Isaiah
Isaiah
Isaiah
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.
1
ANET is the standard reference for the work edited by Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts.
Any texts from the ancient world will be found here in English translation with bibliography.
2
By this we mean that the Masoretes living in Tiberias completed their work of writing the
vowels in the manuscript. They were not making up the vowels; they were inventing a system of marks to
represent the oral tradition, the pronunciations, that the scholars knew but that the people scattered
throughout the world would not know.
3
This title is more convenient than accurate. The term Septuagint actually only applied to the
Pentateuch. The translations of the different books are more properly known as the Old Greek.
4
For further reading, see Millar Burroughs, The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark’s Monastery, and
The Dead Sea Scrolls; see also W. F. Albright, ed., The Bible and the Ancient Near East, and Orlinsky’s
introduction in C. D. Ginsberg, Introduction to the Critical Edition of the Masoretic Text.
5
The use of the Old Greek is one of the most difficult tasks in exegesis, for it requires a working
knowledge of Old Testament Greek as well as Hebrew. Rahlfs Septuagint gives the text, but almost no
apparatus. For that one has to turn to Ziegler’s work. The Cambridge Septuagint is available in both the
technical critical edition, as well as in the edition that offers the Greek and an English translation beside
it. If one wants to start working with this material, then both of these texts should be used: the column
OT Greek at least gives a translation, but since it is simply codex B, Rahlfs would have to be checked to
see if the critical text agreed with B. Fields’ work on the Hexapla may also prove helpful since it will list
the Hebrew, the Latin, the Old Greek, and any Greek recensions that change the Old Greek. It is a
complicated work, but has a wealth of information in it that would be otherwise unavailable to most
students.
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
7
Begin with the basic Old Testament Introductions: R. K. Harrison, Gleason Archer, Brevard
Childs, S. R. Driver, Otto Eissfeldt, to start, and then LaSor/Hubbard/Bush, Pfeiffer, Rentdorff, and
Young. Also, for an initial probe, read the dictionary article: ISBE (rev. ed.), s.v. “Isaiah--VIII. The
Critical Problem,” II:893-904, by G. L. Robinson and R. K. Harrison. In the commentaries there will be
helpful treatments as well: Oswalt (NICOT [rev.], and Grogan (Expositor’s, Vol 6). In this reading notice
bibliography along the way. But some additional works would include Yehuda T. Radday, The Unity of
Isaiah in the Light of Statistical Linguistics (1973), ch. 1 and 2; and O. T. Allis, The Unity of Isaiah
(1950), chapter 3. Additional names and references will be given in the discussions to follow.
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. 8 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.
8
It helps to remember that the earthly sanctuary where the glory of the LORD dwelt on earth
was the one spot on earth where heaven and earth touched, where the Lord could be enthroned in the
earthly and the heavenly spheres as the same time.
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
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.
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”
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 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).
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.
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.
(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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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 9uncovers sinfulness (6:1-5)
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.
9
You will have to decide at the outset if you are going to stay with the traditional translation
“the LORD” instead of using what is really in the text, “Yahweh.” It does not matter, but which ever you
use you will have to explain frequently.
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.
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.
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.
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.” 10
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
10
Lancelot Andrewes preached to the courts of Elizabeth I and James I; he was personally
responsible for the translation of Genesis through Samuel in the Authorized Version. I have modernized
his words here for easier understanding.
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.
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. 11 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
11
Of course, most modern critical scholarship does not believe that Deuteronomy was written or
available until 621 B.C.; some might say its contents were being preached earlier.
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. 14
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.
12
Sargon was the king of Assyria who invaded the land. He died while the siege of Samaria was
in full force in 723/722 B.C., and Shalmaneser succeeded him and finished the job.
13
Subsequent oracles will be from earlier times in Isaiah's ministry, even when the northern
kingdom is still in existence. So this oracle was selected as the introductory one because it hit all the
major themes of the collection.
14
See the work by Gerhard Hasel, The Remnant. This is a doctrine we shall have to look at
seriously in these prophetic oracles.
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).
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
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)15 and “master” (ba’al) are juxtaposed with the
15
This word is difficult for there are two homonyms in the language, one means possess and the
other create. Since they are spelled exactly alike, the context must determine which it is.
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. 16 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.
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 17 are like a booth, a lodge, and a besieged city.
16
See John J. Davis, Biblical Numerology, A Basic Study of the Use of Numbers in the Bible
(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968).
17
Jerusalem is the Queen City; the daughters of Zion are the villages all around. So there is an
implied comparison between daughters and villages.
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.
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
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.
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. 18 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.
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.
18
By "clear" I mean passages that I could quote in conjunction with Isaiah and not have to spend
time explaining them.
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).
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.
I. Only God can provide security amidst the terrifying circumstances of life (7:1-9). 19
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 20
19
Note that now in the exposition, the actual teaching format, I change the wording of the points
to theological statements and principles that are relevant to today’s audience as well as the original
audience, rather than retain the exegetical outline that is descriptive of ancient Israel’s experience only.
But writing the exegetical outline first, even in a rough sketch, makes writing this one very easy, because
I just have to substitute words and condense.
20
If you want to pronounce this Hebrew phrase fairly accurately, it would be as follows: eem lo
ta-a-mee-noo, key lo tey-a-may-noo.
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.”
21
It is always difficult to translate a Hebrew word play. NIV tried “if you do not stand firm, you
will not stand at all.” While that catches the word play, it gives the impression Ahaz is a believer who
simply needs to take a stand. But he is an unbeliever who needs to believe.
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
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 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. 22
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.
22
In the archives of the web site in the section on sermons there is a sermon on this passage in
Isaiah and its connection with Luke’s gospel; the material has been reworked to a homiletic form.
Naturally, though, since this is about the Assyrian invasion of ancient Israel, some abstracting 23
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).
23
Abstracting must usually be done when a passage is so concretely related to a specific setting.
If the text refers to Israel, we must generalize or abstract it to use the designation the people of God, or
believers, or professing believers; if the passage mentions an Assyrian invasion, we must abstract to
speak of divine judgment. It is like beginning with a species and finding the genus in order to move to
our age and go back to a corresponding species. Otherwise, application is lost in the historical
descriptions in the passage, or it is improperly connected.
Exposition
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.
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.
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.
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).
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
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.
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.
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? 24 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
24
These words are reflected in the Garden after the resurrection of Jesus: Why do you seek the
living among the dead?
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.
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
25
Lancelot Andrewes has a marvelous sermon on the name Immanuel; in it he plays on the
words to show that if it is not Immanuel, it must be Immanu-hell.
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 8)
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.
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. 29
26
The expression is a metonymy of either adjunct or effect; the reference is to the invasions that
destroyed the northern kingdom.
27
This then would also be a metonymy of effect or adjunct, the blessing of the people with peace
and prosperity will be His way of bringing them honor. The Hebrew verbs qalal (“light,” “treat lightly,”
“curse”) and kabad (“heavy,” “treat as important,” “honor”) form a fine contrast.
28
The reference to “Gentiles” makes sense in light of the Assyrian policy of bringing in many
people from different lands. Galilee had always been rather cosmopolitan because it was on the trade
routes, but the wars filled it with foreigners. By the time of Jesus it had such a reputation that the very
righteous and pious Jews would have little to do with it.
29
The figure is hypocatastasis. The Bible loves to use night and darkness to represent evil and
destruction and despair, and light or day to signify righteousness, joy, and hope. It was a natural image to
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. 30 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. 31
The joy described here is extravagant. It is the kind of joy that comes at the harvest, or at the
dividing of the plunder. 33 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.
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. 36 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). 37 There will be a time when this Son will rule as king.
35
The figure used in here is synecdoche; the things mentioned represent the kinds of elements in
war.
36
The language is metaphorical, both in Samuel and in Psalm 2. The king will be like a son, an
adopted son, to God, heir of the kingdom. Of course, the metaphor “son” as it applies to Jesus also carries
with it the meaning that He shares the nature of God--eternal and divine.
37
The figure would then be either metonymy of adjunct or hypocatastasis; it would be the former
if he really was going to wear an insignia, and the latter if he is not. The latter is probably the better view,
since the reign of the Messiah is not likely to have all the literal trappings of an earthly monarch. He is
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. 38
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. 39
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. 40 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.” 41 So the King
would be known as the powerful one, the mighty God. 42
40
Moses in Exodus 7:1 is called a god; judges in Psalm 82 are called “gods.” So the term could
be used for theocratic leaders who spoke for God.
41
This passage is quoted in Hebrews as being fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The language of the psalm
could have been applied to a human king in a general way, but the writer of Hebrews, pulling many
passages together in his treatise, saw how the language ultimately applied literally to Christ.
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. 43 It describes one who
produces, directs, and is lord over the ages. 44
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). 45 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. 46 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. 47 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
42
There are several ways to translate the phrase: “God of might,” “mighty God,” “mighty hero,”
or “god-like hero.” The various commentaries will deal with the variations in the context of the chapter
and in relation to prophecy.
43
The Ugaritic text has ‘abu sanimi, “father of years.” The Canaanite expressions are often the
same as Hebrew; they are simply applied to the wrong persons.
44
The genitive should be taken as genitive of the thing possessed, which is close to objective
genitive--he produces and controls the ages. The English “everlasting Father” is the translation of an
attributive genitive; while this is certainly possible it does not provide the clear meaning of rulership.
45
The individual statements of Scripture about Messiah (in the Old Testament) and that Jesus
made (in the New Testament) are frequently capable of one or two interpretations. But when they are all
put together, they clearly point in the same direction. And that the Jews understood this is clear, because
they charged Jesus with blasphemy. One of the best evidences of the meaning of what Christ said is this
response.
46
Micah 5:12 will also describe Messiah as one whose goings have been from everlasting.
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.
All of this will be accomplished by the “zeal of the LORD.” 48 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
47
An attributive genitive--peaceful prince--would mean little in the oracle. The genitive must
express what is produced by the prince.
48
The Hebrew word “zeal” describes a passionate intensity to defend a threatened institution or
possession. When it describes a passionate desire for the wrong thing, or with the wrong motivation, it
means “jealousy, envy.” But when its motive is correct, it is zeal.
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.
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]49 ) 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. 50 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.
49
This is probably the word that the Gospel alludes to in saying Jesus was a Nazarene.
"Nazarene" sounds like netser from Isaiah, and the point would be similar, namely, that He came from a
common place, was a nobody, and to be looked down on.
50
There is also probably a deliberate word play on the name Zerubbabel, "branch" or "sprout" of
Babylon. He was the political leader of the returning exiles, and could then have been a type of Messiah
the Branch.
“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.54 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-nay55]) 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
51
There are about twenty to twenty-five classifications that are attested in the biblical texts,
some of which would be very rare. Those showing possession (“the house of the king” = the king’s
house) are common.
52
In an objective genitive, the first of the two words either produces or acts upon the second
word, the object. A good example is “the tree of live,” a tree that produces or enables life, because if
Adam and Eve ate from it they would continue to live. The “spirit of wisdom” could be an attributive
genitive, meaning “a wise spirit,” but it more likely is objective, meaning a “spirit of [who produces]
wisdom.”
53
A word in “apposition” is a word that follows another word in the same case and modifies it.
So the passage introduces “the Spirit of the LORD … a Spirit of wisdom … .”
54
A hendiadys (Greek for “one through two”) uses two words joined with a conjunction with
refer to the same thing, and so one of the words should be a modifier. In English we would say “I am
good and mad” to mean “I am very mad.”
55
The word is Yahweh, but in the Hebrew Bible the word was always read with the substitute
word “LORD” and the vowels under YHWH are the vowels for the substitute word, ’adonay. The English
Bibles follow that custom with “LORD.”
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.56 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. 8). 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).
56
This figure uses a part for the whole, or a whole for the part. The part that is used here, an
individual animal, for example, refers to that animal for sure, but also to all in that class or group. So it is
both literal and figurative--it is the kind of figure that says more that what is literally stated.
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.
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
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).
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
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.
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
57
In the little book on the Gilgamesh Epic written by Alexander Heidel, there is a whole chapter
on death and afterlife in the ancient world. Heidel shows that Hebrew se'ol can mean (1) death, (2) the
grave, (3) the realm of departed spirits or Hell, and (4) extreme danger. He also observes that when the
righteous are said to go to sheol, it is never usage number 3, but one of the others.
58
Read "The Descent of Ishtar into Hades" in Ancient Near East Texts, edited by James
Pritchard.
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).
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. 59
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.
59
But be careful here again. Christians certainly can become proud, and God will bring them
down--but not down to Hell like Satan. "Pride" in the Old Testament, especially pride like this, belongs to
the unbeliever who rejects, or better yet, tries to replace God.
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.
60
The Hebrew term todah is a noun from yadah, meaning "acknowledgment, praise." The verbal
idea of "acknowledge" works best because the word can be used for praise or confess sin. Although
translated "thanksgiving" in English versions, there is a great difference between our modern "thanks"
and Hebrew 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).
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.
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.
61
"Prime" is literally "noontide"; this would be hypocatastasis. "Life" is literally "days"--a
synecdoche.
62
“The verb is puqqadti, literally "robbed" of the rest of life. This too would be an implied
comparison, hypocatastasis to stress the sudden loss he was anticipating.
63
The verb is puqqadti, literally "robbed" of the rest of life. This too would be an implied
comparison, hypocatastasis to stress the sudden loss he was anticipating.
64
Hebrew is Yah, the abbreviated form, common in poetry.
65
The expression be'eres hahayyim (beh-e-rets ha-khay-yim) is a common one for this world of
living people. The genitive would be attributive--a land characterized by living people.
66
The Hebrew has dori, normally "my generation"; but it means his time on earth.
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.
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.
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
67
"Life" in Hebrew is usually in the plural, as here: hayyay (khay-yay), "my life[s]." But the
plural indicates all the complexity of a lifetime, all the parts--it is a full expression of all that life is.
68
There is irony in the verb "you make an end of me." The Hebrew is taslimeni (tash-lee-may-
nee), from salam (shah-lam), the verbal root of "peace, welfare, wholeness." To lie in peace is an
expression for death; but the Hebrew idea of peace would normally be otherwise.
69
Literally the Hebrew form, siwwiti (from siwwah [siv-vah] ) means "I quieted myself." The
verb suggests that the natural instinct was to cry out and complain, but he forced himself to wait patiently
on the LORD.
70
The Hebrew is emphatic, 'asapsep, literally "I chattered." The verb is suggested to be
onomatopoeic.
71
Another onomatopoeic word, hagah (here: 'ehgeh) means to mumble under the breath. It also
can be used for "meditate."
72
The verb is `asaq (ah-shak), "to be oppressed, crushed." It is much stronger than "troubled."
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)
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.
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. 75 And this is why God blessed
73
The verb means "walk softly" ('eddaddeh).
74
"Anguish" is fine; mar (from marar) literally means "bitterness"--‘al mar napsi (al mar naph-
she).
75
The verb hayah and its related forms is found in this one verse three times. Since the word
occurs several other places in the psalm, this would be the major theological theme to look at. Besides,
the lament is its whole antithesis--death. A word study of hayah or hay would not change the definition,
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.”
III. God answers prayer and restores health in order that His people might praise Him
forever (38:17-20).
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. 77 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.
but would discover that there is a quality of life involved, not merely surviving.
76
The text has missahat beli (mish-sha-khat beh-lee), "from the pit of destruction." The
expression indicates the place of destruction where one is reduced to nothing. Therefore, we have a
metonymy of effect here for the grave or death.
77
"Putting sins behind the back" is a bold anthropomorphism to stress that they were kept out of
sight--did not get in the way of God's love for him.
78
Here is the verb that is fitting for this type of psalm, todekka, from yadah in the imperfect with
a pronominal suffix.
79
The parallel verb is the well-known halal, yehalelekka (yeh-ha-leh-lek-kah). The root word
means to be shining, brilliant; and so the verb to praise has the idea of glowing with a report, enthusiastic
Here we have a teaching that is common to the psalms. The grave 80 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. 81 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.”
as I am doing today;
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.
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
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).
83
When doing exegesis on a Messianic prophecy, it is generally better to wait for the step on
correlation with the New Testament to sort out which parts are first coming and which second. The
prophet never thought in those terms--he just knew the LORD was coming. And from all indications
probably thought it was imminent, as did Paul of the second coming of Jesus.
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.” 84 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.
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.
84
The common idea seems to be one of sighing or breathing out, as the word books may suggest.
In the idea of repenting it would therefore include both the change of will and the feeling of surrendering,
giving in; in comforting it would be the sighing of relief in response to the news.
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. 86 He will come in power. Without Him the “sheep” are weak and frail;
with His presence they find everlasting peace and righteousness.
85
The reference to the breath of the LORD blowing on them is probably a comparison of the
winds, even the cold winter winds, with the breath of the LORD.
86
At the first advent He began His reign in the hearts of people and established the foundation
for His dominion. At His exaltation He was seated at the right Hand of the Majesty on High where He
was to wait until the time for His second coming into this world, when in fact He will put down all
enemies and establish His righteous reign.
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.
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.
Verses 25 and 26 reiterate the theme of His incomparable nature. There is no one like God—He
is the “Holy One.” 87 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).
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.
By waiting (Hebrew qawah88, 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
87
Recall the word study of qadosh, "holy"; throughout these passages that word's meaning will
be developed. He is truly unique, distinct, set apart--there is no one like Him!
88
The word is connected to the noun qaw (kav), a rope or a cord. The idea of hoping may have
some overtones of anxious feelings, a tenseness or tightness. However, the primary meaning of the verb
is eager and confident expectation. The verb is often used in contexts parallel to words and ideas of
secure trust.
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.
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:
I am He
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. 8). We are to be filled with confidence that God will keep His Word and deliver us from the
bondage of the world. 89 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.
89
There are three tenses of salvation or redemption: we have been redeemed/saved from the
penalty of sin (regeneration); we are being saved from the power of sin (sanctification); and we will be
saved/redeemed from the very presence of sin (glorification). You have to watch the passages in their
contexts to be sure you have the right category.
I. “Do not fear” God will redeem His people from the world (43:1-7).
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. 90 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.” 91 It can refer to an
answer to prayer, a healing, rescue, deliverance from trouble, death, or disease—as well as from sin and
90
So we today await the redemption from the bondage of this evil world. But this does not mean
that we are not already believers, or members of the covenant.
91
Some of the older dictionaries still try to base the idea on Arabic and have the meaning to be
"setting in wide open spaces" or the like. Sawyer shows that is not correct.
The word for “your ransom” (kophreka) is from the verbal root kipper, which means “atone,
expiate, pacify, set free. 92 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.
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
92
Many Bible students still rely too heavily on the old lexicon by Brown, Driver and Briggs,
who tended to lump homonyms together as from the same root. While this is the standard dictionary,
modern research must be taken into consideration. The evidence now points to two roots k-p-r, one
meaning "expiate" and the other meaning "cover, smear" (as in caulking on a barge). When these were
taken together, people concluded that sins were only covered over. But that runs against the clear
teaching of the Old Testament, and erroneously joins two different roots together.
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.
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
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).
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.
93
The terms and their related verbal forms are basic to this section of the book: qadosh is "holy,"
and ga’al is "redeem."
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.” 95 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. 96
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.
94
It is amazing how so many things in Scripture harmonize in the divine patterns of typology
and symbolism. The exodus from Egypt by the blood of the passover lamb established Israel as the
redeemed people of God; the sudden and easy deliverance from exile in Babylon corresponds to the
exodus, but it is the deliverance of the people from the bondage of the world. The Church uses the first
exodus as a picture of salvation; it may use the second as a picture of being rescued from this world at the
end of the age.
95
The Hebrew construction with hinneh ("behold") and the participle announce an imminent
action--it is a futur instans use of the participle. That is why I would translate it "I am about to… ."
96
Compare Psalm 126 with the prayer that God would restore the captivity like streams in the
desert.
Verse 22 puts the contrast boldly: negatively, Israel has not called upon the LORD—they did not
pray for this great deliverance; 97 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.
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. 99
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.”
97
In the Book of Revelation John by his example shows Christians to pray, "Even so come
quickly, Lord Jesus."
98
The idea of "blot" is traditional, although it is not accurate for ancient Israel (they had no
blotters) and would not remove the writing on a page anyway. The idea in Hebrew was more of scraping
off a palimpsest (of clay or wax) so there was "a clean slate").
99
In a similar way when Jesus healed the sick or cast out demons, forgiveness of and salvation
from sin was usually also granted.
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. 100 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 kherem101). 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.
III. The LORD encourages His people that He will revive them again (44:1-5).
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.
100
Peter in quoting Psalm 2 in his great Pentecost sermon makes the same point: "Why do the
nations rage … against the LORD and His Messiah." In the psalm the nations were Gentiles. But since
the Jews among others rejected Jesus, to Peter they are now the nations of Psalm 2.
101
The Arabic idea of the harem is related to this--off limits.
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. 102
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.
102
There is an interesting turnabout in Scripture. In this passage when the nations see how
faithful God is in His grace they will want what they have. Paul says in Romans that today the Church is
supposed to be making Israel jealous. One wonders what we display that would make anyone jealous.
