds. Brooke and McClain) used Codex Vaticanus (B) throughout, and then offered variants to the readings. English Translations Translations are the shortest forms of commentaries; they range from tight, literal translations to free paraphrases. It is often helpful to consult translations to see the way the text has been interpreted. To do this well, however, would require some facility with the Hebrew text; but if you are not able to do that, then the better commentaries will have to be used. The Authorized Version is still superior to many that are out today. It was a remarkable piece of work given the manuscripts that they had. You might wish to look at the New King James Version which modernized and corrected the AV but retained its essential nature. It is very good for public reading. The Douay Version has undergone many changes like the AV. This is almost like the Vulgate of Jerome. The Old Revised Version (1883-1885) is good for the original text as well as textual criticism and philology. The Emphasized Bible can be helpful as a good window to the Hebrew; it marks the commentary work of Delitzsch. Moffett, Old Testament in 1926, and the complete work in 1933, is written in everyday English. It was influenced by Deissmann, using the common language of the people. It is old line liberal, offering emendations without notice, but fresh and literal. The Revised Standard Version of 1952 was a very conservative translation with regard to text, grammar, and philology, especially in comparison to other translations. It does resort to higher critical ideas, but usually puts the changes in footnotes. The big change was that they tried to put the Semitic view forward; they thought that the text was not always Messianic where it had been so interpreted, that the AV had read much of the NT back into the text. They simply tried to see what the original writers saw; but they have little emphasis on one mind, the unity of revelation leading to Christ. It ended up with somewhat of a skeptical American viewpoint. But in grammar and syntax and philology, good. The Berkeley Version is very good. The Confraternity Version is a revision of the Douay, but very good. The Phillips Version is a reworking of the Moffett edition, with little in it that is fresh. The Amplified seems awfully confusing; it is not always clear which words are being added to the text, and there is a wide range of meanings in some of the variations. The Living Bible is rather “liberal” in its free renderings, and inconsistent in that at times it almost preserves the AV; however, this should change since it is in the process of complete rewriting by a large number of scholars. Most students are familiar with the ASV of 1901, the NASV, the NIV, and the NRSV, all of which are useful in studying the text. Hebrew students have liked the NASV because it provides a very literal translation, using the standard definitions in the lexica. It is, though, too literal and stilted. The NIV provides the balance for it; it is frequently free and interpretive. The Jewish Publication Society’s TaNaCH Bible is also helpful. “T” stands for the Law (Torah), “N” stands for the Prophets (Nebi’im), and “Ch” stands for the Writings (Chetubim). The modern exegete must look at a few of the most recent or the best translations to get a feel for the way scholarship has understood the text and rendered it into English. The people who have worked on these are the people who teach in the Seminaries and Universities within the areas. Also, if you make a great deal of use of the Book of Common Prayer, you will have to check the translations of the Psalms and the bits of Isaiah. Higher Criticism of Isaiah Higher criticism deals with the date, authorship, and integrity of the book, as opposed to lower criticism which focuses on textual variations in the manuscripts. The Title (Isaiah 1:1) Is the title in Isaiah 1:1 the title of chapter 1, or chapters 1-12, or chapters 1-66? This, of course, will be the involved discussion on the next several pages. But several considerations here lead to the conclusion that the title was meant to be the heading for the entire collection: 1. The title verse mentions all the kings under whom Isaiah prophesied. It is similar to Micah 1:1, Hosea 1:1, and other superscriptions of prophetic collections. They all name the kings in full—apparently for the whole book. The contemporary Micah was addressed to Judah and Samaria; but Isaiah was addressed only to Judah. Hosea, another contemporary, was addressed to the reign of Jeroboam II (Hosea 13:8 would not recognize usurpers). 2. The heading is parallel to the way that other prophetic books are written. 3. Ezekiel 1:1 is a contrast to the pattern; Isaiah 2:1 is written for a small section of the prophecy. 4. A major objection is that parts of the book are not written to or about Judah or Jerusalem (e.g., chapter 13 for Babylon and Edom). But these other oracles are recorded as they pertain to Jerusalem and Judah. Otherwise they would not be there. 5. Chapter 1 is a prologue for the whole book, and not the chronological beginning of the oracles. It sets forth the major themes that will be heard throughout the collection. Ewald called it “the grand arraignment.” The Description of Isaiah as Revelation Isaiah is immediately described as a “vision” or “revelation.” The Hebrew hazon (pronounced khah-zone; from hazah) is a synonym for the ordinary word ra’ah, “to see,” in passages like Psalm 58:9, Psalm 11:7, and Canticles 7:1. But it can mean “see” in a super-sensory way, in a visionary trance or ecstatic state, such as in Numbers 24:4. As a noun the word describes divine communication. The Hebrew word dabar (pronounced dah-var), meaning “word, event,” is the thing that the prophets usually saw (see 1 Chron. 17:15 where the subject is “words” without implying actual sight). Thus, the book is “The Revelation of Isaiah”—a divine communication through the prophet Isaiah. The prophets occupied a unique position in God’s program. They had inter-communication between heaven and earth. At times the prophets entered into the heavenly court in their spirits, saw the heavenly scene, observed the future plan, had the mind of God, breathed the Spirit of God, or spoke the message of God. They may have been caught up consciously in the spirit to such visions, or they may have simply preached a sermon based on the Law, and their words were inspired by God to reveal not only the current needs but also the future. Consequently, through all this they were recognized as speaking for God; they had authority to appoint kings or depose kings, priests, and even other prophets. For our interest, however, they wrote Scripture, the revelation of God that was binding for all people of all times—their immediate audience, and future generations as well—including us! They interpreted history (past, present, and future); they called people to repentance through moral prophecies; and they often lived out their messages through their life circumstances. When they foretold the future, even though their audiences might not have lived to see it all fulfilled they took courage in their faith to endure what they were facing. Their messages were powerful and precise, both for their moral preaching and their future predictions. Only in certain respects does the New Testament spiritual gift of “prophecy” compare with the office and function of the classical prophet in Israel. When the prophets spoke, they spoke the Word of the LORD. But they had to pass the two tests laid down in the Law (Deut. 13 and 18). First, their pronouncements had to harmonize with the Torah. Deuteronomy 13 says even if they came with signs and wonders, if their words did not harmonize with Torah, they were to be removed. Deuteronomy 18 says that what they predicted had to come to pass. This is the second test. Even if some of their predictions lay off in the future, there were enough predictions from them that were current and therefore authenticating. We must also keep in mind that some of the non-writing prophets, an Elijah or an Elishah, did not predict much, but did give the word that certain things were about to happen—according to their words. If a prophet was proven false, no one need fear that prophet, even if employed by a king who had defected from the faith. It should be stated, though, that the true prophets often declared the Word of the LORD in peril of their lives. Jesus Himself lamented that Jerusalem had slain the prophets. And, of course, He would be numbered among them. The Authorship of the Book of Isaiah The issue of the unity and the authorship of the Book of Isaiah is a very complicated issue; many modern scholars have accepted the view that there is multiple authorship for the book, although most people trained by them probably have very little idea of the complicated ideas involved because they never studied them, never read the literature on the other side. And, this is true of those trained in the traditional view; they probably cannot defend their position because they never studied it thoroughly nor read material on the other side either. And, I suspect that this will be true of you too; you will formulate some conclusion without having studied in great detail the arguments on both sides, or without reading the literature—which is voluminous. In the following outline of the issue I have listed the basic arguments. I myself remain unconvinced that multiple authorship is the only or the best solution to the difficulties in the book. The acceptance of one Isaiah is not a view that I consider a major tenet of my faith, but it is what I find still the most compelling for all the data. How the Sovereign LORD God Prepares His Servants Isaiah 6:1-13 Introduction Isaiah 6 records the “call” of the young prophet to the difficult task of preaching a message of judgment to the nation. This incident focused his ministry and prepared him for it. It may be best to say that the elaborate material recorded here actually looks at how the sovereign LORD inspired the young prophet for service. The revelation of the glory of the LORD was the foundation; it led to a response of confession, which brought cleansing, which in turn enabled him to hear the Word of God, which carried a commission to preach the message. A few notes of caution are in order, because this passage is so widely used today. First, Isaiah already was a prophet, so this is not actually a “call” to become a prophet, but a call to a new direction in service. We shall have to be careful how we use that word, or how we define it. It is a call to a new and more difficult task that had to be performed. Second, your exposition will have to be very careful in its correlation and application. Very few people have seen in this life what Isaiah saw—the pre-incarnate Christ (cf. John 12:41) in glory. We work with passages in God’s revelation that describe this heavenly scene with now the risen Christ in glory. That will be the foundation and inspiration of ministry and service today. Passages like 2 Corinthians 3 and 4, and Revelation 1, then, become rather significant in our correlation with the New Testament. Many basic themes that we find here will surface there. There must be a supernatural basis for ministry, or we shall not endure the suffering, opposition, discouragement, and hardship that follows. Paul says that he kept his focus on eternal things, things heavenly and spiritual—the eternal weight of glory. But if you try to apply this passage to say we must see this exact vision, even if you use the words figuratively and rhetorically without defining them, you will make an impossible barrier. Third, the substance of the message is the negative or dark side of the good news. Perhaps this is why speakers usually leave it out, and simply stop with “Here am I, send me.” It was a message of judgment, of warning; they were not going to believe. And Isaiah really did not want to deliver it. So we shall have to consider why this is in the passage. The setting of Isaiah 6 is the year 742 B.C., if our chronology of the death of Uzziah is accurate (and seems to be, given a year or so variance). Uzziah had been a good king (and there were so few of them). But in his latter years he became proud and usurped the role of priest, and God struck him down. With his death the hopes of many probably seemed dashed. Good King Uzziah was dead—and his wicked son would now take over! But on that occasion God broke through and revealed Himself to Isaiah. The young prophet may have been closing down things in the temple, and as the shadows crept across the temple precincts the flash of glory broke through and the prophet entered into the vision of the heavenlies—he could look past the curtain, past the holy of holies and into the sanctuary in heaven. The king was dead; but Isaiah saw the King! Kings come and go; but in a theocracy the LORD reigns eternally from heaven. He is the One whom we must please. He is the One who cleanses from sin, or strikes with judicial blindness those who persist in rebellion. He is the Holy One of Israel, and those who believe in Him will be the remnant, the holy seed, the future of the promise. The impact of this vision was overwhelming! In seeing the LORD of glory, the prophet saw himself, and the nation. As with Moses on Mount Sinai, Job hearing God from the whirlwind, Paul on the road to Damascus, or John on the Isle of Patmos, the young seer was changed forever with this vision. Introduction: Exegetical Expositional Process I shall use this passage to work through the exegetical expositional method, at least in survey form. You will get a better idea of how some of the steps fit together. For more explanation of the method, and examples, see my commentary on Genesis, Creation and Blessing, published by Baker Book House. Also the same method is used throughout the Book of Leviticus in my forthcoming commentary Holiness to the LORD (due out by June, 2002).. A Close Reading of the Text The first thing to do is verify the exact wording of the text that you think is the best rendering into English. Without Hebrew you are at a decided disadvantage—you have to trust the work of others more than you might wish to do. Select one good modern translation as your working base and then choose two more to work through line by line to compare translations. Where they are merely switching synonyms or stylistic arrangements you need not pause; but where the ideas are different, note them. Then, as you study the passage, decide which is the best (not which you like best) and change this base text accordingly. Observe: In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the LORD seated on a throne, high and exalted, and the train of his robe filled the temple. Above Him were seraphim, each with six wings: with two they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying; and they were calling to one another, “Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of Hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory.” At the sound of their voices the doorposts and thresholds shook, and the temple was filled with smoke. “Woe to me,” I cried. “I am ruined.” “I am a man of unclean lips and I live among a people of unclean lips, for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of Hosts.” Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a live coal in his hand he had taken off the altar with tongs; with it he touched my mouth and said, “See, this has touched your lips, your guilt is taken away, your sin atoned for.” Then I heard the voice of the LORD, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here am I, send me.” He said, “Go and tell this people: `Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” Then I said, “For how long, O LORD?” he answered: “Until the cities lie ruined and without inhabitant, until the houses are left deserted and the fields ruined and ravaged, until the LORD has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken. And though a tenth remains in the land, it will again be laid waste. But as the terebinth and oak leave stumps when they are cut down, so the holy seed will be the stump in the land.” A Preliminary Analysis of the Structure As you go through the passage several times, watch for structural markers and subject matter changes. Begin by jotting a word or two description in the margin and bracketing off the sections. In narrative you will have to watch for clauses that advance the narrative as opposed to subordinate and descriptive clauses. In poetry you have to label each line of poetry and then group the similar ideas. Some of the commentaries may help you, but be sure to be ready to challenge their arrangements. I have already done some of this in the above translation layout. Already the development of the passage begins to come clear. The first four verses describe the revelation of the LORD in glory. Verses 5-7 describe the response of the prophet to the vision and the remedy for that response. Then, beginning with verse 8 we have the dedication of the prophet to ministry with the instruction about what he should say. As more and more exegesis is done in the passage, the wording of the points in the exegetical outline can be refined. But at the outset this preliminary wording can help express the contents of the sections. Now, as I study through the passage for the meanings of words and for the figures of speech, I will be able to sharpen the focus of my rough divisions and write an exegetical outline. A Determination of the Meanings of the Words As you work through passages you will begin to discover that there are key theological words that must be explained, or difficult and problematic words that need solving, or basic words along the way that are unclear but not that crucial to your exposition. List the words in these groups, prioritize them, and then do as much research on them as time permits. The more word studies that you do, the less you will have to do because they keep repeating; and the more that you do the easier they become. In Isaiah 6 there are several words that need to be clearly understood by the expositor. Of primary interest will be the words qadosh, “holy” (both in the trisagion and in “holy seed”); kabod, “glory”; tame’, “unclean”; `awon, “iniquity/guilt”; and kipper, “atone, expiate.” Of additional interest for rhetorical purposes would be the words mille’, “fill”; shama`, “hear”; and shalakh, “send.” In the process of studying you will also have to define the words such as “Lord,” “king,” “seraphim,” “temple,” and the like. But, as already stated, since the revelation of the glory and holiness of the LORD are basic to the cleansing and the call, I would make these my focus. You will have to make use of whatever resources are available to you; a good word study book or two would be most helpful, provided you can use them and find the discussions of the critical Hebrew terms. An Analysis of the Poetics of the Passage Now you must determine which words are figures of speech, what the figures are, and what the meanings of those figurative uses of those words should be. With practice you will do this rather quickly—off the top of your head. But here at the beginning you will have to think them through carefully. It will be like trying to get your car dug out of a snow drift—sooner or later you either get your car dug out or the snow melts! That was an extended simile by the way. You should even classify idioms in a passage, because people do not know what they mean—they were originally figures of speech that became common expressions. To say something is “idiomatic” does not help clarify the meaning. One of the values of going through this process—even if you do not get the correct figure of speech—is that you are forcing yourself to think more about the words and their meanings. For Isaiah 6, which does not have as many figures of speech as other Isaianic oracles, the following words would have to be explained. See how you can do with this list (interpreting in the context, of course): “I saw the LORD seated upon a throne” “and the train of his robe filled the temple” “and with two [wings] they covered their feet” “Yahweh of armies” “the whole earth is full of His glory” “Woe to me” “I am a man of unclean lips” “with it he touched my mouth” “Whom shall I send?” “Be ever hearing but never understanding” “Make the heart of this people calloused” “see with their eyes and hear with their ears” “But as the terebinth and the oak leave stumps” “the holy seed” “will be the stump in the land” Writing the Exegetical Outline and Summary Now we probably have enough information to refine the wording of an exegetical outline. It will be written in full sentences that are descriptive of the content of the passage. Do not spend an inordinate amount of time here; you are simply trying to write clear sentences in which you express your understanding of the verses. But do not whip (figure!) over it too fast or write things that are too general. And do not leave the figures of speech in the outline, unless they are easily and readily understood. And for you perfectionists, do not make the outline twice as long as the passage. I. Revelation: When the king died Isaiah saw the LORD reigning in glory, being attended by the angelic praise of His sublime presence, and filling the temple with the evidence of His majesty (1-4). A. Historical reference: The revelation occurred when the king died (1a). B. The prophet was allowed to see into the heavenly sanctuary (1b-4): LISTNUM 1 l 3 s 1 He saw the LORD reigning from on high with all His glory. LISTNUM 1 l 3 The angels attending Him covered themselves while flying and crying out their message: LISTNUM 1 l 4 They proclaimed that the LORD was incomparable. LISTNUM 1 l 4 They announced that His presence and His importance filled the whole earth. LISTNUM 1 l 4 The temple was shaken to its doorposts and filled with smoke at their voices. II. Sanctification: When Isaiah acknowledged his sinful condition in the presence of the LORD he was forgiven immediately (5-7). A. Isaiah confessed his unworthy condition before the LORD and bewailed his lamentable state (5). 1. He lamented his ruin because what he said was common and base. 2. He only realized his sinful condition when he saw the King, the LORD who has all powers at His disposal. B. One of the seraphim intervened directly to take away his guilt and to remove his sin (7). III. Dedication: When Isaiah heard the call of the LORD to go, he immediately obeyed and was commissioned to deliver a message of judgment (8-13). A. Isaiah heard the voice of the LORD prodding him to take the message to the nation (8a). B. Isaiah immediately obeyed the call (8b). C. Isaiah was given a message of judgment (8c-13). 1. God told him to declare a message that people would not believe because they were spiritually blind. 2. God told him to do this until judgment was complete, until nothing was left in the land. LISTNUM 1 l 3 God encouraged him that there would be a remnant of righteous believers that would remain. As you write the summary statement you will have to decide which part of the passage is to receive the primary focus—and become the independent clause of your statement. This is critical, for your exposition and application will center on this. It could differ depending on the audience and occasion of the message; but usually it will be what the author intended. Messages could take different views on this and still be exegetically sound, as long as the context governs the interpretation. Start by writing the main points together: (I) When the king died Isaiah saw the LORD reigning in glory, being attended by the angelic praise of His sublime presence, and filling the temple with the evidence of His majesty. (II) When Isaiah acknowledged his sinful condition in the presence of the LORD, he was forgiven immediately. (III) When Isaiah heard the call of the LORD to go, he immediately obeyed and was commissioned to deliver a message of judgment. Now we need to work on this. Start by editing the sentences so that they are concise. Then, decide what the independent clause will be, and how the others relate to it. Now the summary of the passage might look like this: When Isaiah saw the LORD reigning in glory, being attended by angelic praise of His majesty and shaking the temple with His presence, he acknowledged his sinful condition, received the forgiveness of sins, and obeyed the call of the LORD to deliver a message of judgment. At this point in my approach I made Isaiah the subject of the sentence because it is often easier to make the transition to the exposition and application with the focus on the human. That is not to say that the revelation section is less important. It is most important, since it begins the chain reaction: revelation leads to awareness of sin, awareness leads to confession, confession brings cleansing, cleansing enables hearing, and the hearing leads to the commission. There would be no response of Isaiah if there had been no revelation. But in summarizing the contents of the passage I chose to subordinate the first section and focus more on what resulted from it. I might reword this in the expositional section, but that would depend on my purpose in the sermon. Formulating the Theological Idea Working with the summary statement just written, and with a knowledge of the passage in mind, I now condense the ideas and edit the sentence to produce a propositional theological statement that is biblically sound and true from age to age. This step will be easier in the Psalms and the Prophets than in Narrative, Law, or Wisdom literature, because the material is obviously devotional or sermonic, and the points made pretty much universal in their scope. The setting might be different, but the ideas standard—faith, prayer, obedience, confession, and the like. This theological summary should capture the main motifs of the passage; and it must be worded in a way that is true to the original setting and true to the current audience. To do this it is helpful to substitute more general words for the specific (that is, moving up the ladder of abstraction but staying in the categories): “believers” or “covenant people” instead of “Israel”; “pagans” or “unbelievers” instead of “Assyrians”; “worship” in place of “festivals in Jerusalem” or “making sacrifices,” and so on. There may be other theological points that surface for individual verses or sections along the way, incidental to the main point; these can be brought in too. But the theology you are trying to state should cover the whole passage. It may be that the theological statement may be the same as the homiletic or expository statement. That is fine, because it is the timeless truth, the theology, that must be preached. But I have found that a sermon idea that is more condensed and worded rhetorically, in a memorable way, is far more affective. Of course, understand that we are not reducing the sermon to one sentence. We still expound the whole passage. But the sermon idea enables us to keep our focus on the unity of the passage and the purpose of the message—how it all fits together and where it is going. As is clear by now, the main theological motifs of this passage are the revelation of the sovereign majesty of the holy Lord with all the attending circumstances, the confession and cleansing of the prophet’s sinful condition, and the inspiring and commissioning of the prophet to proclaim the LORD’s message. If I word these in the form a theological statement, it might read something like this: When people perceive the revelation of the LORD’s sovereign majesty in glory they become convicted over their sinful condition; when they acknowledge their sin, they find cleansing; and when they are sanctified, they respond obediently to the call of God. I could use this as a sermon idea because it is a sentence that captures the movement of the passage. But if I do not, at least I have expressed theologically the teaching of the passage. Developing the Expository Idea and Outline The procedure to be followed now for the sermon idea and the main points of the exposition (and sub-points if possible) is simply a continuation of the editing and shortening. For the main idea I can keep the theological statement, unless it is too long and cumbersome. Here I would find it rhetorically better to make it more concise and direct: The revelation of the Lord in glory transforms the lives of God’s servants and inspires them for service. The exposition will “flesh” this out so that each section of the passage reflected here will be fully explained and related. Having written the summary and the theology, it is easy for me to explain the text. But this point keeps me focused. Now I take the main points of the exegetical outline and go through the same process of editing, condensing, and abstracting, to get expository wording. My fuller exegetical and theological statements will come in handy as I get into the exposition and wish to explain the sections. Here again I want to make the points positive, powerful, and precise; but I also want to stay tied to the text—it is the message of the text, not my message loosely connected to the text, that is the substance of what I must say. This is exegetical exposition. You probably will have New Testament correlations, or systematic theology correlations, already in mind by now. You can keep them close at hand while working on the wording of the message, but be careful not to read that material into the text, or make your outline a New Testament outline (“Jesus died for our sins” is not the best way to express the sermon point that Isaiah is making when he is cleansed with coals from the altar, even though ultimately, theologically, that would be true). For the exposition of Isaiah 6 these points are workable for exposition—short, easy to understand and remember, and theologically accurate. Others are also workable, but these will illustrate the difference between the exegetical outline (above) and an expositional outline. They are: I. The revelation of the glory of the Lord uncovers sinfulness. II. The acknowledgment of sinfulness brings forgiveness. III. The removal of sin inspires obedience to God’s call. However the points are worded, they must be expressed clearly in the oral presentation. People need to know where you are in the exposition, and what you are saying about those particular verses. The points and the transitions must be clear. Correlation of Scripture If you have not done so before, you now need to find other passages that teach the same theology, whether in the Old Testament or New. But you always want to include a New Testament text to show that the theology is timeless. You may not find one that does all that this passage does; you may need to join a couple to cover the different sections. But do not use a large number of passages, unless you are correlating them step by step along the way. By bringing New Testament texts from the epistles to bear on your passage, you are safe-guarding that your theology is correct. It may also be wise to make sure that your theological ideas are correct and correctly stated—you may need to check good systematic theologies. With Isaiah 6 we shall not find many passages that are on the same level. This is a rather dramatic event—not a normal vision (if we may speak of visions as normal). This parallels Moses on Mt. Sinai speaking to God face to face, Paul being caught up into the third heaven, and John seeing the risen Christ on the Isle of Patmos. So it will be important to say that while it is possible God could let one of us see this heavenly scene, it is not very likely—it never was normative. So we shall have to look for “lesser” parallels—but even saying that is risky, because I do not want to minimize any revelation. One of the best passages, however, is 2 Corinthians 3 and 4. It is about Paul’s ministry, how he was able to endure a difficult ministry with all kinds of troubles and persecutions. At the heart of it is his statement that when we see Christ in the Word of God, as in a mirror, we are transformed into that same glory, by the power of the Spirit. Therefore we will be inspired to obey the call to minister, keeping our eyes on eternal things, the weight of glory, and not on temporal things. That works well for most of it, but does not express much of the forgiveness of sin. For that I would relate other passages where the response to revelation is conviction of sin, whether Moses, Job, the disciples, or others. I am using revelation in a specific sense here. I could broaden it to mean Scripture, but it seems better in correlation to talk about those portions of Scripture that reveal the risen Christ, or the Lord in glory. If you are following a lectionary for Scriptures for a service there will be several passages grouped together for that particular day. Since Prayer Books do this, it is helpful to show the congregation how they relate, if they do. I personally do not try to construct a sermon using all the passages as if they were a unit. To me that