Part 43
Other links between ch. i and the last part of the book have been noted. Clements (19800: 28) expressed this as 'a selection of the prophet's sayings in order to provide a general preface and guide to his teaching', but it may be more appropriate to envisage this 'selection' in terms of an introduction to some of the main themes ofthe whole book. The issues of sin, judgement, and hoped-for restoration are those with which the community of I srael as a whole and the prophetic writings were deeply concerned, and they form the overarching structure ofthe book of Isaiah.
(1:1) The introductory verse is closely comparable to the opening ofthe books of Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, Micah, and Zephaniah. It is sometimes supposed that all ancient Israelites were necessarily expert in knowing which king reigned when, in the way in which children of an earlier generation were required to learn lists ofthe kings of Judah and Israel. Much more probably this is a literary device at one stage in the editorial process of the Isaiah collection, linking it with the account of the people's history given in the books of Kings. Since those books are usually described as part of the Deuteronomistic History this verse is then regarded as evidence for one of the redactions of Isaiah's words being Deuteronomistic. (Kaiser 1983: 1—2 suggests that this implies a fifth-century date, but there is little unambiguous evidence for dating.) It is not even possible to offer exact dates for the kings listed, but they all ruled in the second half of the eighth century BCE. What follows is described as 'a vision which (Isaiah) saw'. Part of the reference here must surely be to the great vision in ch. 6, but we should also bear in mind that vision (what we might describe as 'second sight' or 'insight') was an important element in the prophetic role. Another way of describing prophets was as 'seers', and the two terms seem in practice to have been synonymous. Indeed, from the visions of Amos onwards the prophetic collections emphasize the importance of visions, and the books of Obadiah, Habakkuk, and Nahum, like that of Isaiah, are described in their opening verse as 'visions'. The distinction between words and visions, which to us may appear fundamental, may not have seemed so basic to the compilers of these oracles. Perhaps this is a pointer, one of
20. It is appropriate to end this introduction with an outline of what we shall be studying. It is a book, mostly of poetry, which begins by warning a religious community of the dangers inherent in its failures, dangers which must lead to punishment. These warnings occupy much of chs. 1—33. There follows the triumphant proclamation that the time of punishment is now over, and that the way to restoration lies ahead; this theme is found in chs. 34—5, and clearly underlies the stories in chs. 36—9, chapters which function as a hinge upon which the whole book turns. As has long been recognized, the announcement of restoration predominates in chs. 40—55. But the book ends with renewed notes of warning; the community must not suppose that in future 'anything goes'. There are still dangers to be guarded against, patterns of behaviour which are incompatible with their religious claims. These warning signs are prominent in chs. 56—66. Sometimes there are clues which suggest a particular historical background for particular pasages, but they are subsidiary to the main thrust of the book and liable to misinterpretation. We may be wiser to read Isaiah as a structured collection of religious verse, keeping this broad thematic progression in mind.
437 ISAIAH
of Hebrew poetry is parallelism: the repetition in slightly different words in the second line of what has already been said in the first. Often such parallelism is described as 'synonymous', with the implication that there is no additional nuance of meaning to be discerned in the second line. But this conflicts with a deeply held traditional Jewish belief, shared also by some Christians, that every word of Scripture must have its own in-built significance. This verse provides a good example of the tension. Are 'children' and 'deal corruptly' simply synonyms of 'offspring' and 'do evil', or do they add details which might otherwise be overlooked? The usual view in modern scholarship has been that they are no more than synonyms, but the other view has been vigorously upheld by some scholars (Kugel 1981: 289—92). Similarly with the words gdy and 'am, translated 'nation' and 'people'. These can certainly be understood as synonyms; but it is also possible to suppose that the wickedness ofYHWH's own 'am is somehow more culpable than that associated with a gdy, a term used of any nation.
many we shall notice, that much of what follows is poetry, and is not to be treated in the precise manner in which we approach prose.
(1:2) The form used here appears to be that of a lawsuit, with witnesses being summoned. We have no means of knowing how closely the book's language is based on actual legal practice; some may feel that poetry and legal usage are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Indeed no legal system could tolerate the duplication of roles here envisaged, for YHWH speaks both as prosecuting counsel, here summoning his witnesses, and as judge, whose verdict, though implicit, is inevitable (Nielsen 1978: 27—9, though her reading of a covenant context underlying the lawsuit seems doubtful—the idea of'covenant' is not prominent in the early chapters of Isaiah). It seems clear that 'heavens' and 'earth' are envisaged as a totality; the whole created order is summoned to witness the verdict that God is about to announce. T reared children': this is the first example of what will become a frequent and increasingly explicit feature of Isaiah, the picture of God as parent (both father and mother) of wayward children. The language may be that of adoption rather than of direct parentage (Melnyk 1993: 252), but we know too little of adoption procedures in ancient Israel to be certain of this.