Exposition
106
One is reminded of what the Angel did to the Assyrian army of Sennacherib; but one is also
reminded how the LORD can use the Babylonians to accomplish His judgment.
107
If this section of the book is history written after the fact, then one of the prophet’s main
arguments for Yahweh’s sovereignty and reliability—God’s ability to predict the future long in advance
—evaporates, and with it God’s sovereignty and reliability.
108
Some versions have surprisingly replaced “Rock” with “God.”
109
The Hebrew catch-phrase (a paronomasia) of tohu wabohu means “waste and void,” or more
specifically without form or structure and without substance. In general, “waste” fits if it can be defined
(perhaps like our expressions “wasteland”).
110
Recall how Paul in Romans 1:18-31 explains that they refused to worship the Creator but
instead worshiped the creatures. So God gave them up to their evil desires to self-destruct.
111
This is not the place to develop the point, but an interesting study can be made of the value of
creation as a paradigm for worship unfold, both in the nature of God, approaching God, and the
construction of the tabernacle.
112
It is this that gives Genesis 1 its polemical nature. The Law said, “You shall have no other
gods before Me.” Genesis 1 traces through creation. And everything the pagans worship is part of God’s
creation, whether angelic powers like Satan, or animals, or trees, or forces of nature. God is before all of
them, because He made them. Idolatry can never free itself of the charge of worshiping the creation and
not the creator.
III. Only Yahweh is the saving God: He is worthy to be praised for His forgiveness
and redemption (44:21-23).
113
See the excellent discussion in George E. Wright’s Israel Against Its Environment, in which
he discusses astrology, voodoo, burning in effigy, spiritism, and magic.
Conclusion
So the prophet portrays the utter foolishness of making and worshiping an idol against the backdrop
of the reality of the sovereign LORD God of the universe, the One who forgives our sins. The message
would be vital for the Israelites in exile among the pagans and their gods; some might have been swayed
into those beliefs, or perhaps led to doubt the sovereignty of God. This call for a renewed faith in the
true LORD had as its practical outcome the imminent deliverance from exile.
The impact on the seventh century audience (following the early date and one Isaiah) would be even
greater, for they clearly were into idolatry. By teaching how the nation was to be punished for idolatry
before being redeemed out of exile, the prophet would be warning the nation to change so that judgment
would be forestalled (as in the Book of Jonah). His ridiculing of idolatry would have had quite an
impact.
From the very beginning of their existence through the exile idolatry was the great sin of Israel.
They, like the pagan nations around them, wanted a god that they could control—one that they could see,
that was like them. They did not want to be the only people on the earth to worship an invisible God.
But all that they were given was the revelation of the invisible God, the eternal Spirit. But this
revelation was often made in terms that they could understand, in human language and human
descriptions (anthropomorphisms). God was indeed revealing Himself to them in human forms and
114
The translation with the present perfect tenses is certainly workable. He could be saying I
have forgiven and redeemed (as in chapter 40 where He said your sins have been paid for). They would
still have to take advantage of the provision for it to be effectual. But it is also possible to take these as
prophetic perfects—I will blot out, I will forgive, I will redeem—so return to me, repent.
References
Gelston, A. “Some Notes on Second Isaiah: (b) Isaiah 44:15-16.” VT 21 (1971):521.
Thomas, D. Winton. “Isaiah 44:9-20: A Translation and Commentary. Hommages a Andre Dupont-
Sommer. 1971. Pp. 319-330.
Whitley, C. F. “Further Notes on the Text of Deutero-Isaiah.” VT 25 (1975):683-687.
In this passage we have the report of the direct prediction that the LORD called Cyrus to be His
servant to deliver His people Israel, in order that all might know that the LORD is God. Critical to this
section is the knowledge of the LORD, both from the predictive side that He can prophesy, and from the
effective side, that He does this that people might know that He is the LORD. The section draws out all
the implications of this truth on several levels.
At the heart of this oracle is the mention of Cyrus by name. He is first introduced in Isaiah
44:28; but then in 45 the point is stressed that the LORD called him by name. Those who hold to the
traditional view of the book point to this passage as a remarkable example of God’s ability to predict the
future. Those who take the critical view argue that since prophets do not predict in such a specific way in
the Old Testament, we have here evidence of a later author in the Babylonian exile, who knew about
Cyrus and “predicted” that he should be the deliverer.
There is a strong parallel to this particular focus on the sovereignty of God portrayed in the Book
of Exodus with Moses and Pharaoh—a point that our prophet has already alluded to by indicating that
this deliverance would be a second exodus. Note these motifs in Exodus: Pharaoh said, “I know not the
LORD” (5:2); God said that He would deal with Pharaoh by a mighty hand (6:1), declaring “I AM
YAHWEH” (6:2 and 6:6), and that when He redeemed (=delivered) His people they would “know” that
He was the LORD (6:7); God promised to bring them to their land to possess it (6:8); and declared to
Pharaoh that by this he too would know that “I AM YAHWEH” (7:17). Exodus 9:16 also announced, “I
raised you up for this purpose, that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” This, of course,
provided that basis of Paul’s discussion of God’s sovereignty in Romans 9:17; Paul also cited Exodus
33:19 to say that God would have mercy on whom He would have mercy. Paul also reasoned that God is
like a potter; and the clay cannot say to the potter, “Why have you made me thus?” The idea of the
potter and the clay is drawn from Isaiah 45:9, the context right after our passage. So the connection to
Exodus and to Romans 9 are an important part of the discussion of the theology of this chapter.
In fact, a close reading of Romans 9—11, the passage where Paul explains how God controls
nations with a view to His plan for Israel, draws heavily on the Book of Isaiah:
11:27 = Isaiah 59:20,21,27 “All Israel will be saved when I take away her sins.”
Clearly, the themes of the prophecies were most significant for Paul’s argument that God sent
His people into exile for sin, that a remnant of believers was preserved, 115 that the nation received good
115
It is important to understand that according to the biblical writers' theology, true believers
believe the Word of the LORD, not only the Law of Moses, but new revelation from the prophets. If the
prophets truly were sent by God, their messages were to be believed; and a true believer would do that.
Thus, the prophetic oracles became Scripture in par with the Law. In the days of Jeremiah, "pious priests"
rejected the prophet and claimed to hold to the Law--selectively interpreted. Likewise, when Jesus came
into the world as the full revelation of God, the true remnant would gradually turn to Him by faith,
because they were inclined to believe the Word of the LORD. It took a little time to convince them that
He was from God, because it was so radically different from what the leaders were teaching. But the
We are in the section of the book that portrays the sovereignty of the LORD as the basis for faith
that the LORD will fulfill His promises. Isaiah 44:24-28 forms the first part of the study, but could serve
as a prologue. The LORD is presented there as the Creator and Redeemer who makes liars and diviners
frustrated by restoring Israel to her land. For this purpose God raised up Cyrus who would perform all
the LORD’s pleasure in restoring Jerusalem and its temple. So with those claims the LORD reveals what
He is about to do with Cyrus.
Isaiah 45:1-7 is the heart of this revelation of God’s sovereign power over the nations for His
own purposes. I would think that the primary focus of the theology here would be as the passages points
to, namely, know the LORD . We shall come back and develop this later; for now it is helpful to keep it
in mind. “Knowing the LORD” involves both the realization and apprehension of facts about who He is
and what He has and can do. It may also involve an act of the will by faith, an acknowledgment that
Yahweh is God. I say “may” because we have samples where it does not. In Egypt God brought the
plagues on Pharaoh that he might know that the LORD is God. Well, in his heart he would have had to
admit that—but he never became a believer. Whereas the Israelites were told by Moses that when they
were delivered they would know that He was God. For them the deliverance confirmed their faith.
Likewise, at the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, “every knee shall bow and tongue confess” that
He is LORD—some as believes in joy, others in forced recognition at judgment.
In the rest of the chapter the prophet will describe the sovereign work of the LORD in bringing
nations into submission to His plan. After an initial key summary statement of His plan for righteousness
and salvation to fill the earth (45:8), the prophet announces woes on the critics who reject the Creator and
His choice of Cyrus (9-13). This LORD will bring the Gentile powers to bow down to Israel in
humiliation and to worship with them in Jerusalem (14-19). Consequently, the nations should pay
attention to these oracles and be saved (20-25).
I see three developments of ideas in this passage that unfold the message. First, there are the
claims of the LORD, namely, that He controls history through His control of Cyrus; secondly, the
purpose of this is that all might know Yahweh, the God of Israel, to be the sovereign Lord God; and third,
the explanation of all this is that He alone is sovereign over all creation, and if He can control all creation
He can surely control Cyrus for His purpose for Israel.
There are several words that you would want to study in this passage. Certainly the verb “to
know” (yada`) would be a primary choice, not to find a new and improved translation, but to uncover its
many refinements and ramifications. The term essentially describes personal, intimate, experiential
knowledge. But since it is normally just translated “know,” you will want to focus on its various
categories of use. It can be used for simply knowing about things, for integrating facts by experience in
life (common use in Proverbs), for acknowledging something such as the sovereignty of God or personal
sin or confessing faith, for God’s evaluative knowledge (Ps. 139), almost on a par with salvation (“The
LORD knows the way of the righteous”), and it can even be used for sexual intercourse. So the
information available certainly stress an experiential knowledge.
"remnant" will take that next step into the further revelation of God. Nowadays it is different, because no
new Scripture is being written; the new programs of God that are yet to come have all been fully revealed
to the prophets and the apostles.
Exegesis
The first verse of the chapter introduces the call of Cyrus, using the Word of the LORD as the
introduction. If the direct speech begins in verse 2, the phrases in verse 1 still record the LORD’s Word
about this king. The striking point, though, is that Cyrus is called “His anointed” (meshikho from
mashakh), a term usually reserved for the believing and/or Israelite kings. Here it carries its widest
meaning of being set apart for a task.
Moreover, the king is said to be strengthened by the LORD: “whose right hand I made strong”
(hekhezaqti from khazaq), the “right hand” being the idiom for “power” (a metonymy of cause). Cyrus
was strengthened by God because he had a task that God wanted him to perform.
The purpose of God’s calling Cyrus was to “subdue all nations”—as an empire builder Cyrus
would put down all rebellious states and unify the Fertile Crescent. The language here says that the
LORD will subdue the nations, strip the kings, and open the doors—all these then being metonymies of
cause, for the LORD would enable Cyrus to do it. In addition, each of these activities as metonymies
represents more than what they merely express. “Stripping kings of armor” would be the effect of
defeating them. “Opening doors” would be the effect of surrendering army. 117
Thus, according to the message of the prophet, the LORD—Yahweh—of Israel did all this.
Archaeology turned up the cylinder seal of Cyrus which gives a parallel account (see the additional page
in this section). In that Cyrus claims Marduk called him by name and took him by the hand to subdue
116
For a discussion of the words "good" and "evil" as they work together in the Bible, seen my
treatment in the introductory materials in Creation and Blessing.
117
It is interesting how literally this happened with Babylon. The general of Cyrus, one Ugbaru
(whom Daniel calls by the title Darius) managed to take the city of Babylon in the same way that
Babylon earlier had taken Nineveh, by diverting the river and breaking in. But when Cyrus came to
Babylon a few weeks later the gates were opened to him and he was hailed as the great king.
The point can be stressed all along the way that God raises up pagan kings and powers to serve
His purpose. The hymn of Daniel (in Daniel 2) declares that God sets up kings and removes kings—they
are at His beckon call. Deuteronomy 32 said that God arranged the boundaries of all the nations with the
number of the tribes of Israel in mind. To Pharaoh the word was, “For this cause I raised you up.” So
throughout the Bible God uses pagan nations for divine purposes. Believers need not fear when they hear
the international news, for God is sovereign over them all.
Cyrus was empowered by Yahweh to do what was to be done. The language of verses 2 and 3a
is figurative and needs explanation. I would take “mountains” to be an implied comparison
(hypocatastasis) with obstacles or opposition. It will be military (I doubt that God was going to flatten
the earth in his pathway; in fact, it was already pretty flat). “Breaking down the gates” and “cutting bars”
would be metonymical, the cause being put for the effect (given in verse 1) or the adjunct being put for
the thing. God would bring down any opposition that Cyrus might meet. The iron gates would be actual
gates of iron—there were 100 such gates leading into Babylon; the LORD opened the way for Cyrus to
parade into the city without even a fight.
The LORD would also give Cyrus the treasures. I think that this is fairly literal in that the
treasures would be the wealth that Babylon stored up in the vaults and archives. “Darkness” and “secret
places” would be metonymies of adjunct, though, for the vaults would be in dark and secret places.
The purpose statement here focuses our attention on the verb “to know.” There are three levels
of meaning of this verb in theological contexts: (1) to know in the sense of intellectual assent, that is, to
know or realize facts; (2) to know in the sense of belief, that is, saving knowledge, personal experiential
saving knowledge; and (3) to know publicly, to acknowledge or admit, and even to praise. At least the
first is meant in this verse (compare Pharaoh in Exodus, and compare Daniel 4). Beyond that we do not
know what happened to Cyrus. Josephus record of the tradition that he was moved by Isaiah’s writing is
interesting, but even if true (and Josephus has proved to be more reliable than many thought) would say
nothing to help us here. God would at least make His point with this king, maybe more.
This passage explains that God chose Cyrus for the sake of Israel, even though Cyrus did not
know the LORD. One is reminded of Pharaoh again—”Who is Yahweh? I know not Yahweh!” But if
Cyrus did not know of the LORD before this, he came to know about Him, and did cooperate with the
divine plan (as if he had a choice).
Here, though, we find the main purpose of this whole section (so I would focus attention here).
God was doing all this for the sake of Israel. He had a plan for Israel, and that plan involved all nations,
whether as the means of discipline or the means of restoration. Pharaoh had been raised for one purpose,
that God might destroy him as the evil oppressor. God also had a plan for Cyrus.
So God could work through a pagan king who had not known the LORD nor acknowledged
Him. Cyrus may well have remained a pagan after this was over, because he gave the credit to Marduk—
unless that was merely to patronize the Babylonian people.
Still focusing on the choice and the preparation of Cyrus, the prophet reiterates the sovereignty
of the LORD in spite of the fact that Cyrus was ignorant of Him (verse 5). The Word of the LORD is, “I
am Yahweh, and there is no other God besides Me.” This point will continue to be made throughout this
section of the book. Yahweh claims absolute and exclusive authority. Marduk is nothing. Bel is a
phantasy. Nebo is worthless. Only Yahweh is God.
So it is only Yahweh who could strengthen Cyrus—not even his own deities could do this. 119
Salvation can only come to people when they realize that what they have believed in was not what has
helped or benefitted them—it was the LORD and His common grace, moving towards efficacious grace.
Verse 6 is subordinated to the preceding verse as the purpose clause. It forms a parallel with
verse 3, which also stresses this same purpose for Cyrus. That is why I have made the break here in my
outline—to have each of the first two sections end with the purpose that people might know the LORD—
even though one could do it differently as long as the context is not altered. I took verse 7 to be a moire
universal proclamation, not limited to the Cyrus event, but certainly bringing it all to a culmination.
“From the rising of the sun” is a metonymy for either the east or the morning (adjunct); likewise,
“setting” could be for either the west or the evening. I suspect a double meaning here is involved, for
both ideas are true—all day and everywhere. So the two form a megrims.
They will all acknowledge that there is no God beside Yahweh. “There is no other.” God
demands absolute allegiance; He claims exclusive rights to this by virtue of creation and redemption.
With this statement the text may also be a polemic against Persian Zoroastrianism with its
dualism. They may be polarized items (light and dark, for example) but they are all under the power and
authority of Yahweh.
118
The use of "servant" throughout these sections makes an interesting study. Cyrus is the
LORD's servant; Israel is the LORD's servant; but ultimately the Messiah is the Servant of the LORD.
119
Recall Jesus' words to Pilate: "You could have no power against Me except it were given to
you from above" (John 19:11).
B. Warning: God will have dominion over the nations, in spite of unbelief (9-17).
In this section the prophet pronounces woes on the critics who oppose or do not believe God’s
plan to deliver Israel. The challenge is whether the clay can ask the potter why the program is as it is.
The LORD, after all, is the sovereign Creator. He has made everything; He can predict what will happen.
And here he predicts that Cyrus will build His city and set the exiles free.
In verse 14-17 the oracle announces that the Gentile powers will have to submit to God and His
plan, to acknowledge that Israel’s God is the sovereign God. All of this will work to the salvation of
Israel.
In view of this, the advice is given to the nations to Look to me and be saved. The word is
given that every knee shall bow and every tongue shall swear to the LORD. Those who were incensed
against the LORD will be put to shame; those who believe will join the remnant, the seed of Israel, that
shall be justified.
Conclusion
The point of the passage would bring great comfort to the believers as they saw how God could
work all things together for the good. It would also be instructive for them, and for all worldlings, to
learn that God expects acknowledgment that comes from faith.
There is another aspect of this whole section that needs to be probed somewhere. In the Old
Testament (as well as the New) Babylon was the epitome of the “anti-kingdom.” In Genesis 11 the
people settled in Babylon after the flood in rebellion against God; they came together to unite and to
become famous. God judged them by confusing their language and then eventually scattered them across
the face of the earth. Thus with the antagonism that would grow, God chose to use war as a means of
holding nations in check—war and conflict was better than collective apostasy. So Cyrus’ coming would
be seen as a part of God’s plan to overthrow the evil empire (see also the Book of Revelation).
God’s plan of redemption seeks to overthrow this work by various parts to the plan. One part
was the confusing of their language. 120 Zephaniah 3 prophesies that God will regather His people by
giving them one pure language. And Acts 2, recording a partial fulfillment, serves as a harbinger of that
coming day when the Spirit of the LORD will be poured out on all flesh. Babylon teaches us that unity
120
Babylon was always known as a cosmopolitan center because of the number of people and
variety of languages. So a judgment of God is eventually turned into a claim to fame by Babylon.
We could thus summarize this passage’s point by saying: Those who truly know the LORD
(=believers) will acknowledge His sovereignty in word and deed, so that He can re-unite and restore and
renew His people to their calling. God was raising a pagan king to destroy the pagan empire of Babylon
so that Israel could be set free and start again; all of this was done that the world might know that
Yahweh is the true God, and that by recognizing that they might turn to Him and be saved.
In a secondary point we could say, Those unbelievers who for one reason or another share part
of God’s work must of necessity admit that Yahweh is the true God. Every one must admit this, either
now in faith for salvation, or later in humiliation when they realize He is the LORD of creation, the
LORD of history, and the LORD of all nations.
References
Abba, Raymond. “Third Sunday After Easter: The Hidden God.” The Expository Times 89 (1978):182-
183.
Carter, Howard. “The Cyrus Decree.” Buried History 7 (1971):37-41.
Dahood, M. J. “Some Ambiguous Texts in Isaiah (Isa. 45:1).” CBQ 20 (1958):41-49
Driver, G. R. “Hebrew Notes.” JBL 68 (1949):57-59.
Manahan, R. E. “The Cyrus Notations of Deutero-Isaiah.” Grace Journal 11 (1970):22-33.
Ogden, G. S. “Moses and Cyrus: Literary Affinities between the Priestly Presentation of Moses in Exodus
6-8 and the Cyrus Song in Isaiah 44:24—45:13.” VT 28 (1978): 195-203.
Simcox, C. R. “The Role of Cyrus in Deutero-Isaiah.” JAOS 57 (1937):158-171.
Southwood, Charles H. “The Problematic hadurim of Isaiah 45:2.” VT 25 (1975):801-802.
Weinfeld, M. “God the Creator in Genesis 1 and the Prophecy of Second Isaiah.” Tarbiz 37
(1967/68):105-132.
Whitcomb, John C. “Cyrus in the Prophecies of Isaiah.” In The Law and the Prophets: Old Testament
Studies Prepared in Honor of Oswald Thompson Allis. Edited by John H. Skilton. Nutley, NJ:
The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1974. Pp. 388-401.
Zimmerli, W. “Ich bin Yahweh.” Geschichte und Altes Testament. Fs. A. Alt. Tubingen: J. C. B.
Mohr, 1953. Pp. 179-209.
It is hard for modern believers to imagine how great the struggle with idolatry must have been.
All nations made claims that their god or gods were the most powerful; and that was usually backed up
by military conquests and enslavement of other people, thus showing superiority over their gods.
Idolatrous people do not hesitate to add other deities to their collection, and so in a conquest might
assimilate the gods of the defeated tribes, as if those deities were actually supporting the conquering
But the true believers could look to the messages of the prophets to point out that God had
predicted His people would be taken into captivity. That was unusual. No people had a deity who
punished His own people. They were always nationalistic gods. But the words of the prophets came
true; so the remnant knew God was in control, even though His people could claim no victory. And now,
with the oracles about a return, they could also see God’s sovereignty. The nations of Assyria and
Babylon may have held the power, but their gods did not accomplish that—Yahweh did. He did this only
for His purposes; now that a new purpose was in line, Yahweh would overthrow Babylon. So when we
consider the question of which God can save, we shall have to keep in mind how Israel’s God withheld
His salvation until the right time, and then how He saved His people. Here, too, we can see His
sovereignty, for He has His plan and His schedule.