runs contrary to the basics of exegesis. Nor do I try to deliver three short homilies in sequence to cover the passages. There is not the time to prepare or deliver three. What I will do is preach on one of them—a contextual, exegetical exposition. Where the other passages have clear links, I will allude to them or incorporate them incidentally and significantly. Writing an Effective Conclusion Two errors exist with regard to conclusions: they are ignored, or they go on forever (that was a hyperbole by the way). The conclusion may have a brief summary of the passage and a rehearsal of where you have been. This may not be necessary if it was all very clear and interesting. Keep it short and powerful. But it must have precise applications. This step is sometimes very difficult, and often is the undoing of an otherwise good message. Be able to say what you want people to know and to believe as a result of this message; and be able to state what they should do. Do not make long lists—just a couple of things in each area. Do not simply apply the material mentally; words for “thinking, recalling, realizing, remembering” and the like are not as good as using words for “doing” in the applications, even though a good number of messages leave it there. For Isaiah 6 I could certainly include instructions to spend time in studying the Scriptures that portray the glorious Christ, to respond with conviction and humility to the revelation of God (never suppress the proper response to God’s revelation) to confess sinfulness and maintain an ongoing sanctification, and then to obey the commands of God to proclaim Him, whether the message is popular or not. Writing an Effective Introduction Now I am ready to write the introduction, because I know where I am going. The introduction must capture the attention of the audience, create or uncover a need in them that this passage will address, and make them want to listen. Do not, I repeat, do not start out with the historical background or a description of the events of the passage. That is one of the most ineffective ways to begin. And do not take up two or three minutes explaining that if you had more time you could do a better job. Once again, introductions like conclusions do not need to be long; shorter ones are most effective—if they are powerful and clear. Of course, if they are not powerful or clear, long ones are merely painful. Drafting the Exposition I would think writing a draft of the sermon will be most helpful for you to gauge where you are and how much time you can devote to the different things that need to be said. Working through wording on paper also helps you be able to say things more readily when speaking. But I do not think you should write a draft in order to read it from the pulpit. That is one of the worst things you could do in preaching or teaching—unless you have had lots of training in script writing and public reading (which means you will have memorized most of it anyway). Personally, I would much rather hear direct speaking than reading, even if it means some of the things that were intended did not get said. The direct approach of speaking will mean that what you do say is easier to understand and retain. Exposition After you have spent some time working through the passage you should have plenty of ideas in mind—more than can fit in one Bible class or sermon! The following notes are meant to supplement the discussion and reinforce the main ideas. I have inserted my expository outline here, using topical headings before each main point for an easy overview: Revelation, Sanctification, Dedication, and Inspiration. You will notice that I decided to make a fourth point to cover the subject matter of message. It could have been left under the third point, but this seems also to work well. I. Revelation: The revelation of the glory of the LORD uncovers sinfulness (6:1-5) A. The LORD reveals His glory (1-4). Verse 1 begins the report of the heavenly vision in the year that King Uzziah died. Several points from the Hebrew text need to be noted here. The first would be the use of the verb “saw” (wa’er’eh from ra’ah); this is not the word for the “seer” of visions, but the ordinary word “to see” or look at something. This suggests Isaiah is very much awake and physically observing this sight. The object of the sight is “the Lord”—’adonay, and not the personal name Yahweh (which would be rendered “LORD”). The term signifies lord or master, the sovereign. The term “sitting” (yoshevfrom yashav) when used of God is an anthropomorphism; it means “rule,” that is, sit enthroned above. The word “throne” is actually used here; in other passages it must be understood. The exalted nature of the Lord is presented to us with “high” (ram from rum) and “lifted up” (wenissa’ from nasa’). The physical description of His location, part of the anthropomorphic vision, is also symbolic of His nature as the “Highest”—an expression often used in the Bible for absolute sovereignty. The symbol of sovereignty, “his train,” completely fills the temple. Such is the dominance of the Lord of Glory. Verse 2 introduces the angels. The term for angels in this order is seraphim (from saraph, “to burn”—”are they not all flames of fire?”). These are attending (literally, “standing about/over him”) the LORD as ministering servants. Their description focuses on their wings (Hebrew uses a distributive construction: “six wings, six wings to [each] one); each angel had six wings. Two covered the angel’s face—such is the nature of God that even angels blush to look at Him—two covered their bodily parts (probably a euphemism, feet meaning their central body), and with two they flew. The vision is similar to Ezekiel’s on Ezekiel 1. Verse 3 reports what they cried continually to one another: “Holy, holy, holy is Yahweh of Armies; the whole earth is full of His glory!” This line needs a lot of attention. It is the central and turning point of the passage (as well as a prominent part in liturgy). The word for “holy” is qadosh (s.v. qadash). A study of this word shows that it means “distinct, unique, set apart.” It does not mean “righteous”; but we use the word “righteous as well as all the other attributes to explain what holy means (i.e., in what way is God distinct from us, from angels, from pagan gods?). The description of God as holy is a major theme in the Book of Isaiah. If I may simplify it, it means there is no one like the LORD in the universe. The threefold use of the term is a Hebrew way of expressing the superlative degree—He is incomparably holy. This trisagion (as it is called, Greek for thrice holy) may harmonize with the later and full revelation of the tri-unity of the Godhead (see Isa. 48:12ff.); but it does not in itself teach the trinity. The expression “Yahweh of Armies” must be understood. The armies are all armies—earthly or heavenly. They are all at His disposal. The use of this epithet usually introduces a judgment theme. The other key word in here is “glory” (kavod from kavad). The basic idea of this word has to do with “weight, being heavy”; metaphorically this becomes “be important.” To describe God as glorious, if I may run the risk of oversimplification again, means that He is the most important person in the universe. The physical manifestation of His presence, the “glory of the LORD,” is metonymical for Him Himself. The words of the angels assert that the whole earth is filled with the evidence that Yahweh is the sovereign God of the universe. Isaiah’s vision concludes with the note in verse 4 of the effects of the Presence—the place shook, and was filled with smoke. This imagery is drawn from Mount Sinai and the Sanctuary. B. The vision convicts God’s servant of sin (5). Verse 5 gives the typical response of one who sees such a scene—struck with the knowledge of one’s own sinfulness. “Woe is me.” Hebrew “woe” (‘oy) is a wail of lamentation. It is an expression that cries out of distress, that all is lost, that grief will overtake; there is nothing that can be done. The key word in here is “unclean” (tame’). The better that you know the Book of Leviticus the better you will understand this. It comes from the temple liturgy and ritual. To be “unclean” need not mean “sinful”; but it does mean off limits, out of bounds, unacceptable in the presence of God because of physical, earthy nature and contaminations. The focus is on the lips (here a metonymy of cause)—what he talks about is perhaps good, clean, and normal; but it is not as holy as the angels’ speech was. Question: What will we talk about in the presence of the LORD? How will our conversations change? The Bible has so much to say about speech, how it is a window to the heart. Isaiah, and the nation, are not fit to enter the Presence of the LORD—their speech betrays greater problems. This is a critical section. Isaiah is probably the finest in the land. People often compare themselves with others and come out looking fine. The standard, however, is the glory of the LORD. There is an old saying: If you have never caught sight (literally or figuratively) of the Sublime, you have never really seen yourself. II. Sanctification: The acknowledgment of sinfulness brings complete forgiveness (6:6,7). The next stage in the preparation of God’s servant is sanctification, sanctification that was inspired by the vision of the glory of the LORD. What is described in verses 6 and 7 is a symbolic act; it signifies that the sin was removed. We know this is symbolic because never in the sanctuary was sin removed by searing the lips with a coal from the altar. What reality there was to this we may only surmise—it is unlikely that an angel actually took a coal and touched his lips. This is a heavenly scene and the heavenly correspondent to the coals is meant; the coals were the instrument of consuming the sacrifices that became the sin offering. The point is that the prophet was cleansed by direct divine intervention. The focus is on the lips because they represented the sinfulness of the prophet. The prophet was cleansed; the people, however, had yet to hear the word, confess, and be cleansed. The meaning of this act is clear from the end of verse 7: “your iniquity has been removed, your sin atoned.” The term “iniquity” here probably includes all three of the categories of meaning it has—sin, guilt, and the punishment for the sin. The critical word to define here is “atoned” (tekuppar from kipper). A careful study of this word and its usage will reveal the meanings of “expiate, pacify, atone.” There is a homonym—exactly the same spelling of the root—that means “cover over.” Unfortunately, in many studies and many sermons the two have not been kept as separate words, and the idea that atonement only covers over and does not expiate has become popular. No. The sins were removed; the person was forgiven. The point here is that Isaiah’s sins were forgiven; God will not bring them up again. (The only thing that Old Testament believers did not know, and could not know, was who would ultimately pay for these sins, since they repeated sacrifices. But God knew, and on the basis of that perfect sacrifice [which, by the way, was from before the foundation of the world] He could guarantee forgiveness. They had His word on it). III. Dedication: The removal of sin enables obedience to the call of God (6:8). Verse 8 records the commission of the prophet in response to the Word of God. The first verb is fraught with significance: “Then I heard” (wa’eshma` from shama`). The conjunction is a “waw consecutive” that expresses the sequence: this hearing follows the preceding sanctification almost with a “so that” or “and then.” A valid point can be made that one cannot “hear” the call of God until there is sanctification. Once one is forgiven and walking with Him, one can hear His voice through His word. One has to be on speaking terms with God. The parallelism of the word of the Lord (not LORD) is forceful: “Whom shall I send, and who shall go for us?” The call passages in the Bible all use the verb “send”; it expresses divine authentication and enablement for the mission, usually accompanied by the divine Presence. Unless the Lord sends, one cannot go with any authority. For discussions of “for us” you can go back to the several treatments in the commentaries, and back to Genesis. It has been interpreted to mean the Lord and the angels, which is possible; it has also been taken as a plural of majesty for the Godhead that allows for the later full revelation of the nature of God. Isaiah’s response? “Here am I, send me.” You probably will not have the time to do much with this, since the other parts are so important. And that is fine since this is easily understood. But “here am I” is a bold break-through response: “Look—me!” And then the verb is repeated, “send me.” Not “I will go.” That would be presumptuous. But “send me,” an imperative, is a request for the divine authority that goes with the mission. IV. Inspiration: Obedience to God’s call will proclaim the Word of God (6:9-13). The message in these last few verses is a message of judgment. You will have to take a little time to show that God warns sinners of judgment. He does this in order that they will repent and become part of the “remnant”—the holy seed (rather than the “seed of evil-doers” of 1:4). This generation had persisted in sin for so long that God was going to judge them. And he will begin to do this by hardening their hearts at the hearing of the Word of the LORD, just as He did Pharaoh of old. The theology of this is heavy: if people live under the influence of the Scriptures and continue to reject its message, Paul says that God gives them up. There is a point of judicial rejection. We do not know when that is, so we can not say; we keep on preaching. Isaiah was told in his case. And then it was the actual preaching of the Word of God that hardened them even more. We can see that even today when the Word offends even the ones who appear “religious.” Lancelot Andrewes said it very well: “It is not our task to tell people what they want to hear; we must tell them what in some sad future time they would wish they had heard.” Isaiah is not happy about this; it is much nicer to have a positive message. But the positive message is meaningless if there are no “teeth” in it. Both in the prophets and in the ministry of Jesus there is the same refrain, “repent or perish.” The denial of judgment, the rejection of the idea of Jesus’ death being atonement, begins with the denial of sin and evil. Modern theologies cannot explain evil, let alone resolve it. Isaiah had to preach this until all the cities were laid waste and the judgment complete. The preaching of it was a call for repentance. Join the message of chapter 1 with this call and you can see that Isaiah 1:18 is a big part of the warning oracle. Jonah knew this; he knew that the LORD was compassionate and merciful, whereas he—Jonah—wanted the sinners wiped out. The end of this passage refers to the “holy seed” (zera’ qodesh); the term “seed” is a hypocatastasis for people, here characterized by holiness. Terms like “seed” and “generation” are used this way to describe a segment of the population. This “seed” is distinct (holy) from the rest of the population. It is only a remnant. The Bible often uses the (implied) metaphor of the tree for the nation or the kingdom of God. Israel was the tree; but because it bore no fruit, it was cut down (exiled). There was only a stump left—the righteous believers who kept the covenant alive. Isaiah will develop this image further by showing that a small branch, a tender shoot, will grow out of the stump, and become a great king, and restore the nation to its glorious heritage. Conclusion Isaiah was thus commissioned to go and preach the Word of the LORD to the nation, a complete message that would not overlook sin, hardness of heart, judgment and sorrow, but a message that would hold out the hope of glory. And before the prophet could preach this, he had to experience it. So I have worded my main expository idea of the passage: The revelation of the Lord in glory transforms the lives of God’s servants and inspires them for service. Of course the applications now have to be made. Naturally, we want to say people need to be sanctified and hear the Word of the LORD for He might be calling them to service. But we have to go back to the revelation to begin the applications. One cannot go and have a look at the LORD in glory; instead today we have the revelation of it in Scripture, many times over. My first application would be that one should meditate on those passage frequently, and that vision of the glory of the LORD, the risen Christ, will convict and inspire. The correlation in 2 Corinthians 3 and 4 helps us here. In chapter 3 Paul says that we (believers) look into the Scriptures as in a mirror and behold the glory of the Lord. But since it is a mirror it reflects and so we are changed into that glory (this idea could cover the point of sanctification in Isaiah 6). Then, in chapter 4 he lists all the hardships of the ministry, but concludes that focusing on the eternal weight of glory enables him (and us) to endure. Growing out of this is the second application: when the Word of the LORD convicts us, we must not cloak our sin but confess it so that we may be open to His will. Sanctification must be the response of meditation in Christ, otherwise we harden out hearts. A third application might be that we are His servants. We must be willing to go where He sends, and to speak what He wants us to speak. It may not be popular; it may not be what we would like to say. But we are to proclaim the Word of the LORD. References Driver, G. R. “Isaiah 6:1, “His Train Filled the Temple.” In Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright. Edited by Hans Goedicke. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Pp. 87-96. Key, Andrew F. “The Magical Background of Isaiah 6:9-13.” JBL 86 (1967):198-204. Knierim, Rolf. “The Vocation of Isaiah.” VT 18 (1968):47-68. Liebreich, Leon J. “The Position of Chapter Six in the Book of Isaiah.” HUCA 25 (1954):37-40. Love, Julian Price. “The Call of Isaiah: An Exposition of Isaiah 6.” Interpretation 11 (1957):282-296. Whitley, C. F. “The Call and Mission of Isaiah.” JNES 18 (1959):38-48. Israel’s Ungrateful Rebellion and Yahweh’s Gracious Invitation Isaiah 1:1-31 Introduction The first chapter of the book serves as a general introduction to all the writings in the collection, including it in most of the themes of the book. The chapter falls into four sections: the indictment of Israel’s sin, the rejection of their hypocritical attempt at reconciliation, the gracious invitation of Yahweh, and a lament over the state of the nation. The first three sections form a natural unit with a culminating invitation; I would use them as the substance of the message. The fourth section could be a fourth point, or an epilogue, or it could be alluded to and drawn in while discussing the first point (this works pretty well homiletically). Several things in general need to be made clear about this passage. First, the literary form and vocabulary of the passage is that of a legal context. God is bringing a formal indictment against the nation. The passage invites comparison with other legal texts (especially the so-called rib passages, Hebrew rib [pronounced reev] is a legal dispute or lawsuit). Second, the setting of the passage appears to be a festal gathering when all the people assembled in the area of the Sanctuary to pray to God to protect them from their invading enemies who are closing in on them. We may go so far as to suggest that this gathering was the Feast of Tabernacles, for the passage mentions “booths” (sukkot), the oil of the fall harvest, and begins with a reflection on the way that the Book of Deuteronomy ends—a book that was to be read at the Feast of Tabernacles. At such an assembly the people would look for words of comfort from a prophet near the end of the services, but this was not what they got—rather, a stern rebuke and call for repentance. Third, the historical setting seems to be the invasion of Sennacherib of Assyria. The events take place in the last part of the eighth century, B.C. Samaria was destroyed in 722 by Sargon and Shalmaneser. Sennacherib invaded the land several times, and according to his account of the third campaign he destroyed 46 cities, carried off 200,000 people from Judah, imposed a heavy tribute on the land, and locked up Hezekiah in the city of Jerusalem like a bird in the cage. This passage certainly offers a picture of such devastation in the land of Judah. So the event may have been the invasion of 701 B.C., or thereabouts, by Sennacherib of Assyria. Isaiah will preach that the nation deserved this catastrophe because of its sin. Whenever we study this kind of material we must keep in mind the spiritual situation, otherwise our applications will be off. Israel was a theocracy, the “people of God” as they were called; the whole nation, whether believers or unbelievers, were under the Law of Moses and accountable to it. In the Law there were sections of blessings and cursings that were held out to the people. If there was sufficient sin in the nation, sin persisted in collectively, then the nation would be destroyed and sent off into exile; if there was continued obedience by a sufficient number, then the blessing of God would be poured out on them. We may use the analogy of Sodom and Gomorrah (for Isaiah does). If there had been ten righteous men—sufficient to have a congregation or at least a religious community with a witness—then the cities would have been spared. As it was, there were only a few believers and they were hardly an influence over anyone. So the cities were destroyed. As long as a faithful remnant existed, Isaiah would see hope for the blessing of God. Please note, the audience of Isaiah would be made up of true believers who walked with God (and who would then have to suffer because of the sins of others), true believers who were not walking with God (and therefore God’s actions to them would be disciplinary), unbelievers who pretended to be righteous and looked pious on the surface (God’s actions to them would be judgment if they did not repent), and unbelievers who left no doubt about their idolatry and sin and had no intention of repenting (if they did not repent, God would purge them from the nation). I suggest that often you will have all four types in most congregations or groups when you speak; so how should the message be directed? We cannot treat them all the same. So we make separate applications: the Babylonian captivity was a catastrophe: to the unbeliever it was divine judgment that purged them from the earth and began their eternal fate; to the sinful believer it was divine discipline meant to bring them to their knees (if they remained alive); to the believers who had not done anything to warrant this, it was a call to suffer on behalf of others. This chapter is a call for repentance to all who needed to repent. That would include the last three groups, but probably be focused on the last two mostly, for it is speaking of the reprobate and the hypocrite. Now if you are teaching this passage to a modern congregation made up of fairly devout evangelical Christians, you will have to adjust your application, for they are not reprobates that God is going to purge from the nation. Your message may simply be that we should be proclaiming to the world what Isaiah has proclaimed in this chapter. Or, if you like, you might focus on obedience (at the end of the chapter) as evidence of repentance and as condition for further blessing. But if you still wished to call for repentance, you would probably say that this passage warns even us as to the results of sins persisted in or cumulatively held, and of the worthless nature of hypocritical worship. It can be a call for repentance, but if the audience is a group of covenant members, true believers, the “or else” part of your call for repentance will be different than if they are not believers at all. Their salvation may not be in jeopardy, but their service to and fellowship with God will be. A believer who repents of sin restores a relationship with his or her God; an unbeliever who repents and avails himself or herself of the grace of God finds forgiveness and passes from death to life. In other words, we must harmonize our exegetical ideas with general theology—the covenant is an eternal covenant, but participation in it requires faith and obedience. Once a person enters covenant with God, that relationship is secure. The problem of sin takes a different approach than with the non-covenant member. So when you read Isaiah and he addresses the nation or the people of God, do not assume he means by that they are all true believers. Most were not. And when you make your applications from such a passage, you will have to specify how the text is to be applied to different types today. In fact, this kind of precision with exegesis and theology and application is just what this experience in Isaiah will require. In the following discussion of Isaiah 1 I have included my exegetical outline. Note that it is written in historically descriptive sentences that summarize the contents of the verses. In the expositional section I shall demonstrate how I would turn them into expository points. Writing the exegetical outline is important for two reasons: (1) it forces you to stay tied to the text, so that in forming your expository points you will reflect these very ideas; and (2) when you are preaching or teaching a passage, as you turn to the text after introducing your expository point you can use a summary statement like this to begin your comments or analysis of the section. If you do develop exegetical syntheses, no matter how rough, the development of expository points is much easier. Most teachers and study leaders skip this step as unnecessary, and that is a pity because of all the steps it helps you to put in your own words what the section is saying, and that brings clarity to any Bible study. Here is the exegetical outline of Isaiah 1:2-20 (the first three sections only since they are the critical part of the theology of the chapter). I. The Indictment: The prophet announces that Israel’s ungrateful rebellion against the LORD has pervaded the nation and brought painful ruin to the land (2-9). A. God summons the nation to answer for its sins (2a). B. God charges the nation with complete sinfulness (2b-4). 1. They have ungratefully rebelled against the LORD who brought them into existence (2b,3). 2. They are completely sinful (4). C. God pleads with the nation to end the devastation in the land (5-8). 1. The prophet portrays Israel as a sick man who is completely ruined by sin (5,6). 2. The entire land has been devastated by an invasion (7,8). 3. Only God’s grace kept the nation from complete annihilation (9). II. The Wrong Remedy: The Sin of Israel has rendered their frantic attempts to worship and pray to God unacceptable and detestable to God (10-15). A. God calls Israel to attention again (10). B. God denounces Israel’s frantic attempts to approach Him for help (11-15). 1. Their sacrifices are purposeless and therefore displeasing to God (11). 2. Their assemblies and celebrations are vain and therefore repugnant to God (12-14). 3. Their hypocritical prayers remain unanswered (15). III. The Divine Solution: Those who turn from their wicked ways to learn to do what is right will find complete forgiveness and blessing from God (16-20). A. God calls the nation to turn away from evil and begin doing what is right, i.e., to show true repentance (16,17). 1. They must change their minds and their actions about evil (16). 2. They must learn to do what is right in society (17). B. God promises complete forgiveness for sin for those who will accept His offer to settle the dispute (18). C. God promises blessing for obedience and punishment for disobedience (19-20). Now that we have a workable exegetical outline, the next thing to do is to write a summary of the whole passage in one good sentence. This forces us to condense the ideas in a way that can be easily summarized, but it also forces us to decide where the center of the message will be. Here I will take the third section as the main focus; therefore, the wording of the other two parts will be as subordinate clauses. I simply take the three Roman numeral points, write them together as a sentence, and condense. My exegetical summary of 1:2-20 is as follows: Having announced the painful ruin that Israel’s sinfulness has brought, and having rejected the hypocritical worship they frantically tried to offer, the LORD offers to all who will truly repent complete forgiveness for sins and blessing for obedience. Now, it is a fairly simple step to take the summary and the exegetical points and transfer them into more useful expository points. This means they will be worded as timeless truths, and not historically descriptive statements. But the wording must be true to the original context as well as to our situation. So in the following discussion of the verses I have inserted a workable expository outline. I say workable because it can always be improved, or it may be worded differently depending on the situation—but it always must fit the original setting as well. Exposition I. Corrupting sinfulness leads to painful ruin (1:2-9). So you see, this kind of a point is not talking about people back there, but about a principle that still applies. And by wording it this way I have brought the modern audience in to hear what the prophet said to the ancient audience. I could leave in the catch-word “Indictment” but that will come out in the exposition anyway, since this is a legal dispute. My exposition will explain what their sinfulness and their ruin was, and then show in other times, including ours, the kind of sin and the kind of pain that must be remedied. A. Rebellion against God is ignorant and arrogant (2-4). The passage begins with God’s summons of the nation to judgment with an indictment against them for their ignorant and ungrateful rebellion against Him. In these verses there are a few things that need comment. Verse 2 is the call to judgment. Israel is accused, God is the Judge and the Plaintiff, and “heaven and earth” is witness. This last expression is a merism for the whole universe. Everything in creation will witness this. Compare Deuteronomy 32:1 as well as Psalm 50. The general statement at the outset is that they have “rebelled.” Pasa` is the critical word here; it warrants a word study because it seems to summarize the charge against them. It often describes a political or military rebellion. So it describes sin that is open aggression, wilful rebellion. It is, by the way, the same word David uses in his great confession of sin in Psalm 51. The contrast is with the beneficence of God who reared and nourished them as children (the figure of hypocatastasis is being used); the verbs gadal and romam could also convey “made great” and “exalted.” They were dependent; God had brought them up. But they rebelled. In addition to their sins we may add the sin of ingratitude as well. Verse 3 shows that their sin was ignorant. The parallelism of this quatrain is beautifully balanced: the two halves are antithetical, but the two parts in each half are loosely synonymous. The ox and the ass contrast with the people of God who do not “know” (yada’) or “consider” (bin). It is significant that the words “owner/creator” (qoneh) and “master” (ba’al) are juxtaposed with the animals, not the people, as if to say they have rejected their creator and lord (a fact to which all creation will witness). Verse 4 is the full catalog of the “rebellion” of Israel. I would note that there are here seven expressions for their sin, signifying how complete or all-consuming it was. The main words for sin are used here. “Sinful nation” uses hata’, missing the mark; “people laden with iniquity” uses ‘awon, the term for departing from the standard or turning aside (and including the other metonymically derived ideas of guilt and deserved punishment); “seed of evil-doers” makes use of the word ra’, the word that portrays the pain that sin causes; and then there is the expression “children who are corrupters,” the key word being shakhat, corrupting, ruining, destroying—a term used for God’s destruction of Sodom. The other three expressions are clear enough: they forsook Yahweh, they provoked the Holy One (qadosh, a critical term in Isaiah), and they have gone back, spiritually as well as politically and economically. Their sin was all-consuming and corrupting. Their various acts fit all the biblical descriptions of what sin involves. But in your exposition you will have to specify. The way to do that in this chapter is to look at the last part and see what Isaiah is telling them to do (such as, take care of the widow and the orphan); those will indicate what these general terms are getting at that they had not been doing. B. Rebellion against God brings complete ruin (5-8). Verses 5 and 6 give us a personification of the land as a beaten and bruised man. The reality of this description will be the devastation described in verses 7 and 8. I would not spend a great deal of time here, other than to explain what the verses mean. I would note, though, that there are again seven descriptions—an introductory clause and then wounds, bruises, sores, and then three negative descriptions of not being pressed, not being bound, and not mollified. It is a complete ruin. It is also worth pointing out that a word like “sick” (holi) again shows up in Isaiah 53 where the LORD removes infirmities vicariously. Verses 7 and 8 stress the theme of devastation (shamam used twice) at the hands of foreigners (zarim used twice). The effect of the invasion is expressed in three similes that describe the ruin left over: the villages are like a booth, a lodge, and a besieged city. C. Divine interventions prevents complete judgment (9). Verse 9 introduces the image of “Sodom and Gomorrah” into the oracle. The figure is simile; the effect of the simile is an allusion to Genesis 19 in which the cities of the plain were wiped off the face of the earth. God did not permit that for Jerusalem. See the historical books to understand why. II. Hypocritical worship compounds sinfulness (10-15). This section describes the frantic worship of people in crisis, but they are unrepentant people and so their efforts are hypocritical and therefore totally loathsome to God. In this section we learn that the sinners Isaiah has just described are actually present in the sanctuary trying to call on God for help. A. The address condemns the “worshipers” (10). In verse 10 Isaiah calls the leaders of the people of Israel “rulers of Sodom and Gomorrah.” The figure is hypocatastasis, making an implied comparison between the two. The Hebrews are no different. This chapter does not limit the sin of Sodom to social injustice, although that was part of their sin. All the terms in this chapter describe the people of Israel and the people of Sodom alike—they were corrupt and corrupting, self-indulgent and indifferent, perverting and perverse. Genesis 19 focuses on what manifestation such an attitude takes: if one’s quest is self-gratification, then the responsibility of righteousness is jettisoned for self-gratification. B. Hypocritical worship is completely rejected by God (11-15). Verse 11 affirms that their offerings are unprofitable. The threefold description is that they are useless (“What to me?”), have no purpose (“vain,” a term used in the Decalogue), and give God no pleasure. The rejection is cast in the form of a rhetorical question to begin with, an erotesis, the name for rhetorical questions. Verse 12 states that their very attendance in the service was not welcome. The verb “trample” (ramam) is literally “stampede”; “Who required you to stampede my courts?”