The verse begins with the characteristic Isaianic word hoy, translated 'Ah', but in reality somewhat stronger than that implies: 'Alas!' It is followed by a characteristic reproach, a form in which the reasons for God's condemnation of the people are set out. The third-person usage in the second half of the verse is somewhat unexpected, and has led some commentators (Kaiser 1983) to regard it as a later clarification; without it the whole section to v. 7 can be taken as a direct address of condemnation. The point is of some importance for our understanding of Isaianic usage, because this part of the verse contains the first instance of the designation of God as 'the Holy One of Israel', an expression found 28 times in all parts of the book of Isaiah, but rare elsewhere, only 5 occurrences in the rest of the HB (van Selms 1982). 'Israel', as we have already seen, came to be used as an overall term for the worshippers of YHWH, but it is disputed whether the term was already in use in that sense in pre-exilic times (when it also designated the northern kingdom) or, as is perhaps more probable, only developed at a later time. If the latter view is correct, the term 'Holy One of Israel' may be seen as a characteristic marker of a fairly late stage in the redaction of the Isaiah material. Holiness, which at an earlier stage meant that which is separate, set apart, has now come to be an appropriate designation of God.
(1:3) This verse has played an important part in Christian tradition. Much of Isaiah came to be regarded as pointing forward to the time of Christ, and the reference here to the ox and the ass recognizing God's presence came to be interpreted in connection with the stories of the birth of Jesus. The animals in the Christmas crib are not a biblical tradition, but are first mentioned in the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, thought to date from the eighth or ninth century CE, where it is said that Mary 'put her child in a manger, and an ox and an ass worshipped him. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: " The ox knows his owner and the ass his master's crib" ' (Hennecke 1963: 410). It is interesting that the Hebrew word translated 'master' is ba'al, the same word as is used elsewhere of a god regarded as a rival to YHWH. There is no suggestion of a rival deity here, or any feeling that the use of this word posed problems.
The same theme, of animals recognizing what is hidden from God's own people, is found again in Jer 8:7, but the 'stork, turtledove, swallow and [?]crane' of that verse might not seem so appropriate to a Christmas crib. The remainder of the verse introduces themes basic to Isaiah. The people are described as 'Israel'. But Israel in the time of the prophet Isaiah meant the northern kingdom, which was absorbed into the Assyrian Empire around 722 BCE. It is likely that the use of the term in a religious sense, to describe the worshippers of YHWH, only became predominant at a later period. The expression 'my people' is also used, here in a strongly condemnatory sense. There is a clear cross-reference here with the usage in 40:1, with its cry to 'comfort my people'. In this opening chapter the people's sins are described in detail and the inevitability of punishment spelt out; in ch. 40 it is made clear that the punishment, though thoroughly deserved, had now been completed and that the people might now contemplate restoration.
(1:5—7) These verses illustrate well the perils inherent in trying to interpret poetry in a precise historical fashion. In w. 5—6 it is clear that a vivid metaphor is being used, with the people's condition set out in terms of a desperately sick body. The language here used of the community will be picked up again in the description of the suffering of the servant in ch. 53; the rather rare word haburd (bruise) is found in Isaiah only here and at 53:5. In v. 7 the metaphor changes, to that of a land lying desolate, and many interpreters have attempted to discover some precise historical 'reality' underlying this description. There has been discussion about whether the devastation of
Sennacherib and the Assyrians in 701 BCE is the setting, or whether only the even greater devastation of the Babylonian armies in the early sixth century was in mind. We may be wiser to take this description, like that of the sick body in the preceding verses, as a vivid way of describing the general
(1:4) The section from v. 2 onwards is rightly set out in most modern translations as poetry, and one of the characteristics
ISAIAH 438
from 'the word of the LORD', and from his 'teaching'. This represents Hebrew tora, the term which came ultimately to be used for the gathered collection of Scripture. It scarcely has that formal sense here, but already we can see that a body of teaching is envisaged which the community could be expected to recognize and adhere to. The roots of tora may be in the wisdom tradition (Jensen 1973), but its usage in the final form of the book goes significantly beyond that base.
punishment inflicted on a people who are perceived to have abandoned the right way.
(1:8) The phrase bat styyon has traditionally been translated 'daughter of Zion', but NRSV is surely right in its rendering 'daughter Zion'. It is Zion itself whose fate is here being described, not its daughter (however that expression may be understood). In the social world of ancient Israel daughters were pictured as their father's possession, and so to describe the city as a 'daughter' implies that it was God's possession.
(1:11—15) Thgre follows a fierce denunciation of wrong ritual practice, comparable to other such attacks in the prophetic books (Am 5:18-24; Hos 6:6; Mic 6:6-8). Some modern writers have claimed that this indicates a complete 'rejection of the sacrificial cult, a momentous break with the past' on the part of the prophet (Heaton 1994: 96). There are difficulties with this view. First, it imposes a very modern, Western approach on an ancient text. Secondly, it ignores the fact that in the sweeping denunciations used here the actual terminology of the sacrificial cult seems not to be employed, as we should expect if the practices laid down in e.g. Leviticus were here being condemned. More probably we should discern a twofold purpose underlying these words. On the one hand the community needed to be warned against complacency; even the glories of the Jerusalem cult-tradition, amply illustrated in Isaiah, cannot be taken as a guarantee of worship acceptable to God. On the other hand there were dangers inherent in a false understanding of what worship could achieve. To set these out offers the beginning of an explanation of the humiliations which the community had experienced.
Sometimes in the ancient Near East cities were pictured as being married to their gods, but that particular mode of expression is not often found of Jerusalem and YHWH (though cf 54:5 and 62:1-5) (Pfisterer Darr 1994).