In this section we have about four separate sections that make up the whole argument. The first
two verses ridicule the impotence of idols. This is then contrasted with the affirmation of how the LORD
saves to the end (3,4). Then, to make the point that the LORD is incomparable, there is a challenge put
forth to the competition which shows that only the LORD can deliver (5-11). Finally, the LORD declares
His power to save (12,13).
There are other ways to analyze this section. There seems to be a pattern in the part of the
chapter that is instructional. The prophet speaks to Israel first with the command “Hearken”; then when
he again exhorts them it is with “Remember”; and then the third time he returns to “Hear.” There is a bit
of an inclusio to this arrangement. The first section calling them to hearken tells how He will bear them
up and rescue them; and the last section telling them to hearken as well repeats the theme that He will
deliver them. But the “remember” section in the middle focuses on the nature of Yahweh as the one true
God. Here then is the basis for the deliverance; and here then would be the central emphasis of the
theology of the passage—the nature of God. This arrangement is helpful to note, but it does not work as
easily into an outline because the sections on idolatry cannot be worked in as well.
Exposition
“Bel” is belu, which is the equivalent of ba’al in Western Semitic. Bel is the Semitic title for
the ancient Sumerian god Enlil, Lord of the Air. When the people of Babylon took over the Sumerian
culture, they made Enlil part of their triad and named him Bel. Marduk was the eldest son of Ea, another
ancient deity, god of Water. In the mythology Marduk fought Tiamat and was rewarded with fifty titles
and supreme authority. Bel conferred upon him his own title of “Lord of the Land” and Ea declared,
“Let him like me be called Ea.” Thus Marduk eventually absorbed the other gods and took over their
functions—creator, healer, deliverer, and determiner of fate; he is in many ways the equivalent of Jupiter.
So we find the title Bel Merodach; he became the king of the gods and the official deity of the city of
121
In fact, there is no oracle in Isaiah that clearly shows the invasion of Cyrus to be a completed
event. It is always future, whether imminent or not.
“Nebo” is nabu, the son and prophet of Bel (compare Hebrew nabi’ [nah-vee], “prophet”). He
was equal to Mercury (or better, Apollo). His city is Borsippa. When fate was being determined in the
realm of heaven, Bel confided to his son what was decided, and Nabu wrote it on the Tablets of Fate.
According to this, from Bel and Nabu the fate of the country was determined for another year. Isaiah has
another view! The theophoric element “nabu” appears in names like Nabonaid, Nabopolasser, and
Nabuchadnezzer. 123
The text alludes to beasts, elephants, and camels probably, that would carry the images of these
deities in processions, or festival enthronements; they now must carry them to safety in flight. But as the
people fled they would not be able to rescue them. Later, Cyrus restored some of these gods.
These verses have irony and sarcasm in them, which makes for a wonderful polemic. How
absurd to trust in deities that cannot save themselves; how absurd for the Israelites to fear deities that
have to be rescued when Yahweh judges the city.
II. The LORD saves His people to the end (3, 4).
Here now is the contrast—the LORD does not need to be saved, He saves His people. Note how
the section begins with a call for the house of Jacob and the “remnant” of Israel to listen to the Word of
the LORD. When a passage talks about the LORD’s protection of “His people” it will be referring to the
faithful (as a whole), because those whom He declared “not my people” He did not sustain.
The contrast between the LORD and pagan gods is drawn out further: the deities that those
animals bore or carried became a burden to the weary beasts; but the LORD bears up and carries His
people. The idiom of “carry” is based on the implied comparison that supporting and sustaining people is
like carrying them wherever they go.
The LORD supports and sustains His people throughout their lives, even to their old age, when
they have the hoary head. The contrast is striking—you will grow old, but I AM. And, unlike pagan
gods, the LORD is not only capable of movement, He is the prime Mover, the One who delivers. The
benefits to God’s people can be summarized in the verbs used: “I have made … I will bear … I will carry
… I will deliver.”
122
Recall the passage in Genesis 11:1-9 which plays on the name of Babylon—”the gate of god”
in their language, but “confusion” in Hebrew. Actually, “confusion” is not the actual meaning, only a
popular etymology (word play) because balal sounds like babel. But the text is mocking the idea it was
the gate of god.
123
There are many resources on ancient Near Eastern religions. Check works on the subject,
such as Helmer Ringgren’s little book on Semitic Civilizations. Or consult the books on each
civilization, such as Roux, Ancient Iraq. If you want a simple approach—with pictures, then use
Larousse’s Encyclopedia of Mythology.
The second verb in verse 8 is difficult. The form in question is hit’osesu (hith-oh-sheh-shoo). It
is a Hithpael imperative; but the etymology is unclear. It has been translated “show yourselves men,”
“be firm,” “be flush with shame”; the main conjectures apart from the standard translations include: “be
ashamed,” and “own yourselves guilty” (these two conjectures would alter the text to connect with bosh
and ‘asham respectively. I suspect that the idea of “stand fast” or “be firm” fits the context the best. The
prophet does address the audience as “transgressors” however, and that is one reason for an idea of “be
ashamed.” One ought not be too dogmatic here.
After reiterating that He is God and that there is no one else, the LORD focuses the themes of
His sovereignty and prophecy in the expression “My counsel shall stand” (‘asati taqum [a-tsa-tee tah-
koom])—God will do His will. His pleasure. In that light, Cyrus is introduced here as “a ravenous bird”
from the east. This hypocatastasis is then clarified for us with the parallel “the man of my counsel”—
linking the image with the above emphasis on God’s counsel. Cyrus, then, was the focus of the
predetermined plan of deliverance; and no one can tell God what He should or should not do. The sum of
the matter is “I have spoken, I will bring it to pass; I have purposed ( yasarti [ya-tsar-tee]), the word used
earlier for “formed” with a plan or purpose or design), I will also do it.”
124
I think there is more to this than that. They knew that they were sinners; that is why they
question whether or not God will take them back. But from the beginning God has said their sins are
paid for. Here He may be addressing them as transgressors to underscore that in spite of what they have
done His promises are sure. And they can be a part of it.
125
Probably a good many of them were able to comply with their pagan captors and thus live at
peace. The stories in Daniel suggest there were captives who fell down before Nebuchadnezzar’s statute
—just not Daniel and his friends. Jews could have done so, all the while knowing in their hearts it was
mere compliance. It was a way to survive. Daniel showed them another way. And Isaiah’s word was
shaking up their system.
The two key words in this section are “righteousness” (tsidqati, from tsedaqah [s.v. tsadaq]) and
“salvation” (teshu’ati, from teshu’ah [s.v. yasha’]). The two are parallel and so must work together in the
meaning of the line. The promise is clearly for “salvation”—the deliverance from exile and the
restoration to Zion of the glorious work through God’s people. The idea of “righteousness” must then be
a metonymy of either cause or of adjunct—that the deliverance or salvation is a fulfillment of the
LORD’s righteousness or faithful justice. Compare Psalm 98:2, which says, “The LORD has made
known His salvation // His righteousness has He openly shown in the sight of the nations.”
Conclusion
The whole passage is a practical application of the sovereignty of God. Because the LORD is
the sovereign LORD God, He is fully able to do what He has planned to do—save His people. He will
defeat and humiliate all false worshipers and their gods who can in no way save. Likewise, the New
Testament makes it clear that the LORD is able to save to the uttermost.
The target audience of this oracle is the Jewish community in exile. They had all but given up
on getting free; they may have concluded that the other side won, and that they now need only bide their
time and live as well as they could under Gentile dominion. They were not keen on going back;
Zerubbabel (in 536 B.C.), Ezra (in 455 B.C.), and Nehemiah (in 444 B.C.) had great difficulty getting
people to return. This message would then serve to rekindle confidence among the people of God, who
may have been wavering with words like “Where is the promise of His coming?” The prophet has
compared this deliverance to the exodus of Egypt; well, the people here seem to be very much like the
people back there—stiff-necked.
It is critical that such people remember (= recall and confirm by acting in faith on the promises)
that the LORD has a plan that cannot be stopped or changed by anyone, and that the LORD has the
power to fulfill His plan, and that the LORD will deliver His people to the shame and humiliation of all
the pagans and their false worship. Isaiah’s audience could also build up their faith in the sovereignty of
God over all pagans and their gods, so that they would not be overwhelmed by circumstances in which it
might appear that the other side was winning. God would deliver His people from oppression in the
world.
The primary application in preaching from this passage today would run along similar lines. We
as the people of God live in a world dominated by paganism with its false gods and oppressive beliefs. It
is easy to relinquish our confidence and courage, and just live quietly in our faith, not engaging in
spiritual warfare. But the Word of the LORD mocks false beliefs, and calls for us to live in active faith
in the promises of God, looking for the LORD’s great deliverance of His people, both now in spiritual
victories and in the eschaton in redemption from the bondage of this world. This passage challenges us
to hold fast the faith that we have received, our conviction of the sovereignty of God, and live out our
assurance that there is no salvation apart from faith in Him. We might be in the world, but we are not of
the world, for this world and its evil system is about to pass away.
126
Recall how Jesus rebuked his disciples in Luke 24 as “foolish and slow to believe” what the
prophets had said about the Messiah. It was all there in the text, but they were too focused on their
understanding of the Messianic Age.
127
The verb shama’, translated “hear, listen, hearken,” always has the idea of responding to the
word—”hear my prayer,” “and he heard,” “listen to the Word of the LORD”—not just listen, but
respond.
References
Leene, H. “Isaiah 46:8—Summons to Be Human?” JSOT 30 (1984):111-121.
Rabinowitz, J. J. “A Note on Isaiah 46:4 (sabal).” JBL 73 (1954):327.
Whitley, C. F. “Textual Notes on Deutero Isaiah.” VT 11 (1961):457-461.
________. “Further Notes on the Text of Deutero-Isaiah” (46:8). VT 25 (1975):683-687.
The LORD Can and Will Help Those Who Trust Him
Isaiah 50:1-11
Introduction
This chapter can easily be divided into three sections: verses 1-3 form the assurance of the
LORD’s help, verses 4-9 are the third Servant Song, and verses 10-11 the final exhortation. The question
raised by the commentaries is whether or not these sections belong together as a flowing argument. It
seems to me that the unit does work; moreover, even if they were originally different pieces they have
been placed together in this section because their themes go together. Some expositors prefer to work
only with verses 4-9 because it is one of the Servant Songs. That is fine; but the context it is now in must
contribute something to the argument of the Song, and so must be covered anyway.
Exposition
Verse 1 asks a series of rhetorical questions, each one of them expecting a negative answer.
There was no bill of divorcement—they still belonged to the LORD; there was no bill of sale—they were
never given up. In Israel, if there was a bill of divorcement given, the person was free to remarry; but the
LORD gave no such bill to Israel, or to the preceding generation. The nation—that generation—was
temporarily put away; but there was no divorce. So the image is an implied comparison between the idea
of a divorce and the LORD’s disowning Israel. He sent the nation into exile to purge those who were not
His people; but Israel still belonged to Him.
Likewise, if a man sold (into employment) children to help pay off a debt, they would be
permanently lost to him. But God had no such debt; neither was He forced to sell Israel into the hands of
a creditor (cf. 52:3). The nation was His possession; but He would bless only that generation of the
nation that was faithful.
Rather, that wicked generation of Israelites sold themselves because of sin; and such sin the
LORD could cancel by His grace. But the “nation” was not cast off forever. There would always be a
remnant of God’s people, and with revival there would be a faithful generation.
128
We need to remind ourselves that the verb "redeem" in these oracles refers to deliverance
from exile, even though for many participants is was probably also their spiritual redemption.
Again, the LORD used rhetorical questions, expecting negative answers. “Is my hand shortened
that it cannot redeem?” His hand was by no means shortened that it could not redeem. To make the
point, the LORD alludes to past acts of deliverance. The references are to miracles beginning with the
Exodus, the drying up of the sea, the provision of wilderness water, or unnatural droughts that brought
death. The main idea of them all seems to focus on the crossing of the Sea on dry ground to deliver them
from Egypt. The two key words for study in this claim of God’s ability to deliver are nasal (pronounced
nah-tsal) and padah (pah-dah).
Verse 3 probably refers to the darkening of the skies with storm clouds (clothing and sackcloth
being implied comparisons); but there may again be a reference to the plague of darkness in Egypt, or the
darkness at Sinai. The LORD was claiming sovereignty over the elements of nature to show that all
power in heaven and on earth belonged to Him.
So this first section is rather short but its point is clear enough. God was fully able to redeem
His people with as great a deliverance as the Exodus. Moreover, God was fully willing to do this because
He had not cast them off altogether, but had sent them into exile for their sins (purging the unbelievers
for the land). God can both forgive sinners and deliver them from bondage.
II. The Song of the Servant: Although rejected, the Servant learned to comfort the
weary because God was on his side (50:4-9).
Verse 4 begins the words of the Servant: in order to teach God had equipped him with a trained
faculty of speech. He says, “The LORD gave me the tongue (metonymy of cause) of them that are
taught, in order that I might know how to sustain with words them that are weak.” The meaning of
“sustain” is problematic here; some suggest “to answer,” “to revive,” or “to feed.” The Greek reads
“how to speak a word in due season.”
The question of who the weary are depends in large measure on who the Servant is. If the
Servant is the nation of Israel, or the remnant, then the weary would be the pagan nations (including
unbelievers of Israel) who are weary of their darkened existence. If the Servant is typological for the
Messiah, then in that case the weary would be any people who were tired of their bondage to sin. Jesus
would welcome the weary to Himself, for He could give them rest (Matt. 11:28).
The latter part of the verse says that the LORD wakens his ear (metonymy of cause, the
instrument of hearing and obeying). The LORD gives revelation to him continuously, morning by
morning. The simile is a comparison with those who are taught—the servant is made ready to receive the
Word every day of his life.
Verse 5 is, according to some, a needless duplication with only the latter part of it belonging
here. But their view misunderstands Hebrew rhetoric. The verse begins with a little different way of
saying that the LORD has prepared him to obey—he opened my ear (see Ps. 40). God prepared him to
hear and respond. The conclusion is that the Servant was not disobedient to hear the message and to
teach it (contra Jonah). “I was not rebellious” (mariti [pronounced mah-ree-tee]) and did not turn away
“backward.”
“I gave my back to the smiters” starts the report. The words are those of a martyr who willingly
accepted the strokes and the abuse. The image of a man being beaten, his beard plucked out, of being
spat upon, figuratively works for Israel or a remnant of Israelites (personification), and perhaps of the
prophet, but becomes literally true in Jesus Christ.
Verse 7 introduces us to the major theme of this chapter: the LORD Yahweh will help me
(ya’azor). This word “help” means that the LORD did for the Servant what he could not do for himself.
The result of divine help was that he was not confounded, but set his face like a flint, the simile
indicating his determination was unflinching. There would be no denial or suppression of the truth
through the suffering, for God was enabling the Servant to endure triumphantly.
The motif of the LORD helping the Servant is repeated in verse 9. If the LORD will help us,
then who condemns us? This the grand theme of all of God’s acts of redemption, for redemption from
bondage is accomplished through forgiveness.
The last part of verse 9 refers to Israel’s oppressors: they shall grow old and wear out like
(simile) garments. The last line is an implied comparison, built off the simile—they will be old and
moth-eaten.
III. Hortatory Address: The people should obey the Teacher-Servant rather than
remain in their destructive ways (50:10, 11).
These two verses change abruptly the flow of the passage, for now the address is given to people
to respond to the message that the Servant had to teach. Two groups are addressed, those who would
walk by faith in the LORD and find deliverance eventually, and those who were faithless and doomed
(Isa. 66:5).
Of course, as a type the passage works well with the fulfillment, Jesus Christ, the true Seed,
whose message to those in darkness was to be believed.
The prophet calls for their destruction as they walk into their own evil. The verb used is an
imperative; but it conveys the suddenness and certainty of the point—their devices will be for their own
destruction (so “walk” is a metonymy). Talionic justice is a major theme throughout the Old Testament.
The words of the LORD conclude the verse: “This you shall have from my hand; you shall lie
down in sorrow”—literally, a place of pain (see Genesis 3). “Lie down” is metonymical, for it means in
the grave—they will die. But they will not have a peaceful repose as the righteous. Their death will be
in pain.
Conclusion
So this passage, if taken as a unit, makes it clear that there is no reason whatsoever to hinder the
LORD’s delivering His people from bondage. The people have suffered for their sins and are weary and
discouraged. So the LORD sends a Servant to comfort them, one who was able to endure the suffering
for the people because of the LORD’s sustaining power. This Servant would then be able to call the
people to faith in the LORD, for therein was the only way to deliverance because the LORD would judge
the wicked by their own devices. Moreover, the people would see that suffering did not necessarily mean
rejection by the LORD, for He suffered in the service of the LORD.
In the Old Testament period the “Servant” role might well have been fulfilled by the prophet, or
the schools of the prophets, if not the core of the believing remnant. The LORD sustained them through
the suffering to encourage the whole nation to trust the LORD.
But more importantly, the passage is prophetic of the Messiah’s work, as indeed the Servant
Songs are as a whole. Jesus declared that He was the Servant; He was the Son of Man who came to serve
and not to be served, to give His life a ransom for many (Matt. 20:28). 129 The idea of “serve” and
“ransom” and “many” are all from the servant songs (we shall see the latter two in Isaiah 53). So on the
physical-spiritual level of the New Testament, people who were in bondage to world powers as well as
(and because of) their sins were burdened and discouraged and without hope. Jesus came and took all the
sins and sorrows of the world on Himself, calling for people to trust in Him to find rest for their souls, to
learn of Him. So in this passage the emphasis on the Servant’s learning and teaching of the weary, His
obedience, His suffering at the hands of smiters who plucked His beard and spat on Him, His confidence
in the God Almighty, and His setting His face like flint to do the will of the Father, not fearing human
opposition—all are clearly prophetic of Jesus Christ.
Therefore, the conclusion reverses the negative opinions expressed in the first section. If people
who are walking in darkness (see Isa. 9) fear God, then they should trust in the name of the LORD. This
129
It is important to remember that Matthew presents Jesus as the true Israel. Many of the
passages that he cites from the Old Testament had the nation in view in the original context, but Christ as
the focus in the fulfillment.
References
Beuken, W. A. M. “Jes 50,10-11: Eine kultische Paranese zur dritten Ebedprophetie.” ZAW 85
(1973):168-182.
Corney, R. W. “Isaiah 50:10.” VT 26 (1976):497-498.
Grether, Herbert G. “Translating the Questions in Isaiah 50.” Bible Translator 24 (1973):207-212.
Hempel, John. “Zu Jes. 50:6.” ZAW 76 (1964):327.
Lindsey, F. D. “Isaiah’s Songs of the Servant. Part 3: The Commitment of the Servant in Isaiah 50:4-
11.” BibSac 139 (1982):216-229.
Maggioni, B. “Le troisieme chant du Serviteur Yahve, Is 50,4-9a.” AsSeign 19 (1971):28-37.
Morgenstern, J. “Isaiah 50:4-9a.” HUCA 31 (1960):20-22.
Schwarz, Gunther. “Jesaja 50:4-5a.” ZAW 85 (1973):356-357.
There are a number of ways that this passage could be outlined. For ease in the arrangement, I
shall break up the first part into two sections:
Exposition
I. God calls His people to exchange their degraded condition for their position of
rightful service (52:1,2).
The prophet, speaking the Word of the LORD, calls for the people to respond to the call of God.
The primary audience, of course, would be the exiles in Babylon who are called to step out in faith and
return to their land and their service (and as we said before, Isaiah probably thought his immediate
audience would go into exile and then need these words to encourage them and to call them home).
We know what the oracle meant in Old Testament times; but what does it mean for us today?
For the modern application the message could be applied on several levels: (1) just as there would have
been unbelievers in Babylon who would come to faith at this call, so too today people might respond to
the message (this or any message about the future fulfillment of the promises) and leave their bondage
and sin and find themselves in the service of the LORD; (2) Christians who have been living under the
oppression of the world (largely due to sin) and being conformed to the world may need to separate
themselves and be useful in God’s service; and (3) believers need to watch and be ready for the coming
of the LORD, for the passage may be again a picture of the LORD’s calling His people out of the
bondage of this world to service above in the final redemption.
Verse 1 employs several figures in the call for an appropriate response of faith by the people.
The addressee here is “Zion”—hence the feminine forms of the verbs. “Zion” is the mountain on which
the temple once stood; so here it is a metonymy of subject for the people of the land who center their
attention on Jerusalem. It is possible the prophet is addressing the exiles still; but it is interesting that the
provenance of his oracles now shifts to the focus in the land of Israel.
The first figure is “Awake”; this is an implied comparison, comparing the waking up from sleep
with responding by faith to God’s Word. The idea of “awake” has been used previously in chapter 50 for
responding to the Word of God, as well as in chapter 51 for the unfaithful to wake up. Here the word is
repeated; the figure of repetition is used to urge the immediate response of the people.