—like a bunch of wild animals. “Stampede” is an implied comparison again; and the question is another erotesis. Verse 13 details the rituals they perform as hypocritical and therefore detested by God. Their minkhah is vain (shaw’, worthless, vain, to a false purpose); their incense (a metonymy of adjunct for prayer) is an abomination (to’ebah, off limits, a tabu); about their assemblies the text quotes the LORD as saying, “I cannot - “ and gives no completion for the sentence. Cannot what? The figure is aposiopesis, the sudden silence, sudden breaking off of the sentence because of intense emotions and frustrations. He concludes by saying it is all iniquity; here the word is ‘awen. But note that hypocritical worship is not merely worthless—it is iniquity. Verse 14 describes their feasts as wearying to God and hated by Him. The verb “hate” (sane’) includes both the ideas of rejecting and feeling dislike for something. To say “my soul” hates is to say this feeling and decision comes from deep down inside. It enhances the hatred. Verse 15 completes this section with a note that their prayers will not be answered. The four cola include two that are figurative and two that are literal. “Spread out your palms frantically” is the metonymy of adjunct; the reality is prayer. “Hide my eyes” is the anthropomorphic expression; will not answer is the reality. The reason? Their hands (metonymy of cause) are full of blood (metonymy of effect or adjunct). Their activities have destroyed other people and so their prayers and presence are unacceptable. Violent sin cannot be overlooked by fervent acts of ritual and worship; God will not tolerate hypocritical acts of ritual. III. Only genuine repentance brings complete forgiveness (16-20). These verses need less work in the exegetical studies than most of the preceding ones did, for they are rather clear, painfully clear to most readers. They make the offer of full forgiveness, but the offer is based on genuine repentance, that is, a change of attitude and action, turning from sin and learning to do good. Positive acts of righteousness are called for because they will indicate whether or not there is true repentance. Verses 16 and 17 give nine admonitions to the people. But they use parallelism and they include figurative and literal expressions, so the nine can be condensed: “wash you, make you clean” are taken together as the general summary for the repentance and forgiveness (“wash” is the hypocatastasis, and “make clean” is the metonymy drawing on Temple ritual from Leviticus); “put away the evil of your doings, cease doing evil, learn doing good” is the threefold call for the change of life that follows forgiveness (“good” is that which enhances, protects, and promotes life; it is the opposite of “evil” which brings pain and ruin to life); and the last four admonitions are specific calls for how to promote and protect life: “seek justice, relieve the oppressed, judge [vindicate] the fatherless, plead the cause of the widow.” Such instructions of championing justice in society were common in the ancient world, for they depicted both justice and mercy. These would be examples of a change toward righteousness. One thinks of various biblical examples, such as Zachaeus, who restored far more than he defrauded—that was evidence of true repentance. So these commands are clear; but you need to correlate other passages where they are mentioned, or where such acts of righteousness are also meant to display a change of heart. Verse 18 tells how this life-changing forgiveness will take place. God will change their lives if they truly repent and confess to Him. The verse is one of the most beautiful in all Scripture. We need to look at it closely: “Come now and let’s settle this dispute, says Yahweh, leku-na’ weniwwakehah yo’mer YHWH Though your sins be like scarlet, they shall be white as snow ‘im yihyu khata’ekem kasshanim kassheleg yalbinu “though they be red like crimson, they shall be like wool.” ‘im ya’dimu kattola’ katstsemer yihyu. The order of the verse reads literally like this: “though / they be / your sins / like scarlet / like snow / they shall be white; though / they be red / like crimson / like wool / they shall be. Here we have the repetition of two similes to stress the point being made. In addition, the word order makes the contrasts within these lines more glaring: the two nouns which form the contrasts meet in the middle, and the first and last cola use “they will be” while the second and third use the Hiphil forms of the verbs of color. The emotional and intellectual connotations of the words used are striking. The “scarlet” (shani) refers to the highly prized brilliant red color produced from the Kermococcus vermillio Planch to produce the famous red dye (Sanskrit krmi; Persian Kerema, kirm; Pahlevi kalmir; Hebrew karmil; and our “carmine” and “crimson.” See also Persian sakirlat and Latin scarlatum). There is great symbolism in the Bible for colors. In the Book of Revelation, for example, the Great Whore is in purple and scarlet while the Saints are in white. Why does Isaiah use red for sin? Dreschler suggested it meant bloodshed—a blood stained garment enwrapping the sinner. Delitzsch interpreted it as a fiery life that was selfish and passionate, a life characterized by wild tempestuous violence. These ideas may well have been in Isaiah’s mind. At least we may say that red signifies that which is most conspicuous and glaring. In contrast to the scarlet and crimson is the whiteness of wool and snow. Not only do these terms represent purity from the cleansing from sin, but they convey the sensations of softness and freshness. The emotional overtones of peace and tranquility offset those of violence and passion. Verses 19 and 20 conclude the call for change with the alternatives for their responses—blessings and curses. If they turn and obey they will “eat” the good of the land; if they refuse and rebel they will be “eaten” by the sword. The idea of eating is first literal, although it would be metonymical for eating and dwelling with the best that God gives; it is then figurative for death by the sword, a hypocatastasis. Conclusion Now that we have a good idea of the meaning of the message in the original setting, and have worked out the wording of the expository points, we must develop the entire exposition, determining what needs to be discussed and how much discussion on the important points is necessary. In adapting it to our modern situation, we do not want to leave the original context behind. The main theological ideas always must fit the original situation as well as our modern setting. So exact exegesis must be properly explained and correlated with the New Testament. It is important that you be able to state your theological idea in an effective expository affirmation—in one good sentence. This sentence will be drawn from your summary statement of the passage (joining the major points into a paragraph and condensing them to one sentence), but in the process must be turned into a clear statement. Why do this? It forces you to be focused in your message. It forces you to be contextual in your message. It forces you to be clear in your message. It forces you to decide what the main point (of the three) is and how the others are to be subordinated to it. For this passage something like this will work: Genuine repentance, and not hypocritical worship, brings God’s complete forgiveness for any and all sin. Now, as you speak you can keep the central point of the passage in sight and make sure everything contributes to that end. Note, even if you do not teach, you should be able after a Bible study to express what the passage is teaching in a clear and direct way. This skill will help you to become an articulate Christian. Correlation with other Scriptures and specific applications will now be more easily developed because you know what your passage is teaching. Now you can write a conclusion and an introduction to it, because you know what the chapter is all about, and how you want to use it. It will be fairly easy to correlate the New Testament with this passage, because it presents the basic doctrines. I could use a few clear teachings of Jesus here. For the first part on sin, I could use, “Unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish.” For the second part on worthless worship, “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me” (—straight out of Isaiah anyway). And for the third point, with a little definition I could use, “Come unto me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” My application would then specify what they should believe about sin, about the provision of grace, and about the futility of works of righteousness without forgiveness. What should they do? Repent (defined as turning away from evil and toward good) and seek God’s forgiveness. If I am speaking to a predominantly Christian group, I might have a different application, focusing on the good works that will bring blessing to those who have been forgiven. Titus 3:1-8 works very well here, for it explains that we were sinful as they, but we have been washed, we have been sanctified, and now must demonstrate our faith by good works of righteousness. All the major motifs of Isaiah 1 can be found in that passage. References Corney, R. W. “Isaiah 1:10.” VT 4 (1976):497-98. Culver, Robert Duncan. “Isaiah 1:18—Declaration, Exclamation, or Interrogation?” JETS 12 (1969):133-141. Honeyman, A. M. “Isaiah 1:16.” VT 1 (1951):63-65. Jones, Douglas. “Exposition of Isaiah One Verses Ten to Seventeen.” SJT 18 (1965):457-71; “Exposition of Isaiah One Verses Eighteen to Twenty.” SJT 19 (1966):319-327; “Exposition of Isaiah Chapter One Verses Twenty-One to the End.” SJT 21 (1968):320-329. Marshall, Robert J. “The Structure of Isaiah 1-12.” Bib Res 7 (1962):19-32. Rignell, L. G. “Isaiah Chapter 1.” Stud Th 11 (1957):140-158. A Call for Faith and the Sign of Immanuel Isaiah 7:1-25 Introduction The oracle given to King Ahaz in this chapter has occasioned so many discussions and views that one hardly knows where to begin. But if we stay with the major ideas and probable interpretations we shall find a straightforward interpretation and a powerful message. It is a message that challenges our faith. Is our faith strong enough to see us through crises? Are we secure in our faith? If not, perhaps we do not fully understand the Word of the LORD or the confirming sign He has given. The historical setting is critical to the account since the prophet supplies it and the oracle draws on its timing. With a close study of the events referred to we may date the oracle in this chapter to 734 B.C. On the throne in Nineveh is Tiglathpileser III, a ruthless and powerful king. Syria, the ancient Aramaea, with its main city in Damascus, and Ephraim, the northern Israelite state, with its main city Samaria, united to form a coalition against the kingdom of Judah with its capital in Jerusalem. Ahaz, Uzziah’s unbelieving grandson, was on the throne in Jerusalem. When he heard of this coalition that was made to replace him with one Tabeel, he sought support from Tiglathpileser (Pul in the historical account) against them. The Book of Kings actually says that Ahaz was a “son” of Pul, that is, a political dependent. The alliance and its costly tribute was foolish, because the Assyrian king was going to destroy the northern coalition anyway. Isaiah came to warn Ahaz that only Yahweh could guarantee safety. The prophecy of the chapter is amazingly accurate. The sign that a boy was about to be born is the pivotal point. Before he would be old enough to tell right from wrong, that is, about 12 years old, the enemies would not only be defeated but cease to exist. According to history, Shalmaneser V (the successor to Tiglathpileser) campaigned against the land and besieged Samaria. He died in the duration and was succeeded by Sargon II who completed the destruction of the northern state in 722 or 721 B.C. So the oracle in Isaiah 7 could be dated about twelve years before that destruction in 722 B.C. Then, in line with Isaiah 7:18ff., the Egyptians and the Assyrians filled the land in their war with each other. Devastation from this war severely tested the people, so that nothing grew in the fields, and the survivors had to rely on curds and honey. This led up to and included the invasion of 701 B.C. under Sennacherib, the next Assyrian king, when Hezekiah was on the throne in Jerusalem, and 200,000 people from Judah were carried off into captivity. As we shall see, the details of the Assyrian crisis are very accurately prophesied in these oracles. You may find it helpful to read Brevard Childs’ little book on Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis, or as a general work, Eugene Merrill, A Kingdom of Priests. The details of Isaiah’s prophecies as well as the images he uses are very precise. The chapter can be divided into three sections, as most commentators and translations indicate. The first nine verses record the words of encouragement offered by the prophet; verses 10-16 introduce and elaborate on the sign of Immanuel; and verse 17-25 go on to predict the invasion of Assyria. The sequence is clear: God was able to prevent the northern coalition from invading if Ahaz would believe, and God was willing to give a sign to guarantee it; but since Ahaz did not believe, God announced that there would be a glorious future for the Davidic family, although the immediate generation would not share in it, and the present land would be devastated by the Assyrians and Egyptians. Outline The following is a workable exegetical outline—it is still rough (I chose to leave it that way to show that it need not be polished to be workable) but it will at least enable us to describe the contents of the passage. This kind of an outline helps us to put in our words what the lines and sections are saying. I. When the northern alliance terrified Judah with plans to invade, Isaiah assured the king of Judah that he would be completely safe and secure—if he would believe (1-9). A. The king and the people of Judah were terrified when they heard of the impending invasion (1,2). 1. Syria and Israel warred against Judah but could not take it (1). 2. At the news of their alliance the people of Judah were terrified (2). B. God sent Isaiah to encourage Ahaz that the plot would not succeed and that he would be secure—if he believed (3-9). 1. God sent Isaiah and his son (named “A Remnant Will Return”) to meet Ahaz when he was checking the water (3). 2. God assured the king that their plan to replace him and divide his land would not succeed and that they would be destroyed (4-9a). a. Nothing would come of the plan to replace him. b. Israel would not even exist in 65 years. 3. The prophet warned the king that he would not survive if he did not believe (9b). II. Although Ahaz would not respond with faith for a sign, Yahweh announced the sign of the birth of Immanuel to show that the threat would end (10-16). A. When God offered Ahaz the opportunity to respond in faith and ask for a sign, he cleverly avoided the commitment (10-12). B. With righteous indignation the prophet announced the sign of Immanuel to show that the threat from the enemies would end (13-16). 1. The prophet in anger condemned the way the king tried the patience of God (13). 2. The prophet announced the sign and its effects: a. A virgin would give birth to a son known as Immanuel (14). b. Before this child reached the age of accountability the danger from the north would end but the land would be ravaged (15,16). III. The prophet announced that God was about to bring an invasion from Assyria and Egypt that would devastate the land (17-25). A. Summary: God will bring in the Assyrians to overwhelm the land (17). B. Details: God will bring in the Assyrians and Egyptians who will occupy the land and carry off people into captivity (18-20). C. Devastation: The land will be so ruined that people will live among briers and thorns and have to rely on natural and uncultivated products (21-25). Summary Message: When a northern alliance terrified King Ahaz and his people, the LORD promised deliverance if they would believe; but when Ahaz failed to respond correctly, the LORD announced the sign of the birth of Immanuel in the royal family to show that Judah would survive the invasion, and to encourage the people for the greater invasion to come from Assyria. Exposition I. Only God can provide security amidst the terrifying circumstances of life (7:1-9). A. The great crises in life terrify people (1-2). The first two verses lay out the historical setting. In the exposition it is here that I would bring in the international scene that I surveyed above. That would leave room, then, in the introduction to the exposition to develop a more immediate bit that would reveal or create a need for trust in the modern audience. Certainly, there are enough international crises and domestic crises that would cause fear in people. And today especially, the fear of attack by enemies has a very familiar ring to it. The point to stress here is the fear this alliance in ancient Israel caused Ahaz (and note the simile of the trees in the wind). B. The Word of the LORD ensures security if faith is present (3-9). Verse 3 records how Yahweh instructed Isaiah to take his son and go meet the king at the end of the conduit at the upper pool, the place where the king would be preparing for the attack. The main point here is not simply the meeting to give the king the word from God, but to stress the situation b taking the son, Shear-jashub. I would here note that in Isaiah 8:18 Isaiah and his sons are called signs; that is, like the families of other prophets, they are “incarnate words” living out the messages of the prophets. Shear-jashub (se’ar-yasub [pronounced sheh-ar yah-shoov]) means “a remnant will return.” This is a loaded name to deliver to the king, for it confirms that war is inevitable, destruction will follow, but a remnant will return. The question was who would be a part of this remnant. The doctrine of the remnant (a small part left over) was introduced in chapter 1 and confirmed as the holy seed (a group of righteous believers) in chapter 6. The point through the Scriptures is that while the covenant promises are unconditional, individual participation in them is conditioned on faith and obedience. Verse 9 will be the explanation of this theme, for without faith there will be no participation in the remnant. The boy’s name will be the focus of the message in Isaiah 10:21. Verses 4-8 record the details of the words of comfort. God clearly says that Ahaz and the people need not fear this invasion, for it shall not happen. In fact, he refers to these two kings as “two tails of smoking firebrands” (hypocatastasis, implied metaphors)—smoldering out. Here we have another solid prophetic connection. Within 65 years Ephraim will cease to exist as a people. Sixty-five years from 734 puts us down in the time of domination by the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal. It was their foreign policy to mix up the nations of the lands that they conquered; they carried the Israelites off and brought in a variety of peoples from all over, so that the land of Ephraim was a land peopled with all nationalities other than the Israelites. The ones who remained intermarried with them, creating a half-breed race of people known later as the Samaritans. Verse 9 gives us the theological lesson at the heart of the passage. We have had the circumstances, we have had the sure word from God, we will have the sign to confirm it—here is the instruction: have faith in the LORD. It is worded in a marvelous little word play put in the negative form: ‘im lo’ ta’aminu, ki lo’ te’amenu “If you do not believe, you will not be confirmed.” The Hebrew verb is ‘aman, from which derives our “amen” (meaning “truly, so be it”). The meaning of the verb changes between the verbal systems (called stems) to enable the word play. The basic stem meaning is “to be reliable, to support”; in the Niphal (passive) stem (the second verb here) it means “be confirmed, faithful, sure, or trustworthy.” But in the causative stem, the Hiphil, the first verb here, it means “to believe,” that is, to consider something reliable, to count on it. By using the two formations of the verb Isaiah can make a powerful play on the words: “If you do not believe, you will not be confirmed.” The point is that if Ahaz did not believe this sure word from God, he would not survive the invasion and be a part of God’s program. But conditional sentences can be read the opposite way too: if he would believe, he would find security and safety in the LORD. It is put in the negative because Isaiah does not expect the king to believe. Here in teaching this passage I would stop to bring in New Testament correlations to keep the message related to the current Christian audience. Find New Testament passages in the epistles, or perhaps words of Jesus if they are self-explanatory, that promise security in spite of the circumstances all around. “This is the victory that overcomes the world, even our faith”—this type of passage (there are many). This will show the current audience that we too in the New Testament age have a sure word from the Lord that in this life and into the life to come we have security in Christ—if we believe. We need not fear what mankind can do, for we trust in the eternal LORD. If you have time you can relate this word play to the Davidic Covenant which uses the same verb to guarantee a sure dynasty to David and his descendants. To participate in that sure promise, however, required faith and faithfulness (“your house and your kingdom will be made sure for ever” … [2 Sam. 7:16]). II. The sign of the birth of Immanuel confirms the Word of the LORD (7:10-16). To encourage the king to believe, God offers to let him ask for a sign that it will happen. But the king will not even do that. So God gives a sign that tells of the future of the Davidic kingdom—without this corrupt king in it. Verse 11 tells of the offer to the king for a sign. Observe closely that according to verse 10 Yahweh spoke to the king (we would say through the prophet); observe also the change to the plural of the verb and the pronoun. The invitation is for a sign. A good article to read on this word “sign” (here as well as for other passages) is by Stefan Porubcan, “The Word ‘OT in Isaiah 7:14,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 22 (1960):144ff. He surveys all the uses of the word and concludes that a sign is a symbolic saying, fact, or action (also a name), wonderful or not, introducing or accompanying and illustrating, or signifying, the contents of a prophetic prediction. Here the king could name the sign, anything at all that he could think of, and God would do it. But the king refuses to put God to the test. Verse 12 must be carefully explained. The king sounds pious; but we know from the Book of Kings that he was a wicked unbeliever. He was trapped here. If he asked for the sign, he would be submitting to the prophet; if he did not ask, everyone would know that he did not believe. So he said, “I will not tempt Yahweh.” The verb “tempt, test” is nasah; it is used in a number of ways, as a close study of it will reveal. If a human tempted God, it usually meant in rebellion, tempting as a challenge, coming without fear and wanting proof. Ahaz pretended piety and said he would not so test God. But God would give a sign anyway, not now to Ahaz, but to the whole House of David (note the plural “you” in the Hebrew text). Verses 13 and 14 record the sign with a stinging rebuke that the king had wearied Yahweh with his unbelief. The sign concerns an unexpected birth through a “young woman” or “virgin.” The Hebrew word is ‘almah (from a root ‘alam) with an article, “the young woman.” A careful study of this term would, I believe, yield the conclusion that it describes a young woman who is ripe for marriage; and that the term in and of itself does not mean “virgin”—the context would decide that. In this context, in the royal court, the most polite society, and certainly as a heavenly sign of God’s presence, this young woman would certainly be presumed to be a virgin. Such a woman was to have a child, and that child was to be the proof of the presence of God among His people, signified by the name ‘Immanu-’el, Immanuel, “with us-God.” The sign would be proof that the royal Davidic household and thereby the nation of Judah would indeed survive and have a glorious future. There are many interpretations offered for this verse, and you will have to be careful to deal with the context, the meaning of the words, and the theology of the Bible all together. I think one has to see from this prophecy two “fulfillments” (as is often the case with prophecy)—a near, partial fulfillment and a far or ultimate and complete fulfillment—because of the time references in the passage for the age of the child and the invasion. Moreover, the way Matthew uses Scripture supports this idea: he saw these old prophetic passages as partially typological, meaning that the historical fulfillment became a type of the final, full (and literal) meaning. But this opens several possible interpretations that cannot be decided altogether satisfactorily. One view takes the “wonder child” to be born as Hezekiah, the good and righteous king to follow. But he would have been born a good number of years earlier than this oracle, probably. Another view is to take the child as Isaiah’s son Maher mentioned in chapter 8. This has a certain appeal because the wording of Isaiah 8:1-4 is similar to that of 7:14, that child is called a sign in 8:18, Immanuel is repeated twice in chapter 8, and the view would give us closure, an identity in the Old Testament passage. The weakness is that the view would require the “young woman” or “virgin” ripe for marriage to be the prophet’s wife, who already had a son. Some who hold this view argue then that Isaiah may have married again—but surely this sounds contrived to fit the view. Another view is that some young princess (a virgin at the time of the oracle) who is unknown to us but known in the court suddenly married and had a child as a sign that the dynasty would continue. This fits the oracle well enough, but the weakness is that there is no closure. But of course, there is no closure anyway, for the prophet never tells who it is. Another approach is to say that in this case there was no immediate fulfillment, only the ultimate fulfillment in Christ. But that would create all kinds of difficulties for the time limits in the context. So, you need to do some reading on the matter and decide which you prefer. I find the anonymous princess view the most plausible, and the Maher a close second. But of course what really matters is that ultimately the fulfillment is Jesus Christ. It was also during a time of warfare and political crisis that the virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus the Messiah, as a sign that the line of David would continue, that God’s promises would be fulfilled. And there was a corrupt king on the throne at that time as well, Herod. The New Testament affirms clearly that Jesus’ supernatural birth literally fulfills the meanings of these words, meaning, they find their fullest meaning in Him. But note carefully, the Christian doctrine of the virgin birth does not depend on the etymology of Hebrew ‘almah as some have contended, but on the plain, propositional statement of the New Testament that Mary was a virgin and the child was conceived by the Holy Spirit. That it fulfilled Isaiah 7:14 indicates that this was God’s revealed plan, and that Jesus is the Immanuel of Isaiah. His supernatural birth is one major sign that signifies that Jesus is Immanuel—in the real and true sense and not just that God is in some way with His people. The doctrine of the Incarnation is that God came into this world and became flesh; Jesus is not a mere mortal; His words are the words of God and to be believed. At the end of His life is the other confirming sign, the resurrection. His birth is a sign of His supernatural origin; His resurrection is a sign of His supernatural nature. He is Immanuel indeed—God with us. But if we do not believe, we shall not be confirmed. Since we have believed in Him, we stand firm in all the difficulties of this life and are assured of His salvation into the life to come. The prediction that the child will eat butter and honey (verse 15) calls for some clarification. Here we shall see that these figures could indicate something pleasant or something bad, depending on context. If you are coming out of a wilderness, eating this would be a blessing. If you had been used to all the finest foods of the land, being reduced to this would not be so good. To understand these metonymies we have to look down to verse 22 to see that eating these is a sign that the land would be devastated and nothing would be growing. So the message was that Judah would survive the northern coalition’s attempts to destroy her, but that the land was soon to be devastated. In other words, the name Shear-jashub would be literally worked out: a remnant would return means that there would be devastation, but there would be a returning remnant. III. The coming judgment makes belief in the Word of the LORD absolutely essential (7:17-25). Whether you include this section in your lesson/sermon/exposition depends entirely on how much time you have and how detailed you want to get with the text. It may be that its essential substance can be covered in part in your introduction; that means you can finish on the second point and make an easier transition into the New Testament. To go back from that high point of “Immanuel” theology and discuss the Assyrian invasion might be anticlimactic, and certainly not the best homiletical style. It is also possible that you can jump ahead and discuss this in the warning of “if you do not believe” if not in the discussion of “Shear-jashub”; the main thing is that it may be better expositionally to end up on the call for faith and the sign from God. So there are several ways to re-arrange the material in a lesson. But it also