The verse also brings out another characteristic theme of Isaiah: that of the remnant. There is an inherent ambiguity in this theme: it may be a means of expressing vividly the magnitude of a disaster. Only a remnant is left. Indeed, sometimes the scale of a disaster can only be grasped by the fact that there are a few survivors, as is recognized nowadays by the media when they heighten their account of an earthquake, an aeroplane crash, or a fire, by letting the few survivors tell their story. But a remnant can also be a hopeful sign; there arc those who have lived to tell the tale, and on them a better future can be built. Both usages of the theme are found in Isaiah, sometimes in close relation to one another (see 10:20-3 and commentary), but here there is no doubt that the underlying notion is of disaster. There has been much discussion as to which of the two ideas inherent in the theme of remnant is primary, a commonly held view being that 'remnant as threat' goes back to Isaiah himself, while 'remnant as promise' is secondary. It may be more appropriate to understand the whole motif as a theodicy: the community in the Second Temple period were very aware of themselves as a remnant, those who had survived great disasters. But those disasters had been part of God's purpose for his people, who might, as a purified remnant, look forward to a more confident future under his guidance.
In what way should we understand these condemnations? Some have simply taken them at face value, and supposed that the whole cultic structure had become decadent. But we need to remember that there is no polemic as bitter and violent as religious polemic, and it may well be that this passage illustrates rivalries within the Jerusalem community, of which there is a good deal of evidence scattered through Isaiah, illustrated in particular in chs. 56—66.
The word mcluna, here translated 'shelter', occurs in only one other place in the HB: Isa 24:20 (NRSV: 'hut'). The idea is very much that of a temporary and insecure place of refuge. Less certain is the meaning of ncsura. NRSV's 'besieged' is doubtful as a rendering of the word and is in any case scarcely appropriate for the context. Kaiser (1983) deletes the reference to a 'city', to obtain the meaning 'like a refuge in the sheepfold', but this seems purely speculative. REB's 'beleaguered' may bring out the sense, but it seems doubtful whether we should follow the example of many commentators (most recently Stacey 1993) in claiming that the language here 'changes abruptly from image to harsh reality'.
One way in which this condemnation is more all-embracing than the comparable passages in the other prophetic collections is that all forms of religious activity are here condemned; even prayer (v. 15). There is no sense here of private religious observance being acceptable and the condemnation being limited to public worship. The development within the passage is also striking. From v. n it would appear that it is sacrificial worship of any kind which is rejected, but in the following verses the words 'you' and 'your' become increasingly prominent, so that the climax in v. 15 is a clear condemnation of the offerers rather than of their practice in itself: 'Your hands are full of blood'.
(1:9) The community's self-recognition as a remnant is now brought out. The use of'we' suggests the existence of a group with which the prophetic tradition could identify which regarded itself as the surviving remnant. The image of Sodom and Gomorrah is based on Gen 19, with special emphasis on the totality of destruction; in the next verse the same image will be used in a rather different sense.
This in turn raises important interpretative questions. Those being condemned are apparently those in positions of authority; they are the 'rulers of Sodom'. At one level, therefore, Isaiah is condemning the community's leaders. At another level, however, the book claims authority for itself; 'the vision' mentioned in 1:1 is clearly a vision of God, empowering the prophetic group. This tension, whereby Isaiah both condemns the rulers and claims authority for itself, runs all through the book and is especially prominent in chs. 56—66. It is a tension still characteristic of modern religious leaders,
(1:10) The theme of Sodom and Gomorrah is now used to emphasize the wickedness of the community as a whole, and of its leaders in particular. They have become totally alienated
439 ISAIAH
of divine titles here is in general more characteristic of the second part of the book. (1:26) But the picture is not all of gloom; the punishment is to be followed by restoration. The phrase 'faithful city' provides an indusio (that is, the repetition of an opening word or phrase at the end of a section) with v. 21, where that status had been lost, and the use of sedeq not only offers a link with v. 21, but also gives a reminder of the importance of this s-d-q root in Jerusalem's tradition. Perhaps originally concealing a divine name, it reminds us of Melchizedek in Gen 14 and of Zadok the priest in the story of David, and of the frequent use of the root in the Psalms.
who both exercise positions of authority and feel free to condemn those in authority.
(1:16—17) It is important to recognize that what has preceded leads directly into these verses. Until the commands set out here are observed there can be no true worship. The commands here may be understood as a tora, the term understood now in a slightly different sense. Here it implies a set of commands, comparable to the Ten Commandments (though those here are all positive) or the briefer statement in Mic 6:8. The material itself is part of the common stock of ancient Near-Eastern texts. It is sometimes supposed that concern for the oppressed, the orphan, and the widow was peculiar to Israel, but exhortations of this kind were widespread. Thus in the Aqhat epic from Ugarit, the achievement of Dan'el as ruler was that 'he judged the cause of the widow and tried the case of the orphan' (Gibson 1978: 107). This Canaanite evidence should remind us that it was not Israel alone in the ancient world that had an awareness of justice.
We are here introduced to a theme which has caused much discussion: that ofthe 'inviolability of Zion'. Ithas been widely held that there was an ancient tradition, traces of which can be found for example in Ps 2, that Zion was impregnable and could not be captured by its enemies. On the other hand Clements (1980/7) has argued strongly that the tradition found its origin in the interpretation in Isaiah and elsewhere ofthe Assyrian king Sennacherib's failure to capture the city in 701 BCE. However that may be, it proved to be a powerful theme, being retained often in the teeth of historical evidence to the contrary.