“Put on” (libsi [liv-she], s.v. labas [lah-vash]) is another comparison, linking the ideas of putting
on clothes with acting by faith (compare Ephesians 6 with its “put on the whole armor of God”). The
idea means to make full use of something. Here that “something” is “strength” ( ‘oz [oze]), probably a
metonymy of effect, the cause being the power of God that will give the believers the strength to do what
needs to be done (recall the renewing of strength in Isaiah 40). So the point is that by faith they must
respond to the Word of God and trust God to enable them to return to the land.
They are called to put on their “beautiful garments.” The expression recalls the festive robes of
the priests (cf. Exod. 19:14 and 28:40). Rather than be in the estate of the slave (47:1), the people will be
restored to their dignified state of a holy nation and a kingdom of priests (see Zech. 3 which symbolizes
this restoration by having the filthy garments removed from the priest (who signifies the nation) and
clean robes and a new miter or turban given to him (which signifies the renewal to spiritual service after
the exile).
The explanation given in the verse is that from this time on the un-circumcised and the unclean
(probably referring to the Babylonian invading armies among others) will not plunder the temple and the
state and desecrate them. Of course, this promise is contingent upon their putting on the strength by
faith. Unfortunately, very soon after their return the people lapsed into sin, necessitating the reforms of
Ezra and Nehemiah, and even Malachi. Consequently, the un-circumcised and unclean (Seleucids,
Romans, and others) did again enter and plunder. Thus, the promise of the restoration to the land and to
service must await the end of the age. All the prophets continued to hold out such glorious promises; and
the people had the opportunity to fulfill it, to be that generation. But as each generation failed, the
people knew that their time wasn’t it—they looked for another.
Further references: for the un-circumcised Babylonians, see Ezek. 44:9; for “put on” metaphor
terminology, see Isa. 11:5 and 51:9; for the ultimate spiritual fulfillment of this promise that nothing
unclean will enter the holy city, see Rev. 21:2,10.
Now the people are referred to as the “captive daughter of Zion” rather than merely “Zion.”
Since cities and locations are usually feminine in Hebrew, the people from Zion could easily be referred
to as a daughter (collectively). The implied comparison is meant to indicate that this is the nation from
Zion/Judah, what Judah produced.
II. The LORD will vindicate His name by delivering His people from bondage (52:3-
6).
In these verses we have the reason for the LORD’s call for the people to respond by faith—there
is nothing to prevent the LORD from reclaiming His people.
Verse 3 introduces the idea that when Israel went into bondage she went because of her own sin,
and not because the LORD sold her for a price. Because no price was paid as Israel sold herself for
nothing, no price was required to redeem her. Israel was still God’s possession. Verse 3 introduces this
theme in a soliloquy of the LORD: Israel was not sold to Babylon for compensation, and so she will be
redeemed without money. The adverb hinnam ([khin-nahm], s.v. hanan [khah-nan]) means “free,
without cost, for nothing, for nought, gratis”; it is etymologically related to the word for “grace” (hen
[khane]) and so provides a nice illustration of the meaning of grace as “freely” or “gratuitously, without a
cause.” But here the adverb simply means “for nothing, for no cost.”
Verse 4 provides two illustrations for the people. The nation had gone down into Egypt, and had
been invaded by Assyria—in both cases they were in similar bondage, but in both cases the LORD had
not been through with them.
The LORD’s reasoning continues in verse 5 as the subject comes back to Babylon—now “what
am I about in Babylon?” is what the LORD says. The critical problem in this verse is the verb yehelilu
(yeh-hay-lee-loo). The old translations took it as a causative idea: “make them shout,” meaning that the
Babylonians made the Israelites praise their gods. All we know, though, is that they taunted them to sing
the songs of Zion (Ps. 137). The more recent translations take the verb as an intensive or plural use of the
stem, referring to the wild shouts of exclamation with which the Babylonian rulers praised their gods for
the victory over Israel. This makes better sense with the last part of the verse, that the name of the
LORD was being blasphemed. This means then that the LORD’s character was being brought into
contempt, and His works credited to someone else (compare the New Testament idea of blaspheming
against the Holy Spirit, meaning that the works of Jesus were credited to the power of the evil one).
Verse 6 repeats the main motivation for the reunion of Israel in her land—that they might know
my name—the same idea expressed in Exodus 3 and 6 for the Exodus. By His great deliverance of Israel
from bondage the LORD would make His people know His name. Here the meaning of the verb “know”
must have the same idea it had in Exodus 3 and 6, “to experience the meaning” of the name. They will
be convinced that Yahweh is the one and only God, and that He indeed does speak. He is not like false
gods; He is actively at work to bring about His will. The fulfillment of the covenant promises of the
LORD will vindicate His reputation and prove that He is completely trustworthy. All the blaspheming
and mocking will be suddenly silenced.
The exclamation in verse 7 (“How beautiful”) is a form of erotesis for exclaiming or declaring
the prospect in the form of a question. The prophet transports himself to the future in thought 130 and sees
the people in Jerusalem (in ruins of course) joyfully welcoming the returning exiles with the exclamation
that “God reigns.” The basic theological point of verse 7 is the announcement of the good news of
SALVATION (i.e., deliverance from bondage in exile). The cause of that salvation is God’s power over
the nations (“God reigns”); the effect of that deliverance is peace and prosperity (“peace” and “good
news”). Those who come to Zion with the good news—the returning exiles—are the welcomed
messengers. Their feet are beautiful, meaning their coming is wonderful. “Feet” could be taken as
synecdoche or metonymy (there is often a thin line between the two figures); the latter would work better
to represent the whole person who comes with the good news.
The point of the verse is that the people will welcome the approach of the messenger who can
declare that God is about to fulfill His promise of redemption. The same point applies to today’s
preaching of the Gospel that announces there is a day of redemption coming.
Verse 8 carries the same theme further with a description of the watchmen calling and singing to
one another when they make eye contact to confirm the coming home of the exiles. There is no reason
not to take the “watchmen” literally in this passage; there would have always been such watchers,
whether to safeguard whatever domains were there, or whether the Levites waiting for the dawn in the
eastern skies so that they could begin the early morning sacrifice. 131
This verb sapah (tsah-fah), from which we have “watchers,” is used figuratively for the prophets
in Hosea 9:8; Jeremiah 6:17; Ezekiel 3:17, 33:7; and Isaiah 56:10. But I doubt that that is the best
meaning for this context, for the verse talks about the watchmen seeing the return. Besides, Brown,
Driver, and Briggs do not list this passage with that meaning for “watchers.”
B. People should break forth into praise because of the LORD’s salvation (9, 10).
Verse 9 is a call to praise the LORD for this great deliverance. People are called to praise
because the “desolate places” are no longer such—in fact, waste or desolate places are being called to
sing. I would take this as metonymy of subject, meaning that the people who live in the waste places
(which are now no longer waste places) will sing for joy. The reason?—the LORD has “comforted” and
“redeemed” His people (these two words being major themes for this section of the book). So in the
130
It is interesting that one of the reasons for a deutero-Isaiah was that a prophet would not
transport himself to the future exile and write to that audience. However, here even in the “deutero-
Isaiah” section the prophet transports himself to the future in Palestine after the exile.
131
Psalm 130 carries the same theme and may very well reflect such an experience. The
psalmist (speaking on behalf of the nation) has been forgiven by the LORD because the LORD does not
mark iniquities. So he waits eagerly for the Word of the LORD to be fulfilled, more than the watchmen
wait for the morning. But his forgiveness is a sign that in the end of the age God will redeem Israel from
all her iniquities.
Verse 10 uses a bold anthropomorphism to express the dominant power of God—”He has made
bare His holy arm.” It is the idea of pushing back the mantel and exposing the arm for action. “Holy”
arm means that His power is unique, incomparable. There is no “arm” like His, no power like His. It
will be a mighty salvation.
IV. God calls His people to respond to His deliverance with purity and confidence
(52:11, 12).
Now, in a slight inclusio with the initial “awake, awake” we have the final “depart, depart.”
Verse 11 records an address to the exiles that comes from Jerusalem (“from thence” shows that the
speaker is not in Babylon), suggesting again the transporting of the prophet in his vision. Since the
LORD is present in the march to the holy land, the people must be pure. They must not be defiled by
unclean things. After all, they are to be restored as the kingdom of priests. If they truly believe in the
LORD, they will separate from the world and follow the LORD’s call to a renewed spiritual service.
Thus it is with every kind of deliverance.
The prophet holds out for them the promise of divine protection. Unlike the exodus from Egypt,
they will not have to go in haste, or by flight, because the LORD will lead them in the way and be their
rearguard as well. Compare this text to the ending of Isaiah 40.
Conclusion
So there is in this passage the dominant theme of the joyful departure from bondage of the exiles
to the holy city. Because the promise was about to be fulfilled, the people were to purify themselves and
be confident in the sovereignty of their God. Their restoration and renewal was imminent; but that new
beginning was but a foretaste of the great eschatological redemption at the end of the age. For this
connection compare the use of “God reigns” in Isaiah 52:7 with the several enthronement psalms where
“the LORD reigns” is the cry at the end of the age.
In general, one could use this passage to teach that the LORD sovereignly reigns over the world
and so people can trust in His word and obey His commands. While this would be a legitimate use, the
passage has a more specific point to make, and we must always be as specific as possible. The chapter is
specifically about God’s people heading for home to renew their spiritual service of the LORD. And so
one basic and crucial application today would be in line with the way that Paul uses the passage. The
whole chapter can be seen as a type, a picture, of God’s plan of salvation that culminates at the end of the
age. It portrays a call to people who are in bondage to sin to leave their bondage because the LORD
offers them redemption, deliverance; and they can depart for the Holy City, the heavenly Jerusalem now,
where no unclean thing will enter. The destination of Zion becomes a symbol of the ultimate fulfillment
of the promises. The LORD will redeem His people from all evil and purify His name from blasphemy
and mocking. The reason for the great salvation with all its good news and the basis for the praise of the
saints is that God reigns. So the wonderful news of the Gospel announces salvation; it is entered by faith
now and realized fully at the end of the age. Those who respond by faith to the call of God begin their
pilgrimage to the holy city; they themselves become bearers of the good news.
References
Blank, Sheldon H. “Isaiah 52:5 and the Profanation of the Name.” HUCA 25 (1954):1-6.
Hanson, Paul D. “Isaiah 52:7-10.” Interpretation 33 (1979):389-394.
Melugin, R. F. “Isaiah 52:7-10.” Interpretation 36 (1982):176-181.
Exegetical Notes
13 Behold, my Servant shall prosper;
The verb yaskil (pronounced yas-keel; s.v. sakal) calls for the most attention here; the word is
from the wisdom vocabulary. Some versions translate it “prosper” and some “deal wisely”; it means
both. The Servant will have been wise in life so that in the final analysis He prospers with God. I should
think that the context of this verse would be looking at the final aspect—”prosper” or “be successful.”
The word needs some study, but given the many words and ideas in this passage that need study, I would
not spend a great amount of time on it.
The verse requires no special attention, which is good because the passage has much that does.
The parenthesis offers a nice parallelism to underscore how the suffering disfigured him.
for that which had not been told them shall they see,
and that which they had not heard shall they understand.
Here the main difficulty is the first verb, translated “startle” here, but “sprinkle” in some Bibles.
The latter is the reading in the Vulgate and in Aquila and Theodotian, carrying the sense of purify by his
life—blood, that is. But there are several things problematic with that view. The verb nazah is used
throughout the Law for “spread, splatter, sprinkle”; but as Delitzsch shows in his commentary it always
has the liquid as the object, and never the object of the sprinkling (see Lev. 16:19 and Num. 19:18).
Moreover, that rendering is competing against the context which describes the amazement of leaders at
the exaltation of the Lord. The reading “startle” is better (but note the Greek which has “many nations
shall tremble”). With all due respect to Young’s commentary, I do not think that the Greek translation
can be easily discarded. The Hebrew term is difficult. The idea of the word, supported by the cognate in
Arabic, is to “leap up”; then in the causative, “cause to leap, spurt, splatter.” So here the idea may
simply be “start (or startle) with astonishment.” To see a sprinkling here in order to suggest Gentile
conversions and purifications is out of harmony with the stanza, and certainly not well founded with such
a problematic verb.
The point of the passage is that kings will be absolutely amazed to discover that this one actually
is the King of Glory. The idea of “shut their mouths” is a metonymy of effect (or adjunct) for the
surprise that they will have.
The question is rhetorical—who could have imagined such a thing, and who would have
believed what we would say. The question (erotesis) expresses amazement over the matter, as if to say
no one, or very few, believed it.
Note that Paul quotes this verse in Romans 10. His argument is wonderfully contextual. In the
chapter he speaks of his desire that Israel might be saved. He then shows that the Gospel is in
Deuteronomy. The message is that if anyone calls on the name of the LORD he will be saved. How can
they hear? The messengers will bring good tidings—this was from Isaiah 52, our last study. But not
many believed, Paul says, and so then quotes this verse to show that.
The “arm of the LORD” again is anthropomorphic for divine power. Who could have divined
such a unique manifestation of God’s power as that which this song describes, that the Son of Man who
was rejected and crucified would triumph in this as King of Glory!
“Before him” means that the growth and the development of the Servant was with full awareness
of and by the divine will of God.
The first half of the verse uses two similes to capture the idea of simplicity. The “tender plant”
in the simile is actually a “sucker” from the stock. The “dry ground” could at first describe the troubled
existence of the people under Gentile domination, or perhaps the effects of such devastation that left the
land and the people unprofitable—not flourishing and rich and healthy. There was nothing appealing here
if one were looking for a man who was “every inch a king.”
and as one from whom men hide their face he was despised,
The verb “despised” (bazah) occurs twice in this verse. It means to look down the nose with
contempt; it means to consider something worthless and of no value, and then treat it accordingly.
and afflicted.
The lines are chronologically reversed: we did think that God was punishing him, and now we
know he was—but for our sins.
“Griefs” and “sorrows” are repeated here now from the last verse; this means that they were our
griefs and our sorrows that were transferred to him, with which he was acquainted. “Esteem” is repeated
here as well; in the last verse “we did not esteem him” but in this verse “we esteemed him” punished by
God. The three verbs of the penal nature of the suffering are “strike” (naga’), “smite” (nakah) and
“afflict” (‘anah in the Piel/Pual).
This verse calls for a clear definition of each of the key words. For him are the “wounds”
(meholal) and also the “bruises” (medukka’), “chastisement” (musar) and “stripes” (haburah). These are
all punishing blows.
On our side are the “transgressions” (pesha’im) and “iniquities” (‘awonot) that caused his
sufferings. And also on our side are the benefits of “peace” ( shalom) and “healing” (rape’ [rah-fay]).
The word “peace” is an objective genitive—the chastening produced or brought the peace.
Here is the confession required of anyone seeking salvation; and it is required of Israel to find
salvation in Christ today. The verses use the simile of sheep that go astray, meaning people who turn
away from God and sin. “Go astray” means “to wander aimlessly.”
The verb “has laid” on him is the verb paga’ (hipgia’); this verb will be an important one to
study because it will be repeated at the end of the song as the summation—”he made intercession” for the
transgressors. It is a word that means “to intercede, interpose.” In places in the Bible it is used to
describe prayer, an intercession that is burdensome. But here it is substitutionary suffering that will
divert the punishment—interposed.
The allusion of the verse is to the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16. In that event the sins of
the people were placed on the Scapegoat. In fact, many have seen this passage not only as a prophecy of
The idea “opened not his mouth” is a metonymy of cause—he did not complain or protest;
neither did he confess sin (which people often have to do when they suffer)! This idea is then developed
by the simile of a lamb silently going to its death—he did not open his mouth. The suffering was
willingly accepted.
The verse are now beginning to get longer as the song continues. The verse has some difficult
Hebrew in it. But the general idea is that his death was unjust in the way that it was carried out (perhaps
a hendiadys, “by oppressive judgment”), and that it was for the “rebellions” of other people.
The “wicked” (resha’im) are those who are not members of the covenant and who are guilty,
deserving to die. To say “he made (literally, “he gave”) his grave with the wicked” is a metonymy of
effect or adjunct—he died with wicked criminals. The “rich” would be seen here as the oppressors since
the parallelism works with the “wicked.”
“Violence” is hamas (khah-mas), social injustices, oppression, general public evil. There was no
crime by him that deserved death. Moreover, there was no “guile/deceit” ( mirmah) in his mouth—he
spoke the truth, concealing nothing that should be confessed or brought to light, and expressing no
deception or revenge.
The word “pleased” is hapes (khah-fates); it does not signify that God received some morbid
pleasure out of the afflicting of pain; rather, it simply means that this act of sacrifice was the will of God,
it was what he desired to be done. The word is repeated at the end of the verse.
The key word that needs to be studied here is ‘asham, the “offering for sin.” This is the
reparation offering of Leviticus 5; it takes care of the sin and guilt and also makes reparation or
restitution for what was wronged, lost, defrauded, or spoiled by sin. Here is the first place where one of
Israel’s sacrifices is applied to a person, the Servant of the LORD. The word interprets all the previous
intimations of vicarious, substitutionary, redemptive suffering. It opens the way for John the Baptist to
say, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.”
justify many,
The teaching of justification through the personal knowledge of and belief in this Servant is now
stated clearly. The term “justify” is a declarative use of the Hiphil of the verb sadaq (tsah-dak), meaning
he will declare righteous (not make righteous), as he himself is righteous (Peter: He is just and the
justifier).
Note the repetition of the word “many” here and in the next verse. Jesus in the Upper Room
alludes to this passage in the eucharistic sayings about his blood being poured out for the remission of the
sins of many. (For a discussion of what he meant by “many,” see Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic
Sayings of Jesus).
In this passage I would stress the verb “made intercession” (discussed above). Theologians have
correctly used the theme of interposing of the blood of Christ for salvation, his blood/wounds pleading
for us. Here is one of Wesley’s solid hymns: “Five bleeding wounds he bears, for me to intercede; they
pour effectual prayers, they strongly pleads for me; forgive him, O, forgive they cry, nor let that
ransomed sinner die, nor let that ransomed sinner die.”
I think that the song ends where it began, with the exaltation of the suffering servant. There is
the hint in here of the conquering hero who divides the spoil and gives gifts to his people. His honor
comes because he bore the sins of many—the center of the Christian faith.
But for the Christian the Scripture presents a far different view of the sufferer, and of suffering.
In summary, we may report from the Bible that it is the will of God that believers suffer. That is not a
popular teaching; it is not a truth that we remember or hold dear to our hearts. We hate suffering and try
to avoid it. Nevertheless, our LORD says that the world hated Him, and if it hated Him, it will hate us as
well. The Bible says that all who live godly lives in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution (2 Tim. 3). Paul
announces that it is given to us to believe and to suffer for Christ (Phil. 1:29). Peter explains that Christ’s
death is a sample for us, that Christ suffered for us, leaving us an example that we follow in His steps (1
Pet. 2:19-23). In fact, our Lord learned obedience through the things that He suffered; if that is true of
the Son of God, how much more is it true of us?
We do not seek suffering. Some in the history of the Church have done that, considering
martyrdom, no matter how contrived, to be the highest good. Nevertheless, God declares that suffering
will be a part of the experience of the faithful believers in this world. It is inevitable. It is part of God’s
plan for the development of our faith.
Suffering may come to the people of God in many forms—actual persecution from the world,
malicious slander and mental cruelty because of our chosen piety, trials and testings from the Lord,
suffering with and for others in the body, or the natural cost of serving the Lord in this sinful world. In
such cases suffering is a service to God, a self-sacrificing service. It is when we do this that we take up
our cross, that we have fellowship with his sufferings.
The picture of the suffering of our Lord is nowhere more poignantly displayed than in the
prophecy of Isaiah, Chapter 52:13-53:12. What is described here is the ideal Sufferer, the Suffering
Servant. The prophet himself does not identify him—that identification must await the fullness of time
when Christ came and suffered, the just for the unjust. For us who know Christ we can see this as the
prediction of His sufferings. This is the primary meaning of the text.
But secondarily, it is also exemplary for all suffering that is accomplished for others. Indeed, as
Peter says, Jesus suffered, leaving us an example of how we should suffer to the glory of God.
The passage is divided into five stanzas of three verses each. The first line of each of the
sections gives a summary of that section. In fact, the first stanza, 52:13-15, gives a summary of the
whole section.
132
The significant theological ideas of this song make the many alternative suggestions for its
meaning highly unlikely. Up to now the servant has been Israel, the remnant, Cyrus, the prophet, and
ultimately a prophecy of the Messiah. If here the servant is the remnant that was suffering because of the
sins of the whole nation, then the passage could only in general terms be applied, for their suffering did
not redeem the nation, their suffering did not justify. But there is the application of profitable vicarious
suffering on a limited basis, as Peter himself suggests when applying this passage (but only after he states
what it fully means). The view that the sufferer is Zerubbabel, and the speaker of most of the passage is
King Darius giving a eulogy on a visit to Jerusalem is unconvincing.