works well to leave it in the present order—if you do not miss your explanatory transitions. Ahaz’ unbelief is the critical problem. God had offered complete security if he would believe. And he could have had a confirming sign. But he did not believe. And so God announced a sign that the Davidic House would continue by divine intervention. This sign, coupled with the faith it was meant to signify, would be necessary for the greater judgment that was coming. Doing the homily this way would require that in discussing the third section you explain that the greater judgment was coming for unbelief and that faith in the supernatural provision of God would see people through it. So we read the idea of faith and judgment on two levels—the context’s, and the end of the age. Verses 17 and 18 introduce the invasion. The fly is Egypt and the bee is Assyria. The figurative expressions are hypocatastases (implied metaphors) to match the cultural ideas of the lands. God will “hiss” for them—an anthropomorphic way of saying He will summon them. They will come and fill every place in the land according to verse 19. The armies will fill the land. And the invading armies will not only destroy the land, they will humiliate the survivors. Verse 20 introduces the idea of shaving. This may well be a metonymy of adjunct or of effect. The invading armies often did shave their captives and carry them off into slavery without clothing and without dignity. And the land will be left desolate (see Isaiah 6). Verses 21-25 predict how life in the land will be after the invasion. Nothing will be able to grow or be harvested, and so briers and brambles will overtake the land where vineyards once were. People will have their animals and have to rely on them for staple products. These expressions would all be metonymies of adjunct or effect for the conditions. Conclusion The message of the chapter for the time of Ahaz corresponds nicely with the timeless truth the passage teaches, and se we can word it in a general principle: True security from all danger (even judgment) comes by faith in God’s supernatural provision of Immanuel. There is a glorious future promised by God through the Davidic Covenant; that future is guaranteed and confirmed through a divinely appointed birth that is completely unexpected and that is proof of God’s presence. Thus, God calls people to believe His word and find security in troubling times, in this life, and in the life to come. In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son to be born of the Virgin Mary; this One is Immanuel in the true sense of the word. His birth confirmed that His word was trustworthy. Faith in Him guarantees participation in the glorious future of peace and righteousness. The application for unbelievers is certainly the warning to believe or they will not be confirmed. The application for believers would be twofold: to gain confidence through this sign that their destiny is sure, and to share the work of the prophet in calling for others to become part of the remnant of the LORD and put away fears of the circumstances of life. The first chapter of Luke records the visit of Gabriel to Mary to announce the birth of Jesus in fulfillment of this chapter. In that visitation three names or titles are used of the Messiah. First, the child was to be called “Jesus” (because He would save His people from their sins, the parallel passages add). In addition to other passages in the Old Testament, this seems to refer to the first part of the oracle of Isaiah 7, for that is a promise of salvation for the nation from the prophet Isaiah. And the name Isaiah (yesa’yahu [pronounced yeh-sha-yah-hoo]) is a close approximation of Jesus (in Hebrew yesua’ [pronounced yeh-shoo-a]), for it means “Yahweh saves.” And Isaiah says in chapter 8 that he and his sons are signs. The second name given is “Son of the Most High.” “Son” was primarily a title for the Davidic king, coming from the Davidic Covenant in 2 Samuel 7. The “Most High” draws further attention to the royal Jerusalem liturgy, for Melchizedek was the King-priest of the Most High God, reigning in Salem (=Jerusalem). So this title fits the second part of the chapter, which addresses the House of David, promising a glorious future in the birth of the king. The third title harmonizes with the identification of this child to be born as Immanuel, for Gabriel says that the one born of the woman, the virgin Mary, by the Holy Spirit, will be known as the “Son of God.” So Gabriel’s message draws all the themes of Isaiah 7:1-14 together in a series of names. References Albright, W. F. “The Son of Tabeel (Isaiah 7:6).” BASOR 140 (1955):34-35. Bird, Thomas E. “Who Is the Boy in Isaias 7:16?” CBQ 6 (1944):435-443. Gottwald, Norman K. “Immanuel as the Prophet’s Son.” VT 8 (1958):36-47. Hammershaimb, E. “The Immanuel Sign.” Stud Th 3 (1951):124-142. Hasel, Gerhard F. “Linguistic Considerations Regarding the Translation of Isaiah’s Shear-Jashub: A Reassessment.” AUSS 9 (1971):36-46. Lattey, Cuthbert. “The Immanuel Prophecy: Isaiah 7:14.” CBQ 8 (1946):369-376. ________. “The Term Almah in Isaiah 7:14.” CBQ 9 (1947):89-95. McKane, William. “The Interpretation of Isaiah VII 14-25.” VT 17 (1967):208-219. Mueller, Walter. “A Virgin Shall Conceive.” Evangelical Quarterly 32 (1960):203-207. Myers, Albert E. “The Use of Almah in the Old Testament.” LuthQ 7 (1955):137-140. Porubcan, Stefan. “The Word ‘OT in Isaiah 7:14.” CBQ 22 (1960):144-159. Scullion, John J. “An Approach to the Understanding of Isaiah 7:10-17.” JBL 87 (1968):288-300. Wilson, Robert Dick. “The Meaning of Almah in Isaiah 7:14.” PTR 25 (1926):308-316. Wolf, Herbert M. “A Solution to the Immanuel Prophecy in Isaiah 7:14—8:22.” JBL 91 (1972):449-456. Young, Edward J. “The Immanuel Prophecy: Isaiah 7:14-16.” WThJ 15 (1953):97-124. Zimmermann, F. “The Immanuel Prophecy.” JQR 52 (1961):154-159. The Announcement of Judgment Isaiah 8:1-22 Introduction This chapter is actually part of the whole unit that runs through Isaiah 9:7, for the end of chapter 8 is a transition into chapter 9—the gloom and despair of those walking in darkness in the north of Israel who will see a great light, the Messianic age. This passage forms the judgment part of it, the judgment leading up to the coming of the deliverer. Clearly the focus is on the destruction that took place in Samaria in 722 B.C., but includes the invasion of even Judah at that time. However, the message centers on the positive note that God will be with them if they trust in His word and hold their integrity. So even in a passage about judgment there is the direction for positive application. Naturally, though, since this is about the Assyrian invasion of ancient Israel, some abstracting will have to be done to make the application for today. That it was an oracle announcing a judgment for their sin makes it somewhat easier to bring across to New Testament teachings. In the final correspondence between this passage and the New Testament application, the New Testament announces an impending eschatological judgment on sinners throughout the world, beginning with wars in the latter days before Christ comes. But it is also possible to say that God uses such means as personal, national and international crises to judge sinful peoples even today, before the end of time. In either case, the only hope people have is the hope that Isaiah had to offer—to make the LORD our fear and to believe in His word and to hope for Him. The two alternatives are here in this chapter—the LORD is either our sanctuary or our stumbling stone—He is Savior or Judge. Paul rightly says that the Gospel was first revealed in the prophets, for this is basic to all subsequent revelation. The expositor will have to determine how much of the chapter should be treated to get the message fully across. I would think that even if all the chapter is not included in the outlined exposition, it will all have to be brought in somewhere as part of the contextual discussion. It may be necessary not to deal with the last section about spiritism—and the point of the chapter can still be made—but that section does portray the wrong source of security, the antithesis of fearing, trusting and waiting on the LORD. Verse 18 makes a logical stopping point for the second major section, because it affirms the faith that is sealed by the signs. In this set of notes I shall outline and discuss the whole chapter. I believe I would deal with all three sections in a homily, but my major emphasis (and more time) would be on the second section. It is also possible to do some rearranging for rhetorical purposes: the first section lays out the crisis, then the last section shows the wrong approach, and then the middle section shows the right approach and the danger of missing it. Here is a rough arrangement of the outline that could be developed to describe the contents: I. Through the symbolism of the name Maher-shalal-hash-baz, the prophet announces the swift invasion of Assyria that would exile the northern kingdom, but only besiege Judah because it was protected by God (1-10). A. By writing the oracle and by naming his son as a sign, Isaiah prophesied that Assyria’s invasion would be swift and complete (1-4). 1. God instructed the prophet to write in a public place the description of the swift plunder that was coming (1). 2. The prophet had a son and named him for the oracle of the swift plunder that was coming shortly on the land (2-4). B. The prophet announced that because the people had defected in their allegiance, God was about to bring the Assyrian army to judge the land (5-8). 1. The people had rejected the peace of Jerusalem for military alliances outside the land (5-6). 2. God was about to bring the Assyrians to exile the northern kingdom and cover the land of Judah (7-8). C. By challenging the invading army to do all they might, the prophet affirms the triumph of Judah because God is with them (9,10). 1. He challenges Assyria to invade and fight (9). 2. It will not work because God is with them (10). II. The prophet warns the people that if they panic in the crisis and do not follow his example and fear and trust the LORD, then they will fall in the war (11-18). A. The prophet warns the people that if they do not fear the LORD they will be lost (11-15). 1. The prophet himself was warned not to panic like the people were doing (11-12). 2. The prophet learned and proclaimed that the LORD was to be feared and sought for security (13-14a). 3. The prophet warned that those who refused would be quickly destroyed in the invasion (14b). B. The prophet demonstrated by his faith and affirmed by the signs that security was in the LORD alone (16-18). 1. He had his words sealed and testified to among his disciples (16). 2. He affirmed that he was waiting in faith on the LORD who was his security (17). 3. He and his children were signs (18). III. The prophet warned the people that if they were foolish enough to seek help from the spiritists they would be utterly lost (19-22). A. It is foolish to consult the dead for advice when the only hope is in the living God (19). B. It is necessary to test the spirits to know who is telling the truth (20). C. Those who turn aside to idolatry and spiritism will be lost in utter despair and devastation (21-22). Now, with this general outline in mind we may transfer the individual points and sub-points (where possible) to a more expository style—shorter, timeless, theological statements. But remember, they must be true to the passage as well as true today. Exposition I. Although judgment for infidelity is certain, there is protection through Immanuel (8:1-10). A. God’s judgment will be swift (1-4). Verse 1 introduces the theme that judgment will be swift on Syria and the northern state of Israel. The prophet was to take a great tablet and write the message on it for everyone to see. He wanted his message attested—it was prophecy. So here we have the name Maher-shalal-hash-baz introduced, another of the sons of the prophet who served as a sign, an incarnate word. This is a war cry comparable to such given in Egypt and Canaan of the time. It means something like “Spoil—speed, prey—hasten.” The name is unique; it uses a combination of imperatives and nominal forms to cry out for a sudden plundering of the land. The name also uses repetition to stress the point: spoil//prey, and speed//hasten. This is the first symbolic act of the section—the writing of the words for all to see in advance. It was a witness to the fact that the people had rejected the prophets’ warnings and now only swift judgment lay ahead. Verses 2-4 record the second of Isaiah’s symbolic acts, the naming of the child with this name. Isaiah took faithful witnesses to record the writing of the name; and then he and his wife had a child and called him by the name Maher-shalal-hash-baz. The terminology in here has led many to conclude that this birth is what 7:14 prophesied, for it has “the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son; then said Yahweh to me, ‘Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz, for before the child shall know to …’.” There is certainly a familiar ring to these elements from the last chapter. But as noted earlier, such a view would require that Isaiah have married again, or that the term ‘almah be given a rather different meaning. If this prophecy was given in 733 B.C., then the focus of verse 4 would be about 11 or 12 years later, 722, when Sargon took Samaria. Judgment was certain because they had rejected the LORD. B. Judgment will be irresistible (5-8). Verses 5-8 can be called the tale of two rivers, Shiloah and Euphrates. Shiloah was the flowing stream or canal in the city of Jerusalem. The prophet was using it as a figure of speech (hypocatastasis) for the legitimate Davidic empire, the theocratic administration of Israel. The people had rejected that and had turned to rejoice in Rezin and the northern coalition. So because they rebelled against the house of David, God would bring in the judgment, the River Euphrates. This river represents the king of Assyria and his armies, who will “flood” the land including Judah. The section ends with a cry to the land, “O Immanuel.” The point of the expression is a reminder that the warning of 7:14 extends beyond this invasion. The expression ‘immanu-’el itself became a war cry for Israel; it declared the presence and protection of the LORD in battle, it described the land that was being protected, and it named the future Coming One who would signify the presence of God with His people. C. Judgment will only be averted by God (9-10). Verses 9 and 10 could be taken two ways, that Israel’s plans to defend herself will fail, or that Assyria’s plans will not be totally successful. I take the latter view because the verses seem to be addressed to the nations. The Assyrians may try their hardest to break and to dash in pieces the land of Israel, but their counsel will come to nought, and their declaration shall not stand, for “God is with us” (‘immanu-’el). If the former view is taken, then this cry of “God is with us” would be the thing that Israel trusted in that would not come to pass. On this section Wildberger has some good comments, especially about the point of the strange name. He concludes by saying that to be confronted so clearly with God’s will to save and then still choose the way of unbelief could only result in a disastrous future, the seeds of which had been sown already. II. Comfort is only for those who fear the LORD (8:11-18). A. The LORD is a stone of stumbling if not feared (11-15). The passage begins with the prophet receiving a warning in verses 11 and 12 not to take the view that the people took (that this was all a conspiracy and nothing more—it was indeed divine judgment), nor to fear just what they feared. Verse 13 calls for the fear of the LORD of hosts (YHWH Seba’ot). If Israel were to panic it should not be because of foes, but because of the LORD (who has power over the body and the soul). Israel was to learn from this that the LORD was not like other tribal gods or friendly spirits who would protect His people without question. There is a major textual decision you will have to make in here. Some of the commentators want to change “sanctify” in verse 13 and “sanctuary” in verse 15 to “conspiracy,” making the LORD the conspirator as well as the stumbling block and the spreading net. This would involve a change in the Hebrew letters of q-d-s to q-s-r. Any change in similar letters or order of letters is certainly possible; but if the MT makes good sense, and there is no sufficient manuscript evidence for the change, the suggestion should be rejected, even though it may be an interesting proposal. The verse says, “Yahweh of armies—Him shall you sanctify, let Him be your fear, let Him be your dread.” In this verse we have the first section of our application. In view of the coming judgment one must sanctify and fear the LORD. The main word for “sanctify” is qaddesh, related to the word for “holy” we saw in Isaiah 1 and Isaiah 6. The word “fear” is yare’ (pronounced yah-ray); this word needs study. The term is a worship word, speaking of one’s devotion and adoration—reverence—for the LORD. But it also speaks of a shrinking back in respect and terror. The result of fearing the LORD, among other things, is the avoiding of sin. If the people were to be true worshipers, they would shave to sanctify and fear the LORD. Verse 14 could be translated a little differently. Traditionally it has been rendered, “He shall be for a sanctuary, and for a stone of stumbling … .” “Sanctuary” does not fit very well—hence the attempt to change it. The term could simply state that the LORD is set apart, distinct; unlike other national gods, the LORD will be the one causing the distress on His own nation. This section gives a different view of God. He is a stumbling stone, a slipping stone, a trapping net, and a throwing stick (the last two referring to catching birds). These are not essentially His nature that Israel had come to know. But if people rejected the LORD, then He would become these avenues to judgment for them. The metaphors all show that God will bring the people down. Verse 15 gives the conclusion of the section, affirming that many will fall and be taken. The New Testament picks up the section and uses it to stress the point Isaiah is making clearly. If the LORD is not your salvation, He is your stumblingstone. Immanuel is not with us, if Immanuel is rejected. God has to be believed in before His name becomes real in our experience. Romans 9:32f. and 1 Peter 2:8 pick up the use of the metaphor of a rock that cannot be rejected or it will be a stumbling stone. B. Those whom fear the LORD will hope in Him (16-18). Verse 16 is the second time in the chapter that the Word of the LORD is to have witnesses. “Law” here probably means the clear teaching of the prophet Isaiah. It will be bound up and sealed by his disciples and kept as proof that he predicted the destruction ahead of time (Dt. 18). Verse 17 tells of the prophet’s expectation: “I will wait for the LORD.” He can only expect the judgment now, for his teachings have been set aside. The Hebrew words for “waiting, hoping, and looking” all signify eager faith in the Word of the LORD that fully expects it to come to pass, but agonizes in the waiting. The words imply some anxious tension as part of the waiting and hoping; they are elsewhere used of twisting ropes and knots. But those who fear the LORD will wait for His Word to be fulfilled—having done all that they can do to warn others. Verse 18 is Isaiah’s confirmation of the truth of what he has said. He and his sons are signs. Their names mean what his message said; and he wrote the name and the message with witnesses ahead of time as proof when it should come. Isaiah can say that he and his sons are proof that judgment was coming (Maher-shalal-hash-baz), but a remnant would return (She’ar-yashub) because salvation was of the LORD (“Isaiah,” Yeshayahu). This verse is cited in the Book of Hebrews with a greater meaning. Christ in glory will say, “Here I am and the sons that You have given Me.” This is a different meaning—it is a midrash, an analogical application of the text. In heaven all the company of the redeemed will be evidence of a great judgment that was avoided by those who feared the LORD and put their trust in Him to find salvation. III. Great despair and devastation comes to idolaters (8:19-22). Not only is God not like friendly spirits who ignore the sins of the people, neither can He be manipulated into delivering them. This section is a warning against superstition; the last section was a warning against false fear and supposed conspiracy. Verse 19 gives the third leg of the application (first: fear the LORD; second: hope in Him; third: pray to the living God). Isaiah is amazed that the people would turn to spiritism in the day of crisis (see the example of Saul going to the witch of Endor). The question is powerful: Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? To pray to the dead, departed spirits instead of to the living God is utter folly. Verse 20 gives the test. If they do not speak according to the truth of the teaching of Isaiah, the truth of Scripture, they are to be avoided. This is how the people can know whether these “wizards” and “necromancers” tell the truth or not. If they lie, they have no morning. This idea picks up the biblical theme of the wicked being in the darkness of Sheol. Verses 21 and 22 form the transition to the next section. The imagery used here predicts a time of despair (faces turn upwards) and gloom and darkness. The images of darkness and light are implied comparisons; darkness would represent the effects of sin—oppression, pain, evil, gloom, hopelessness—and light would reflect the effect of righteousness through the Messiah—joy, freedom, hope, knowledge, and righteousness. But the prophet declares that the people will be filled with the gloom of judgment. Note how this transition works: the people who walk in darkness have seen a great light! Of course, between the end of chapter 8 and the beginning of chapter 9 are 700 years. That is the way prophecy works. Conclusion Drawing on the summary of the exegetical points, the three Roman numeral points written as one sentence, we move towards a theological point by the same process that we changed the exegetical outline into an expository outline. An exegetical summary of the passage might read something like this: Using the symbolism of a name the prophet announces the swift and certain destruction from the invasion of Assyria, and warns that genuine faith in the LORD is the means of escape and not foreign alliances or idolatry which will inevitably lead to doom and despair. We may now try to write the theological idea in a more useful form for exposition. This will be more of a principle, and will lead smoothly into the application. It will not elaborate on all the details, but it will make the point of the passage in a positive way. Here is one way to do it: Those who wish to escape the imminent judgment of God must fear the LORD, trust in His Word, and pray to Him alone. This instruction of REVERENTIAL FEAR, PATIENT HOPE and SINCERE PRAYER (or as Isaiah puts them, “Make Yahweh your fear,” “Wait for the LORD,” and “Should not a people seek their God?”) is applicable for us in the Christian era who know that judgment will yet fall on the earth and only the devout believers will be spared. In terms of application, the easiest part will be if the message is addressed to people who have not put their faith in the LORD, or who may be delving into new age or spiritist things for hope and comfort. Their fear is wrong—they are afraid of the threats in life, and they fear spirit powers. The truth of Scripture is that if you fear the LORD (=trust and obey Him) you will not have to live in fear of life. For believers, the application is a little different. Of course, they may be living like the unbelievers—so God’s warning to Isaiah is the warning to them, not to fear what they fear. But it can be a tremendous message of comfort and assurance. The judgment, whatever kind, however severe, cannot harm them because the LORD is with them—Immanuel. They may rejoice in the safety and security that they have in the LORD, their sanctuary, and hope in Him for final deliverance. In the meantime, like the prophet Isaiah, they can warn others about false trust, and show their faith to a world that is lost. Any number of New Testament passages that promise escape from judgment for faith in the LORD are at the heart of this message. They may be brought in along the way or at the end. But the exposition must show how this passage, as other temporal judgment passages do as well, forms a picture of divine judgment for sin that can only be escaped through the promise of Immanuel. References Ackerman, H. C. “The Immanuel Sign and Its Meaning.” AJSL 35 (1919):204-214. Brodie, Louis. “The Children and the Prince: The Structure, Nature, and Date of Isaiah 6-12.” Biblical Theological Bulletin 9 (1979):27-31. Creager, Harold L. “The Immanuel Passage as Messianic Prophecy.” LuthQ 7 (1955):339-343. Emerton, J. A. “Some Linguistic and Historical Problems in Isaiah VIII:23.” JSS 14 (1969):151-175. Fullerton, Kemper. “Isaiah’s Earliest Prophecy Against Ephraim.” AJSL 33 (1916):9-39. Hindson, Edward E. “Isaiah’s Immanuel.” Grace Journal 10 (1969):3-15. Jensen, Joseph. “The Age of Immanuel.” CBQ 41 (1979):220-237. Kraeling, Emil. “The Immanuel Prophecy.” JBL 50 (1931):377-397. Moriarty, Frederick L. “The Emmanuel Prophecies.” CBQ 19 (1957):226-233. Talmage, Frank. “Isaiah 8:1.” HTR 60 (1967):465-468. Whitley, C. F. “The Language and Exegesis of Isaiah 8:16-23.” ZAW 90 (1978):28-43. Wolverton, Wallace I. “Judgment in Advent: Notes on Isaiah 8:5-15 and 7:14.” Anglican Theological Review 37 (1955):284-291. The Glorious Messiah and the Messianic Age Isaiah 9:1-7 Introduction For this section of the notes I shall provide a fully written exposition of the text to demonstrate how the exegetical details can be incorporated into an expository style. The length of the time allowed for the exposition will determine if parts must be shortened or cut. But having already determined in the exegetical process what the central theological ideas are, I will be able to condense around them rather easily. In spite of all the advances of civilization, the world today is still consumed with a desire for peace and a fear of war. When people observe the conflicts and the rumors of wars, gloom and despair often engulf them like a thick darkness. Not the least of the trouble spots is the Middle East. Peace there has been the pursuit for centuries. While there have been scores of efforts to bring about peace between Israel and Syria and the Palestinians, no one would be surprised if war broke out tomorrow. Peace movements and peace negotiations proceed all over the world. Stronger countries believe that peace must be negotiated from a position of power; radical groups believe that terror will force the issue. But we are left with a more dangerous and more frightening world than ever before. And we are left wondering if anyone is really interested in peace and righteousness and justice for all, or just in securing their own interests? The problem is still the presence of evil. It sets brother against brother, and nation against nation. Ultimately, the world’s gloom and despair is linked to spiritual darkness. The Bible comforts and reminds those of us who have come to trust in Jesus Christ not to despair as if there was no hope. We have the revelation of our Lord that not only announces His sovereign reign but also charts the course of world events. One of the most significant revelations is found in Isaiah 9. Against the background of the prophecy of war and destruction, darkness and gloom (chapter Isaiah gave this prophecy about the Messiah—the glorious coming king. “Messiah” is a Hebrew term that means “anointed one,” that is, the anointed king. In a sense, every king who was anointed in Jerusalem as a descendant of David would be called a “mashiah” (pronounced mah-she-ack), a messiah. But the Bible tells how ultimately a son of David would come who would be known as “the Messiah.” We believe that Jesus Christ is that Messiah. The New Testament word “Christ” is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word “Messiah.” This Messianic Prophecy, then, holds out hope for peace and righteousness through the reign of Jesus the Messiah. The text can be divided into two sections: the Dawn of the Messianic Age (verses 1-5) and the Righteous Reign of the Messiah (verses 6 and 7). While the entire passage is instructive for the message, the verses that focus on the nature of the Messiah are critical, for therein lies our hope for everlasting peace. So most of our attention will be given to the meanings of the name of the Son, showing how these description fit perfectly the nature of our Lord Jesus Christ. Exposition I. Peace will come with the dawn of the Messianic Age (9:1-5). Isaiah declares that in contrast to his present age of war, gloom, and despair, there is coming an age when peace will reign universally. It will begin with the coming of the Messiah, the promised future king. So we call that period the Messianic Age. The prophet here shows how it will unfold. A. The change in circumstances will end the despair (1,2). The passage begins with the announcement of the change: there will be no more gloom for those in anguish; in the past the LORD humbled the northern lands of Zebulun and Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee. Why? That is where the Messiah will first appear—Galilee of the Gentiles, a place looked down on for so long as less spiritual, less pure than Judea. The explanation of this exaltation is found in verse 2. Those who walk in darkness have seen a great light, on those in the land of the shadow of death a light has dawned. The language is poetic: darkness signifies adversity, despair, gloom and evil, and the light signifies prosperity, peace, and joy. The language is used elsewhere of the Messianic Age—Malachi says that the “sun of righteousness will rise with healing in his wings” (4:2). So the people in the north who have suffered so much have the prospect of a wonderful new beginning. We should note in passing that Isaiah’s verbs are in the past tense—he writes as if it has already happened. That is prophetic language. The prophet was a “seer” or visionary. He received divine revelation and recorded what he saw. As far as he was concerned, if it had been shown to him from God, it was as good as done. It was certain, even though it had not yet worked out in history. So “light” will shine on people who were walking in “darkness.” The initial fulfillment of this prophecy is beyond doubt. Matthew quotes this text in conjunction with the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. He is the true light of the world that lights every person. He brings to a darkened world grace and truth, and the sure promise of peace. When He began to minister in Galilee with His teachings and His miracles, He demonstrated that He was indeed this Messiah. His proclamation of the kingdom through salvation is what ends the despair, for believers in Him are not lost in gloom and despair, for they know that what He promised will come to pass at His second coming. B. The Messiah brings joy and prosperity (3). The prophet turns to address the LORD directly. His words explain what it means that light will dispel the darkness—joy and prosperity will follow. The prophet gives no clue as to how soon this would happen. But we who have the full revelation of God know that Jesus made it clear that he was the Messiah, and that the age of peace and righteousness was yet future. The joy described here is extravagant. It is the kind of joy that comes at the harvest, or at the dividing of the plunder. Harvest was a regular time of joy in Israel; after a long time of labor in the fields the people would gather to eat and drink and celebrate. The Bible often uses the analogy of the harvest to describe the coming of the LORD (see Matthew 3:12 for the harvest and winnowing imagery). It is a thanksgiving celebration for the completion of the harvest. Dividing the plunder, the other image here, is a bit more poignant since wars will lead up to the end of the age. The image is about the victors after the battle is over, dividing up the booty. Such would be an almost delirious celebration of triumph that would usher in an age of peace. C. Joy comes through the cessation of war (4, 5). The imagery of joy at the division of the plunder leads directly into the explanation: the prophet foresees the time when the LORD will break the oppression of the enemies. He draws the analogy with the time of Israel’s victory over Midian through Gideon by the power of the LORD. So shall it again be. But this victory will be greater. Verse 5 says that the implements of war will be burnt up. This will be no lull in the action, no