(1:18—20) We return now to the language of the lawsuit. The people are summoned; their offences are set out; and the alternative possibilities laid down (Tf you are willing...'; 'if you refuse...'). Clearly repentance is envisaged as a possibility. Repentance is not a prominent theme in the eighthcentury prophets such as Amos, but it later came to be of major importance, e.g. in Jeremiah. This may be an indication that this passage is a relatively late element in the complete collection. (1:21-3) Tlris passage is usually characterized as a lament. The metre, at least at the beginning of the poem, has three stresses in the first part of the line and two in the second, as is usual in such laments. Some scholars wish to delete 'but now murderers' to preserve the form throughout the verse, but we do not know enough of the details of Hebrew poetry to be confident in doing so. The opening word 'cka (how) is also typical of the lament (cf 2 Sam 1:19, 25, for one of the most famous laments, that of David over Saul and Jonathan). Jerusalem is not named in the Hebrew text, but it is clearly the subject here, as is made explicit by the Greek translation, and this concern with Jerusalem, both its great potential and its wickedness in practice, will run throughout the whole book. Mispat (justice) and sedeq (righteousness) should have characterized the city and especially its rulers, but they are nowhere to be seen. The passage ends with further reference to the orphan and the widow (cf. v. 17), as those in whose interest justice and righteousness should in particular be exercised. The theme of the corruption of justice is one which runs through the whole prophetic tradition, but is specially characteristic of Isaiah, and is one of the elements which hold the whole book together.
(1:27—8) Religious polemic is clearly again at work here. Those of whom the writer approved are offered sweeping promises; there are others whose behaviour leads them to be condemned as forsaking the Lord. This is very reminiscent of the divisions highlighted in chs. 56—66. Various attempts have been made (notably by Hanson 1979) more precisely to identify different groups within the Second Temple community, but they founder for lack of sufficiently detailed knowledge.
(1:29—31) Reasons for the rejection of one group are now offered, and they are to be found in some form of idolatrous practice the details of which are not clear to us. The closest links are again with chs. 56—66. In addition to the link between v. 31 and 6 6:24 already noticed, we may see in particular the reference to the 'oaks' in 57:5 and to the 'gardens' in 65:3. What is here condemned seems to be some form of pagan worship; it is apparently quite different from the misuse ofthe temple referred to earlier in the chapter. The variety of condemnations and of hopes expressed in this first chapter have led a number of scholars to see in it a summary ofthe message ofthe book as a whole (Fohrer 1967). One must not push this idea too far—there are important elements in the book which are not reflected here—but in general terms it is a valuable concept, particularly if it is divorced from largely sterile debate about how much of its contents can plausibly be said to go back to Isaiah himself.
(1:24—5) Thgse verses comprise one unit with what has preceded; they are introduced by the characteristic 'therefore' of judgement. The wrongs which have been outlined in the previous verses here have their inevitable consequences spelt out, and metaphors based on metallurgy provide a link between w. 22 and 25. God is here described as 'the Mighty One of Israel', a term distinct from but closely related to the more usual Isaianic term, 'the Holy One of Israel'; the present phrase is not found elsewhere but the almost identical 'mighty One of Jacob' occurs at 49:26; 60:16. The piling up
(Chs. 2—4) The majority of commentators have seen these chapters as consisting of a variety of short and largely unrelated oracles but the attempt has been made to discern in them 'a coherent and functional literary unit' (Wiklander 1984, p. ix) a theory based on an elaborate text-linguistic foundation. On this reading the basic theme is the 'restoration ofthe covenant by means of a lawsuit involving Yhwh, Judah and the nations' (ibid. 114). It is an interesting theory which anticipates some more recent literary readings, but suffers from the serious weakness that the word covenant does not
ISAIAH 440
(2:3) A particular concern of the Second Temple community was the position of the worshippers of YHWH vis-a-vis those who worshipped other gods (cf. Zech 8:20—3; 14-16). That concern is very prominent in Isaiah, and a variety of attitudes can be found, ranging from the extraordinary openness of 19:24—5 to the bitterness of some of the foreign nations material and the opposition to Edom in ch. 34 and elsewhere. Here a measure of openness can be seen, but it is clear that Israel is envisaged as playing a superior role as the nation from which others might profitably learn.
occur in these chapters! Nevertheless the theory that a unifying structure can be discerned in this material, beginning (2:2—4) and ending (4:2—6) with a vision of a glorious future for Jerusalem, is a valuable one.
(2:1) Somewhat unexpectedly a new superscription is introduced here. Various suggestions have been made to account for this unique feature. It might wish to stress that the following oracle, found also in Micah, is genuinely Isaian; if ch. i is seen as a later summary of the book as a whole this could be seen as the original introduction to the oracles of Isaiah himself; it may be intended as an introduction to chs. 2—12
It is striking that here tora (law) and 'word of the LORD' are treated as synonymous. The word of the Lord is characteristically that which was uttered through prophetic mouthpieces; tora, as we have seen, had a variety of meanings, but here it may be comparable to the kind of summary of divine guidance found in 1:16-17.
(NB the comparable introduction to the 'foreign nations' section at 13:1), or to chs. 2-4 on the view outlined above.