The exaltation is reported in v. 15. Kings are astonished that he, of all people, should be so
exalted. The contrast is staggering—he will startle kings (“startle” is preferable to the translation
“sprinkle”). When they see God’s plan work out, when they look on him whom they pierced, they shall
see what they had not been told, they shall understand what they had not heard. In that day, they shall
realize what the wisdom of God teaches, that the suffering servant will be exalted.
The point we learn about suffering here is that the suffering Servant prospers with God because
he deals wisely. He has insight. This is the point the prophecy makes about the Servant’s sufferings—
they are practical. He endures them, not for his own sake, but for some practical end of which he is
aware and to which they will bring him. The suffering, which seems to be misfortune, is here seen as the
Servant’s wisdom which will issue in his glory. The first stanza, then, gives us the general theme. In
contrast to human experience God reveals in his Servant that suffering is fruitful, that sacrifice is
practical. Pain, in God’s service, shall lead to glory.
It is this that is at odds with the world. What is success with God is often failure in the eyes of
the world. Success with God may not include fame and fortune, health and happiness—as the world
knows them. What is success? Success is knowing the will of God an doing it. The Servant knows that
suffering is in God’s plan the way to glory.
Verse two describes his beginnings: like a tender plant in a parched ground. His beginnings
were unlikely. Who would have thought that a “carpenter’s son” out of Nazareth would figure
prominently in the divine plan. There was nothing appealing or attractive in his appearance that would
make Israel rally to him.
Verse three reports that he was despised, that is, looked down on, held in contempt, as well as
rejected. His life was filled with grief and sorrows, so that men turned away their faces from him. In
short, they did not “esteem him,” they didn’t think much of him, especially in his condition.
These words illustrate vividly a habit we all share, the habit of letting the eye cheat the
conscience, of letting the sight of suffering blind us to the meaning. We dislike pain and suffering; we
turn away from it, forgetting that it has a reason, a future, and a God. We look on things so superficially.
We make snap judgments about suffering on the surface. Everyday we allow the dulness of poverty, the
ugliness of disease, the futility of misfortune, the disappointment of failure, to prevent us for realizing
that we share the responsibility for them. We allow suffering in others or ourselves to blind us to the fact
of the reasons and purposes for sufferings. We consider the sufferer an unlucky person who is falling by
the way. The truth is that suffering is part of God’s p[an to remind us of the human predicament we
share, to bring up out of ourselves in sympathy and patience, and to eventually fit us for glory. So it is
reasonable that the suffering Servant himself share the suffering of the world to redeem the world.
But now they knew they were wrong. The hand of God was indeed upon the Servant, and the
reason was sin, yet the sin was not his, but theirs. Verse 4 makes this clear, and verses 5 and 6 amplify it.
The second set of expressions clarify the purpose of this vicarious or substitutionary suffering as
redemptive: “The chastisement of our peace” and “by his stripes we are healed.” All interpreters of this
verse agree that the peace, the healing, is ours in consequence of the chastisement and scourging. The
pain was his in consequence of the sin that was ours—that is, the suffering was vicarious. And the pain
brought spiritual healing and peace—that is, the suffering was redemptive.
That the suffering is vicarious and redemptive is confessed by Israel in verse 6: “All we like
sheep have gone astray, we have turned everyone to his own way, and the LORD has laid on him the
iniquity of us all. The verse begins and ends with “all.” Substitutionary suffering of this Servant touches
all who have sinned—and we know that that is all of us.
But people argue that vicarious suffering is unjust. They forget, however, that there are two
reasons people endure suffering in this world—justice and love. We often suffer because we ourselves
are not innocent. We share the cause of pain in the world. This is justice. But to suffer in service to God
is a demonstration of love. The epitome of this is the suffering Servant. Not only is his suffering
vicarious—it is voluntary. Human experience feels it has found its highest and holiest form of love when
the innocent is willing to take the blame for others. “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay
down his life for his friends,” and greater spiritual service can no one do for others, than to suffer with
them and for them that they might be healed spiritually.
But, of course, the suffering of this Servant far outdistanced human vicarious suffering (and it is
here the nature of the Servant begins to unfold): his suffering removes sin. We may observe a Moses
interceding for the sinful people, asking God to take his life so that wrath could be averted from those
worshiping the golden calf. That is noble; it’s magnificent. But it cannot remove sin. God himself had
to carry the sins of his people. What all vicarious suffering had failed to do in Israel’s experience, the
suffering of our Lord accomplished. Centuries after this oracle was written our divine Lord came and
fulfilled to the letter the words of this prophecy. His vicarious suffering would strike the heart into
penitence and lift it to peace with God.
Not so with the suffering Servant. He did not open his mouth, but was silent like a sheep led to
the slaughter. Why was this Servant the unique sample of silence under suffering? Because he knew the
truth. It had been said of him in 52:13: “My servant shall deal wisely.” He knew what he was about.
He had no guilt of his own, and no doubts of God. He knew that is was not punishment he was enduring
for himself, but that it was a service he was performing—a service laid on him by God, a service for
man’s redemption, a service sure of results that were glorious. If anything will enable a person to accept
silently his suffering it is this—the knowledge that the suffering was service to God.
And so it was at this point, according to the prophecy, that the Servant, though brought so low,
was nearest his exaltation; though in death, yet nearest life, nearest the highest kind of life, the “seeing of
a seed,” the finding himself in others; though despised, rejected, and forgotten of men, most certain of
finding his place of exaltation with God. Before him every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that
he is Lord.
Conclusion
Isaiah, then, presents us with a picture of the ideal suffering Servant. He does not identify the
Servant in his prophecy, but we who know the Lord Jesus Christ can see that it is He. The suffering of
our Lord corresponds to the letter with the picture Isaiah draws. Nothing else can. The suffering of Jesus
was vicarious in a way that no other has or ever could be—he took our sins on himself and made full
atonement for them. While we were yet sinners, he died for us. He himself knew no sin, but suffered,
the just for the unjust, that we, sinners, might become righteous before God.
Jesus knew full well the purpose of his suffering, and willingly submitted to it as his service to
God the Father in order to provide for us salvation. There is no peace with God apart from the
chastisement that he, the sinless Son of God, bore. We have no healing for our souls, no removal of our
But in addition to this truth, there is an additional application, a secondary application that flows
from this. Once we trust Christ as our Savior, we are made members of his mystical body, and are
therefore called to follow him. It is the will of God that we demonstrate the same type of sacrificial love
that he had. If we are to love one another in Christ, we must realize that it will cost something. If we are
to bear one another’s burdens, it will mean that we will have to put ourselves out for others, to suffer with
them, to give of our time, our talents, and our finances. We are called to a life of self-sacrificing love for
others. And Christ shows us what that should look like.
The Lord may call on us to suffer and even perhaps to die. If that should be his will, then we
must seek to suffer and to die well. It is far more important for us to do his will, to please him, than to
have a comfortable, carefree life.
If we Christians have learned to see in sufferings the purpose of God, and in vicarious suffering
God’s most holy service; if patience and self-sacrifice have come to be part of our spiritual life—the
power to make this change in our faith has been Christ’s example. To submit to God’s will and to
sacrifice self are the hardest things for us to do; to accept suffering and death without complaint or doubt
demands a living faith that sees suffering and death as a prelude to glory. But if we submit to God’s will
and sacrifice self for others, or for the building up of the faith of others, we shall then be living out the
love of Christ in this world, and please our heavenly Father.
References
Allen, L. C. “Isaiah 53:2 Again.” VT 21 (1971):490.
Aston, Frederick A. “The Servant of the LORD in Isaiah 53.” The Evangelical Quarterly 11 (1929):193-
206.
Blythin, Islwyn. “A Consideration of Difficulties in the Text of Isaiah 53:11.” Bib Trans 17 (1966):27-
31.
Clines, D. J. A. “I, He, We and They. A Literary Approach to Isaiah 53. JSOT Supp 1. Sheffield:
University of Sheffield Press, 1976.
Collins, J. J. “The Suffering Servant: Scapegoat or Example?” Proceedings of the Irish Biblical
Association 4 (1980):59-67.
Collison, Frank. “The Use of Isaiah 53 by Jesus and the Early Church.” Indian Journal of Theology 20
(1971):117-22.
Daabe, P. R. “The Effect of Repetition in the Suffering Servant Song.” JBL 103 (1984):77-84.
Dahood, Mitchell. “Phoenician Elements in Isaiah 52:13—53:12.” In Near Eastern Studies in Honor of
W. F. Albright. Ed. by Hans Goedicke. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971. Pp. 63-73.
Gelston, A. “Some Notes on Second Isaiah.” VT 21 (1971):517-527.
Ginsberg, H. L. “The Arm of YHWH in Isaiah 51—63 and the Text of Isaiah 53:10-11.” JBL 77
(1958):152-156.
Hoad, John. “Some New Testament References to Isaiah 53.” The Expository Times 68 (1957):254-255.
Hoerschelmann, Werner. “Summary and Evaluation of Bultmann’s View on the Use of Isaiah 53 by
Jesus and the Early Church.” Indian Journal of Theology 20 (1971):98-108.
Koch, K. “Messias und Sundenvergebung in Jesaja 53—Targum.” JSJ 3 (1972):117-148.
Verses 1,2 CALL The LORD invites people to take advantage of all His
blessings (spiritual and physical).
Verses 3,4 EXPLANATION The LORD will confirm the eternal covenant made with
David; David was evidence of God’s ability to fulfill
promises.
Verses 6,7 CALL The LORD calls for Israel to respond while they can; those
who mistreat and misjudge God must change their
ways and receive His pardon.
Verses 8-11 EXPLANATION God’s ways are higher than our ways; and God’s word is
effectual, so that His plan will be fulfilled.
Verses 12,13 RESULT Life will be abundant in blessing; the LORD will do this
for His own name’s sake.
In the first half the LORD enjoins the people to enjoy the blessings of returning to the land in
fulfillment of the covenant promises; in the second half the LORD warns them not to delay or misjudge,
for His ways are high, His word is effectual, and His blessings are sure.
Clifford divides the passage a little differently. He sees it as a unified poem in three strophes,
vv. 1-5, 6-11, 12-13, summoning the exiles to end their separation from Yahweh’s presence by leaving
Babylon and coming to Zion. The exiles are to come to the waters (cf. Isa. 12:3), to enjoy without
payment a rich feast, to seek Yahweh where he may be encountered, in a word, to live—by being in holy
Zion associated with Yahweh. Like David, whom Yahweh chose at the time of the exodus-conquest (2
Sam. 7:8-16; Pss. 78:43-72; 89:1-38, esp. 20), those exiles who heed the invitation to make the new
exodus-conquest, to come to the feast, will find themselves “found,” “chosen,” “loved,” “covenanted
with.” In short, they will find themselves brought near, consecrated, so that the glory of the heavenly
luster of Yahweh will shine forth to the nations.
The passage, then, is on the continuation and fulfillment of the promises because of the
everlasting covenant, God’s ways, and God’s words. It is a call for the people—those who believe in the
LORD, and those who will believe in the LORD when they hear this call—to take advantage of His offer
to share in the blessings of the covenant.
The application of this passage today would have to begin by focusing in on what blessings
based on the Davidic covenant have been channeled through the New Covenant. The theology that
informs this answer will have to look at the nature of the Messiah as a Davidic king, the role the
resurrection played in continuing and guaranteeing the full blessings, and the relationship of faith to full
Exposition
I. The LORD exhorts the people to receive His blessings which are freely provided
and permanently satisfying (55:1-5).
A. Call: The LORD calls everyone to take advantage of His blessings (1, 2).
The first two verses use figures of speech to describe the blessings 133 of God: thirsty, water,
money, buy, wine, milk, without cost. There are two ways that these can be taken, as metonymies or as
hypocatastases. If the first interpretation is taken, then there would be reality to the water, milk, wine,
buying, and all, but it would represent more than physical prosperity—it would represent abundant life
and prosperity now freely given to the people. The fact that these would be granted by God and obtained
by faith adds the spiritual dimension. This view would be saying that God was actually offering fine food
and water, which may have been symbolic of spiritual blessings too.
If the terms are classified as implied comparisons (or hypocatastases), then the meaning would
be exclusively spiritual blessings. Buying would simply be acquiring, but it would be free, for the
provision of blessing would be through free grace. No money would be changing hands—it would be a
gift from God. That which is good, the richest fare representing spiritual values, would satisfy them. In
exile they had to labor for material provisions; in freedom God would give them the greatest of spiritual
treasures, life, peace, and joy.
There may be some allusion here to Paradise. They are invited to eat what is good and find
satisfaction for their souls. What the passage is saying is that God will provide for all their needs,
physical to be sure, but more importantly spiritual since it is redemption and restoration to service life in
Zion, he holy city. And that provision will be freely given to those who respond by faith.
The main thrust is the call—the imperative. “Come, listen to me.” This is a call for them to
respond by faith, a faith that will leave bondage and return to the land once again to be the people of
God. There they will find spiritual blessings. Clifford argues that the life that is being offered here
is proximity to the LORD in the shrine of the LORD. It is an invitation to a “feast”; as in Proverbs 9, the
invitation moves from food and drink to higher life (see also Psalm 36 where the believer will drink from
the rivers of pleasure [‘eden] and be satisfied with the fatness of the LORD’s house. To do this they must
come to trust in the loyal love of the LORD, believing that God will not only deliver them from Babylon
(where they were separated from their God’s shrine) but would truly supply all their needs.
B. Explanation: The LORD will confirm the Davidic Covenant (3, 4).
This passage was cited in Acts 13:34 to show that the Davidic covenant was confirmed by the
resurrection. Thus, we see the basis in that link for the Christian application of this passage. God made
an everlasting covenant with David, assuring that a son of David would rule forever, and bring peace and
prosperity to the land. In the New Covenant today believers can trust the LORD to provide for them and
to bless them, for the resurrection shows that He can do this. But they also look forward to the grand
fulfillment of the promises.
133
I use the term "blessings" because in Hebrew it signifies an enrichment, a gift from God. This
could be a spiritual, physical, or material enrichment, as well as the empowerment to obtain such a gift.
The expression “I will make an everlasting covenant” probably should be interpreted to mean “I
will confirm my covenant as everlasting.” The primary reference is the promises to David, and there
was no other covenant for him. Those promises were: an eternal kingdom, an eternal king, universal
peace and righteousness, abundant prosperity, justice and equity throughout the world. Of course, the
prophets are beginning to make it clear that the whole nation needs a New Covenant (meaning inner
spiritual life rather than an outward law code) in order to realize the promises made to Abraham and
David. 135
Verse 4 draws upon David as an example: as David was, so Israel will be evidence of the
covenant being fulfilled. David was a witness to the covenant in that God began to fulfill His plan
through him; Israel will also be a testimony to God’s promises as they return to Palestine and become a
people again—the stone that the nations rejected has become the chief cornerstone (see Psalm 118 where
the “king” [political leader of the returning exiles] leads the nation to Zion to begin the new program).
C. Response: Nations will want to share in Israel’s portion as God’s people (5).
Still addressing the nation, the prophet announces that they would summon people to them
because of the work of the LORD. Here is another prophetic glimpse of the future incorporation of the
nations into the covenant. “Nations” refers to people in the nations, not nations en masse entering the
covenant (although there have been such forced conversions). So this would be synecdoche.
Because the LORD will endow with splendor, people will see God’s gracious dealings and run to
Him. But note the emphasis of the passage: Israel will summon them. Israel always was to be a kingdom
of priests, a light to the nations, a channel of blessings. But if people do not believe themselves, they will
never do this. Or if they do believe but are caught up in affluence, or are worldly, or believe it is more
important to remain separate, they will not do this either. Here, however, he is saying that this group will
have a fresh appreciation for the grace of God and so will extend it to other nations.
There are obvious parallels to the New Testament teaching on the mission of the Church. Those
who have responded by faith to God’s call have found rest in Christ, who is the Davidic King, and will be
witnesses to the nations of the unfailing love of God.
II. People must quickly turn to the LORD in faith because His word is about to be
fulfilled (55:6-13).
The people were in captivity; many of them had concluded that all was lost, that there was no
future to the promise (as in “where is the promise of His coming?”), that perhaps the gods of Babylon
134
In the prophets the Davidic Covenant and the New Covenant merge together with the
Messianic vision. The New Covenant gives the full expression to the Abrahamic Covenant and
essentially captures the spirit of the Sinaitic Covenant although it replaces it. But there can be no New
Covenant without a righteous theocratic administrator. So the vision of the Messianic Age blends the
eternal covenant with Israel and the eternal covenant with David.
135
To understand this better, you need to correlate the passages (especially Psalms and Isaiah
and Jeremiah), and read the literature on these texts--the covenants, royal liturgies, and the eschatology of
Messianism.
A. Call: The LORD calls the people to repent and turn to follow His way while they
can (6, 7).
The imperatives of verse 6 stress the urgency of the moment, a window of opportunity—they
must not delay in responding to God’s call to return to the land and be the people of God. The
commands here are for prayer: seek and call on Him. The time was right for the deliverance, it might not
come again or again be as clear; they should therefore pray for deliverance. 136 If they believed the Word
of the LORD delivered through the prophet they would change their thinking and pray expectantly for the
deliverance. The expression “while He is near” is meant to convey that God was about to act on their
behalf.
Verse 7 could be taken in one of two ways. If the “wicked” refers to all unbelievers, then this is
a general call for repentance and salvation. But that does not fit the context very well. Rather, the
“wicked/evil” are those in Israel who judge the LORD by the standards of their experience and mistrust
Him. It would then be a rebuke of very weak faith among those who professed to be part of the covenant
people. Of course, the verse is general enough in its wording that it could embrace both—obviously if
people were doing wicked things as well, they should abandon those. This is a clear teaching in the
Bible.
The context favors this latter view, that is, it is a call for the people to change their weak faith to
confidence, for the theme of God’s ways and thoughts are here introduced. People should abandon their
thoughts (pessimism, skepticism, weak faith—which are evil) and their ways (resigned to exile,
disobedience to covenant—which are wicked). Not only abandon, but repent! Such thoughts and ways
are sinful—but God will forgive their foolish unbelief. But their repentance must issue into faith; they
must act in faith on God’s thoughts and ways—put faith into action.
B. Explanation: God’s plans are incomprehensible and His Word is effectual (8-11).
The “thoughts” and the “ways” of the LORD in verse 8 refer primarily to the LORD’s plans for
the restoration of Israel in fulfillment of the covenant. Of course, the words fit any of the LORD’s plans,
because they are beyond what we could ever think to ask. Here the contrast is made clear by the simile:
the heavens are higher than the earth; and since God is in heaven and we are on earth, His ways are
higher. But by higher it means incomprehensible to us. There is an entire existence of which we have no
knowledge; there is an eternal plan that we can hardly grasp, and there is a divine nature that our infinite
minds cannot comprehend. We are always trying to limit God with our categories and our understanding.
Just when we think we have figured God out or have determine how God should act, He does something
far more marvelous. We are so slow to learn that the only thing we can do is trust what He says and
praise what He does. The rest of this passage will anticipate such trust and praise.
The second part of the explanation draws on God’s thoughts and ways as they have been
revealed, to say that the Word of the LORD is effectual (verses 10,11). At the center of this section is the
affirmation that God’s Word does not return to Him empty or void. This means that what He says will be
accomplished because His Word is the expression of His powerful will. No Word from God is vain,
untrustworthy, or given to deceive; nothing God plans to do can be interrupted or set aside by humans.
His Word will prosper (salah, “achieve its purpose”). Verse 10 provides an earthy simile using the rain
that comes down, waters the earth to produce the fruit, and returns to heaven having fulfilled its purpose.
So is the Word of God. Not a Word from God will be wasted or ineffective.
136
Note that God had determined the program for the deliverance; but his plan determined the
means to the end as well--prayer. Prayer is the handmaiden of the eternal plan.
C. Result: The LORD promises joyful abundance for His own name’s sake (12, 13).
The themes of great rejoicing and peaceful fulfillment are found in this last section. This is what
God has in store for His people. The imagery also speaks of paradisiacal splendor: things growing to
such fullness that trees are hitting each other in the wind (personifications here, “burst into song”
meaning grow luxuriantly, and “clap hands” be full in growth so that they hit each other). The hope also
includes the prospects of the reversal of the curse, something that the book has mentioned before with the
snake and the viper being rendered harmless. Here thorns and briers will be replaced. The figure would
be synecdoche, the bushes and trees representing types of growth.
The point is that all this will be done for “the name of the LORD” (verse 13b). In other words,
because God has spoken, His reputation is at stake. He will fulfill His Word to show that He is
trustworthy and able to do what He has said. The evidence of that will be everlasting.
Conclusion
So these are the motifs of the chapter: a call for people to receive freely God’s gracious
provision of (spiritual and physical) blessing, the promise of the fulfillment of the covenant program, the
attracting of nations to the faith, the explanation of the incomprehensible nature of God, and the
affirmation of the efficacious nature of His Word of promise. I would word the expositional idea in this
fashion: Because God’s Word is sure, people can receive abundant blessings by trusting His marvelous
plan to fulfill the covenant promises.