temporary peace treaty. War will end. Elsewhere Isaiah has says, “They shall beat their swords into ploughshares,” that is, military weapons will not be needed in a time of lasting peace. How can these things be, given the world situation as we know it? The answer to this question is found in the second half of the oracle which describes the nature of the Messiah who will bring in the reign of peace and righteousness. If such peace is to come, someone must have the ability to produce and maintain it. II. Peace will finally come with the righteous reign of the Messiah (9:6,7). Isaiah now turns to introduce the One who will transform the gloom and despair of war into the joy and peace of a time of righteousness—the Messiah. A. The LORD will bring about the advent of the Messiah (6a). The first part of the prophecy is very familiar to Christians: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulders.” Isaiah is very precise here, as we now know. A child will be born into the family of David, and that there was a birth in Bethlehem is beyond question; but the Messiah will also be a Son that is given, and that Jesus did not come into existence in Bethlehem is clear from the Bible. According to the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam. 7:14), the term “son” is a title for the king. The same is true in the vision of Daniel where the expression “Son of Man” is used (7:9-14). Daniel’s vision shows this glorious king in the presence of the Almighty, the Ancient of Days, and that he would be given the kingdom of peace. Isaiah announces that the child to be born will be this Son given. This idea is then clarified by Paul: “In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman … .” (Gal. 4:4). The New Testament bears witness that Jesus is this Son who came into the world. In fact, Jesus Himself set about to prove His origin was in heaven, not in Bethlehem. When He was about to raise Lazarus from the dead, he prayed and included these words in His prayer: “that they might know that You sent Me” (John 11:42). By this He meant that He was from above, and they were from below. Or, in debating with the religious leaders Jesus asked how David could call his descendant his “Lord,” clearly showing that the “Son of David,” the Messiah, was greater than David (Mark 12:35,36, regarding Psalm 110). And of course, to the woman at the well Jesus clearly revealed Himself: she said, “When the Messiah comes, He will declare all things to us.” Jesus said, “I that speak to you am He” (John 4:25,26). It is clear, then, that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the Christ, the child born into the house of David, the Son given by God to be the long expected King. The first advent of Jesus established His identity; it did not begin His reign, however, for He has yet to put down all enemies. The prophecy that “the government will be upon His shoulder” will come to complete reality at His second coming—an aspect of the Messianic prophecies that the prophets did not see (see 1 Peter 1:10,11). The reference to the shoulder is probably a reference to the wearing of an insignia of office on the shoulder (see Isa. 22:22). There will be a time when this Son will rule as king. We may say that Jesus now reigns above, and that is certainly true. But Isaiah envisions a time of universal peace and righteousness in this world. That has not happened yet. Hebrews 1 states that this exaltation will be complete when the Father again brings His firstborn into the world. So Isaiah does not know when all these things will take place; only that they will happen because the Word of the LORD has declared it. B. The Messiah will be a Wonder King (6b). The nature of the Messiah is now portrayed in the listing of His throne names. It must be noted that these are not names in the sense that we have names. These are character descriptions. They are intended to give the nature or the significance of the person named. We use the word “name” at times in this way. We may say, “She made a name for herself,” that is, a reputation. The names in this section describe the nature of the glorious king. Moreover, in the ancient Near East kings were in the habit of taking throne names when they ascended the throne. They took titles and added epithets to their names. Usually the epithets they chose were too generous for mere mortals. For example, in the Middle Kingdom of Egypt the rulers took five titles when crowned—each name referring to some god, some land, some aspiration they had for their administration. One king who was crowned heard the priest say, “Let the great names of the good god and his titles be made like those of [the god] Re: Mighty Bull, One Capable of Planning, Great in Wonders, Filled with Truth, Son of Re to whom life is given.” So in these epithets the King would be extolled as the repository of might, wisdom, wonders, truth, and all life. These are, to be sure, rather ambitious. There is evidence of such titling in Israel, especially in cases where God bestowed names on new kings. Psalm 2, the coronation psalm, says, “You are my Son, this day I have begotten you.” So on the day the king ascended the throne he was declared to be the Son, that is, God’s anointed King. So too in 2 Samuel 23:1 do we find a proliferation of names for David: “David, the son of Jesse, the man exalted by the Most High, the man anointed by the God of Jacob, Israel’s singer of songs.” And then we have the LORD’s sending prophets to rename kings, such as calling Solomon Jedidiah (2 Sam. 12:25). But there is nothing to compare with the type of names found in Isaiah 9. The only names comparable are those honorific titles of Egyptian kings. They all had grandiose, ambitious throne names. Each name had a permanent title and then a variable description. So too in Isaiah: Counsellor, God, Father, and Prince are the permanent titles; wonderful, mighty, everlasting, and peace are the variables. But Isaiah is affirming that the one who is coming will not merely have great titles, but will in reality be what those titles claim. What had been a hope, a wild dream, or monarchs for ages will surely become a reality some day. With a king such as this, peace is assured. There is no hope in some pagan Egyptian king who made great claims; the only hope is in the Word of the LORD that promised Immanuel. 1. Wonderful Counselor. The first words used to describe this Son have usually been separated in the English Bibles to form two epithets. But Isaiah himself joins these two terms together in Isaiah 28:29. So probably, as with the other titles, the one word serves to qualify the other—he is a wonder of a counselor. “Wonderful” is a word that primarily describes the LORD or extraordinary or supernatural things in the Scriptures; it means “extraordinary, surpassing, marvelous, wonderful.” It was not used in a trivial sense, as we often use the English word “wonderful.” For example, in Genesis 18 the LORD announced the birth of Isaac to the aging Abraham and Sarah. When Sarah laughed in her heart, the LORD, knowing she laughed, said, “Is anything too hard for the LORD?” “Hard” is our word—Is anything too marvelous, wonderful, extraordinary, for the LORD? Or again, David, meditating on the knowledge of the LORD, came to realize that the LORD knows everything about him, his thoughts, his intentions, even the words he is trying to say, all of it (Ps. 139:1-6). He marvels, “Such knowledge is too wonderful for me!” Or again, when the Angel of the LORD appeared to Manoah, Manoah inquired, “What is your name?” To this the visitor responded, “Why do you ask my name, seeing that it is Wonderful?” Then, when the flame on the altar blazed up, the Wonderful Angel ascended to heaven. To describe the king with this Hebrew word “wonderful” is to ascribe to him extraordinary, normally supernatural abilities. Jesus, by His mighty words, showed Himself to be wonderful in this sense. In John 11:25 he said, “I am the resurrection and the Life; whoever believes in me will live, even though he dies.” Then, to authenticate His claims He raised Lazarus from the dead. That is extraordinary. It is marvelously surpassing. It is wonderful. We would have to say with Nicodemus that no man can do these thing apart from God. Jesus has the words of life because He has power over life and death. What a King He shall be! The second word in the title is “Counselor.” The word means “one who plans.” It means he has the wisdom to rule. Isaiah 11:2 will explain that this king, this Immanuel, has the Spirit of Counsel, that is, his wisdom to rule is God-given (compare Solomon’s wisdom). The word “king” as well as other related terms are related to the idea of decision-making. Kings make decisions; they give counsel. At times they must surround themselves with counselors to make the right decisions. But this king will be a wonder of a counselor. Jesus’ teachings and judgments showed that He was a great counsellor. His insight was supernatural—He knew what was in people. In John 1:48-51 He rightly analyzed Nathanael; He said, “I saw you while you were under the fig tree before Philip called you.” To which Nathanael replied, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God, You are the King of Israel.” He recognized the Wonderful Counselor when He appeared. So too did the woman at the well in John 4. She said, “Come and see a man who told me everything I ever did. Is not this the Christ?” Or again, when the Jews sent men to bring Jesus bound hand and foot to them, they returned empty-handed. Their reason? “No man ever spoke like this man” (John 7:26). This work of our Lord continues today, for when He went away He promised to send another counselor (John 14:16), the Holy Spirit, who would continue to counsel by His Word, to convict, to teach, and to transform people. What made Jesus such a wonderful counselor? He knew what was in man (John 2:25). He had that wonderful knowledge of which David spoke. And it continues. What is it in the seven letters to the churches in Revelation that is His constant theme? Jesus says, “I know your works.” That needs very little explanation; it is painfully clear. 2. The Mighty God. Not only was Messiah to be wonderful in counsel, he was to be the image of God as no other was. The term “God” can be used of kings and judges in the Old Testament. But Isaiah does not use it that way, unless that is the sole meaning here. Every other time Isaiah uses the term “God” (‘el) he means deity. In fact, he has just announced in chapters 7 and 8 that this king would be known as ‘Immanu-’el, “God with us.” To say “a king is with us” would be of little effect. But to say that a king is coming whose power will display that God is with the people—that is a sign. There is another passage that uses “mighty” and “God” together to describe Messiah. Psalm 45:3 says, “Gird your sword, O Mighty One … Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.” So the King would be known as the powerful one, the mighty God. This epithet, no matter how translated, would be too generous for a mere mortal. It actually brings the ideology of divine kingship into Jerusalem and applies it to some future king. But Jesus claimed such for Himself as well. He claimed to be divine. According to John 8:58 He identified Himself as the great I AM of the Old Testament, the sovereign Lord God of Israel. In Matthew 24:30 he announced, “All power is given to me.” “I AM”—”all power.” In sum, Jesus is the Mighty God. The apostles bear witness to this. John declares He is God in the flesh, the agent of creation (John 1:1-3). And Paul reminds us of His deity and His power in Ephesians 1:18-21. What might have seemed to Isaiah’s audience to be an honorific title, or a description of one who would rule as God’s vice-regent, became historically true and literal in Jesus Christ, for the mighty God came in the flesh. 3. The Everlasting Father. The third title in many ways is the most striking. It is literally “father of perpetuity,” that is, one who will be perpetually the father. In Canaanite religion the high god is called “father of years,” and this title in Hebrew seems to carry a similar force. It describes one who produces, directs, and is lord over the ages. The title might be taken to mean that this wonder king has the durability to rule. But the use of the terms in the Old Testament suggests another view. The Messiah—the King—was to be known as the “Son,” not the Father, according to the Davidic Covenant. The covenant said that God would be to the king a father, and the king would be to Him a son (2 Sam. 7:14). But here in Isaiah the Son is called the Father. The point in Isaiah is that the sovereign LORD who had always enthroned the Davidic kings would come and rule as the Messiah. This seeming confusion of “persons” shows up in a couple of other prophecies. In Isaiah 48:15-16 the LORD God Almighty is speaking and says, “I, even I, have spoken; Yes, I have called him, I have brought him, and his way will prosper. Come near to Me, hear this: I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, I was there. And now the LORD God and His Spirit have sent Me.” The same phenomenon of the LORD being both the sovereign who sends Messiah and Messiah who is sent is found in Malachi 3:1-5. Now all this seems a bit confusing, but the statements of Jesus confirm the fact that the “Son” who is given is also known as the Father. Jesus said, “I am not of this world” (John 8:23), “I came in My Father’s name” (John 5:43), and finally, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). So Jesus is the expressed image of the Father, the Sovereign king-maker. By taking this title, Everlasting Father, the Messiah is to be known as the One who is the sovereign Lord over the ever changing years—he produces and directs eternity. Such a name belongs to a god, not just any divine creature or spiritual being, but to the God. 4. The Prince of Peace. This last title means that the Messiah will be one who ensures for his people the blessings of peace. He will be a prince who brings peace. The word “peace” is used as an epithet for the LORD as well as the King. In Judges 6:24 because of the greeting of “peace” from the Angel of the LORD the place was called “The LORD is peace.” Whenever the LORD visited his people, whether by the Angel of the LORD or by His promised Messiah, it was to announce or promise peace to the world (Isa. 11:6-9; Ps. 72:3,7). But the Hebrew concept of “peace” is more than the absence of war. To Isaiah, peace is a condition in which all things follow their destiny undisturbed. Elsewhere the prophet will talk of the lion lying down with the lamb, and children playing at the viper’s nest. This can only occur, of course, when major changes in nature are made. Therefore Isaiah’s vision of the Messianic Age will culminate in the prophecy of a new heaven and a new earth—there will be a whole new creation! It is at this point that we find a little difficulty in the New Testament. Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, no doubt; but His teachings on peace seem to be contradictory. He said, “Come unto me all you who labor … and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). He also said, “Peace I give you”—not as the world gives (John 14:27; 16:33). The peace that Jesus brings is a peace that passes all understanding. But Jesus also said, “I came not to bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34); “In this life you shall have trouble and persecution” (John 16:33). So Jesus did not hold out the immediate prospect of Isaianic peace to His disciples. He said that He was sending them among wolves, that brother would rise against brother, and that people would hate them and drag them before magistrates. The simple and obvious conclusion is that Jesus brought peace with God through redemption by His death and resurrection, and will eventually bring total peace through His exalted reign over all the earth. Jesus said that the kingdom was within us, and that it would also come with lightning flashes in the heavens (Luke 17:20-25). So we yet await the fulfillment of the Isaianic vision of peace in this trouble-torn world. C. Messiah will reign in righteousness (7). The prophet declares that peace and righteousness will characterize the reign of Messiah. Such is not the case now, but is to come. That is why Christians pray, “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” That reign will then issue into the eternal state (1 Cor. 15:23-25). All of this will be accomplished by the “zeal of the LORD.” On the one hand “zeal” here indicates the divine resentment for honor so long abused; and on the other hand it means that His love flares up to fulfill His promises to His own people. Conclusion The central idea of Isaiah’s oracle is as follows: Complete and lasting peace comes with the righteous reign of the divine Messiah. The prophet anticipates that the present gloom at the prospect of war will be replaced by the joy of peace. That peace can only be accomplished through a King who is a Wonderful Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the Prince of Peace. Righteousness and peace is impossible without Him; nothing is impossible for Him. The words of the prophet held out hope for his generation. God was not abandoning His people to invasion and disaster, but was promising that in spite of the prospect of war there was a glorious future ahead. And on the eve of the birth of Jesus the nation also felt the oppression of world conflict and the despair it brings. Into that world Jesus came, clearly claiming to be the Messiah of Israel, this Wonder King. But His first coming was to lay the foundation of the glory that would follow, that is, His death on the cross would reconcile people to God, bringing them into eternal peace with God through the forgiveness of sins. And so now as we look forward to His coming again, the words of Isaiah hold out hope for us too. Wars and conflicts abound; despair and depression accompany the fear of danger and aggression. But the Word of God is clear: there is coming a time of complete and lasting peace with the coming of Messiah. There is hope. We who know the LORD by faith need not despair as those without hope. But what then are we to do while we wait for this King? First, it is our task to carry on the ministry that Isaiah had, to announce to the world the only hope, Jesus the Messiah. Our primary concern is that people find eternal peace with God. We are the ambassadors for this King, calling others to be reconciled with God. And what goes along with this? Our lives must be purified from sin so that we may present to others the hope of righteousness. Our efforts must be tireless to declare to the world that the hope of peace rests with Jesus Christ and none other. And our promotion of causes of peace and righteousness must be consistent with our message, in our families, our communities and our world. But secondly, this passage also instructs us about the resources available to us even now from our King. We know that Jesus is the Wonderful Counsellor, so we may obtain instruction and guidance for our lives from Him and in His Word. He is the Mighty God, for all power is given to Him, so we may trust Him to accomplish great things in and through us. He is the Everlasting Father, so we may take comfort in the stability that knowing our sovereign Lord reigns brings. And, He is our Prince of Peace, so we may rest in Him, knowing that because of Jesus Christ all is well between us and God. In short, these descriptions of our Lord Jesus Christ are calls to greater prayer, greater confidence, and greater service. References Bourke, Joseph. “The Wonderful Counselor.” CBQ 22 (1960):123-143. Brodie, Louis. “The Children and the Prince: The Structure, Nature, and Date of Isaiah 6-12.” Bib. Theol. Bull. 9 (1979):27-31. Carlson, R. A. “The Anti-Assyrian Character of the Oracle in Isaiah 9:1-6.” VT 24 (1974):130-135. Crook, Margaret B. “Did Amos and Micah Know Isaiah 9:2-7 and 11:1-9?” JBL 73 (1954):144-151. Driver, G. R. “Isaiah ix 5-6.” VT 2 (1952):356-357. Rignell, Lars G. “A Study of Isaiah 9:2-7.” T Luth Q 7 (1955):31-35. Snaith, Norman H. “The Interpretation of El Gibbor in Isaiah ix. 5 (EVV v. 6).” The Expository Times 52 (1940-41):36-37. Treves, Marco. “Little Prince Pele-Joez.” VT 17 1967):464-77. Wolf, Carl Umhau. “Luther on the Christmas Prophecy, Isaiah 9.” T Luth Q 5 (1953):388-90. The Glorious Reign of the Messiah Isaiah 11:1-9 Introduction This chapter concludes the section of the book that we call the “Book of Immanuel.” The prophet has announced the supernatural birth if this one who will be known as “Immanuel,” has described his victory over evil and oppression, declared his provision of peace in the world, and described his nature through the throne names given in chapter nine. And because his message had relevance to the faith of his audience, he showed how these promises meant God would continue to deliver his people from their enemies. And so in chapter ten he spoke further of the judgment on rebellious people, as well as judgment on the Assyrians who would be oppressing the people of the land. Now, though, he turns his attention fully to the reign of the Messiah, and while emphasizing peace and righteousness again takes these themes to their greatest limit in the expected reign of the Messiah, what we call the Kingdom. All the points that the prophet makes are God’s revelation and therefore will be fulfilled completely. The prophets, however, did not know the time sequence of the events. Isaiah expected the birth of a child in a matter of years, and the destruction of Israel in about a dozen years, and the judgment on Assyria not too long after that. But in chapter nine the fulfillment comes seven hundred years later when God sent the Son into the world. But the peaceful reign of this wonder king has not happened yet. And what chapter eleven promises will come later with the second coming, some 2700 years and counting after Isaiah declared it. Exposition The following comments on this portion of the chapter are not intended to exhaust the material that is here, but to direct you in your detail study and reflection on the passage. The subject matter discussed here is very rich, and will take some time to assimilate. I. The Messiah will reign in righteousness by the power of the Spirit of the LORD (11:1-5). A. He will be a “Davidic” king (1). This first verse announces what the “Book of Immanuel” has been predicting all along, that there will be a future king in the line of David who will be known as Immanuel. The verses to follow explain exactly how God will be with us in this One. The ancient writers used the imagery of a tree to symbolize a kingdom (see also Daniel’s description of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, chapter 4). Israel was a tree. And at the judgment of God at the exile, God cut down the tree, leaving only a stump—the holy remnant. But in time there would come forth from the stock a branch that would become a great king over the restored nation. This passage uses the image of “a shoot out of the stock of Jesse” and “a branch out of his roots”—both building on the comparison with the tree, and so serving as implied comparisons (or hypocatastases for he technical name of the figure). The Hebrew for “shoot” (hoter) and “branch” (neser [pronounced neh-tser] ) invite comparison with the prophecies of the “Branch” (Hebrew semakh) in Zechariah 6:12 (and elsewhere). There the prophecy describes one who will be the Davidic king—and much more. He will be a priest as well. And Jeremiah 33 adds that He will be “Yahweh our Righteousness.” The reference to Jesse is deliberate. Had it said from David, one would have concluded that he would be born into the royal family as a crown prince and grow up in the ruling class. But Jesse was never king; born to Jesse means He will not start out as royalty. He would inherit the kingdom some day, but not at first. The name “Jesse” focuses our attention on His humble origins. B. He will reign by God’s Spirit (2, 3). After the initial announcement that “the Spirit of Yahweh” (ruah YHWH) was resting (nahah [pronounced nah-khah] from nuah [noo-ack]) upon him, six appositional statements are made about what this involved. The constructions all use the grammatical construction known as “the construct,” meaning a noun is followed and explained by a following noun know as the genitive case. In “the Spirit of the LORD” we would say that “LORD” is a “possessive genitive” classification—it is the LORD’s Spirit. But in the combinations that follow we might use either a “genitive of attribute,” but probably would be better to use an “objective genitive.” This works better with picking up the apposition from the first mention of the Spirit, explaining that that Spirit produces wisdom. Thus, the six qualifications (or three pairs) explain how this one will reign—and the six clearly come from the Holy Spirit. “A spirit of wisdom and discernment” (ruah hokmah u-binah [pronounced roo-ack khok-mah oo-bee-nah]) refers to his judicial abilities. One is reminded of the prayer of Solomon and the resulting wisdom by which he was able to rule. That wise rule, in all its best, is but a shadow of the coming reign. These two words need closer analysis. “Wisdom” (hokmah) is practical, ethical, and moral skillfulness, the ability to act within circumstances so that the results are productive and beneficial to the community. “Discernment” (binah) refers to the ability to distinguish or decide between things, such as different choices. It is possible that these two words form a hendiadys. Then the Spirit would be said to produce “discerning wisdom.” It may be, however, that the two are meant to be retained with their separate but complementary meanings. Wisdom will include discernment, as Proverbs teaches, and discernment will include wisdom. “A spirit of counsel and strength” (ruah ‘esah u-geburah [pronounced roo-ack ey-tsah oo-geh-voo-rah]) assures that the king will need no advisors. He will make the right plans and have the power to carry them out. We have already seen in chapter nine that he will be a “wonder of a counselor” (that noun is etymologically related to this one—kings were to be counselors); and we also saw in that same passage that he would be “the mighty god” (gibbor and geburah are etymologically related as well). This king, then, will make all the plans and fulfill them heroically as well. The fullness of the Spirit will empower him to do this. “A spirit of the knowledge and fear of the LORD” (ruah da’at weyir’at YHWH [roo-ack da-at veh-year-at ‘a-doe-nay]) describes the one who is rightly related to God. There can be no “knowledge of the LORD” without right action; and “the fear of the LORD” means no idolatry, no sin, no rebellious acts—only pure religion as it was divinely intended. The king will show in his every act that he is accountable to God—he will only do that which pleases the Father. Like none before him, this king will share in God’s ability through the Spirit. Thus, the prophecy of Immanuel begins to unfold here. Verse 3 has been variously translated: “he shall be of quick understanding,” “he shall make him perceptive,” or “his delight.” The form hariho (pronounced ha-ree-kho) in the text is critical—it is also difficult. It is the hiphil denominative verb related to ruah, “spirit, breath,” and to reah, “scent, odor.” Does the verb then mean “smell, perceive an odor”? If so, then the idea would be an implied comparison for “delight in” the fear of the LORD. If it is to be connected more closely to “Spirit,” then the idea would be “make him perceptive” in the fear of the LORD. In the context the latter seems overwhelmingly the case, since “odor” and “scent” have not been used, but “Spirit” has. And this makes more sense of what follows: he will not judge by sight, and not reprove by hearing. He will have the ability to see and judge things as they really are. Otto Kaiser says, “All other human judgment is a premature leap in the dark, constantly threatened by emotions and by ignorance of the true situation.” C. He will reign in righteousness (4, 5). Three words need to be studied here for the theological description of the reign (as well as for connections with other passages). The most important word is “righteousness” (sedeq [tseh-deck] ) because it is used twice here. This word, and the others in its group, have the basic idea of conforming to the standard—his rule will conform completely to God’s Law (compare Psalm 45 and its citation in Hebrews). It is paralleled with “uprightness” (mesor [may-shore] from yasar [yah-shar]) and with “faithfulness” (‘emunah [eh-moo-nah] from ‘aman [ah-man]). Righteousness, uprightness, and faithfulness will characterize His reign. Once these words have been defined, then the focus of them in the context must be stressed. They will enable the Messiah to champion the rights of the poor and the needy, and to punish or destroy the wicked; they will enable the Messiah to bring justice to the earth and be faithful to His word and to His mission and to His people. He will rule by the “rod of his mouth” and “the breath (note: ruah again) of his lips” are figures, the first is an implied comparison (word = rod that rules) and the second is probably a metonymy (breath produces the word that condemns). Thus, with the proper virtues, he will do the work of God himself (of course because He is God). II. The Messiah’s reign will bring peace to the whole of creation (11:6-9). A. The nature of the world will change (6-8). There follows then a series of examples of life under this king’s reign. What is portrayed here picks up the earlier prophecies of Isaiah 2:4 with the beating of the swords into farming instruments, and of Isaiah 9:7 with the promise of “peace.” Peace, to Isaiah, we have said, means a condition in the world in which all things can follow their divinely intended purposes or destiny uninterrupted. These three verses illustrate that condition. I would take the animals and the people mentioned here both literally and figuratively, that is, with the figure of speech known as synecdoche. They represent the types of animals: predators and prey, violent and peaceful, cunning and innocent. But it will take a change in nature for the lion to feed on straw rather than meat, or for a child to lead animals out to graze and back them back again, or for a suckling child can play where once only danger lurked. Some expositors argue that these are just expressions to say in the next life, heaven, there will be peace and harmony (although some would say “in the church”). But we have animals as well as people in mind here. Why include the animals if something was not intended for them as well, as other Scriptures confirm? The study of the text must explain why the figures are used as well as what they mean. Isaiah clearly foresees that when the Messiah comes there will be a change of conditions in the world order—in the curse, if you will. Paul also observes that the whole earth groans, waiting for the day of redemption (Rom. . Obviously, such changes did not occur at Christ’s first advent, and no amount of exegetical juggling can get the words to say they did. The second advent, the Great Jubilee, will bring major changes (and you wold have to ignore or explain away scores of verses that describe the changes that will occur). B. There will be no more danger or destruction (9). This verse explains the point of the representative examples listed above. When righteousness will truly prevail, the world will be brought into the condition that God had first intended it to have. Two verbs are used here that need clarification. “They shall not hurt” is yare`u (yah-ey-oo, from ra’a’); this word is related to the common word in the Old Testament for “evil, pain, calamity.” With the cessation of evil comes the cessation of harm that it brings. The other word is “destroy” (yashitu [yash-khee-too] from sahat [shah-khat); this word means “corrupt, ruin, spoil, destroy.” All this will end with the reign of the Messiah. The reason is clear: the knowledge of the LORD will cover the earth. Thus, Isaiah is describing not merely a regional king honored and empowered by God, but a universal reign of righteousness through the Spirit of the LORD, in which nature is changed and all will know the LORD. This can only be possible with the divine reign of Christ when He comes in glory. I do not think that the wording of verse 9 can be watered down to say that knowledge about the LORD will be available to Judah. Isaiah focuses his attention on Zion, the holy mountain, because it is and has been the center of attack and affliction; but when it is safe and at peace it is due to Messiah’s presence and powerful dominion over the earth. Conclusion The passage was clearly laid out as the hope for the people troubled by wicked rulers and endless wars. As in Isaiah’s day, so now, the people of God can be encouraged that there is a glorious future, that the world will see the day of redemption, that the oppressed and the weak will be