(2:2—4) Th£ most remarkable feature of these verses is that they are also found in Mic 4:1-3, with very minor internal differences and a different conclusion. It is obviously possible that one prophet, or the collector of his oracles, borrowed from the other; if this is so, there are no certain criteria for deciding on which side the dependence lay. But it may also be that there has been a tendency to lay too much stress on the supposed 'originality' of prophets. As we work through the whole Isaiah collection we shall come across a number of places where there are very close similarities with material found in other prophetic books. The present example is a well-known one and has therefore attracted much attention; the others are mostly in the foreign nations oracles which have been the subject of less attention. The use and reuse of existing prophetic oracles may be a subject which deserves more attention than has customarily been devoted to it. Whatever its origin, the striking feature of this oracle is the glorious future held out for Jerusalem, in stark contrast to what has preceded in ch. i. The vision is to be fulfilled 'in days to come'. Later in this chapter we shall find frequent references to the day of the Lord, pictured as a day of disaster. This oracle, in common with much else in Isaiah, seems to be saying that beyond the disaster there will be a genuine hope of restoration and new prosperity. 'The highest of the mountains': the theme of the 'cosmic mountain' is a widespread one in the ancient Near East and in the Hebrew Bible in particular (Clifford 1972 offers a useful survey of the main relevant texts). The theme is frequent in the Psalms (cf e.g. Ps 48:1—3; 68:15—16), and both in this passage and in the Psalms the claim is made that Mount Zion, in fact not at all a spectacular mountain, will be established as 'the highest of the mountains'. The mythical features of this picture show us that this is theological geography. It is also noteworthy that, despite the importance for much of Israel's tradition of Mount Sinai and the Torah given there, in the Isaiah tradition the 'holy mountain' is consistently Mount Zion.
(2:4) Ancient Israel lived in a world where war was a fact of life. The vision of the cessation of war in this verse is a remarkable one, and it is perhaps not surprising that it proved too remarkable for a later prophetic voice. In Joel 3:10 we find the vision being reversed; there ploughshares and pruning hooks are to become swords and spears, in recognition of the need for continued conflict.
(2:5) This brief appeal has no equivalent in Micah. It is an exhortation of the kind more commonly found in Deuteronomy, inviting the community to amendment. It is couched in the first person plural (cf. 1:9), suggesting the identity of a group to whom Isaiah is making special appeal.
(2:6—21) An extended passage, the precise meaning of whose details is not always clear owing to textual uncertainties, is devoted to the 'day of the LORD' theme. The Hebrew word Id, with which it begins, can indeed mean 'for' as in the NRSV translation, but it is more likely here to be asseverative, that is making an assertion rather than spelling out a condition, and should be translated 'surely'. It is a new start, not a direct continuation of v. 5, to which it is linked only by the phrase 'house of Jacob'. Already there is a difficulty in the condemnation here: the word translated 'of diviners' is missing in the Hebrew text, and is supplied from a later tradition, which presumably already felt that the gap needed to be filled. In any case the idea seems to be another condemnation of false worship comparable to that found in 1:29-31. There is no other evidence that the Philistines were especially gifted as 'soothsayers'. The point of the address to YHWH is that intercession is useless; doom is inevitable. The condemnation is largely formulaic, with two refrain-like phrases giving a structural unity to the whole. One is found in w. 9, n, and 17, and speaks of humanity being humbled; the other in w. 10, 19, and 21 pictures those who are left hiding among the rocks in the hope that they might thereby escape God's anger. As can readily be seen the two sets of passages are not identical, as a modern refrain would be; this may imply that the poem is not a unity but has been developed over an extended period (Vermeylen 1977-8), but it may also be a characteristic of Hebrew poetry to tolerate greater variation than would be acceptable in most modern Western traditions. The passage as a whole brings together two basic Isaianic themes: the vanity of human self-confidence and the folly ofworshipping false gods.
Remarkable also in view of later developments within the book is the place here given to 'the nations'. Elsewhere, especially in chs. 13-23, they are presented as the recipients of the judgement of YHWH. Here, a much more positive future is held out for them. It is in the light of this passage, the first dealing with foreign nations, that later judgements will naturally be read. (Davies 1989 makes an interesting comparison between this passage near the beginning of the whole book and 66:18—24, which rounds it off.)
441 ISAIAH
(3:12) The whole section ends with a statement of a society in confusion, expressed in a way which shows all too clearly the values of ancient Israelite society. It is regarded as a sign of disaster that children or women, bracketed together in the parallelism, should be in positions of authority. It will be for the reader to decide whether he or she can accept the prophet's assessment in such a matter. (3:13-15) In these verses we return to the lawsuit language already found in ch. i, and the problem already expressed there returns even more clearly. Here YHWH is both the prosecuting counsel (v. 13) and the judge (v. 14). Whatever we may think about the legal proprieties of such a situation the prophet's intention is clear; he continues his attack upon the leaders of the community, regarding them as the real perverters of justice through the oppression of the weaker members of society. The section ends with the messenger formula ('says the Lord GOD of hosts') showing the prophet's claim to divine authorization.
(2:n) The poem reaches a climax with the assertion of God's sole power 'in that day'. Here the way in which the 'day' is spoken of differs sharply from the picture of the latter 'days' in v. 2. There it was a time of the vindication of Zion and its worshippers, here it is an occasion of unmitigated disaster.