For Israel it meant a call to faith to those professing believers who were unsure and hesitant—
much like the call that Jesus made to the disciples who followed Him but were weak in faith, often
unsure, somewhat skeptical. It took the resurrection to show that no matter what happens, God can do
what He said He will do. The remnant of Israel must turn from such evil and respond to God’s call to
return to the land and be part of the covenant program. The inspiration for this renewal of faith would be
the awareness of the ways of God and the Word of God.
So the primary application would be to nominal believers today who have capitulated to their
circumstances and have not stepped out by faith to become part of God’s work of fulfilling the promises
of the New Covenant through the knowledge of Christ, the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant. In the
words of the New Testament, they must demonstrate their faith by their works. Repeated emphasis on
God’s ways and God’s word will rekindle their faith, if there is any faith there at all. Even those who are
mature in the LORD need to keep reminding themselves of the promises of God, so that they might trust
His Word and discover His plan. I would correlate New Testament passages on the nature of God’s
Word and the guarantee of the fulfillment of the promises.
Of course, the language of the passage is basic enough to apply to unbelievers who need to
respond to the call for faith and become a part of the kingdom. They must turn from their wicked ways
and trust in His Word to receive His marvelous blessings.
References
Beuken, W. A. M. “Isaiah 55:3-5: The Reinterpretation of David.” Bijdragen 35 (1974):49-74.
Brueggemann, W. “Isaiah 55 and Deuteronomic Theology.” ZAW 80 (1968):191-203.
Caquot, A. “Les `graces de David’. A propos d’Isaie 55.3b.” Sem 15 (1965):45-59.
Exposition
137
The last two verses, or at least the last verse, may have been an editorial colophon because it
has been used before (48:22). It is at least a favorite idea of the prophet.
B. He laments the apathy over the death of the righteous (1, 2).
According to the first two verses, the prophet notes that no one cares that the righteous have
died. The application of this point would fit any time; but the projected meaning here is about people
who died in the exile. The righteous, the devout, are swept away with the wicked, and no one takes it
seriously. Innocent people died. But the text makes it clear that they died to be spared the greater evil;
and, in contrast to the wicked who die, they will enter peace, they will find rest as they lie down in death.
The chapter will end by telling us there is no peace for the wicked.
In the Babylonian exile, as in all wars and catastrophes, good people died as well as the wicked.
And while no one paid much attention to the distinction (unless, of course, some probably used it to point
out that it did no good to be righteous, or that the wicked were no worse than the righteous), God made it
clear that for the righteous death was an entrance into eternal peace. How much better to do in such a
calamity knowing you were right with God, than to go out into a devastating eternity.
As I said above, this could be a separate section. But I think he is talking about the wicked who
would perish in exile, and so begins with a distinction that not all who die there are wicked.
So the section needs to be treated as you would treat Ezekiel 1-8. Ezekiel is actually in the
exile, but writes about the idolatry in Jerusalem in order to explain why they went into captivity. It was
not for bad political choices as they had explained. This chapter in Isaiah would have had the same
effect on the exiles—this is why you are here, so do not even think about lapsing into this now or in the
future, for there is no peace for the wicked. But, of course, the chapter would have also been an
important indictment on the people prior to the exile, Isaiah’s actual audience, especially in the reigns of
Ahaz and later Manasseh (who tradition says had the prophet sawn asunder). The sinfulness of these
practices is self-evident. But the people doing them convinced themselves that such practices met their
spiritual needs.
The wicked would have no chance of resting in peace when they died. The following catalogue
explains why. Verse 3 begins the description with “seed” or “offspring” to show that they shared the
nature of adulterers and prostitutes. Metonymy (probably adjunct) will figure in these verses because
while they describe idolatry false religion was also fornication, literally. This is the point of verse 5
which says, “you burn with lust among the oaks.” The groves of trees were signs of fertility of a local
“baal”; that then became a place to worship—to practice the fertility cult. Verse 7 continues this motif:
where they made their bed they sacrificed to pagan deities, meaning, the practice of the bed was the
sacrifice, at least in part. The pagan symbols of verse 8 probably refer to what Ezekiel 16:17 refers to;
looking on the “nakedness” is literally looking on the “hand” (yad), a euphemism for the male organ, 138
the sign of fertility. Their idolatry in Canaan was with all kinds of symbols and implements that were
designed to induce fertility. Where they were to have placed the Law—the doorposts—they had these
grotesque images. They forsook the LORD and made a covenant with the leaders and devotees of the
ritual, on whose nakedness they looked.
138
Perhaps. It is also possible that yad simply meant something like an extremity that could be
used for either hand or organ.
It is interesting to note in verse 10 that they believed this all met their needs. They were worn
out by these pursuits, but somehow found strength in them rather than see how hopeless it all was.
People wrapped up in pagan religion, whether Canaanite or modern, do so for some reason. Satan is able
to meet some of their needs, and they then believe the lie.
II. Comfort: God promises comfort and revival for those who are contrite and humble
(13b-21).
Verse 15 is the actual explanation for the comfort, and will, therefore, occupy more of your
exegetical interest in this passage. The descriptions of God are the same as we have seen before,
beginning in chapter 6 with the “High and Lofty One.” The theme of “live forever” lets the audience
know that life and death and time are no problem for God. The point of all this exaltation is to say that
the One who dwells on High dwells also with/in the lowly. And the New Testament will expand the
theme to say that He will take the lowly on High with Him. Here we have the themes of God’s greatness
and God’s grace.
So you should spend some time on “contrite” (daka’) and “lowly” (shaphal). One who is lowly
in spirit is one who is humble, surrendered, depending on God. One who is contrite is one who has had
his spirit or attitude crushed by a divine act. There can be no service to God apart from these attitudes.
God resists the proud, but dwells with the repentant, surrendered, obedient, grateful, sinner. Both words
are probably implied comparisons (hypocatastases).
Once you have defined the terms and illustrated them you need to make the point that God does
not leave them crushed and low—He revives them. The Hebrew term means “renew, restore, cause life.”
As soon as they are crushed and lowly, He comes to dwell in/with them, and they are no longer crushed.
God has no desire to keep people abased and crushed—He wants life. They may be still humbled over it
all, but that is different.
In the exile God poured out His wrath and punished sinful, rebellious unbelieving Israelites. He
destroyed many; He brought many to their knees. Those who were contrite and repentant He would
forgive and restore to their land, so that they could praise Him. Most of these had never gone into
wicked idolatry like their reprobate countrymen had. To such who are righteous, including idolaters who
now repented, God gave peace (compare verses 2 and 19). It would be “peace” in this life (v. 19) and
“peace” in the life to come (v. 2).
Conclusion
This passage should be pretty straightforward for exposition, especially in view of modern pagan
trends, inside and outside the Church. The whole culture worships false gods in the most profane and
debased ways. Thus, God brings judgment and destruction. People who belong to the faith, however,
humbly submit to His will, and He will heal, guide, and comfort them with peace.
As for applications, we can work in several areas. For the wicked, the pagan unbeliever,
whether in personal trouble (divine judgment) or not (deceived in his prosperity), the message is clear:
repent or perish (as Jesus preached). For the believer the message is one of comfort—God heals,
comforts, guides, and grants peace, now and in the life to come. This would call for a greater
commitment to the faith. Another way to apply the passage to the believer is to say believers ought to
pick up the message the prophet was giving; that is, we ought to warn the wicked, and hold out the clear
promise of fellowship with the LORD.
So there are several levels of application here, from the pre-exilic community, to different
periods of oppression, to the eschaton. But one aspect is timeless and basic to each level: God dwells
with the humble and the contrite. If people want to show that they are true believers and faithful to the
LORD, they must show evidence of repenting, surrender to His will, and walk humbly before Him; then,
He will dwell with them, heal them, restore them to life, and bring them peace, comfort, and joy—so that
they might turn from mourning to praise. So we might begin by asking people where they find comfort,
joy, peace, and fulfillment.
References
Greenfield, J. C. “The Preposition B … Tahat in Isaiah 57:5.” ZAW 73 (1961):226-227.
Irwin, W. H. “The Smooth Stones of the Wadi. Isaiah 57:6.” CBQ 29 (1967):31-40.
Morgenstern, J. “Jerusalem—485 B.C.” HUCA 27 (1956):101-179; 28 (1957):15-47; 30 (1960):1-29.
________. “Further Light from the Book of Isaiah upon the Catastrophe of 485 B.C.” HUCA 37
(1966):1-28.
Renaud, B. “Le mort du juste, entree dans la paix (Isa. 57:1-2).” RScRel 51 (1977):3-21.
Weise, M. “Jesaja 57:5f.” ZAW 72 (1960):25-32.
But the theology of both the Old and New Testament settings corresponds. The Good News in
the historical setting was release from the bondage of the exile to full and free service of the LORD once
again, a jubilee-like experience; but in the New Testament that bondage is sin and death, and the
deliverance is spiritual and eternal as well as physical. Once again the New Testament captures the spirit
as well as the letter of the Old Testament passage; but it takes it to its divinely intended—and lofty—
fulfillment.
Exposition
I. The Announcement of the Good News: The servant declares how God will deliver
and restore His people with glory (61:1-3).
Verse 1 bases the oracle on the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For the Spirit to be upon the
speaker clearly meant in the Old Testament that the speaker was controlled (= filled) by the Spirit—his
message was the message of God breathed out by the Holy Spirit through the person. Here it is the
“Spirit of the Lord Yahweh” who is upon him. In the historical context the meaning is that the prophet,
for the discharge of his function, is empowered and enabled by the presence of the Holy Spirit.
The two verbs that express the significance of this are “He has anointed me” and “He has sent
me.” The image of anointing (hypocatastasis or, implied metaphor) signifies that he was set apart for this
mission and endorsed by God.139
The several purposes for declaring the Good News now are enumerated. First it will be Good
News to the poor. This is a theme that has been introduced before in the book, the Good News being the
message of deliverance from bondage. In the New Testament it is the Gospel. The “poor” are those who
are destitute, in a distressed condition, poor in every way. One can think of other, current examples of
refugees driven from their homes, hungry, destitute, and confused.
The theme of “bind up the broken hearted” picks up the theme of the earlier chapter on bringing
revival to the contrite and the lowly. Those “crushed in spirit” ( hypocatastasis) by the exile will be
strengthened and encouraged.
“To proclaim liberty for the captives” is an idea drawn from the Year of Jubilee (Lev. 25), as
well as from the concern of the captivity. Of course that would also bring in the teaching on the High
Priest, so in the New Testament there would be more correlations. “Freedom” or “liberty” is the word
right out of Leviticus 25:10,40.
The last expression in the verse is “release for the prisoners.” The difficulty here is that the
expression translated “release” is used most often for opening eyes and ears, hence the Greek has it “open
eyes to the blind.” The idea of “recovery of sight” could have been used metonymically for people as if
139
The idea of anointing with oil is hereby explained theologically: theocratic leaders so
anointed would be receiving the enablement by God to rule--the Holy Spirit. Zechariah 4 explains that
the olive oil to the lamps represented the Spirit. And John in his first epistle explains we have the Spirit,
the anointing from God. A prayer for anointing by the Spirit today can only be used in the sense that we
desire the manifestation of the anointing that we already have.
Verse 2 begins with “to proclaim the acceptable year (“year of favor”) of the LORD.” It was up
through this line that Jesus quoted, and said was fulfilled. The rest of the passage looks to the Second
Coming. Here the “Year of Favor” would be in general referring to divine intervention; but it is also a
Jubilee. The idea of “favor” or “grace” captures all the themes in the previous oracles that affirmed that
God by grace was delivering people from bondage.
The “day of vengeance” is certainly divine judgment. To Israel it would have come with the
deliverance, for Babylon was to be destroyed in the process; but in the New Testament it is
eschatological, referring to when Jesus comes with the baptism of fire to judge the world and fulfill His
promises to the believing remnant and believing Gentiles.
The theme of comfort (Isa. 40:1) is reintroduced here with “those who mourn.” The language
foreshadows the beatitudes of our Lord Jesus Christ. Those who mourn and grieve do so under the
bondage of exile; today it is both spiritual and physical, but there is a coming day when all manner of
things will be well.
Verse 3 uses a good deal of imagery. “Ashes” is metonymy of adjunct, people having put ashes
on their foreheads while mourning. The “turban of beauty” could be drawing upon some festive clothing
that replaced the ashes (see Zech. 3) and so another metonymy; or it could be a implied comparison with
such action, signifying the change of estates. The “oil of gladness” would refer to oil used to welcome
guests to festive occasions, and “festal clothing” would be the natural clothing worn to such affairs—not
funeral clothing. Drawing on the image of such a banquet, God is saying that they will rejoice, praise, be
comforted, and be glorious, in the place of mourning and despairing (giving up hope).
The verse closes with a metaphor of the branch joined with righteousness to be a symbol of
endurance: “trees of righteousness” means that the people will be solidly and enduringly righteous. The
image of the “trees” is paralleled with that of “planting.”
Jesus did not read the entire section. The aspect of vengeance or judgment was not part of the
first advent, as we now know; neither was the complete renovation of all things, as this passage predicts.
The part that Jesus read tells of making proclamation; the part that He did not read speaks to actually
doing it, changing the estate of the afflicted. Jesus came and proclaimed the Good News; He did enough
miracles to show He was the Messiah, and that when He returned He could indeed change all things.
II. The Announcement of the New Service: Israel will be restored to her spiritual
service (61:4-6).
The background of this section is the original call of Israel as a kingdom of priests (Exod. 19:6;
and add 1 Peter 2:9 for us who have been grafted in ). Verse 4 predicts that they will rebuild the ruined
and devastated places; verse 5 tells how foreigners will serve them in the ordinary work; but verse 6
focuses on their spiritual service.
They will be called “priests of God” and named “ministers of God.” Zechariah 3 portrays the
restoration of the nation to its priestly function. God does not deliver and forgive for no purpose; God
saves in order that the redeemed might serve. What Israel had, she lost by sin; but it would be restored
after the exile to a generation that was bearing fruit. God will have a kingdom of priests on this earth;
today it is the Church; at the end of the age it looks like the prophets anticipate and Paul confirms that
God will yet save Israel (those who are alive prior to the second coming, of course) and use them again
for this purpose.
Verse 10 interrupts the flow of the argument with an outbreak of praise. The prophet, speaking
for Israel or Jerusalem, expresses gratitude for the promised felicity. The central point here captures the
message of the whole chapter. He has clothed me with the garments of salvation, and arrayed me with
the robe of righteousness. God has given believers righteousness and salvation. That is the reason for the
restoration to service, the joy, and all the festivities. The image of the clothing is used here again by
comparison: clothing signifies the nature of the person.
Verse 11 then continues the message of verses 8 and 9, not 10. God will make righteousness and
praise spring up from the land. “Spring up” is literally flourish; it draws on the image of planting oak
trees, but looks to the product that righteousness will cover the land, because righteous people will be
there serving the LORD. This is more than the dream of a prophet; it is a vision of the future—yet to be
fully realized, needless to say.
Conclusion
The passage can be treated on two levels, one for historical Israel and the restoration from the
exile for part of it, and the eschatological sense for the other part. Jesus in His first advent announces the
fulfillment of it, but as with so many of the prophecies there is a partial fulfillment at the first advent, the
rest awaiting the second advent.
But the passage can easily be used for today, for the NT applies it this way. The Messiah has
done it—and is doing these things—for us: our response should be to live righteously, joyfully and
hopefully as those who have been given sight, set free from bondage, received the LORD’s favor. But
just as the Spirit anointed the messenger (the prophet first, and then Jesus) to announce this to those in
sin, so the Spirit has anointed us as John tells us, making us a kingdom of priests as Peter reminds us, so
that we too can proclaim good news to the world. This we do while waiting for the culmination of God’s
program for the ages, which will see that great day of vengeance when He comes to set everything right
and make all things new.
One expository arrangement that could be used in preaching from this passage is as follows (as
in a message for people called to service):
I. God’s servants are appointed by God’s Spirit to proclaim God’s message (Isa. 61:1a)
II. The proclamation of the Word of God transforms the lives of those who believe (Isa. 61 1b-3)
References
Cannon, W. W. “Isaiah 61:1-3, an Ebed-Jahweh Poem.” ZAW 47 (1929):284-288.
Everson, A. Joseph. “Isaiah 61:1-6 (To Give Them a Garland Instead of Ashes).” Interp 32 (1978):69-
73.
Gowen, D. E. “Isaiah 61:1-3; 10-11.” Interp 35 (1981):404-409.
Miller, Merrill P. “The Function of Isaiah 61:1-2 in 11Q Melchizedek.” JBL 88 (1969):467-469.
Morgenstern, J. “Isaiah 61.” HUCA 40-41 (1969/70):109-121.
Nutz, Earl. “The Commission of Messiah.” BibView 12 (1978):131-135.
Peterson, Eugene H. “A Garland of Ashes.” Christian Ministry 8 (1977):28-30.
The prayer is similar to Isaiah 53 in that the exiled people confess their sin as a nation before
God. Here they pray for the advent of the LORD to end their afflictions through some powerful
intervention. Although the nation had rejected Him by their idolatry and wickedness and brought the
exile on themselves, He had not finally rejected Israel. There would be a remnant that would return.
Nevertheless, if the people were to be part of that remnant, they had to confess their sin and pray for
deliverance before He would deliver them from the consequences of sin.
Exposition
I. The Demonstration of God’s Power: The people of God desire the direct
intervention by God (64:1-4).
The purpose of such a great display of God’s power is that the name of the LORD might be
known. This is a theme that began with the plagues of Egypt and continued throughout the Bible—that
He might make Himself known. All acts of God are revelation; His great acts of redemption are likewise
to be revelatory so that others might find salvation.
The Church prays “Thy kingdom come, they will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” It also
prays, “Even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus.” Verses 1-4 are essentially what we are calling for God to
do. And when it happens, when the heavens open and the LORD descends, it will not be just to deliver
people from the exile in Babylon, but will be to deliver the redeemed in the Lord, dead or alive, from all
bondage, and to make all things new—things that we could never imagine.
Living in the expectation of the LORD’s coming to deliver His own, the people of God have the
opportunity to reflect on God’s past interventions. Thus it was with Israel in exile; and so it is today on
the eve of the Second Coming. And that reflection should inspire greater faith and obedience and
devotion.
II. The Forgiveness of Sin: The people of God acknowledge their unworthiness (64:5-
9).
III. The Bestowal of Favor: The people of God appeal for divine favor (64:9-12).
This passage closes with an impassioned appeal for God to look favorably on them, forgetting
their sins against Him, and remembering that they are His people.
The prayer is that God will not remember their sins. The word “remember” is anthropomorphic
(here not remembering is equal to forgetting if we say it positively). God knows everything perfectly
well; so the expression must mean to hold something against them. When God forgives, it means that He
will never bring that issue up again. People may have troubling forgetting; other people may make it
difficult for them to forget—but if they confess their sins to God, God will never mention them again or
hold them against them.
The plea for God to “look upon” them is also anthropomorphic; it conveys the idea of turning
with grace and compassion. The idea is reflected very well in the High Priestly benediction which is a
prayer for the bestowal of grace, a prayer for God to lift up His face and look on them so they would have
grace and peace (Num. 6:22-27).
They motivate God to answer their prayer with the appeal that the Temple has been destroyed,
the Temple in which praises were given to God. This holy and glorious Temple has been burned down.
After all this, will God still hold back and punish them more. It is time for this divine discipline to end,
and the restoration of all things to begin, so that Zion can once again be the center of worship and praise
it used to be.
Conclusion
This prayer follows the pattern of many Israelite prayers. It contains the introductory cry, the
lament, expressions of confidence, and the prayer proper with its motivations for God to work. We need
to study the structure and compare it with other lament psalms, for it does follow the pattern. 141 The
prophet, speaking for the people, acknowledges both their humility and their confidence as he prays for
swift intervention by God for the fulfillment of the covenant promises.
Likewise, people today eagerly anticipate and desire the Second Coming of the LORD in which
He will deliver His people from bondage (even that which they have brought upon themselves) and make
everything new by destroying oppressing nations. But that expectation should prompt people to confess
their sin to the Lord and avail themselves of His mercy. Then their confident prayer will come from holy
lips: “Even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus.” But the prayer will not be for purely selfish interests, but for
the glory of the Lord. For indeed, His work today seems to be in ruins in so many places, and the Church
has fallen in disrepute, thanks to the sin of people. God will never let that remain forever. That, then, is
our appeal, when we pray for the heavens to be opened and the LORD to descend and bring all this to an
end. In the meantime, we walk by faith in the blessed hope of the redeemed.
140
Both of these figures, Father and Potter, are straight metaphors, as is the description of the
people as "clay." They stress the personal and covenantal relationship the LORD has with Israel.
141
Remember, though, that the pattern is never stereotyped. We should expect variations and
rearrangements.