delivered, and that oppressors be either destroyed or changed. Such a hope helps believers to live above the curse, fixing their eyes on the hope of glory. It would have been in Isaiah’s day an evangelistic message as well: there is not a ghost of a chance for safety or salvation for this fallen world in any other except in the Messiah who is to come. But besides being a message of comfort or warning that we too must declare, this passage can be applied to the spiritual life as well. In other words those who believe in Christ become subjects of the King; they share His ministry and receive benefits from him. They are to emulate the King. And so we can make some specific applications for Christians who are trying to be like their King. The first point is based on the fact that the Messiah will have the Spirit of God working in and through Him. And we know that when Jesus returned to heaven, He sent that same Spirit continue what He began. Thus Christians have been given the same Spirit that governs and controls their King. And that Holy Spirit can produce wisdom, might, and fear of the LORD. Second, once the subjects of the King are controlled by this Spirit (and how to be controlled by the Spirit is a full study itself), they will see that they are being moved toward righteousness. We who are in His kingdom, which is a kingdom of righteousness, ruled by the king or righteousness, must promote righteousness wherever we are. Third, Spirit filled believers will also promote and extend peace in the world, insofar as they can. They must champion righteousness, and righteousness will enjoy peace. They will not usher in the age of righteousness, but they will bring others into the kingdom by emulating the telling of the glorious King . References Crook, Margaret B. “A Suggested Occasion for Isaiah 9:2-7 and 11:1-9.” JBL 73 (1949):213-224. Erlandsson, Seth. “Isaiah 11 and Its Historical Background.” Wis Luth Q 71 (1974):94-113. Freedman, David Noel. “Is Justice Blind? (Isa. 11:3f.).” Bib 52 (1971):536. The Burdens Upon The Nations Isaiah 13:1—23:18 This next major section of the Book of Isaiah contains judgments against the nations before the establishment of the reign of the Messiah. The time of the judgment certainly would be in the immediate future of the prophetic vision, perhaps with the Assyrian invasion; but at times they will reach down through time to anticipate later, even eschatological judgments. So these chapters have been taken by commentators to anticipate some of the judgments found in Revelation 4-19. The cursing here is an outworking of the oracle of Genesis 12:1-3 where the promises based on the covenant were first made. We must remember that Isaiah is a prophet, and as such he was called upon to interpret history, past, present and future. How would he know that this invasion was part of God’s judgment? Was that just his opinion? Well, because he predicted things he was known as a prophet of the LORD. So these oracles were seen as divine revelation. Isaiah 14:3-23 Divine Judgment on the Evil Kingdom Introduction There is a good deal of critical debate about this chapter, which you may read at your pleasure. On the surface the passage is clearly a taunt of proud Babylon. That would put a Babylonian message in the first half of the book, a real problem for some critical scholars who strictly put Babylonian material into the second half of the book, and attribute it to a second Isaiah. So this section is often classified by them as a later insertion from Deutero-Isaiah of Babylon. Other scholars see it as a taunt of the Assyrian king, Sennacherib, and not Babylon at all, since Assyria is mentioned in verse 25. But Babylon is very clearly the focus of chapter 13; and whereas verses 24-27 may be about Assyria, the section in chapter 14 that we are addressing seems to follow clearly on the oracle against Babylon in chapter 13, and claims to be against Babylon. There is no reason why “Babylon” here should be replaced by “Assyria” in the text. It is possible that Babylon is mentioned but Assyria meant if at the time of the oracle Babylon was a subject state to the Assyrian Empire. Of course, all these kings of Assyria and Babylon were proud and ruthless, and so it would fit either setting. But in this context the passage is part of the oracle on the end of the Babylonian empire that would rise again and capture Judah. Exposition Prologue (14:1, 2) The prophet begins this oracle with a word of comfort and hope for Israel—in line with his theme of “a remnant shall return.” He declares that God will have mercy on them and restore them to their land. More than that, they will rule over their oppressors. I. The righteous may confidently anticipate the LORD’s judgment on evil oppressors (14:3, 4) The passage begins with words of comfort and hope for the righteous who must endure suffering and oppression in this world at the hands of the wicked who rule and terrorize the world. Verse 3 announces the promise of rest from oppression (the verse is the prodasis [“when”] of verse 4): “When Yahweh shall give you rest … .” The verb “rest” (haniah [pronounced hah-nee-ack] from nuah [noo-ack]) is a common theme in the prophetic literature about the future; it picks up the theme about the sabbath rest from the beginning of creation (Gen. 2:1-3) and the conquest of the land (Ps. 95), and anticipates a final restoration to it i the age to come (Heb. 3, 4). Of course, the agent who grants this rest is the Lord Jesus, the Messiah Himself: “I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). The rest promised here is from sorrow (me’osbeka [pronounced may-ots-beh-kah] from ‘asab [ah-tsav]), from fear (mirogzeka [mi-rog-zeh-ka] from ragaz) and from bondage (ha’abodah [hah-a-vo-dah] from ‘abad [ah-vad]). These three expressions describe the difficulty of the people of God in this fallen world, notably under the pagan—Babylonian—domination. The first word, “sorrow,” is right out of the curse narrative of Genesis 3—pain in childbirth for the woman, and pain in tilling the ground for the man. Fear and bondage are the other two agonies that Israel would have to experience, and only divine rest from such servitude would heal. The fear described here is the agitation, quivering, trembling—not the pious term for “fear” or reverence. So the writer anticipates a time when the people will be set free from their troubles and sing a victory song. Verse 4 is the apodasis ( … then): when you have this rest, [then] you may take up this taunt against Babylon. The word for “taunt” is masal (mah-shal), a term normally used for a “proverb”—a wayside saying, observation, similitude, aphorism. The taunt here is: “How the oppressor has come to an end!” The taunt that follows delights in the sudden collapse of the nation of Babylon. Two things are worth noting here. First, Assyria was the major threat in the early days of the prophet, from his call in 742 down to the invasion of Sennacherib in 701. But the prophet later turned his attention on Babylon when the King welcomed the emissary and showed him the treasury. As mentioned above, here we have the theme of Babylon in the first half of the book, although Babylon is not yet the power it was to become in a few decades. Here the prophet looks ahead to the enemy who, like Assyria, will oppress the people. The word is that all such oppressors will be destroyed before the great Messianic Age. Second, the destruction of Babylon would lead to the restoration of Israel in 536 B.C., but the promise of the glorious appearance and reign of Messiah would not come about in that year, or shortly thereafter, as history shows. So “Babylon” would be the immediate fulfillment, the immediate reference point; but “Babylon” would also typify a greater “Babylon” of the future (whether actually Babylon rebuilt or a nation like Babylon was is too difficult to say; see Revelation 19). The reason the typology works is that the real power behind either empire—Babylon then or the Babylon to come—is the evil one. So this song celebrates both victory over the physical enemies of the people as well as the spiritual powers behind those enemies. II. When evil is judged, great joy and security will prevail on earth, and in hell great commotion will accompany those entering judgment (14:5-11). A. There will finally be great joy on earth (5-8). Verses 5 and 6 declare that God will break the ruthless tyrant. The pride of Babylon is focused on her ruthless king, or her kingship in general that characterized the proud nation. The terms “rod” and “staff” refer to the dominion of the pagan rulers, and so they are metonymies—they are the symbols of authority. (If you argue that there was no rod or staff in their hand as a symbol, then you would have to classify these as hypocatastases, implied comparisons). The point is that the power of these oppressors is t be broken (sabar [shah-bar]). They ruled with a continuous stroke of anger, afflicting other nations; but soon they would be broken down. Here is another expression of talionic justice. Verse 7 affirms that this judgment will bring great joy to the people. The key terms here are “rest and quiet” (nahah saqetah [nah-khah shah-keh-tah]) and the joy, or ringing cry (rinnah from ranan) that will break out in all the earth. These are the joyful shouts that exclaim the cessation of oppression and the beginning of lasting peace. Verse 8 speaks of security restored. The “trees” rejoice since no one has ever come up to cut them down. If these are implied comparisons, then they indicate Israel is the trees and the oppressor the cutter. But if the actual trees are meant, the figure would be personification; the forests would be delighted that the enemies no longer will come through cutting down trees to burn their fires and make their ramps. This seems to be what the verse is saying. B. There will be great commotion in Hell (9-11). Verses 9-11 give the other half of this section, describing the commotion in Hell when the oppressor has been cast down. Here a word study on “sheol” (se’ol [sheh-ole]) would be in order. The Babylonian world had such a common use of the themes of magic, demons, Shades, or Hell, that this approach in the taunt would be obviously appropriate to those who knew about them. Here sheol refers to the realm of the departed spirits, all those who died in unrighteousness, without God, without hope, without their pomp, and left to wander in darkness (see Ps. 49). Verse 9 announces that sheol is in tumult (the same word for “rage” of the nations in Psalm 2:1). The meeting party is made up of the kings of the earth and others who are already there. “Shades” (often translated “spirits”) is a term for departed spirits (Hebrew: repa’im [teh-fah-eem); it needs a good bit of study in its usages to see its range of meanings and applications.. Verses 10 and 11 record their taunt of the descending oppressor. “Your pomp” has been brought down to sheol. The “maggots are spread over // the worms cover” is a graphic line of their physical destruction. The term “maggots,” rimmah, is actually a term for the destroying power of decay. In Ugaritic texts it was venerated as a god, the god Rimmon, if the link is correct. But that term could possibly be from another root since Rimmon was also a god of vegetation. Nevertheless, there could be a word play here, a paronomasia; it certainly would suggest to the Hebrew reader an allusion to the Canaanite material. The figures with the words “maggots” and “worms” are probably metonymies, referring to the starting of the decay in the grave that changes pomp into putrification, and bringing down the arrogant to sheol, the land of the shades. III. God will bring down the proud (14:12-23). The taunt now focuses on how far the brilliant king has fallen. The prophet makes the comparison between him and the morning star, and then writes the taunt out fully that the people will sing. Verse 12 addresses the “shining one, the son of the morning.” The Hebrew term for “shining one” (NIV “morning star”) is helel (hay-lale); the root word means “shining, brilliant” (it is probably related to halal, the verb “to praise,” as in a glowing report). The classical translation was “Lucifer” (etymologically connect to “light”), although that has been replaced in modern renderings. With this section we discover that we have a possible double meaning—not unusual for Hebrew poetry. The word helel describes the brilliance of the oppressing king, claiming to be the son of the morning star. But some scholars have seen a second reference in it to Satan, or a spirit force behind the throne. In the Old Testament “stars” may refer to angelic or demonic powers. And the pagan kings claimed to be divine, or at least the offspring of the gods. It is the view of the Hebrew writers that back of the major powers in the empires is a satanic or demonic spirit. The prince of Persia, for example, is both a king and the spirit force behind him in Daniel. In Ezekiel 28 we have a song to the King of Tyre. But the language seems to transcend the king of Tyre, for he is described as the anointed Cherub who was perfect in every way when he walked in the holy mountain (heaven) with God in Eden, until evil was found in him. So the language of the chapter goes way beyond the King of Tyre, although it is about the King of Tyre. As such, the chapter traces the beginning of evil to Satan when he was in heaven. But it will not explain to our satisfaction how evil began; it only uses the passive voice: “evil was found in you.” The Bible will trace it back no further than that; but the Bible will make it clear that God is not the author of sin. Now if Isaiah 14 is the same kind of chapter, then it may be referring to that same evil—the pride that led to Satan’s being cast down from heaven. Lucifer, or Helel if you prefer, would then show the glory that Satan once had. Indeed, Paul says that he still can change himself into an angel of light to deceive people. But the primary meaning of the chapter is the human king who was filled with pomp and vainglory, who fell quickly from his exalted position. The hint to the spirit force behind him is not very strong, but rather subtle. The passage is prophetic, looking to the future time of the destruction of this wicked king, and that is why it is written in the past tense. Verse 13 portrays the great pride of this one who said he would exalt himself above God: “I will ascend to heaven, // I will raise my throne above the stars of God.” He arrogantly thought that he was suitable for heaven, higher than the angels, fit to join the assembly of the gods. In verse 14 he thought he could make himself like the Most High. Such was the ambition of these powerful despots who thought they were divine. But the contrast is: “But you are brought down to the grave // to the depths of the pit” (note bor // she’ol), according to verse 15. So this section shows the age-old pattern in divine judgment—great human pride will be abased. Pride should not be trivialized to thinking more highly of oneself in mundane matters. It is religious pride that tries to usurp God’s throne and will in no way submit to the LORD. Verse 16 records the amazement of those in hell of those who witness his fall; it is in the form of a question, an erotesis: “Is this the one who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble?” Here too it would refer primarily to the king of Babylon, the empire builder who kept puppet empires at bay and who would not let captives go home. When divine judgment has fallen, such kings are nothing. This evokes the amazement over them. Where is all their power now? Verses 18-19 show that this one will not even have a state funeral. Kings normally lie in state when they die, but this one will be cast out of his tomb. To stress the indignity of this the prophet uses a couple of similes: “like a rejected branch” and “like a corpse trampled under foot.” The image of a branch is used here ironically; it often is used for a king who continues a dynasty. Here it is cut off and cast down. The other simile is of a trodden carcass. He will be like the rest of the carnage on the battle field. There will be no honor or dignity in his death. The section ends with a brief summation (verse 20-23) that there would be no normal burial for this one, because he has ruined his land and his people. The idea of remaining nameless forever, which is the thrust of the last few lines, is an expression that signifies non-existence. His death will be ignominious. To be forgotten is to be utterly destroyed—even from memory. But the death will also be for the land, the great land of Babylon. It will be turned into a place for owls, a swampland; God would sweep it with the broom of destruction (implied comparison). Babylon was destroyed by Persia in 538 B.C.; and after a while the city itself was ruined, and lay in ruins for 2500 years, until Sadam Hussein began rebuilding it as part of the cultural heritage of Iraq. In the days of Isaiah, the people of Judah had no idea of the length of time between the oracle and its fulfillment. They might have expected it soon. But they did not know how the sequence of judgment with the exile, deliverance from Babylon, and judgment on Babylon would work out in Old Testament times, nor could they have known that there would be a glorious future destruction of “Babylon” at the end of the age when Messiah comes in glory (Rev. 19). Epilogue (14:24-27) In this little section Isaiah declares that this kind of destruction is what God had purposed for Assyria as well. So it looks like he has made an application of his prophetic taunt song to the immediate situation. But this little addition, especially within the context of the Assyrian crisis, has led many scholars to conclude that Sennacherib was the one intended in chapter 14. Babylon would then have been referred to figuratively for the Mesopotamian region in a comparison of Assyria’s immense pride with that of Babylon. This avoids having to have the prophet look down the future for an oracle against Babylon; but it still retains the difficulty of the Babylonian motif so early. And besides, the straightforward use of the name Babylon would lead to the conclusion he meant Babylon. The other oracles are against the nations so named. And he certainly was not hesitant in using the name Assyria when that is what he meant. Conclusion The passage then has the tone of triumph for the people of God. Its primary application would be jubilation for the believers. They will have the rest, the release from fear, bondage, and oppression. Only faith in the LORD leads to this. Believers can anticipate that their oppressors—and the evil force behind them—will be completely and utterly destroyed, since God has no tolerance for pride and arrogant oppression. Many passages about divine judgment come to mind in connection to this. Among them the New Testament oracle about how Babylon has fallen, Babylon—that symbol of the present evil world system, the anti-kingdom. Certainly on a much smaller level (by secondary application) we may say that there is a warning here for anyone not to live according to the standards of the evil empire. God will abase the proud. But do not make this point in place of the main point about divine judgment on the greatest pride, rejection and replacement of God. The scope here is cosmic; the victory is spiritual and final; the time is eschatological. With all that in mind, it is worth noting that anyone choosing pride and oppression is heading for destruction, the same destruction as their god, the god of this world. References Alden, Robert L. “Lucifer, Who or What?” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society” 11 (1968):35-39. Craigie, P. C. “Helel, Athtar and Paethon (Jes. 14:12-15).” ZAW 85 (1973):223-226. Eareckson, Vincent O. “The Originality of Isaiah 14:27.” VT 20 (1970):490-491. Erlandsson, Seth. “The Burden of Babylon, A Study of Isaiah 13:2—14:23.” Springfielder 38 1974):1-12. McKay, J. W. “Helel and the Dawn-Goddess: A Reexamination of the Myth in Isaiah 14:12-15.” VT 20 (1970):451-464. Orlinsky, Harry M. “Madhebah in Isaiah 14:4.” VT 7 (1957):202-203. Vanderburgh, Frederick A. “The Ode on the King of Babylon, Isaiah 14:4b-21.” AJSL 29 (1913):111-121. The Deliverance of Judah’s King Isaiah 38:1-22 1. The Account (38:1-8) This chapter records another lesson on faith for believers of all times. It is faith in the power of the LORD to do what seems to be the impossible. In the sickness of death, King Hezekiah prayed and had his life extended by fifteen years (1-7). For a sign of that promise, the sun went back ten degrees on the sun dial (8). In response to this gracious provision of extended life, Hezekiah recorded his song of thanksgiving for that answer to prayer (9-20). The last two verses record what Hezekiah had done for the healing, and what he had asked as a sign (21, 22). Any exposition of the song will have to provide the historic background for the situation. 2. The Song of Thanksgiving (38:9-20) To capture the tone of the song and get the proper interpretation of the lines, the literary genre must be established. This is a classic declarative praise song, a todah song that would be offered in the Sanctuary, accompanied by the giving of the peace offering. So it is jubilation! It is a praise in celebration of life, thanks to divine intervention. The point can then be rather readily captured by anyone who has had health restored, especially if dramatically from an apparent life-threatening situation. Of course, people who have had health restored from lesser ailments can also appreciate the blessing of life. But this is the tone that must be caught in the exposition of the passage. In a typical declarative praise psalm the first part will include a looking back to the problem and the prayer. Unfortunately, many translations and a number of expositions have chosen to use the English present tense, giving the impression he is still praying. But it is a praise psalm; this is simply reporting the need when he prayed. Therefore, it should not be the main part of the message, nor should it make a separate point. It lays the foundation for the praise. The parts of the passage according to the declarative psalm structure are as follows: the report of the lament (10-12), the report of the prayer at that time (13-14), the report of the deliverance (15-16), and the didactic section with the praise proper (17-20). The first part is a review of what happened (10-16); the last part is the praise (17-20). The expositional arrangement could group these in a number of ways, just so the point of each section is maintained. I would put the first two sections together as the report of the trouble (10-14), and then as sub-points have the lament and the prayer. My second section would be the report of the deliverance (15-16). The third section is the climax, the praise with the lesson (17-20). The application from a praise psalm is pretty straightforward. People should do what he is doing, praising God publicly, individually, for the additional life given to them. But note that in a praise psalm there are always specific reasons for praise and certain lessons learned. Here there are two major things: God restores people to life to serve Him further, and God lets people go through anguish for their welfare—to improve. There is always the praise for the healing, but there will certainly also be the questions as to why God allowed this to happen. The welfare of the sufferer concerns spiritual benefits, to be sure; and that means that the faith of him and others will be strengthened through the entire process. It is sad that in order for people to grow spiritually God often has to put them in positions of desperate dependency on Him. Usually when they have things going their way the spiritual life becomes less urgent. A secondary application would be to encourage others who are ill and suffering, or even at death’s door, to pray for life. That is the purpose of a testimony of praise. Exposition (Part One: The Report of the Deliverance) I. Faced with the prospect of possible death, believers can pray to God for help (38:10-14). A. Believers may face the treat of pre-mature death (10-12). 10 I said, “In the prime of my life must I go through the gates of death, and be deprived of the rest of my years?” Beginning with verse 10 the king is recalling what he thought when he learned that he might die pre-maturely. This is looking back—he is no longer in danger for this is a praise psalm! There is no clear indication that these lines should be questions, but they certainly could be, and would make very good sense that way as he reasoned through what was happening, perhaps expressing his amazement that he might die. The point is that this is not the death of someone in a ripe old age—it was at the noon time of his life, before he lived out his whole course. 11 I said, “I will not again see the LORD, the LORD, in the land of the living; no longer will I look on mankind, or be with those who now dwell in this world. The Hebrews were convinced that they should live and worship God in this life as long as they could. For them to die and go to the next world was not a wonderful thought, nor a solution to anything. Death was an enemy that God could and should conquer. I take it that the expression “see the LORD” refers to worship in the Sanctuary where they would see evidence of the LORD’s favor through the praises of Israel, and so “LORD” would be a metonymy of cause (compare Psalm 63 as well as other passages on this). Certainly going to heaven would be perfection and glory; but edifying praise, prayers for intervention, and active participation in God’s spiritual program only work in this life while we have life. Hezekiah did not want this experience to end early. 12 My dwelling has been removed and carried away from me like a shepherd’s tent. Like a weaver I have rolled up my life, and He has cut me off from the loom; day and night you make an end of me.” This verse uses two similes to make the point. The habitation or dwelling is probably his life, or more specifically his body (so possibly a metonymy itself); like a tent it was being folded up and taken away—you have to imagine here bedouin tents and how easily they are removed. The other image is that of the weaver; Hezekiah’s life, under this figure, was rolled up and about to be cut off—he had spun his last work. God was bringing him to an early and sudden death. B. Believers may pray for divine healing (13, 14). In these two verses Hezekiah recalls how he prayed for God to intervene and spare his life. 13 I waited patiently until morning but like a lion He broke all my bones; day and night You make an end of me. This verse tells how Hezekiah waited for the LORD to restore him. “Waited patiently” could very well be a metonymy of adjunct since it accompanies his praying. The word “morning” is clearly a hypocatastasis, comparing the recovery to full health to the morning. But it did not come quickly because the LORD was apparently “destroying” him. “Bones” is a metonymy of subject, meaning the whole person encased in the boney framework. “Lion” is of course another simile. And the expression of breaking all the bones may be an extension of that simile, but it is certainly hyperbolic as well. 14 I cried like a swift or a thrush I moaned like a morning dove; My eyes grew weak as I looked to the heavens, “I am troubled; O LORD, come to my aid.” Here we have the praying and the prayer that occurred while he was waiting on the LORD. His cries and moans are compared to birds (similes), suggesting that he was losing his strength and resolve and could only moan softly like an injured dove. To “look on the heavens” probably is metonymical for his prayer. When he prayed he grew tired and exhausted because of his sickness. The “eyes” are singled out (synecdoche) for the whole body because they easily indicate failing health and vigor, both to himself (he cannot see, or cannot keep his eyes open) and to others (who see in his eyes that he is near death). His prayer is for God to come to his aid. The Hebrew text here is li ‘orbeni ( lee or-bay-nee), “be my surety.” He wants God to pledge to him, or perhaps, to be his pledge, his assurance, his surety of life. The word then is also a metonymy (of cause) since he wants God to assure him of life and health. II. God delights in answering the fervent prayers of the righteous (38:15, 16) A. The appeal must come from the righteous (15). Verse 15 tells of the answer to his prayer; it could easily go with the preceding section as part of the prayer, but I have put it here as part of the discussion of the answer to the prayer because it seems to be a transition and not part of the request. Moreover, verse 16, the report of the deliverance, is tied strongly to this verse. 15 What can I say? He has both spoken to me and He Himself has done this. I will walk humbly all my years because of the anguish of my soul. I have used the term “righteous” in my point to capture the spirit of this verse and make a link to the New Testament’s affirmation of the prayer of the righteous. God is the one who can deliver Hezekiah; but God is the one who has done this to him. How can that be explained? Probably not to our satisfaction. One can only conclude that God has a plan for our lives that can put us through all of this, so that we might cry to Him for healing. Therefore, faced with such power over our lives, and seeing no one else we can turn to for help, we like this king must “walk softly” before Him. This hypocatastasis would refer to a careful life of obedience—making sure that we do not make the wrong step. This idea includes faith in the LORD and obedience to His Word and living so as to be pleasing to Him. God is willing to restore to health someone who will be obedient to Him; someone who would return to a life of self-indulgence and unrighteousness has no appeal at all. B. God delights in saving life (16). 16 O Lord, by such things men live, and my spirit finds life in them too. You restored me to life and let me live. Here is the clear report that the prayer was answered. This sixteenth verse develops a principle from what the LORD has done—by this men live. Those who believe in the LORD and pray to Him, living a life of cautious obedience—they are blessed by God with life. And this is why God blessed Hezekiah—his spirit revived when he knew what God was doing to him, and what God wanted to develop in him. So from this comes the great proclamation of praise in 16b: “You restored me to health (tahlimeni [takh-lee-may-nee] from halam [khah-lam]), you let me live (wehahayeni [veh-ha-kha-yey-nee ] from hayah [khah-yah] ). I would spend some time on these words, defining them and illustrating them, because this is the first praise report. It means, of course, that God has power over our health, our life, and our death. Psalm 116 affirms, “Precious in the eyes of the LORD is the death of His saints”—or, nobody dies without God’s “say-so.” (Part Two: The Actual Praise for the Deliverance) III. God answers prayer and restores health in order that His people might praise Him forever (38:17-20). A. Praise is edifying (17). 17 Surely it was for my benefit that I suffered anguish; in Your love you kept me from the pit of destruction; You have put all my sins behind your back. All biblical praise is meant to teach something as a means of explaining a difficulty or encouraging faith. Here the king acknowledges that this bitter anguish was for his benefit (Hebrew lesalom [leh-shah-loam]), his welfare, or wholeness, or completeness—his health and well-being. There is simply no other way to develop this. Jesus Christ, even though he was a son, the Book of Hebrews tells us, learned obedience through the things that He suffered. To learn from suffering is critical; it is not sufficient merely to recover or be healed. In the same verse the king explains that God kept him from destruction by His love and did not let his sins condemn him. Here is praise for the attribute of faithful love that was the cause of the deliverance, and that did not use his sins as reason to destroy him. Most praises will focus on one attribute of God—this is it. So we learn from this and other Scripture that God loves His people and will preserve them from destruction; but in the process He may put them through bitter anguish so that they might have a stronger faith, greater obedience (tread softly) and better praise. B. Praise is the declaration of God’s faithfulness (18). 18 For the grave cannot praise you, death cannot sing your praise; those who go down to the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness. Here we have a teaching that is common to the psalms. The grave cannot praise—he is no good to God if he dies and goes to the grave because he could not then tell how God saved him from the grave. Only the living can praise God’s faithfulness. Hezekiah’s experience of God’s faithfulness was that God mercifully restored to life His covenant believer. We will be able to praise God in heaven throughout eternity; but only in this life can we praise God by saying, “He kept me alive to serve more in this life.” C. Praise is to be unending (19, 20). 