(2:12-19) The idea of a 'day of YHWH' when his enemies would experience his power seems to have been a common one. Am 5:18 presents the idea of the 'day of YHWH' as one to which the people looked forward in eager anticipation. In this Isaiah passage the idea that YHWH will indeed have a day of punishment of his enemies is again set out, but with the disturbing difference that the enemies are now pictured as those who claimed to be his worshippers. In particular, as frequently in Isaiah, the most severe condemnations are reserved for those who trust in their own strength. The imagery used is not always clear, but an important place is found for the stormwind, a recurring image of divine power in the HB, from the description of Mount Sinai down to the apocalyptic writings.
(3:16—23) There follows an extraordinary male chauvinist attack upon the women of Jerusalem. There were women prophets in ancient Israel (e.g. Huldah, 2 Kings 22), but those prophets whose words have been handed down in written form seem for the most part strongly misogynistic (Hos i and 3; Am 4, as well as this passage and Isa 32: 9—11). Whether this tells us more about the women of the time or about the prophets to whom such words are attributed must be left open. The form of 16—17 is a reproach, describing female behaviour from a male point of view; it leads into a prose expansion, w. 18-23, which reads like a catalogue from some ancient fashion store. Several of the terms are found only here, and not all of them can be identified; the larger commentaries must be consulted for fuller details (Wildberger 1972: 135-45). (3:24-4:1) In one sense this is a reversion to the reproach of 3:16-17, but there is a shift of emphasis. Instead of the attack upon the women of Jerusalem the stress shifts so that the reference is to Jerusalem itself, pictured, as cities often were, in feminine terms. The 'sitting on the ground' as a symbol of mourning undergone here by Jerusalem will be used in the same way of Babylon in 47:1. But the passage reverts at its close to the picture of individual women, eagerly seeking the respectability which being called by a man's name promises. (4:2-6) The degradation and desolation of Jerusalem might appear to be complete, yet it is now contradicted by the great hope expressed in these verses. In historical-critical terms it is certainly a late addition, and has been disparagingly described as a 'mosaic of cliches from different sources' (Bentzen 1957: ii. 108); in the context of the book as a whole, however, it functions as showing that the ordeal suffered by Jerusalem at the hands of its enemies was not the whole story. There was a glorious future to look forward to. Remarkable, too, is the transformation of the 'on that day' theme, so negative in ch. 2, such a powerful symbol of hope here. The use of semah, 'branch', here introduces a term which elsewhere (Jer 23:5; Zech 3:8; 6:12) is associated with a hoped-for figure in terms that can be called messianic. (In Isa 11:1 the word rendered 'branch' in NRSV is a different Heb. word.) Another theme, rare in these early chapters of the book, introduced here is that of the Exodus and the wilderness journey, evoked in v. 5 by the
(2:22) This last verse is missing from the Greek translation (LXX). Its presence illustrates the way in which the tradition developed. It functions as a kind of brief sermon to the readers of the final form of the book, warning them of the dire consequences of the kind of behaviour outlined above.
(3:1-5) As at 2:6 the word Id, translated 'for' in NRSV and elsewhere, is really asseverative: 'Surely'. What is sure is the complete break-up of the established structure of society. Among the prophets it is Jeremiah who is often pictured as endangering the very basis of the society in which he lived, but this charge is less often brought against Isaiah. Here, however, it is clear that the whole established order is at risk. The words translated 'support and staff in NRSV function in two different ways within the announcement of judgement. They refer to the structure of the society without which there would be chaos. But they also refer to the need for sustenance: bread and water. (NEB/REB omit the reference to bread and water as a later gloss, but this kind of double allusion seems well suited to the basic Isaiah tradition.) The list of leaders of society undergoes an interesting development. At first it appears as purely neutral description ('warrior', 'soldier', and so forth); but as it develops it becomes steadily more derogatory ('skilful magician', 'expert enchanter'). It is an entirely male-dominated structure, and age is also regarded as an important prerequisite for ability to rule. Notice particularly in this respect v. 5, where the parallelism suggests that 'youth' is equivalent to 'base' and 'elder' to 'honourable'. (3:6-90) NRSV makes the section end at v. 8, but it may be better to take the first part of v. 9 (down to 'do not hide it') with what precedes. This brings out more clearly the link, already familiar to us from ch. i, of Jerusalem with Sodom, regarded as a gloss by BHS and Vermeylen (1977-8), but quite understandable in the larger context of the book.
(3:96-11) These rather generalizing verses have often been regarded as additions to the original context, but if we pay less attention to which words may be original to the prophet Isaiah himself, we can see that this section fits well as an overall verdict on different kinds of behaviour, and the rewards that each brings. The word 'verdict' is deliberately chosen, for the legal context is clear to see.
ISAIAH 442
point being made. In itself the point of v. 8 seems to be that land is to be held in trust, and encroachment by enlarging it infringes that principle. The story of Naboth in i Kings 21 may illustrate the same point. (5:9-10) The image here is of the prophet being admitted to the heavenly council (cf. Jer 23:18, 22) to hear the divine verdict on unacceptable behaviour. An ephah is one-tenth of a homer (de Vaux 1961: 199-200), and so the point of the decision seems to be that in future those condemned will harvest only a tenth of what they sow—a less severe threat than one might have anticipated.
'cloud by day and smoke and the shining of a flaming fire by night' (Sweeney 19880:18—19). This forms an important link with the later part of the book. We also note in this passage a positive use of the theme of the remnant: those who are left are to be 'recorded for life'.