Most modern critics wish to place this section much later than even the time of the so-called
“Deutero-Isaiah,” perhaps even in the first half of the fifth-century. But as before, there is ample
evidence that the passage could fit the earlier time as well. Indeed, the text is written in such a way that
there are several times of application that would work. Verse 11 is said to refer to the temple, and the
conclusion is that it must be the temple rebuilt. But it only mentions the “holy mountain.” Thus, it
would be hard to date this chapter without recourse to one’s presuppositions about the book itself.
Exposition
I. The LORD will judge rebellious people who turn aside to false gods (65:1-5).
The first section picks up the familiar theme: the abandonment of the LORD for pagan and
superstitious practices and the retribution awaiting those guilty of it. It is the familiar theme of the sin of
Israel in the Old Testament. Here is a final warning: if they continue to reject the appeals of the LORD
they will be utterly destroyed.
So in verse 1 God explains how He extended the offer to the people to participate with Him in the
covenant and in pure worship. The first verse as read in the MT indicates that Gentiles have been called
by God and have found Him. Some commentaries suggest that the verse should follow the Greek to
indicate that He is saying that He has submitted Himself to be inquired of (cf. Ezek. 36:37) by them that
have not asked, and that He has submitted Himself to be found by them that have not sought.
The holding out the hands (an anthropomorphism) in verse 2 is in the gesture of entreaty (cf.
Prov. 1:24). But the people have been obstinate (see also Paul in Rom. 10:21). There has been no
response by them to God’s overtures. Rather, they have followed a “way that is not good.” This is a
Verses 1 and 2 are applied by Paul in Romans 10:20,21 to two distinct groups of people—the
nations in verse 1, who while in a less privileged position have responded to the call; and the Jews in
verse 2 who have stubbornly refused. Paul is clearly following the Hebrew tradition of the passage.
Verse 4 introduces their sitting among the graves for the purpose of necromancy. Oracles from
the dead were supposed to have been conveyed to those who spent the night in the graves, because the
souls of the dead were thought to have haunted the tombs.
The same verse tells of their eating unclean meat, such as the pig, probably at sacrificial meals
(cf. 66:17). It was believed that to eat animals considered unclean would be not merely an act of
rebellion but a means of communion with supernatural powers, the animals being totems, and the eating
being a religious act allowing the consumer to receive the qualities of the ancestor which the totem
animal represented. The pagan connections and ideas for the pig are some of the reasons why it was
outlawed in Israel. It was not merely that it was meat that easily turned bad.
The words in verse 5 are the warnings of one who claims to be holier than others, one who was
consecrated by communion with a divinity (perhaps through eating or by being in the tomb) to passers-by
so that they will not contact him and be rendered unclean and incapable of normal duties for a time.
God says that such people are “smoke” in His nostrils. This may mean that they are the cause of
fiery anger (Jer. 17:4) which manifested itself in the nose according to Hebrew idiom (Ps. 18:8), or that
they are to be judged by God.
II. The LORD will purge rebels and prepare the remnant for the consummation (65:6-
16).
When the LORD purges the rebels from the land, He will bring forth the faithful as the sole
possessors of the blessings (verse 9). “Bring forth” here means cause to emerge. And the “mountains”
would be a reference to Judah, the land which God’s servants will inherit. The use of “there” in the text
may be temporal—in the future.
The boundaries of the land are given in verse 10. “Sharon” refers to the whole land, from the
Mediterranean to the descent to the Jordan (and not Judah only). The Valley of Achor is apparently the
deep valley known as the Wady Kelt, leading down to the Jordan near Jericho. These general
descriptions give the breadth of the land that was to be the possession of the LORD’s faithful.
Verse 12 announces that such who do these are destined for the sword. The verb “destine” is
manah, a play on the name Meni.
Then, in verse 15 the motif of “name” is introduced. The name of the wicked will be left to
curse. This means that a fate like theirs will be the most extreme malediction which the righteous can
imprecate upon an enemy. On the other hand, the good estate of the righteous will necessitate different
epithets to be used in describing them (see 62:2, 4, 12; and Rev. 2:17; 3:12).
Thus, in verse 16, the LORD’s faithful accomplishment of the threats and promises in these
verses will lead people to appeal confidently to Him to fulfill a blessing prayed for, or to avenge a
perjured oath. Thus, the “God of truth” will once again be revered in the land; and the troubles of the
former times for the remnant will be gone.
III. The LORD assures His people of a glorious future in the new world He will create
(65:17-25).
At the consummation of the ages the LORD will create a new heaven and a new earth and a new
Jerusalem. It will be characterized by security, prosperity, safety, and close communion with the LORD.
The glorious state described in this chapter is picked up by John in the Book of Revelation in his
description of the world to come. In that place John portrays it after the Messianic Age and so it must
issue into the eternal state, unless the events in Revelation are not to be taken so strictly chronologically.
It will have as its central focus the Messiah, Immanuel; and the righteous will have free access
to Him. This glorious new creation will, as Paul says, begin the reign of Christ on earth, that will
eventually be delivered up to the Father (1 Cor. 15) and become what we call the eternal state. But
All the expressions in these verses are very clear. The prophet in describing the restoration of
human society to right conditions tells of a transformation of the physical universe, just as formerly the
perfect creation was destroyed and changed by sin. The words are used of the Christian hope in 2 Peter
3:13, and Rev. 21:1. Weeping and mourning will be removed (verse 19). And one of the causes of
sorrow, death, or at least untimely death, will be removed so that there will be longevity once again
(verse 20).
These descriptions have been taken in a couple of ways by commentaries. Some wish to take
the expressions literally and see reference to a new period on this earth when all the transformations in it
will be established; for in the eternal state there will be no death and no sinners at all. People who will
be on earth will live, marry, have children, build, and be in harmony with nature. Jerusalem will be the
center of God’s theocracy, and there will be peace and safety there. This view, a millennial reign of
Christ and His saints, would see these conditions in Isaiah as a prelude to the eternal state. This view
harmonizes well with some passages of the Bible, but doesn’t harmonize very well with Isaiah 25 and
with the order of things in Revelation.
Others, noting that Isaiah 25 had announced there would be no death, and noting the sequence in
the Book of Revelation (new heaven and new earth after the millennium), describe this picture as the new
creation to come. The language then is figurative and representative—if there were death, one who dies
at 100 would be considered a child. And if there were sinners, they would be quickly condemned. But
the weakness with this view is that it really strains the meanings of the lines.
What is clear from the prophet’s message is that there is coming a marvelous new creation that
will end the curse and its effects. A return from captivity to Israel could not have satisfied these
prophecies, especially since the apostle picks them up and advances them. This, then, remains the
glorious prospect of the righteous. But the sequence of the events, and how it will all be worked out,
cannot be worked out with absolute certainty at this time.
The passage holds out the hope of a share in the world to come, the new creation of the LORD.
God will renovate all things in this world to show what He had intended from the beginning. And that
“season of refreshing,” that “world to come” as the Rabbis termed it, will see the removal of the curse
and the fulfillment of all the promises. So those who respond to God’s call and serve Him faithfully are
the heirs of that new creation. Those who stubbornly refuse His call and go after false gods instead will
have everlasting shame. Faithfulness to God’s call, then, becomes the central point of the application.
Believers must show their faith by their devotion; unbelievers must turn to the truth by faith, abandoning
all false beliefs and wicked practices.
For the believers, if the new heaven and the new earth come about a little differently than
expected, they will not be disappointed.
References
Conrad, Diethelm. “Mitteilungen Zu Jes 65:3b.” ZAW 80 (1968):232-234.
Heerboth, L. A. “New Creation According to Isaiah 65.” CTM 5 (1934):29-37.
Jefferson, Helen Genevieve. “Notes on the Authorship of Isaiah 65 and 66.” JBL 68 (1949):225-230.
MacRae, Allan A. “Paul’s Use of Isaiah 65:1.” In The Law and the Prophets: Old Testament Studies
Prepared in Honor of Oswald Thompson Allis, pp. 369-376.
Martin-Achard, R. “L’esperance des croyants d’Israel face a la mort selon Esaie 65, 16c-25 et selon
Daniel 12:1-4.” RHPR 59 (1979):439-451.
Mauser, U. “Isaiah 65:17-25.” Int 36 (1982):181-186.
Exposition
The Babylonian religion had said that creation was accomplished by the cosmic victory of their
god over ti’amat, the source of all the dragons or serpents of the deep. The sea monsters were the forces
of chaos that ti’amat, the Deep, mustered to avenge the death of her husband; and so they had to be
controlled. The ancient Babylonian creation myth (see Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis) has
the god Marduk creating the universe after defeating Tiamat (lit. “salt water”), and then creating humans
from the blood of the god Kingu. Some of these words are found in the literature of the Bible, albeit
changed in meaning because the forces of nature are not deified. In fact, the Genesis account is a
polemic against it. Yahweh God created the universe; and in the beginning the whole world was
enveloped in darkness. At that time God’s Spirit hovered over the face of the “deep” (Hebrew tehom is
the masculine cognate of Babylonian feminine word ti’amat). God controlled the chaos and gathered the
waters into their places; but the deep was not a goddess.
Accounts of the Exodus (cf. Ps. 114) also use language that was familiar in the ancient world to
reflect God’s victory over Sea, words such as the Deep, Rahab (serpent), and Leviathan, which are all
forces of chaos to the pagans. To the writers of the Bible they are forces of chaos as well, but the chaos
of nature, such as the ocean or rivers. They were never even considered to be gods by the Hebrews. And
the writers chose to use the terms to make that point, that they may have been forces of nature but they
were not gods, and that Yahweh, the God of Israel, could control them..
The prophet Isaiah, as indeed the rest of Scripture, sees the future events at the end of the age
(the eschaton) as parallel to the accounts of the beginnings of the creation. At the beginning the LORD
brought life out of the deep, as if to say what the pagans worship God manipulated. And accordingly,
God will create again at the end of the age, a new heaven and a new earth, but only after he defeats all
the evil forces that controlled the hearts and minds of the pagans. Isaiah has more to say about this than
any other writer. Here, in chapter 27, that new creation will come about through a great victory over the
forces of chaos once again; and while the Hebrews did not deify these forces of nature, they understood
the pagans did, and in fact that the pagans worshiped them. Accordingly, these forces of nature were
false gods, and that also indicated that evil spirits were in it all deceiving the world.
This verse, then, announces victory over the kingdoms of this world, over the spirits behind
them, underscoring the biblical polemic against pagan religion.
The verse begins with “in that day” which is an expression often used by the prophets for
eschatological predictions, usually end-of-the-age predictions. Here the “sword of the LORD” is the
means of the victory. Elsewhere in Scripture this is clarified as the decree that comes from His mouth,
the Word of the LORD (so the figure would be implication [or hypocatastasis]).
The “weapon” is powerful: hard and great and strong. The threefold description of God’s
powerful word underscores the certainty of His victory over evil.
Evil carries three descriptions here as well: Leviathan the gliding serpent, Leviathan the crooked
serpent, and the monster that is in the sea.
Leviathan is an interesting motif in the Old Testament. It is used in Job with the meaning of the
crocodile, although there are probably mythological allusions in that passage as well. In Ugaritic the
term is Lotan; the pictures the Ugaritic texts provide are of a seven-headed dragon of the deep, viewed as
the god of the underworld, the force of the ocean, or chaos. In this passage the term “monster” (tannin) is
also used, and these two, Leviathan/Lotan and tannin, are paralleled in Ugaritic mythological texts. It is
interesting that in the Genesis account of creation we are also told that God made also the great sea
creatures (tanninim). The point is that they are just animals in the account; and the significance of this is
that whatever the pagans worshiped—God made. In this sense, Genesis 1 becomes a polemic against
pagan religion, and a theological explanation of “You shall have no other gods before me”—of course
not, because none were before Him, He made them all.
The term “serpent” is also used here, with the adjectives of “crooked and twisting.” The serpent
was venerated in Egypt (especially as the sacred cobra), Phoenicia (as the mother goddess of all living),
and in Canaan (with snake worship). Of course, in the Bible the serpent is the representation of evil and
death, or connected with death. The remarkable parallelism of these expressions in Isaiah 27:1 and in
Ugaritic texts for the god of the deep cannot be overlooked; Isaiah is clearly alluding to the passages in
his announcement of the great victory at the end of the age. 142
It may be that the imagery in Isaiah is meant to be used in its figurative sense of the Deep—that
is, Sea Water. The fact that the pagans had deities who ruled the deep need not have been carried into
the allusion. The repetition of “Leviathan” in the passage may represent the two largest rivers known to
the Hebrews, the Tigris and the Euphrates, which are akin to the sea, and like the sea are symbolized as
monsters and destined to be tamed. Leviathan the gliding or the swift would be the Tigris (meaning
“swiftness”), and Leviathan the crooked would be the Euphrates. The punishment of these elemental
forces seems to be regarded as a necessary preliminary to the establishment of a new order, especially if
they figuratively describe Assyria and Babylon respectively, and the spirit/gods behind them.
So the reptiles, even though of mythic origin, signify for Isaiah the chaos of the sea, but
opposition from world powers as well with the spirit forces behind them. The LORD will put down all
enemies, including the evil or Satanic spirits who had become false gods that the pagans feared. These
spirits used things that the people feared or revered to draw their devotion.
142
See a detailed discussion of the Ugaritic texts in Gray, The Legacy of Canaan (Leiden: E. J.
Brill).
The imagery of the two Leviathans for the rivers, as well as the monster of the sea, would then
fit what we see in Daniel 7 and Revelation 12. The monster or dragon would be Egypt (see 19:5; Ezek.
29:3, 32:2), whereas the rivers would be the other two powers, Assyria and Babylon. If only one
Leviathan were mentioned, it might represent the supra-terrestrial waters as the dragon would represent
the sub-terrestrial waters. But the link to pagan mythology most certainly moves the whole interpretation
into the world of spiritual darkness.
The key verb in here, translated “punish,” is the Hebrew verb paqad, normally translated with
the meaning “visit.” All the detailed studies of this term show that it means a visit for blessing or for
cursing; it means to change the destiny of someone or something. So in a passage on judgment it tells
how the LORD intervenes to destroy.
The text literally says, “Sing about a vineyard of wine.” The imagery of vines and branches is
well known to students of the Bible. But the motif is a lot deeper when eschatology is considered. The
theme was first introduced in Genesis 49 where God promised a king through the line of Judah (v. 10).
But when the One comes “to whom [the scepter] belongs” (the translation of Hebrew “shiloh”), and the
obedience of the nations will be his, “He will tether his donkey to a vine, his colt to the choicest branch;
he will wash his garments in wine, his robes in the blood of grapes; His eyes will be darker than wine; his
teeth whiter than milk.” Without getting into the details of this prophecy in Genesis 49, it will be
sufficient to say that this early prophecy about the “Messianic Age” uses language of paradisiacal
splendor and abundance. Accordingly, Jesus’ first sign in John 2 was to turn water into wine, a harbinger
of the coming Messianic Age and an announcement that “Shiloh” had come.
Isaiah says that God watches over His vineyard, i.e., Israel. He waters it continually. As part of
the allegory we would have to conclude that watering the vineyard refers to the provision of the Word of
the LORD through the prophets (see Jer. 7:25; and see the imagery in Psalm 1:1,2, where the water is
identified as the word). How else could God nourish a holy nation?
The allegory continues with a mention that if only briers and thorns were confronting Him, He
would burn them out easily. This is an internal problem, not a reference to invasion. It refers to
paganizers within the nation of Israel. But burning them out is tempered with a desire for them to come
to Him in faith. God judges, but He offers the opportunity of refuge in the covenant.
This alternative for peace is actually extended before the section on judgment to follow. It is the
message throughout Scripture—God offers His enemies peace! This, in the context, could refer to both
unbelieving Israel and the foreign oppressors.
Verse six also announces that “in the days to come” the people of God will flourish. Here is the
climax to the little allegory. “Israel” is used because the prophet means both Israel and Judah will
flourish. He now changes the image slightly to make Israel a plant rather than a vineyard
(hypocatastasis). It starts off with normal growth—planted, takes root, and buds. Since the prophet is
addressing the nation of Israel that already was in the land, a prophecy about coming days must be
something in the future when Israel will be brought back to the land. But his imagery takes an unusual
turn: “and fill all the world with fruit.” Restored Israel will lead to the blessing of the whole world (as
Gen. 49 said). Daniel also saw the kingdom of Messiah as a tree, and as a stone, that filled the whole
world. In John 15 Jesus, the true Israel, is the vine, and His disciples the branches. That, at the very
least, was the beginning of the fruit that would spread throughout the world. Paul in Romans 11 makes it
In verse 7 the LORD is the subject of the sentence. The questions asked (reminiscent of Paul in
Romans) expect a “No” answer. God did not strike Israel down. Rather, punishment would be tempered
by mercy, for in exile, cruel as it was, people would survive. There was a future for Israel.
By an implied comparison [hypocatastasis] (“with his fierce blast”) and simile (“as on a day the
east wind blows”) the prophet refers to the invasion from the east, from Mesopotamia—Assyria and/or
Babylon. The judgment will be like the swift east wind that scorches the land.
According to verse nine this will be the way that God will make Israel deal with her sins. As in
Isaiah 40, the point is that through this the sins will be atoned for. He is not referring to the objective
basis of atonement, but the practical side of the experience. In exile they would come to penitent
awareness of guilt. In other words, the people were removed so that sins would be removed. They will
have a new attitude to the will of God. The verse is like Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:24-31.
The penitent and purified nation will show the fruit of its “atonement” by the destruction of
pagan influence. They will return to do what they were supposed to do from the beginning.
Unfortunately, it would take the Babylonian captivity to purge them of idolatry and make them fiercely
loyal to God.
Verses 10 and 11 seem to be rather literal. All that is described in here are the effects of war (so
in general could be called metonymy of effect)—abandoned cities, animals moving freely throughout,
people gathering dry twigs, and the like. Isaiah sees the effects of war as the reversal of civilization.
The reason for all of this is the lack of understanding in the people—they are for the most part
spiritually blind (see Isaiah 6 again). Isaiah likes wisdom motifs. So because of inner blindness—which
led to pagan corruption, God would withhold His compassion and favor—even though He made them
(see Isaiah 1 again). Of course, as Hosea announced, when they turned to the LORD in faith, then He
would show them pity (Lo Ruhamah, “no pity,” the name of Hosea’s daughter used as an oracle, becomes
Ruhamah, “pity”).
When the LORD gave Israel victory over Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt when He restored them to
their land in 536, that was a great deliverance. But this passage was not fulfilled at that time (although it
could have been used to explain the victory); in fact, some of the oracles of these end times were written
by the prophets after the return from the exile. Evil still existed, Israel was not pure, and their stay in the
land would not last but a few centuries and they would be scattered again. The fulfillment still lies in the
future.
Conclusion
There is much that can be done with a passage like this, for it is a wonderful prophecy of God’s
dealings with His chosen people. It serves as a comfort and a warning for us today as well as it did for
ancient Israel.
As Paul said to the Romans, if God did not spare the natural branches, they should take heed lest
he not spare them either. Believers are to learn from Israel’s mistakes. We have been grafted in; we are
a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. We are the branches of the vine. And even though our
participation in the New Covenant in no way nullifies a future blessing for believing Israel, our concern
in applying this passage is with us today primarily.
So I would first be clear that this is a prophecy for Israel, and for the great future victory over
evil forces in the world, human and demonic. When that victory comes God will fulfill all His promises,
especially those He made to Israel.
But I would also work the message to be applicable also to us who are in Christ. We know the
eschaton will begin with a great celebration of victory over Satan and all his forces; and we know that the
people of God will be preserved through the judgment, and will emerge purified to serve in the heavenly
city. Thus, we can speak about an application in terms of how this hope purifies us (the apostle said
whoever has this hope purifies himself), or in terms of bearing fruit throughout the world to demonstrate
we are in the kingdom (our LORD said the kingdom was taken from them and given to a people bearing
fruit). But we also know that in the future that hope will become reality. There is great evil in the
world, demonic evil; and it will be destroyed completely, and the people of God purified and glorified to
serve Him in the new heavens and the new earth.
We have here Isaiah’s glimpse at the promises of the “new” covenant. He does not provide the
details of Jeremiah 31 or Ezekiel 36, but he complements what is there. The passages on the new
covenant promised: a restoration to the land for Israel and to the pure worship ad spiritual service as
But this chapter is also immediately practical—for ancient Israel as well as for us today. We
shall see that the prophet lays out the plans that God has for His holy people in this world; but the clues
in the chapter, and the related contexts of the time, let us know that attaining these promises to the full
called for spiritual service—which is why the chapter ends with the reminder that this is the heritage of
the righteous servants of the LORD.
Exposition
Verse 1 makes the point that the present and future population of Jerusalem will exceed what she
had before. The nation of people, addressed as “Jerusalem” by metonymy (subject or adjunct), is
compared to a “barren woman” (by implied comparison, called hypocatastasis) who is bereaved of her
children and separated from her husband. The image of marriage and the family has been used in these
oracles before, and provides a good comparison for the covenant relationship between the LORD and His
people. The “married wife” would have been Israel before the exile, in rebellion against God and
bringing the judgment of God for sin; her children would have been those Hebrews living when Babylon
attacked. The Israelites some seventy years later (children of the desolate) will outnumber them greatly.