19 The living, the living—they praise You, as I am doing today; fathers tell their children about your faithfulness. 20 The LORD saves me and we will sing with stringed instruments all the days of our lives in the temple of the LORD. The praise of Hezekiah will encourage others to pray when they are sick, so that the living will rejoice and praise in the way that God grants full life. The theme of this praise should be very clear by these last verses—God restored the king to life. Therefore, today and throughout all his life, he says, he will praise the LORD—not just once for the answer to the prayer. Every day that he has is a gift from God, and he will declare that truth. Conclusion The basic lesson from the point of the psalm is rather clear: If God restores us to life—or even preserves our lives from danger—unending praise in the Sanctuary must come from us to Him. We know this; we simply do not do it. We are eager and diligent to pray, because we are in a panic and desperate. But how soon we forget the reason that God delivers us from illness and death. He expects our public praise. And then there is a parallel in the spiritual world. By God’s love and grace we have been given new life in Christ—salvation. So with our whole lives all the time we should be praising God in public. After all, He redeemed us that we might be trophies of His grace in this world. References Ackroyd, P. R. “An Interpretation of the Babylonian Exile: A Study of 2 Kings 20, Isaiah 38-39.” Scottish Journal of Theology 27 (1974):329-352. Hurwitz, Marshall S. “The Septuagint of Isaiah 36-39 in Relation to that of 1-35, 40-66.” HUCA 28 (1957):22-38. A Message of Comfort to God’s People Isaiah 40:1-31 Introduction With this chapter we begin the second portion of the Book of Isaiah, which has as its common theme the salvation and future blessing of God’s people. When you work in this section of the book, you have to work on several levels of significance or application, and you have to work on them in the proper order. First, you must interpret the passage as the author intended it to be understood. This means that your first consideration would be to think about how the message would fit the exiled community as they were being encouraged to leave Babylon and return to the land. The prophet was giving them a message they would need later when they were in exile. Recall that the Jews had been taken into captivity in three waves, in 605 B.C., 597 B.C. and 586 B.C. when Jerusalem was destroyed. They knew that they were to be there for 70 years, and so toward the end of that exile they were to be prepared to leave. They did leave in 536 when Persia ruled the land. But a lot of the Jews did not go back to the land, but stayed in the east. As we said before, Isaiah did not know these dates, because he is writing beforehand. He probably thought his audience would be in exile, and she he was giving them the message of comfort. Of course, you will still word the theology of the passage in the form of timeless truths, but the arena of its primary application will be this community. Second, and related to the first, you must consider the impact of the message on the immediate audience. This is true of all prophetic passages, in the Old or New Testament. They may predict something far off in the future, but the immediate audience will learn some basic principle under that discussion that will build faith, reprove, or instruct. The theological message of the passage will be the same; but the response to it will be different for different times, perhaps preventive as opposed to remedial. Even if Isaiah’s immediate audience never went into captivity, they would have learned from the sermons to repent (and hopefully stave off the exile), and to know that even if they went they were still the covenant people (if they believed) and would be coming back. That would have encouraged them. Third, you must then consider how the passage would be understood in Gospel times. This step is usually important because the prophecy probably will have some Messianic import. Often the Messianic passage will have a meaning back in the Old Testament times that is but a type or a foreshadowing of the Christ event. Or, the Isaianic passage may be quoted in the New Testament, especially in some apostolic teaching on doctrine or practice, and this provides a good intermediate step to the present application. Isaiah 40 was applied to John and Jesus in their missions. Fourth, you then may look for the significance or application for the modern audience. Here you are looking for similar conditions to the original setting so that you can apply the theology in a similar way. In many cases in these chapters we can think in terms of the anticipation of the second coming and the fulfillment of the promises, just as they were looking for divine intervention and the fulfillment. Many of these oracles have both the immediate and the ultimate applications in mind, and so that makes this approach a little easier to see. Based on Isaiah 40, for example, what John did as a voice announcing the coming of Messiah (the fulfillment of the prophecy) we too can do since there is now a second coming we anticipate (an application of the fulfillment). The passages are all different, some more directly related than others. But if you have done the proper contextual exegesis and worked up the theology the passage teaches, the levels of application will unfold fairly easily because they will be similar. Isaiah 40, for example, announced the “coming” of the LORD to intervene and deliver the people from bondage; so that the people were to prepare for this and to comfort others and to wait on the LORD. That was true on the eve of the departure from Babylon (where they expected divine intervention but not an actual coming of God into their midst). It was true on the eve of the first coming when John came preaching repentance because the Messiah was coming (and that Messiah actually was God coming into the world, but as a shepherd). And it is true today as we look for the second coming (when He will come in glory); must wait for it, prepare for it, and announce the comfort it brings. This chapter is the prologue to the whole series of oracles and songs that follow; it has the basic themes that are found throughout the following chapters. The passage begins with promise (1-11). It opens with an instruction to comfort the people of God (1,2), followed by the oracle of the one preparing the way (3-8), and the heralds announcing the coming of the LORD in accordance with the Word of God (9-11). Israel was in need of such good news because they were in captivity under Gentile domination. The heralds bring the good tidings not to Babylon, but to Zion where the glory of the LORD will reappear when He leads His people like a Shepherd. The second part of the chapter is an encouragement that God is able to do all this (12-26). The message of comfort is based on the omnipotence of God (12-17) and the incomparable nature of God (18-26). Consequently, the people who know Him are instructed not to mistrust Him but to renew their faith as they wait for the promises (27-31). So the first section is instruction about the coming intervention, the second section is the theological basis for it, and the third is application. A quick reading through the chapter will surface several imperatives, and these will give us an immediate focus on the direction of our exposition: “comfort” in verses 1 and 2; “prepare” in verse 4; “go up” and shout in verse 9 (and point out the coming of the LORD in verse 10). Then, in the last part of the passage there are principles and lessons but not in the form of imperatives: the people should renew their faith (26), stop mistrusting the LORD (27), build up their faith (29), and wait expectantly for the deliverance (31). I will come back to the application later, but it looks to me like the lessons in verses 1-11 are geared to the faithful remnant, the messengers, and the lessons in the end are for the general population who are weak in faith, or lacking in faith. The first are the heralds, the voices; the latter the nation in general. If I am planning my exposition, and my study to get ready for that exposition, I will probably not do as much detailed analysis of the middle section for several reasons. First, it is one of the most magnificent sections in the book and if I try to simplify it I might diminish it. Second, it is pretty clear what God is saying. I might have to explain an expression or a question—but an excellent reading of it will do very well. Third, my main emphasis will focus on all the instructions that employ key theological words and unusual figures of speech. I would certainly not treat this material lightly or quickly, for it is the theological basis of the instructions; but there are not that many things I need to work on there for the exegesis. Exposition I. The promise of the coming of the LORD brings comfort and instruction to God’s people (40:1-11). I chose to use the expression “coming of the LORD” in my point rather than “divine intervention” (the way it would be understood by Isaiah’s audience) because the word is in the text and I shall have to explain it anyway, and because in the complete fulfillment it is an actual coming as well as real divine intervention (both first and second). A. ”Comfort my people” (1, 2). I have chosen in these subpoints to pick the key phrases out of each section because they capture the point nicely. This is not always possible, but here it is because of the different messengers. In the development of this section the text employs different heralds; the first two verses call for the remnant to announce a threefold comfort to the people. And this is all tied to the message of the first eleven verses, that God will now deliver His people. Verse 1 calls for the word of comfort to go out. These imperatives, “comfort, comfort” are in the plural—nahamu, nahamu (pronounced na-kha-moo)—meaning that the prophet and the school of the prophets, or perhaps even the whole faithful remnant, are to announce comfort to the people in general. The verb nakham is crucial here. In the niphal verbal system the verb means “to repent”; but here in the piel system it means “to comfort, console.” I would do some reading on this word, but the meaning is pretty much the same as in English. It suggests that the people are discouraged, depressed, suffering—and the prophets will bring them hope, encouragement, good news, to ease and soothe their troubled hearts. The expression “comfort” would be a metonymy of effect; the cause would be what the prophets would say to the people, and that is coming next. Verse 2 literally says “speak to the heart.” This is a poetic expression (using a metonymy of subject, “heart”) that represents an intimate and loving speech, sincere and heartfelt. For example, Boaz, we read, “spoke to the heart” of Ruth—kind, loving, gracious, generous, and tender. In this context, the three reasons for this kind of speech were war had ended, iniquity had been pardoned, and judgment was over. Note that it is “Jerusalem” that is to be spoken to in comforting words. This would probably be a metonymy of subject although adjunct could be argued for since Jerusalem being the main city would represent the nation—but we still mean the people in it. It is interesting to me that the name Jerusalem is used when the exiles in Babylon are ultimately intended. This suggests a Palestinian provenance for the writing. This oracle would certainly be comforting to the exiles in Babylon. But it soon became clear to them that these words, and many of the other prophecies in the rest of the book, were not exhausted or completely fulfilled in the return from the Babylonian captivity. They knew there was another, greater fulfillment at the end of the age, when the Messiah would come. This is why at the Temple in Jerusalem Simeon rejoiced to see the baby Jesus—the “consolation” of Israel, a direct allusion to Isaiah 40. B. “Prepare the way of the LORD” (3-5). The second instruction is for the preparation for the coming of the LORD, so that the glory of the LORD would be revealed. In the immediate setting, the restoration would be evidence of God’s glorious intervention (so “glory” would be metonymy of cause or adjunct); but in the advent of the Messiah, the glory of the LORD would be present and revealed—in part at the first advent, for the flesh of Jesus was the tent that covered the glory except when He chose to reveal it; in full at the second coming when He comes in glory. At the first advent, many saw it (“we beheld His glory”); but at the second coming, “all flesh” will see it (a synecdoche for all human beings). This section begins with the voice of one crying. We learn from the New Testament that this is ultimately a prophecy about John the Baptist—although others could have cried this message in the original period, and others in our age could also be such a voice. The speaker is a mystery—only a voice. His identity is not important; the message is. John represented this so well: “I am a voice” (Mark 1:3). He made it very clear, using Isaianic images, that he was not the light. The imagery throughout this little section uses implied comparisons (hypocatastasis). The “desert” represents the wasteland and the barren places; and so it speaks of need in the human heart, or even obstacles and impediments to life. All the changes enjoined are then in the spiritual life: valleys, crooked places, ridges, and the like are all sinful things, problems in the life that need to be straightened out. The “straight highway” is the spiritual believer who through repentance and amendment of life leaves nothing in his spiritual condition that would hinder the appearance of the LORD, the apprehension of the coming of the LORD, or participation in the Messianic Age of the LORD. C. “Cry: The Word of our God shall stand forever” (40:8-8). The mortal messenger will bring the good news of comfort and forgiveness; but there is no comfort in mortal flesh. Flesh changes and dies like grass (simile); its beauty like that of flowers cannot last. To see the vivid picture, you need to be familiar with what grows and what does not grow in the land. These comparisons show the fading and transitory nature of human lives. One cannot find comfort there. Humans fail; they cannot save themselves. But the contrast is with the eternal Word of God that cannot fail. So the message of hope comes from God’s word. That is truth. That can be trusted. D. “Say: Behold — your God” (9-11). Now the heralds are people who bring good tidings to Zion, possibly the returning remnant if not the faithful who live in the expectation of divine intervention. They can point to the reason for the restoration, the comfort, the hope—God will make Himself known to deliver them. These heralds are to announce to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah—the people in the land (metonymies of subject): “Here is your God.” Any divine intervention could be described in this way; but ultimately the literal meaning would emerge. John would announce, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.” And from his initial announcement through all subsequent prophets, apostles, preachers, and laity, the heralds of the kingdom hold out this promise of the coming. But when He comes again the words will be self evidently true—”Here is your God.” At the end of the age, then, Zechariah the prophet says that Israel will look on Him whom they have pierced, and realize this is their Messiah, this is their Savior, this is their God. The sum of the message of comfort and the hope of the people of God is God’s presence. Two images are presented here of God’s presence. First, He is the sovereign LORD coming with power and His arm rules for Him. The idea of the powerful arm is anthropomorphic and idiomatic. Powerful majesty will be the pattern of His dominion as King. He will bring rewards to dispense to His faithful subjects. The second image presented here is that of the shepherd. “He tends His flock” is hypocatastasis to go with the simile “like a shepherd.” This figure will be carried through the next three lines. Do not assume that the figure of the shepherd is limited to Christ’s first coming. The figure of a shepherd was commonly used in the ancient Near East for monarchs; it is the natural figure for any culture with much animal husbandry. And the New Testament will use the images of the Great Shepherd in heaven today (Heb. 13:20) and the Chief Shepherd who is coming again (1 Pet. 5:4) to go along with the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep (John. 10:11). The figure in each case does signify the care, leadership, and provisions that the LORD will bring to His people. The great message of comfort—for us too at advent—hangs on this point. Look to God. He is coming to establish His kingdom. He will come in power. Without Him the “sheep” are weak and frail; with His presence they find everlasting peace and righteousness. So in this section I should think that the application would run to the faithful remnant, especially the spiritual leaders, to announce that the sins have been paid for (and that brings comfort) and that God is coming (and that will mean deliverance and recompense), and to call for spiritual preparation. II. God is fully able to bring deliverance to his people (40:12-16). A. He is the sovereign Lord of creation (12-14). What kind of God is He whose coming is so expected? After all, the hope of His coming and the promise of deliverance from bondage will only be as great as the God in whom we believe. So the prophet Isaiah begins to think about His greatness by thinking about His work of creation. Through a series of questions the prophet portrays God as the Mighty Creator. No mortal could even think to do this. The argument develops in three stages. In verse 12 the questions show that only God could create. The language is anthropomorphic in that it shows the LORD to be like a workman working with His hands, baskets, and scales. Of course, Scripture makes it clear that He spoke and it came into being. In verse 13 we have the second stage in the thought—no one could even understand the Spirit of the LORD, for His thoughts are so much higher than ours. And then in 13b and 14 we have the next level—no one gave God any advice, ever! God created everything by His own design and counsel (see Rom. 11:34). And what He did is not only beyond our ability—it is far beyond our comprehension. B. He is sovereign over the nations (15-17) God needs the counsel of no one—certainly not the nations. They are all insignificant. Using obvious similes the prophet compares the nations (nations that terrorized the world) to a drop from the bucket, dust on the scales, fine dust if they are islands. They do not count; they do not tilt the balance of power one bit (see also Dan. 2:20ff.). Even in a religious sense God does not need the nations for sacrifice or worship. If a sacrifice were to make a difference with God, all the animals in Lebanon would not be sufficient. So mighty Assyria and Babylon are there merely to do God’s bidding. But none of them can influence Him or challenge Him. It is an interesting link to trace some of these themes into the New Testament. Jesus at His temptations was offered all the kingdoms of the world—and Satan could have delivered them. But they are worthless, especially for such a price. And why should He want these many divided and warring kingdoms when what belongs to Him is the one everlasting kingdom of His Father, a kingdom of righteousness and peace. And at His trial Jesus told one of His judges, “You could have no power at all unless it was given to you from above.” “My kingdom is not of this world.” These kingdoms are all part of the cosmos, the present world system. God is not impressed. C. He is the incomparable One (18-20). A theme is now introduced that will run through this whole section of the Book of Isaiah. There is no one like God. He is the true and only God. To compare Him to idols is blasphemous. Even the materials for idols comes from God (see Isa. 44). Humans who are weak and frail have made the idols; they look for ways to make idols that will last. No one made God; rather, God created humans. The nature of the question in verse 18 then is rhetorical (erotesis) to express that there is no one to whom we may compare God. D. (Therefore) God alone is able to control creation (21-26). If God made everything, and if He is sovereign over all nations, and if He is incomparable, then all creation is under His power. Verse 21 begins this section with four rhetorical questions to remind the people of this that they already knew. The repetition is meant to be a rebuke, like hammering a point home: “Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded?” They had centuries of time to have these truths sink in, but their weak faith and stubborn hearts had not taken it all to heart. Now in verses 22-26 he picks up themes he has already introduced—creation, nations, incomparability—but focused on how God controls. According to verse 22 God is the Lord of creation and rules with providence. The heavens are like a canopy with everything in His tent. According to verses 23 and 24 He is sovereign over kings—they are planted (hypocatastasis) by Him and then just as quickly as He lets them grow to full flower and power He blows them away like chaff. But His reign is eternal and constant. Verses 25 and 26 reiterate the theme of His incomparable nature. There is no one like God—He is the “Holy One.” The people are called to look and contemplate the heavens and see God’s handiwork. It is by His power that the starry hosts were created and keep their order. Many Jews in Babylon had fallen into star-gazing and worship. Isaiah will address the issue of astrology and wizardry directly in these messages; but he will also deal with it indirectly by showing that creation witnesses to the sovereignty of God. The New Testament will confirm that this whole universe is borne along by His powerful word (rhema). III. God’s people may renew their strength through hope (40:27-31). A. The prophet rebukes those who distrust God (27-28). The people who were in exile in Babylon were a strange mix of persuasions. There was the true remnant of course. But there was a large segment that probably believed in the LORD but had all but given up hope because they were overwhelmed by the captivity. God had apparently discarded them and was not concerned or aware of their plight. Isaiah will have to convince them through these chapters. Some needed to come to faith, period. Most needed to rekindle their faith with this truth. Verse 27 is a rebuke for the people because they were convinced that God had written them off. That was their complaint. But Isaiah affirms that God is the Creator and the Preserver of all things. He will not forsake what He has made. His first point to prove this is that He does not grow tired like humans. No problems are hidden from God, or too much for Him to handle. And his second point is that God is incomprehensible. His ways are right, even though we do not know them. We will never understand Him, but He knows all about us. So how can anyone even suggest that our ways are hidden from Him? That reverses the whole matter. B. The prophet promises new strength for believers (29-31). According to verse 29 God will give strength to those who are exhausted and suffering under oppression. Even youths (v. 30) run out of energy and stumble. So human life is frail and transitory. Verse 31, however, brings the contrast, and the climax of this message on comfort: those who wait on the LORD shall change. By waiting (Hebrew qawah, pronounced kah-vah) the prophet means a longing for the fulfillment of the promise by faith, but it is a longing or looking for that is characterized by confident expectation. Waiting requires patience; but it is never indifferent. There is always a restlessness, an eagerness, a looking for something, an inner vigil. To hope for something is active; it is never out of mind. English Bibles alternate between translating with “hope” or “wait.” The two ideas are in the word. Here we would say the term describes the essence of confident, expectant faith. In the immediate context it describes the attitude and actions of those Israelites who believed the promises of the LORD and were ready to step out when God began to move. They believed the release was coming; they waited for it. They knew it would happen; they just did not know exactly when. And when the release would come, they would escape with energy and quickness like eagles mounting up. But the road back to the land of promise would be long, and so it would be as if they would start quickly, slow to a run, and then to a walk. These expressions describe both the facts of embarking on a prolonged journey and the growing confidence that continued success would bring. They would never grow tired on their journey back; and they would not look back in fear. Rather, their confidence would grow as they went because their way back to Judah would be the fulfillment of the promised hope. Likewise, believers living now at the end of the age in the expectation of the coming of the Lord have the same kind of confidence. To hope for the coming of the LORD does not imply that there is a chance it might not happen; rather, it implies an active faith in the truth of His coming. It will happen; they are expecting it soon. Those who wait for the LORD will not be entangled by this life, but will be focused on the spiritual preparation for His appearance. And as they live out their faith in the light of that hope, they will find their strength renewed for life’s difficulties along the way. Conclusion In writing a summary expository idea of this whole chapter, I would try to capture all the main aspects of the material: Because of the incomparable knowledge and power of God, those who have found pardon for their sins and who believe in the sure promise of His Word will prepare for His coming, finding comfort in this life and gaining confidence through faith. This is but one way to do it, but a little long (even if I did underscore my main sentence to highlight it). I could have easily made the last ideas parallel—comfort, preparation, and strength. But I was thinking of the passage in terms of the focus of Peter that those who have this blessed hope purify themselves. A little shorter expository idea could be something like this: If we truly believe His word, and realize who He is, we will find comfort in this life, faith to endure, and hope for His coming. I would base the instructions on the solid doctrine this passage has about the nature of God, but focus on the instructions. As we today look forward to the coming day of deliverance, the appearance in glory of our God and Savior Jesus Christ, we should comfort one another, especially those of weaker faith, with the blessed hope, we should instruct one another in the spiritual preparation, we should build our faith on God’s Word, and we should see the fulfillment in the first advent as a sign of the second advent. But ultimately we must wait on the LORD—and I think all that is meant in the above instructions is meant to be a part of that waiting. That is what gives us the strength for the journey home. References Cross, Frank M. “The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah.” JNES 12 (1953):274-277. Dahood, Mitchell. “The Breakup of Two Composite Phrases in Isaiah 40:13.” Bib 54 (1973):537-538. Driver, G. R. “Hebrew Notes.” VT 1 (1951):241-250. Holmes, I. Vivien. “Study on Translation of Isaiah 40:6-8.” The Expository Times 75 (1964):317-318. Limburg, James. “Expository Articles: Isaiah 40:1-11.” Interpretation 29 (1975):406-411. Marshall, David W. “Interpreting the Old Testament.” Bible League Quarterly 289 (April-June 1972):26-30. Melugin, Roy F. “Deutero-Isaiah and Form Criticism.” VT 21 (1971):326-337. Tidwell, N. L. “MT Isaiah 40:10: An Approach to a Textual Problem Via Rhetorical Criticism.” Semitics 6 (1978):15-27. Trudinger, Paul. “To Whom Will You Liken God?” VT 17 (1967):220-225. The LORD is the Gracious Redeemer Isaiah 43:1-13 The LORD is the Gracious Redeemer Introduction The next two oracles of the book (Isaiah 43:1-13 and 43:14—44:5) focus on redemption from captivity. It is here that the message focuses on the idea of the Servant as the nation. In the first one the LORD promises to regather His undeserving nation (servant) and renew them. Israel is first exhorted not to fear (43:1-7) because God formed them and called them in the past; and because they are precious to Him they will be regathered from the whole earth. The LORD then brings the people forth as a witness that He is God alone (43:8-13). Both this witness and the nations in general will recognize that the LORD is sovereign, that He acts without any assistance, and that none can oppose Him. The layout of this section reveals parallel structures in the pattern of the text: 1 Do not fear—you are mine, I created you 2 you will be protected 3 I will ransom you because I am your Savior 4 I will exchange you because I love you 5 Do not fear—I am with you, I will gather you 6 I will call for the regathering of my people 7 gather my people whom I created for my glory 8 Call for blind and deaf (=Israel) to be witnesses for me 9 Challenge for the nations to be witnesses against me, who can say they foretold this; others say it is true. 10 You are my witnesses, my Servant whom I chose, I am He there is no god before or after me 11 I, even I, am the LORD there is no Savior apart from me 12 I declared, saved, proclaimed I, not a foreign god You are my witnesses—I am God 13 I am He, from the ancient days no one can deliver out of my hand I act, and who can reverse it? From this layout we can see that there are essentially two parts to the passage. Verses 1-7 promise the regathering from the captivity so that the people have no reason to fear. There are two cycles to this message, the jussive “do not fear” serving as the structural markers. The rest of the passage is a trial; first, witnesses are called for the LORD and then witnesses are called for the nations, and second, the LORD makes His claim that the witnesses will attest to that He alone is the sovereign Lord. The proof of His divine sovereignty is that He conducts His people through history in a way that they can follow with confidence; and His ability to predict the future, to chart it out, to show the direction He was going, is great evidence of His sovereignty. Acts without words are open to all kinds of interpretation, and words without acts are hollow promises; but words that predict the acts, and acts that confirm the predictions, attest to the truth of the claims of the LORD and build confidence in the yet unfulfilled promises that He has made. In this passage that promise concerns the regathering of the nation: God is able to create a future out of the ruins of the past. He alone can do this. And even if Israel had been blind and deaf (i.e., disobedient to and ignorant of God’s Word), they would make superb witnesses to what He was able to do when they saw the promises begin to unfold in spite of their sin. This passage, then, may be used to build confidence in the promises of God—Do not fear, God says, I will ransom you from the world; you are my witnesses that I alone am the sovereign God and am able to do this. The immediate fulfillment for Israel would be their return from the captivity—which had been predicted as well as their captivity. But that fulfillment was merely a harbinger of the greater ingathering that would take place at the end of the age. For the Christian, it will be necessary to assess the promises of the New Covenant that await fulfillment. These overlap with the promises here in the prophets of Israel, for we have been grafted in to the New Covenant. Paul then says that the whole world is groaning, waiting for the day of redemption (Rom. . We are to be filled with confidence that God will keep His Word and deliver us from the bondage of the world. Such hope casts out fear. But our confidence in the promises is only as strong as our knowledge of the LORD. So this passage, and those to come, will have very strong theology on the sovereignty of God—stronger than many would like. We must be sure to teach that as the necessary basis of our faith. One of the reasons that churches are so weak in the faith and so heretical today is because sound doctrine has been lost—there just is no teaching or preaching to speak of that would feed the hungry soul. There are little homilies that lack biblical and theological substance, various classes on related issues other than Scripture, and literature and music that is often shallow, experiential, and too frequently unbiblical. How could anyone grow? Well, the next 23 chapters