(5:I~7) Though the literary form is very different the thrust of this passage is essentially that of the kind of lawsuit of which we have already seen examples: the evidence, in the form of God's kindness to his people, is set out in w. 1-4; the verdict— guilty—is assumed and punishment follows in w. 5-6. Then v. 7 supplies a kind of key to the dramatis personae of the story, offering the opportunity for a characteristic play on words. In form it may be regarded as a parable, a rare literary form in the prophetic writings, though some prophetic actions can certainly be regarded as parabolic: Isa 8:1—4 °ffers an example
(5:11—17) w. ii—12, the condemnation of excessive drinking, with the picture of the accompanying merriment, is reminiscent of Am 8. Were the prophets somewhat Puritan in their approach, or was the excess of some people's behaviour an open scandal? v. 13, 'therefore' is a characteristic word of threat, binding this spelling out of the consequences to the woe which has preceded. The tense of the verb 'go into exile' would normally be rendered by an English past, and this makes good sense in the final form of the book: its compilers knew what their community's history had been, and interpreted it as divine punishment. The reason for the exile is striking: NRSV 'without knowledge' might imply mere ignorance, but the Hebrew really means 'for lack of knowledge'—a failure to grasp what God really wanted of his people, v. 14, the threat is elaborated with another 'therefore'. Sheol, the place of the dead from which there was no return, eagerly awaited the offenders—the rulers of Jerusalem, so frequently condemned in these opening chapters, v. 15 is almost identical with 2:9 and functions in a way similarly dismissive of human aspirations, v. 16 is a key text for the appreciation of much of Isaiah. It brings together three key terms: the holiness of God, which will play an important part in the vision of ch. 6; and the qualities of mispat (justice) and sedaqd (righteousness), which are claimed as characteristic of divine action and are required of God's worshippers also. One of the most important features of the teaching of the Israelite prophets is this claim that divine characteristics and human behaviour should in some way reflect one another. Where justice and righteousness are lacking the whole of society, from the leaders down, is at risk.
(Westermann 1967: 201—2). The parable may itself be based on a vintage-song, though we know too little of these to be confident. It would be unwise to interpret the details of the action described in an allegorical fashion, with specific meanings being given to watchtower, wine vat, and so on, though this kind of literary reading, so much despised by historical critics, has had something of a renaissance in recent years, v. i is one of the places where NRSV has modified the RSV translation, rendering 'my' rather than 'a' love-song. If this is correct, w. 1-2 could be seen as providing the setting, with the song actually starting in v. 3 (Petersen and Richards 1992: 82—3). The more usual view is that the song is found in w. ib— 2, with 3—6 providing the reflections of the owner of the vineyard (Emerton 1992, who also suggests rendering v. i 'a song about my friend'), v. 2,'wild grapes'. Literally'stinkers'! v. 4 at first looks like the defence to the lawsuit. It takes the form of two questions. The first simply invites a sympathetic answer; the second expresses bewilderment at the unforeseen and unwanted harvest. But then we realize that it is not really a defence at all, for the T' of this verse continues to speak in v. 5, now passing judgement. In v. 7 'house of Israel' and 'people of Judah' are treated as synonymous. This may be a pointer to a late date for the final form of this parable, when Israel referred to the whole religious community, not simply the northern kingdom. The passage closes with the kind of wordplay that defies acceptable rendering in English. God looked for mispat (justice) but found mispdh (bloodshed), for sedaqd (righteousness) but found safaqd (a cry). The parable, having begun with the prophet himself as speaker, ends with proclamation from YHWH.
(5:18—25) The series of woes continues, rounded off with a threat. The basic charge is that those condemned are imposing their own standards of right and wrong (v. 20), corrupting the legal structure (v. 23), and confident that God is either ignorant of or uninterested in their behaviour (v. 19). In the light of these sweeping condemnations the charge of drunkenness (v. 22) seems a relatively trifling matter. It is disputed whether the references to wisdom in v. 21 imply any specific link with a wisdom movement in Israel, as proposed by McKane (1965: 65-7). Speculation about Isaiah himself having once been a member of such a wisdom movement is probably best avoided (Whybray 1974); to be 'wise in one's own eyes' means that one is conceited or a fool, and has nothing to do with membership of a wisdom group. All we can say with fair confidence is that these passages are aimed against the policy-makers who were convinced, as is not unknown with politicians, that they were the special recipients of wisdom. By contrast, as the threat in v. 24 makes clear, the Isaiah tradition regards them as having rejected the torn
(5:8) A new section begins here; this is not made very clear in many editions of NRSV. We have a series of woes, introduced by the word hoy (cf 1:4). For a reason which is not clear NRSV here translates this word with the very neutral 'Ah', whereas in a similar series in Amos 'Alas' is used. Whether the origin be in a mourning-cry or in some form of cultic usage its impact is powerful. Sometimes the punishment is implicit in the woe itself, sometimes a threat is added, introduced by the word 'therefore'. There is a link between the series of woes here and that which follows in 9:8-10:4, best illustrated by the common refrain found in 5:25 and several times in the later passage. This initial verse illustrates a common characteristic of this section; it is complete in itself, but has probably been elaborated in the course of transmission to emphasize the
443 ISAIAH
are shown in this chapter to have been inevitable, having already been spelt out in his very call. The point is clearly put by Kaiser (1983: 115): 'The first-person account serves to transpose the narrative fictitiously into the time of Isaiah, using his ministry to reflect the fact that Yahweh was also present beforehand in the history of disaster... and therefore to make clear and credible his abiding power over the future of this people.'