The call is for these people to “sing” and to “sing aloud”, because of the restoration from exile.
The commands to sing are metonymies of effect, showing the result or effect of the cause—God will
restore them (cause), and they will sing (effect). Calling people to sing before the answer to prayer or
before divine intervention is a significant call for faith.
Verse 2 anticipates the restoration of the nation by calling for an enlarging of the tents. I think
all the images in this verse are related, so one classification and explanation will be adequate. I would
think we have metonymy of adjunct or effect; the returning exiles probably actually had tents or similar
structures for a while. The call to make the tents larger assumes that there will be an expanding
population: the cause will be the restoration and multiplication, and the effect (stated in the text) is their
expanding their tents.
Verse 3 explains this call to sing. The returning exiles will spread out to the right and to the left.
In the Semitic world, one looks to the east, and so the right hand is south and the left hand north. But
there will be more than a population increase—they will possess the nations and rebuild the desolate
cities. Here the “nations” means the regional tribes occupying the land in the absence of the nation of
Israel.
In verses 5 and 6 we have the explanation that the promise of the prophet is based on the
relationship that the nation has to God. The lines are beautifully balanced:
The theme of creation is brought forward here again in “your Maker,” that is, the one who brought Israel
into existence, but now He is compared to a “husband” (carrying the implied comparison across from
previous lines to form a metaphor here). The image of husband would be worthless if it were not for the
fact that this husband is being described as the sovereign Creator, the LORD of armies, the Holy One of
Israel, the Redeemer, and the God of the whole earth. Any people related by covenant (=image of
husband) to such a One as all that need not fear anyone—except God Himself.
The condition of Israel is addressed as a wife that is bereaved, grieved in spirit, forsaken, and
cast off (carrying the implied comparison further in the description). But will she be cast off forever?
The following verses affirm that the exile was a temporary manifestation of God’s wrath to purge the
rebels and faithless from the nation.
Verses 7-10 record the speech of the LORD to assure Israel of future peace. The poetry is
exquisite:
The whole Babylonian captivity is referred to as a “small moment” when God forsook Israel. It is
another implied comparison, a hypocatastasis, to compare 70 years with a moment—but in the plan of the
eternal God that is what it is (see also Psalm 30). The regathering is with tender mercies ( rakham should
be studied fully for this passage). The time is then described as God’s wrath (metonymy of cause for the
effect was the judgment of the exile) when He hid His face (anthropomorphism, a very human
description to convey withholding mercy), but the restoration (“I will have mercy” is metonymy of cause,
its effect being the return) is a display of His everlasting loyal love (a word study on khesed would be
helpful). God is speaking to the nation as a whole; His anger was against sin, so that the exile would
purge the rebels and draw contrition and faith from the remnant. Now the restoration would show that
the judgment time had passed, that there would be a new beginning.
The announcement is similar to the Noachian Covenant; it is as if once again the LORD was
hanging up His battle bow in the sky. 143 So the simile is made with the “waters of Noah” (metonymy of
effect since water was what God used to judge the world). So here too the LORD seals His promise with
an oath, just as He did in the days of Noah.
143
In Genesis 9 the word for the rainbow is the same as the battle bow; it gives the picture of
hanging up the battle bow because peace was to follow.
II. The LORD assures His people of prosperity and security (54:11-17).
There are several views offered here. (l) The gems refer to the people themselves. In support of
this one would emphasize that the address is to the people of Israel, the context is the restoration to
Jerusalem, and the interpretation of verse 14 suggests that the passage refers to the restoration of Israel to
the righteous service of the LORD. Other post-exilic passages use precious stones to represent people, or
the leader of the nation (see Psalm 118 for the stone as the nation, Zechariah 3 for Messiah). And since
there was no building of the city with these precious gems it seems more likely that the redeemed, the
people themselves, are meant. Besides, 1 Peter 2 indicates that the righteous are stones (although not
gems). If this is the correct interpretation, then we have hypocatastasis throughout, a comparison of the
holy city made of gems with the people. One reading of Revelation 21 and the vision of the heavenly
Jerusalem “as a bride” with all the gems also seems to support this interpretation.
(2) A second interpretation is that the gems represent spiritual qualities in the restoration. There
will be righteousness and truth, and upon these will God rebuild His nation (see Psalm 97:2 and Isaiah
11:4,5). People who take this view can get carried away with symbolic meanings of all the different
gems, since there are not many controls in the context.
(3) A third view takes the building and the gems literally—but with a spiritual meaning. This
would be metonymy. That is, when the great restoration comes, the people will be gathered to the
LORD, to the Messianic sanctuary. In the new creation the setting and the circumstances of that place
will be with spectacular elements that actually exist—there is a reality to the surroundings. A glorious
new city made with all the precious gems would be in the age to come. But the gems would still signify
the purity and the righteousness and the perfection of the LORD and His eternal holy place.
In support of this view is the fact that in both Isaiah 54 and in Revelation 21 so much detail is put into the
description of the city, as well as the fact that both passages seem to distinguish the people from the city,
for the people will enter the city. This view would harmonize well with the interpretation in Revelation
of a physical-spiritual reign of Christ with the new holy city in a new heaven and a new earth.
One could argue that the gems in some way represent the wealth of the nation as it is returned to
its land to be a state again; but the language is rather elaborate. It seems to have a future view like so
many of the Messianic passages. How it will all work out exactly is hard to say with confidence, until we
see it all fulfilled. Even in Revelation 21 there is no small disagreement over whether there is a physical
reality to the vision or only a spiritual reality. We know at least that the redeemed will be glorified in
His presence, in the place He is preparing—wherever and whatever that might be. I prefer the third view
about, an actual new heaven and new earth and new Jerusalem, but unlike anything limited to this
physical world.
So the LORD says to Jerusalem, “O you afflicted, tossed with tempest and not comforted, I will
set your stones in antinomy, and lay your foundations with sapphires.”
The context must be considered in the full interpretation here. Verse 13 stresses the spiritual
significance of this valuable restoration to be the kingdom of priests. “Your children will be taught by
the LORD.” In other words, the divine influence on future generations of Israelites will be responsible
not only for their being in the land and growing under God’s blessings, but also for the peace that they
Then, in verse 14 we read how the LORD will establish the city of Jerusalem—it will be with
righteousness. The use of this term is metonymical; the context of the verse makes it clear that the
victory over the captors and the nations is meant (this use of “righteousness” has been used before in the
book and is used in Psalms as well), for they shall fear no more. But why call it “righteousness?” The
reason is that righteousness is the cause of the victory—the righteousness of God who will judge the
wicked oppressing nations, and the righteousness of the people who believe in the LORD and walk in His
ways. Israel will be far from oppression and terror (again metonmyical ideas since they refer to the
actions of the nations and the effects of those oppressing nations).
Obviously, these promises were not completely realized by the returning exiles. The promises
of God for the covenant people stand; but participation in them fully by individuals is based on faith and
obedience. Moreover, God’s prophetic messages do not specify the time of the fulfillment. That
generation, with the opportunity for the new beginning and the great fulfillment, did not merit the
complete promise. Hebrews says that all of them died, not receiving the promise; consequently, the
grand fulfillment is yet to come.
The summation of the passage in verse 17b provides us with a key to the exposition: “this is the
heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness which is of me.” God promised peace,
security, righteousness, and spiritual service for the believing remnant; but they had to take His promises
by faith and return rejoicing to the land to do it.
To tie this together with the events of the post-exilic community would be most helpful as you
prepare the theology of the passage. The promises were there for the taking; but the returning
community in those days received only part of what God was fully intending to do. The rest remains yet
unfulfilled.
Conclusion
In direct correlation to the message of this chapter I would include Peter’s epistle in which he
reminds us that we are an elect nation, a holy priesthood, living stones built on the foundation stone, a
people that has obtained mercy and will not be put to shame; and that we are to show forth our praise of
Him as we live in righteousness before all people who will see our good works and glorify the Father (1
Peter 2:5-10). So the message for us today is the same as the message for the returning exiles in Isaiah
54. God has begun a new work in Christ and called us as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation
displaying the mercy and righteousness of God. Great promises of the blessings of peace, safety,
prosperity and victory are held out to those who obediently walk in God’s perfect will for their lives.
But this does not nullify the fulfillment of these verses at the end of this age and the dawn of the
messianic age. God will regather His people, and He will build His holy city, and He will make his
servants into spiritual servants. What the people of God do in the meantime will find its glorious
culmination at the time of the coming of the Messiah.
Isaiah 48 deals with just such a problem with stubborn Israel. The prophet foresees that the
people of Israel in captivity in Babylon will be resigned to living out their lives there. They will put out
of their mind the promises of a new covenant with a restoration to the land and a renewal of their service
of God. And so he writes this oracle to rebuke them in that weak faith and to exhort them to heed God’s
call.
Based on the messages of the previous chapters, the LORD here exhorts His unclean nation to
take note of the prophecies carefully because they have been living in unbelief too long and need to
renew their faith in and commitment to God’s word. Furthermore, He reminds them how He continues to
be patient with them for their benefit, but calls them to contemplate His sovereign acts. Finally, the
LORD encourages them to flee from Babylon through His great redemption when the opportunity arises.
The future of God’s people is not in captivity.
Exposition
I. The Rebuke:
The LORD rebukes His people for their disbelief and idolatry which He has sought to
overcome by His sovereign word (48:1-11).
But verse 1 explains that what all that these descriptions claim is just that, claims, for the people
are hypocritical—they do not do it “in truth” or “righteousness.” Their participation in ritual acts, praise,
taking oaths, confessing belief, is not done with sincerity (“truth” as we have seen before is reliability,
dependability, as well as holding to true beliefs), nor with righteousness (their lives have not
corresponded with the standard of the covenant). So the prophet observes that they are skeptical of the
Word and hesitant to respond.
Verse 2 then explains further that they claim to be professing Israelites. They call themselves
“citizens of the holy city” and claim to rely on the God of Israel. This is what they would protest in
response to the charge of the prophet. But affiliation to the faith does not always translate into living by
faith.
B. The LORD appeals for them to listen to His word by reminding them of His
predictive power (3-8).
Verse 3 introduces the theme of this section: God had predicted the former things and they
happened as He said they would. The “former things” refers to that which the LORD had already
predicted correctly, including for the audience who ended up in Babylon, the captivity. He predicted
many things in antiquity, and then He brought them to pass just as He said He would. The use of
“mouth” is, of course, anthropomorphic, a more vivid way of expressing the decree of the LORD—He
actually spoke.
Verses 4 and 5 explain that it was necessary to use prophecy because the people were stubborn.
The previous chapter branded them as obstinate; but now their neck is iron and their brow brass. The
implied comparisons are intended to show how hardened they were, how slow to believe. They would
not bend or yield; they refused to be controlled by the LORD.
Verse 5 completes the explanation by explaining that their hesitancy to believe in the LORD had
the danger of opening the way for them to idolatry, crediting an idol that they made with the acts of God.
God had to convince them through such supernatural ways as predictive prophecy because they were
wayward. When the prophet here records the Word of the LORD that claims the use of predictions, he
probably has in mind the importance of prophecy throughout all the history of Israel rather than only one
specific event. Israel’s history was foretold, from beginning to end, by the living God. But certainly the
captivity in Babylon was uppermost in his mind, for God had foretold it, and no one believed it—until it
happened.
Three things set Israel’s historiography apart from any other in the ancient Near East, and these
are significant. (1) Israel had a linear history: it was moving from its beginning to its culmination in
the eschaton—there was an eschatalogy. But the nations in the ancient world, even though they had
historical events, had no concept of progression. To them, it was all the annual seasonal cycle, year after
year. The deities all served to restore vegetation, crops, life, year after year. But there was no goal at the
end of the age. (2) Israel had a God who judged His own people, often by using other nations to do it.
The deities of the other nations were national deities, loyal to their people—servants of their people. But
only in Israel do we find prophets telling how the LORD would destroy His own people. Here is a clear
evidence of truth, and not propaganda; Yahweh is not simply the God of Israel, but rather the God of
heaven. (3) Israel had a God who predicted the future. All nations could claim that their deities
caused whatever happened to happen; but when what happened was foretold by the LORD, and what was
foretold could not be changed by armies or deities, the truth rests with the LORD God of Israel.
So now there was to be a “new thing.” It is recent, new, so at they cannot say they heard of it
elsewhere, or did it themselves (verse 7). This new thing that they never imagined would probably refer
to the bringing in of Cyrus as the deliverer to set them free. Who could have imagined that?. This was a
new prophecy because if it had been made otherwise they might have claimed they knew it. God is
always one step ahead of people. And these people took some convincing. It reminds us of the contrary
audience of Malachi, who challenged everything the prophet said, demanding proof or explanation.
This idea of the “new thing” is developed further in verse 8; it will then be picked up in verse
14. Israel did not know this, nor had they heard it. These events are new and unprecedented. But God
did not fully reveal them lest they should treat the prediction lightly and say that it corresponded to their
own calculations. Familiarity with the expectation sometimes lessons the appreciation or the
understanding of it. The first part of verse 8 probably means that Israel had not received notice of Cyrus
in years past, even though punishment and downfall had been predicted for Babylon itself. The reason
the agent was not predicted before now is that Israel would not have appreciated or accepted it, being in
the state of disbelief and disobedience that they were in. They were “transgressors from the womb”—a
clear description of the sin nature. Seldom do we realize how our sin nature necessitates how God must
deal with us. It surely demands patience and compassion; but here it calls for convincing proof, because
of slowness to believe. Rebellious people do not accept signs and predictions easily.
C. The LORD remains patient so that His word and His works will accomplish their
intended goals (9-11).
Nevertheless, the LORD continues to be patient with these people, so that they might benefit
from His intervention (if God was not patient, who would benefit?). It appears that verse 9 would make
no sense to someone who had lived through the exile; but the point is that God cut that period short or
they would have been cut off. And if they had been cut off completely, there would be no praise offered
to God for the deliverance from bondage.
Note the parallel praise of the psalmist who returned from the captivity: “You severely
disciplined me, but You did not give me over to death” (Ps. 118—the speaker represents the nation).
Underscore in this verse that it is because of God’s reputation that Israel was not destroyed.
Ezekiel 36 will say the same thing, that God would deliver them from exile because of His Word—He
would keep His promises—and by doing that He would sanctify His name which they had profaned. And
Malachi would reiterate, “Because I the LORD change not, therefore you are not consumed.”
The idea of “deferring anger” is rather anthropomorphic. It is similar to the LORD’s “repenting”
over the evil that He said He was going to do. These expressions show His compassion. But His plan
was formed, not only for the exile, but the number of years in the exile, the time and circumstances of the
return—all of it.
Verse 10 uses the language of refining to describe the captivity in exile. “I have refined” is an
implied comparison; and “in the furnace” is also an implied comparison of exile with a furnace (see Deut.
4:20; 1 Kings 8:51; and Jer. 11:4). Note that the genitive helps interpret the figure: “furnace of
affliction”; this could be classified as a genitive of apposition, the furnace, which is affliction.
Our hymn writer caught this image nicely: “In the furnace, God may prove me, hence to bring
me forth more bright” (Zion Stands).
The expression “but not as silver” could be taken in two ways. It either means that the refining
was not as severe as would be needed to refine silver, or it was not with silver as the product, that is, the
Thus, the purpose of delivering Israel from bondage was for the LORD’s sake. He would
prevent His reputation as the powerful Lord God from being disparaged among the nations. God will not
let His name be profaned among the nations (see Ezek. 36:22-36). And out of this we have the prayer,
“Hallowed be thy name.” We too pray that God will fulfill His promises and thereby rescue His name,
His reputation from the world.
Verse 16 critical for the interpretation of theology. The LORD is the speaker throughout this
section—”I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time it was, there am I.” Then the
text says, “and now the Lord God has sent me, and His Spirit.” Most commentators suggest that 16b
changes the scene to the earthly drama. Watts says, “Someone, ostensibly a leader, claims that Yahweh
has sent him and his spirit.”144 This forces him to say that in verse 17 and following this leader quotes
his commission from the LORD. That seems to me somewhat forced. Others say that the line is a
parenthesis or insertion, perhaps coming from the interpolator who claims to have a divine commission to
address the contemporaries. This is most unnatural and contrived. But they are trying to avoid having
Yahweh be both God the One who is sending and the Servant who is sent. So one view, followed by a
number of scholars, is to see an additional comment here by the writer or editor.
144
John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 34-66, Word Commentary (Waco: Word Publishers), p. 178.
Well, you can take your pick of which view makes the most sense, both in this context, and in
the synthesis with the rest of revelation. It is not a major point, but in this context it will determine who
is speaking in verse 17—the LORD or an interpolator/prophet/leader.
The wish or lament is expressed in verse 18: “O that you had hearkened to My commandments.”
The similes (“river” and “waves of the sea”) in the apodasis mean that if she had, then her welfare
(shalom) would have been as full and constant as the waters of a wide and unfailing river, and her
righteousness (parallel, so success or blessing—metonymy—for being right with God) as the sea.
The apodasis continues in verse 19 with more similes—”sand” and “gravel.” If they had
obeyed, there would have been innumerable descendants, because there would have been no captivity,
only divine blessing. The text indicates that the captivity almost annihilated the population, and with that
the name of Israel came precariously close to extinction.
The language of their singing is thanksgiving to God for the deliverance from bondage. It
includes allusions to the Israelites’ deliverance out of Egypt—they thirsted not when He led them through
145
We also had in Isaiah 6 the significance "Who will go for us?" Of course, in isolation all these
verses can be explained. But when the totality of Scripture is taken together, it is likely than something
more natural is flowing from the Godhead.
146
It is hard to imagine why the people would not go, but that is the case. Psalm 126 has the
prayer that God would bring more and more exiles back to the land--there was a trickle of them in the
wadi--but the psalmist wanted the banks to overflow, "as streams in the desert."
Verse 22 is a problem because it does not seem to fit nicely here. Some scholars consider the
verse to be a structural marker from the editing of the collection, especially since Isaiah 49-55 forms the
second collection of the latter part of the book. But the verse does make sense in this context, though, for
God was giving peace (welfare) to His people who would return in faith to their land. But to the
Babylonians, the wicked, there would be no peace.
Conclusion
It is again a remarkable point of theology that is taught in this passage, namely, that even though
His people should prove unfaithful, God will remain faithful, for He cannot deny Himself—a truth that is
clearly reiterated in the New Testament. The fulfillment of the covenant promises is based on the
character of God, who by His mighty arm will do what His Word proclaimed He would do.
If you take the view that Isaiah prophesied this over a century before it happened, the application
would be that his audience is being forewarned. It is a fuller development of his words to Ahaz—a war is
coming, a remnant will return; if you believe you will not have to go through that. And even in the days
of Hezekiah, after the fiasco with Evil-Merodach, the prophet said, there is a captivity coming, but
because of obedience it will not be in your lifetime. And, these oracles were comparable to the event in
chapter 8 where the prophet would write ahead of time so it would be witnessed when it happened. The
point is that all the prophets prophesied things that were far off in the future—judgment, exile,
restoration, the coming of the Messiah. 147 It was all meant to call people to faith and obedience, so that
they would escape the catastrophe, or if it should come that they might be on God’s side, and that when it
came they would know that it was the LORD. So the application for the earlier audience would have
been a general call to obedience because of the prophetic word.
The application for the exiled community comes from the precise words in the text: they must
turn from their rebellion and unbelief so that they may be a part of the returned exiles, going forward to
fulfill God’s covenant program. God reminds them of prophecy so that He can convince them of His
sovereignty. They will be in captivity, so they will actually be called upon to believe and leave; whereas
the earliest audience will see all this tragedy and try to avoid it in the first place.
Both messages fit the New Testament instructions for the Church. We are in need of the
constant exhortations to stir up our faith and live obediently to avoid divine discipline, for if God did not
preserve the natural branches, Paul says, He could also lop of the ones that were grafted in (Rom. 11). Or
as John says, He could remove the Lampstand (=ministry) from our midst (Rev. 2,3).
But also, we are looking forward to the Day of the LORD when He delivers us from the bondage
of this world, and fulfills the promises He has made to us. Those are guaranteed, because His Word is
dependable. But we are enjoined to believe His promises, to watch and pray and be ready, in a word, to
prepare for it. We are not to get too enamored with this world (“love not the world”) because it is
passing away. A great day of Judgment and Redemption is coming. 148
147
The article by Kenneth Kitchen, "Ancient Orient, `Deuteronism,' and the Old Testament," is
worth reading just for the discussion of exile. See New Perspectives on the Old Testament, ed. by J.
Barton Payne (Word, 1970).
148
The psalmist expressed it, "This is the day the LORD has made"--deliverance from Babylon!
Our singing of that should be as witness to the expected fulfillment of the promises.