of this book will be filled with strong meat—truth that will change people’s lives. Exposition I. “Do not fear” God will redeem His people from the world (43:1-7). A. Cycle One: God will ransom His people (1-4). Verse 1 lays the foundation of the Word of promise by affirming that this is the nation that God had formed. The language is covenantal: You are mine. The epithets that the prophet uses for God refer to the historical act of the foundation of the nation at Sinai—but the terms are creational. The expression “he who created you” (bora’aka) uses the main word for creation (bara’), a term that means to fashion or refashion something into a new and perfect creation. It can have the idea of renewal or transformation. In the biblical texts only God is the subject of this verb. So the formation of the Israelites into a nation, the people of God, is being called a creation. Likewise, Paul uses creation terminology for our salvation in the New Testament. The second epithet is “he who formed you” (yotserka). This word (yatsar) means to form or fashion something by design, a plan, a blueprint (Gen. 2:7). It is the word for an artist—the participle is the Hebrew word “potter.” So the expression says that God is the creator of the nation, and that His creation is by design. The main reason for the call to cast away fear in this verse is the expression “for I have redeemed you” (ge’altika [pronounced geh-al-tea-kah], from ga’al). This verb is a little different from other words in the Bible that we translate “redeem”; this is the kinsman redeemer or avenger, the one who makes things right—pays debts, avenges death, judges the enemy, rescues the poor and needy, or marries the widow. The key idea seems to be “protect”—the family and various other institutions. When the verb describes the LORD’s activity, it usually always means judging the nations to deliver the people from bondage; in New Covenant passages it is eschatological. I would take the verb here to be prophetic perfect (or at least a perfect of resolve), for this is what He was about to do. Finally, the idea of “called you by name” is a reference to both creation and election. God chose His people, and by calling them by name exercised His sovereignty over them (compare other “naming” passages). In fact, the idiom of naming in the Babylonian account of creation (Enuma elish) represents creating. So the point of the first verse is clear: Israel belongs to God because He formed them into a nation in the first place and now will deliver them from bondage to Himself. Verse 2 uses some bold figures to express divine protection. Water is used for invasions and exiles in the prophets (we saw it already in Isaiah 8 with the water flooding up to Jerusalem); and fire is used for purging persecutions that come upon the people. All the imagery here is implied comparison. But it all means that God will protect His people. Verse 3 begins to spell out the promise of the rescue from captivity. Here the self-revelation of the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, adds the epithet “your savior” (mosi’eka [mo-she-eh-ka], from yasa’ [ya-sha]). The verb “to save” is a common one in the Old Testament; John Sawyer has a discussion on it and the other words for salvation in the Old Testament in his book Semantics in Biblical Research, New Methods of Defining Hebrew Words for Salvation (SCM Press). The name “Jesus” (Ye-shua) is, of course, drawn from this verbal root, as is the name “Isaiah” (Yeshayahu) itself (“Yah saves”). Most of the words for salvation are military terms; this one basically means “deliver, save.” It can refer to an answer to prayer, a healing, rescue, deliverance from trouble, death, or disease—as well as from sin and its punishment (although “saved from sin” is not a very common usage). In this passage it refers to a deliverance from bondage, and so is essentially political, although this deliverance includes the fact that sin was the reason for the exile. So it is a physical-spiritual deliverance. The word for “your ransom” (kophreka) is from the verbal root kipper, which means “atone, expiate, pacify, set free. The noun means to set free through some means of expiation. In this context the term is applied a little differently (as are the terms for salvation and redemption): God will set His people free from bondage—at the expense of the oppressors. So their destruction will be the ransom price—the exchange given to set Israel free. Verse 4 continues this theme with two new words that call for attention. The deliverance is because Israel is precious (and honored) in God’s sight. They are highly valued because rare—the chosen people. And the main motive for the deliverance is “because I love you” (‘ahabtika, from ‘ahab). The term for love conveys the idea of choosing spontaneously (as opposed to the idea of “hating” which means among other things “reject”—Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated). Other words for love will stress the covenant loyalty that God has for His people; but this one indicates that He chose them and His love for them remains constant. Of course, this does not mean that He overlooks idolatry, and unbelief—the captivity was intended to purge those who were not truly in the covenant. B. Cycle Two: God will gather His people (5-7). Verse 5 repeats the caution “Do not fear.” The promise of divine presence (meaning God will intervene for protection and provision) is the basis for the comfort. In this, and in the next couple of verses, in a number of ways God says that He will regather His people from all over the world. Not all of the exiled people went to Babylon—they were scattered. But as the Creator, God will speak to the north, south, east, and west, and the world will give up His people. In verse 7 we discover that with the repetition of the creation theme that God’s purpose for Israel was “for my glory.” Likewise, in the New Testament do we read that Christ always did things that the Father might be glorified. We shall see later in the book, and in Ezekiel, that the regathering is not because Israel deserved it, but because God’s reputation (=name) was at stake. And He will not let the sins of the people rob Him of His name and steal His glory. At the risk of making it too simple, we could say that the verse means that God’s establishment of a covenant people has as its purpose that God might be seen throughout the world, for “glory” means an enhanced reputation for the LORD, honor to Him. Everything He does is for that purpose, for all glory given to Him will attract many more to the Kingdom. Likewise when we glorify the LORD, it is meant in part to draw people to His love. II. “You are witnesses” The LORD is able to deliver His people because He alone is the sovereign LORD God (43:8-13). A. God calls witnesses for and against His claim (8, 9). The setting of this section is a court scene to determine the veracity of the claims of the LORD. Witnesses are called on both sides of the case to see what the evidence will be. From the use of the terms for “blindness” and “deafness” used earlier and elsewhere for Israel, we would conclude that verse 8 is a call for the disobedient and sinful nation to witness God’s gracious provision. The figures would be hypocatastases, comparing blindness and deafness to disobedience and spiritual ignorance. But even in that condition Israel had had the opportunity to see and hear what God was doing, and so would qualify as witnesses to the power of God. In fact, their witness would be more effective, for they were surprised by what God had done. Verse 9 is a challenge from God for the other nations to say anything if they or their gods were able to do what the LORD could do—foretell this deliverance as He had done. Powerful acts can be attributed to deities or kings; but predicting them is quite another matter. God is on one side; all other powers on the other. Who in truth is the sovereign Lord? These witnesses will have to step forward and give their credentials (a theme that will run through several chapters), or finally admit the truth of the LORD’s claims. B. God’s claim of absolute sovereignty stands (10;13). Verse 10 begins with the first cycle of “You are my witnesses.” Israel is here addressed as the chosen servant of the LORD. In view of what follows this makes great sense. But believers do not always like the idea of being chosen, nor do they like the idea of being servants. But if God is God, they must be both servants and chosen. If God was chosen by us (!), and He is our servant (!), then He is not much of a God. The verse focuses on the purpose of this election—that they might know and believe that “I am He.” This construction is made up of two simple pronouns: ‘ani hu’ (pronounced ah-nee who), “I [am] He.” The statement is fraught with significance. I am the One. There is no one else. Who else matters? I am the sovereign Lord who has no rivals. This point is expanded with “there is no god before or after me.” The Law said, “You shall have no other gods before Me.” The call to Moses said,”I AM that I AM.” It seems to me that this theme running through this section of the book needs to be recaptured for today when the view of God is weak, or when theologians are busying themselves trying to “re-image” God, and in the process making God a god and not the only God. The LORD God Himself lays down the challenge—where are the rivals? I believe that a very strong case can be made in these and other “I Am” revelations that within the Godhead we have here speaking the second person, the pre-incarnate Christ in the glory that He had before the foundation of the world. He is the Savior. Verse 11 repeats and adds to this: “I, even I, am the LORD, there is no Savior apart from me.” The Hebrew is wonderfully cryptic again—’ani ‘ani YHWH, literally “I - I - Yahweh.” Now the personal, covenantal name is put in place of the pronoun “He,” and the epithet “Savior” is added to the exclusive statement. No religion in the ancient or modern world made such claims to exclusivity and salvation. There is only one God; and there is only one Savior—Yahweh. Verse 12 brings in the theme of prophecy. The LORD alone, not a foreign god, was able to proclaim and declare in addition to save (see above comments on works and acts). This verse, as well as verse 13, will affirm that the LORD is the only true God, always has been, always will be. And He is completely sovereign. No one can deliver out of His hand, and no one can make Him change His plans. One can only trust the LORD, certainly not rebel against Him. Deliverance comes from Him; judgment also comes from Him. He alone can save; no one can save from Him. Such knowledge of God must lead to faith. Conclusion The message of this chapter is rather straightforward. It is a message for the people of God not to fear the circumstances of life because the LORD is about to redeem them in fulfillment of His promises. He is fully able to do this because He is the sovereign Lord of the universe, as everyone will attest. So in our age we can transfer this theme rather easily. First, Jesus Christ is the sovereign Lord of creation, the great I AM, the only Savior. He has made promises to us, and those include ultimate redemption from the bondage of this world and transference to His Father’s House. As a result we should not fear, for He has overcome the world. So Christians should be strong in the faith, evaluate everything in line with eternal principles, and look forward in expectation to the great deliverance. References Conrad, E. W. “The `Fear Not’ Oracles in Second Isaiah.” VT 34 (1984):143-151. De Boer, P. A. H. “A Mistranscription.” VT 1 (1951):68. Reisel, M. “The Relation between the Creative Function and the verbs br’—ysr—`sh in Isaiah 43:7 and 45:7.” In Verkenningen in een stroomgebied. FS M. A. Beek. Ed. M. Boertien et al. Amsterdam: Huisdrukkerij Universiteit, 1974. Pp. 64-79. Rubinstein, A. “Word Substitution in Isaiah 43:5 and 54:16.” JSS 8 (1963):52-55. Walker, Norman. “Mitteilungen Concerning HU’ and ‘ANI HU’.” ZAW 74 (1962):205-206. Williamson, H. G. M. “Word Order in Isaiah 43:12.” JTS 30 (1979):499-502. Redemption by God’s Grace Introduction This section is the second oracle about the prophet’s message that God would deliver His people from bondage. The preceding section looked at God’s unchallenged ability to do it; this part stresses that Israel does not deserve it. The section falls into three main parts: the declaration that God will deliver them (14-21), the explanation that they do not deserve this (22-28), and the exhortation for them not to fear (44:1-5). Exposition I. The LORD promises to deliver His people in a great exodus and prosper them in the way (43:14-21). A. The covenant God promises victory (14-15). Verse 14 declares that God has intervened to bring down Babylon on behalf of His people Israel. The verse begins with the double description of the LORD: the Holy One of Israel and their Redeemer. Once again the text is probably using the Hebrew prophetic perfect tense, since the delivery lies in the future—the certain future. The content of the verse teaches that God will bring down their powerful adversaries (compare Daniel’s song in Daniel 2:20ff.). In this verse are included the Chaldeans, a general name for the Babylonians, but technically the ruling class of royal priests. Nebuchadnezzar was a Chaldean. Verse 15 reiterates the self-revelation of the LORD as the Holy One, Creator, and King. “I am the LORD” is the declaration, couched in terms of the covenant made at Sinai (see Exodus 20). The epithet “your Holy One” stresses the uniqueness of the LORD as the covenant God. And “creator of Israel” recalls Sinai and underscores the fact that they owe their existence to Him. The expression “your King” makes the point that it is a theocracy and that they owe absolute allegiance to God. B. The LORD promises a safe exodus (16-21) First, in verses 16 and 17 the LORD reminds the people of the first exodus out of bondage in Egypt. The text does not mention the exodus by name, but by stating that the LORD makes a road through the Sea definitely alludes to that time, for they would not pass through the sea here. The allusion implies a comparison. Moreover, the usage of the verbs “form” and “create” in the context have already referred to that period of history. The prophet has also used “water” and “flood” as figures of this captivity. So the allusion to the escape from Egypt through the flood is a good one. Verse 17 adds to the allusion: the LORD led out the armies of Egypt, horse and chariot in all their strength, and buried them in the sea (“they lie down together, without rising”). The LORD crushed them out of existence because they were chasing His people to enslave or destroy them. Now Israel should be reminded of that great deliverance that made them a nation in the first place. God is fully able to deliver His people from world powers. Second, the LORD exhorts the people to forget the former exodus (verse 18). After recalling the exodus, the LORD tells Israel not to remember (zakar) nor consider (hitbonan from bin) it any more—they should not dwell on the past, because God is going to do something new and wonderful. Live for the future! An application could easily be made along the way here: many Christians live only in the past with their focus on what Christ did back there—the passover/exodus, or on their own conversion experience; this is fine, but they are not looking for the next event, the culmination of the covenant program in the second coming! The events of Christ’s first coming laid the foundation for what He will do at the second. Third, the LORD is going to bring a marvelous new deliverance through the desert (verses 19-20). The theme is announced in verse 19: “Behold, I am about to do a new thing.” What is coming is a new thing. “New” (kha-dash) can mean something completely new, or a renewal or transformation (it is often parallel with bara’, “create”). The “new thing” will be a road through the wilderness (compare the road through the sea in the previous verses). The imagery compares this return to streams in the desert, probably the point of the comparison is that roads that might be empty or lightly traveled will be “flooded” with people returning to the land as wadis are flooded with water in the rainy season. Verse 20 is a little more difficult to understand. It appears on the surface that the waters created to supply the needs of the returning Israelites would also refresh the animals, and this relief will lead to God’s glory. Fourth, Israel will praise the LORD (verse 21). “This people I have formed for Myself—they shall declare My praise.” “Praise” is tehillah (from halal), the spontaneous expression of what is enjoyed. Israel, when released to return to their homeland, will offer such expressions of joy. II. The LORD declares that the people are undeserving of this deliverance (43:22-28). A. Indifference to sin shows unworthiness (22-24). Israel demonstrated her present weariness with the LORD by her continued sin and by her failure even to give an offering to Him. Verse 22 puts the contrast boldly: negatively, Israel has not called upon the LORD—they did not pray for this great deliverance; positively, they have been weary or tired of the LORD. The idea of “weary” is connected with toilsome labor (as in “much studying is a wearying of the flesh”). Through all their troubles they got tired of trying. Verse 23 clarifies that Israel had not brought the LORD whole burnt offerings or peace offering sacrifices. In the foreign land sacrifice was not possible. So God did not make them weary with much sacrificing and burning of incense; He did not make them serve and He did not make them wear out. The explanation of all this is now given in verse 24. God was brought no sacrifices and no sweet cane as a gift. Rather, God was made to serve because of their sins. These words are meant to imitate the words of the last verse: you made Me serve with your sins (I did not make you serve with offerings); you wearied Me with your iniquities (I did not weary you with incense). These words express the LORD’s distress caused by Israel’s sins, and intensified by the fact that Israel offered no sacrifices, and made no prayers for deliverance from sin and bondage. B. God forgives sin for His own sake (25). This verse is the heart of the passage. “I, even I, blot out your sins for my own sake; your sins I will not remember.” The verb “blot out” (the participle mo-kheh, from makhah) is a hypocatastasis, portraying the complete removal of sin. As a participle the construction should read, “I am the One who blots out your transgressions.” The two words for sin are “transgressions” or rebellions (pesha’ [peh-sha]) and “sins” or failures (hata’ [khah-tah]). God will remember these no more. God knows everything, and so the idea of His not remembering is obviously anthropomorphic to express to express complete removal of the sins from the judicial record, so to speak. The point is the charges will never be brought up again. In this verse we see clearly that the deliverance from Babylon was connected with the forgiveness of sins—which was one of the threefold words of comfort in the beginning of chapter 40. Or, to put it another way, the restoration was a sign that sins were forgiven. But since Israel simply wearied God with sins, and made no plea to Him, and offered no gifts or sacrifices, this deliverance was completely by grace. “For my own sake” I do this. Ezekiel also will explain that God’s name (=reputation) is at stake, His Word must be fulfilled or His character will be called into question. God remains faithful to His promises even when His people prove unfaithful, or weary Him. They may profane His name, but He will sanctify it. This is why we pray, “Hallowed be thy name.” C. God disciplines for unconfessed sins (26-28). Verse 26 is worded as a challenge. Using “remember” yet again, God tells Israel to remind Him of anything He may have overlooked that would render forgiveness unnecessary—list any service records that could cancel out the marks against you. If they did not think that their deliverance was connected to forgiveness, they should now make their case to justify themselves. Verse 27 affirms that sin has been with the nation from the beginning. “First father” means from its origin the nation was a transgressing people; the “interpreters,” especially the priests and prophets, had failed and rebelled by leading the people astray. Verse 28 speaks of the punishment: “profaned” and “given to the curse.” The verb “profane” is from khalal; it means to treat something as common. There is a word play here with its antonym qadosh, “holy”—”The princes of the Sanctuary (or “holy place” or “holiness” or even “holy princes”) I have made unholy or common.” Sending unbelieving Israelites into exile was a way of showing (as Hosea had said) that they were not His people (Lo’ ‘Ammi, “Not My people”). The unbelieving in Israel were not holy, not set apart—they were lost like the pagans. Unfortunately, the remnant of true believers in Israel (the Jeremiahs, the Ezekiels, the Daniels) had to go into captivity because the majority were unbelievers; but the meaning of the exile was different for them. The verb “curse” is kharam (the noun is kherem). It means “devoted, put under the ban, set apart.” In short, something under the “ban” was off-limits; it was for God to either keep for His own use or destroy—here destroy. (Recall what happened to Achan when he took the “cursed” garment). So the judgment on Israel with the exile was twofold: humiliation and destruction. They had not heeded the prophets to turn from their sin, and so God brought the destruction. Now God challenged the people to convince Him that the exile was not deserved. If that was deserved, then the regathering was by grace. III. The LORD encourages His people that He will revive them again (44:1-5). A. Introduction: God’s people should not fear (1,2). In the first two verses of this chapter the LORD uses several motivations for Israel not to fear: “my servant,” “Israel whom I have chosen,” “made you,” “formed you,” “will help you,” and “Jeshurun.” This list of descriptions and qualifications solidly reiterates the covenant ties between God and Israel. The name “Jeshurun” is a synonym for “Israel,” used in Deuteronomy 32. It looks to the future of the nation, the blessing awaiting it for the reward of the righteous. It seems to be connected with “upright, straight,” an adjective connected with the nation of believers. The verb “will help” is from the root ‘azar (the noun ‘ezer is “helper” which is used for Eve but mostly for God). It means assistance, that is, doing for someone what that person cannot do for himself or herself. Because the people belong to God, and because He is about to deliver them, they must respond to His Word or promise by faith and not with fear. B. The LORD will revive His people again (3-5). First, in verses 3 and 4 the LORD announces that He will revive them physically and spiritually. Verse 3 says that God is going to pour out three things—water on the one who is thirsty, His Spirit on the seed of Israel, and His blessing on the people. The whole verse seems to be talking about the basic spiritual need of Israel. It may be that the physical thirst is a comparison to spiritual thirst (see Ps. 42:1 and 63:1). The restoration of Israel is like water to a plant in parched ground—they will grow and become healthy. Then, the Spirit would be the means of the deliverance, and the “blessing” the summary description of the restoration—so these are used metonymically. Westermann has a good little paperback book on “blessing” (which is the short title). He shows that the term means “enrichment” along with the enablement to obtain God’s good gifts. Here then the verse ties the (metonymies of) cause and the effect together. The divine Spirit is the source of the national revival and increase, which is the blessing (compare Ezekiel 37:9). Verse 4 provides a comparison of how Israel will flourish—Israel’s offspring are to be as numerous as the blades of grass in well-irrigated meadows. Or, like poplars by the water courses. Second, the text states that then the people will be attractive to the Gentiles (verse 5). The people represented as speaking here are Gentiles who became proselytes to the faith. They are attracted by the prosperity and the honor given to this ancient people by God’s blessing. So they wish to be numbered among them, to be called by their name. Gentiles coming to the faith and using Hebrew names in naming their children is good witness to the glorious prospect of such a prophecy. Conclusion The message of promised deliverance from bondage in the world continues into this section; but the emphasis here is on the grace of it all. I would make as the main focus the way that God develops how He has acted toward His people in keeping the covenant promises in spite of their indifference and sin. Even though we are unfaithful, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself. Moreover, a meticulous analysis of His titles and deeds toward His people will further underscore His grace. And, I would emphasize also how the demonstration of His sovereignty and grace attract Gentiles to the covenant of the LORD. We today as believing Christians can look at any and all disciplines that God has brought into our lives, any of the effects of our sin, and know that we deserved them, and much more. We can look around the world and see suffering, pain, and even exile, and know that sin is the cause. But we Christians also have the sure promise of God that He will honor His covenant promises and complete the redemption He has begun. From beginning to end the plan of redemption is by grace; that we cannot deny. And so from this passage we are instructed not to fear, but to praise; not to remain in sin and indifference, but to respond to the Word of the LORD as faithful servants, and use the hope we have as a means of reaching out to the world. References Chilton, B. D. The Glory of Israel. JSOTSup 23. Sheffield: University of Sheffield Press, 1983. Pp. 81-85. Jones, H. J. “Abraham and Cyrus: Type and Anti-type?” VT 22 (1972):304-319. Justesen, J. P. “On the Meaning of SADAQ.” AUSS 2 (1964):53-61. Lofthouse, W. F. “The Righteousness of Yahweh.” ExpTimes 50 (1938):341-345. Olley, J. W. “Righteousness” in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study. Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1979. Scullion, J. J. “Sedeq-sedaqah in Isaiah cc. 40-66 with Special Reference to the Continuity in Meaning between Second and Third Isaiah.” UF 3 (1971):335-348. Smith, J. M. P. “The Chosen People.” AJSL 45 (1928/29):73-82. Trever, John C. “Isaiah 43:19 According to the First Isaiah Scroll (DSS/Isa/a).” BASOR 121 (1951):13-26. Watson, N. M. “Some Observations of the Use of “Righteousness” in the Septuagint.” JBL 79 (1960):255-266. Whitley, C. F. “Deutero-Isaiah’s Interpretation of sedeq.” VT 22 (1972):469-475. Dead Idols or the Living God Isaiah 44:6-23 Introduction In this section of the oracles the prophet contrasts the LORD’s ability to order history with the inability of false idols. The contrast exploits a description of idols and idol-makers in a parody on the folly of idolatry. How absurd to imagine that something we can make could actually deliver us from problems we could not free ourselves from! Surely those who serve idols are spiritually blind. While in this section we focus on the folly of idolatry, the passage is part of the wider section that affirms that the LORD is the only God. There are three general sections here: the first part records the LORD’s claims of sovereignty on the basis of who He is and what He has done (6-8). The second part (9-20) is a lengthy parody on the foolishness of making idols because they are worthless. The oracle closes with a call for faith and praise in the living God who redeems us from our sins (21-23). Exposition I. The LORD alone is the sovereign God (44:6-8). A. The LORD declares His absolute sovereignty (6). The passage begins with the claims of Yahweh for absolute authority as the one true God. As is typical of this section of the book, the prophet introduces Him with names and epithets: “Yahweh, the King of Israel, his Redeemer, Yahweh of Armies.” It would take some time to explain fully all these titles, but the exposition will at least have to capture the point of each one. The first one is “Yahweh,” the personal name of the covenant God. The second one, “the king of Israel,” stresses that the covenant is a theocracy. The third, “his Redeemer,” shows how the LORD delivered His people from sin and bondage. Each of these first three has been used by the prophet before; but the next one is new to these oracles—”Yahweh of Armies.” It is often translated “LORD of hosts.” It indicates that Yahweh has at His disposal all armies, terrestrial and celestial. It is a military term used by the prophets to announce forceful warnings of judgment or displays of God’s power. It means that God has the resources to carry out anything He desires or decrees. So in a passage that will ridicule and mock idols and idol-makers, the prophet uses these to introduce Yahweh who will claim absolute sovereignty for Himself. But such a powerful lead-in is most effective. Now Yahweh speaks to reveal Himself: “I am the first and I am the last, and beside Me there is no God.” This exclaims His exclusive sovereignty: He begins everything and He ends everything, He is the Creator and He will be the Judge. But He also is eternally present (if we take the merism of the expression as well), the eternal I AM. The New Testament will use similar motifs for our Lord Jesus Christ: “I am the alpha and the omega.” He is the beginning and the end, the full revelation, the final authority, the Living Word. Such expressions attest to His eternality as well as His sovereignty over everything. Elsewhere when Isaiah describes how the whole world was full of His glory, we would conclude that that indicates that He is the most important person in the universe; and when He is described as holy, that indicates that there is no one like Him (review Isa. 6). These passages harmonize theologically. The text adds that besides Yahweh there is no god. This does not deny that people worshiped other gods, or that there were spiritual powers behind their idols. But it does deny that they are gods. There can be but one true God. Everything else is a created being. Every being has to be categorized, creator or created; and there is only one who is creator. No other religion in the ancient world held to such a dogmatic affirmation of exclusive monotheism. There was nothing inclusive about the true Yahwistic faith. The spirit of idolatry, whether in the ancient world or in modern Christendom (note I did not say in Christianity), is to rob God of His unique divinity and introduce rival gods into religion. But the Word of the LORD declares that they are not gods. B. The LORD confirms His claims with prophecy (7). In the form of a question Yahweh challenges the pagans to show what other god could predict the future. Here is proof of His exclusive right to divine majesty. The stronger the prediction, the more marvelous the power. God already affirmed in these passages that He predicted the Babylonian captivity as well as the return from exile, long before it happened. This, the prophet says, is proof that Yahweh is God, for prophecy is based on the sovereign control of history. C. The LORD appeals for faith (8). Yahweh’s appeal is for confidence based on the truth of His sovereignty: “Fear not, neither be afraid.” The repetition stresses the good news that they do not need to fear other gods or other people, for Yahweh is the only Rock. This word “Rock”is a common figure (hypocatastasis) for God; it signifies a solid foundation, strength, and security. The expression is couched in an ironic question and answer (almost tongue-in-cheek): “Is there a god beside me? No, there is no Rock; I know not any.” The parallel passage in Deuteronomy 32 is helpful here. That prophetic message tells of the Rock that formed Israel (v. 18), and how Israel forgot that Rock and went after other rocks that could not defend them (v. 30), for those rocks are not the Rock. (v. 31). So all these solid affirmations about the LORD provide the backdrop for the next discussion—the folly of idolatry. How utterly foolish to try to make gods, when the sovereignty and divinity belongs to the one true God alone. And why would anyone want to replace Yahweh? Why would anyone think he could? II. Idols are profitless and ridiculous (44:9-20). A. Idols cannot profit their devotees (9). The first part of the theme of the folly of idolatry is announced immediately: idols are profitless. The language used here to make the point is most significant, for it shows how idolatry reverses creation. In Genesis we read how God turned the chaos (“waste and void” [tohu wabohu]) into His marvelous creation, culminating in His forming (