(instruction) of the Lord. This whole section brings out very clearly the tension between those who rely upon human political skills and those who seek a superior religious authority.
v. 25 provides a second threat, and here we are confronted with a methodological problem. Those who have attempted to trace the redactional process underlying the book have noted the identity of the last part of this verse ('For all this his anger...') with the conclusion of each section of 9:8-10:4, and have concluded that some displacement, deliberate or accidental, has led to this arrangement (NEB placed 5:24—5 after 10:4 but REB reverts to the order of MT). Some scholars (Clements igSoa: 66) have regarded the displacement as intentional, whereas older commentators supposed an accidental dislocation. But as we saw in the introduction there is a strong case for the view that it is the book of Isaiah as it has been handed down to us that is the subject of attention, and that we should not attempt rearrangement to conform with an original authorial or redactional intention which is no longer accessible to us. As it stands, therefore, this warning of God's continuing anger forms an important frame to the passages dealing with the hope of a glorious royal figure who features in chs. 7—9. The destruction envisaged here is cosmic in scope.
The other question often asked concerning this vision, whether or not it should be regarded as inaugurating Isaiah's ministry, loses much of its force if the whole passage is seen as a literary device. It is nevertheless worth bearing in mind that this account does bear striking similarities in its overall shape with those in Jer i and Ezek i. In each case a specific date is given. There follows an account of the divine presence with the prophet, a theophany. This leads the prophet to acknowledge his unworthiness, from which he is purified and then given a commission. The accounts end with an indication of the content of the message that the prophet is to deliver. There are minor differences of order and of degree of elaboration, but the similarities are so great as to raise the possibility that the accounts are based on someknown form of commissioning. (6:1) 'In the year that king Uzziah died'. The year of death of Uzziah (known also as Azariah) is unknown, but a date around 740 BCE is likely. More striking is the manner of describing the year. Why is the accession of the new king not mentioned? It is possible that this is a way of dismissing Ahaz, who for the Isaiah tradition, as for the Chronicler, embodies all that could go wrong with the Davidic dynasty. In any case, as the following words make clear, it is the Lord himself who is the real king. He wears a sul, a robe elsewhere associated with the priestly garments (Ex 28:33—4). (6:2) There have been many conjectures concerning the seraphim, who are here pictured as messengers in the divine council. The root s-r-p might make it appropriate to think of them as 'burning ones'. Alternatively they have been likened to snakes; but when one notes that they had wings and genitalia (here euphemistically 'feet'), could call out, and could carry things the similarities diminish. There are no real biblical parallels; the same root is used in Isaiah at 14:29 and 30:6, but these links do not seem to shed much light on this passage. With visionary language of this kind, attempts at precise description, or at finding a specific cultic context, are likely to be misguided. (6:3) This is the only direct example in the HB of the Trisagion, the threefold cry of'Holy'. It has, of course, been taken up in almost all Christian eucharistic liturgies as the Sanctus. One of the nearest parallels to it in the HB is Ps 99:3, 5 with its cry of'Holy is he!' There (v. i) cherubim rather than seraphim were the divine attendants. We are not sure of the difference. God is here described as 'the LORD of Hosts'; it can be taken in this context simply as a divine title, whether its origin is to be sought among the hosts of heaven or in some kind of military usage. It is striking as the only context in which the divine name is used in a genitival ('YHWH of...') relation with another noun; the HB was very dismissive of the Baals of this place and that.
(5:26—30) The approach of an oppressing army is vividly portrayed, but perhaps the most important point comes at the outset: this oppressor has been summoned by God himself, in terms of signalling to the nations, a metaphor which will be used again in 11:12 and 49:22. (The Heb. here has 'nations', though NRSV has changed it to the singular 'nation', without note, in view of the context.) Here it connotes threat; in the later passages the signal will herald deliverance. What follows is a conventional description of an army on the march, and it would be unwise to limit its applicability to the Assyrians or any other enemy force. Its universal reference is shown most clearly at v. 30, where the devastation is directly linked back to the 'on that day' language of ch. 2 and elsewhere.
(Ch. 6) With this chapter, one of the best-known in the whole book, acute differences of interpretation arise. Clements summarized a widely held view of the whole of the following section when he wrote, 'Undoubtedly we have in 6:1—8:18 a memoir written by the prophet himself (Clements 19800: 70). On this view ch. 6 is autobiographical: the prophet's own account of his calling, precisely dated and vividly set out in the context of the worship of the Jerusalem temple. More recently, however, a number of scholars have been much more cautious. They note the increasing tendency within the prophetic tradition to personalize the experience of individuals by attributing first-person accounts to them, and see this as idealizing by a later generation rather than a reliable guide to personal experience. (Such an approach is characteristic of the work of R. P. Carroll on Jeremiah; it has not yet been applied in so systematic a way to Isaiah, but the principles laid down are very similar, and were indeed outlined by Carroll himself in an earlier work. See Carroll (1979) for basic discussion.) It may be appropriate to see in this chapter part of the 'presentation of a prophet' (Ackroyd 1987) rather than an item from an autobiography. In particular the disasters that the community had experienced since the time of Isaiah himself
'The whole earth is full of his glory': is this a claim to universalism, or would 'land' be a better translation than
ISAIAH 444
ficiality). The problem is not just a modern one, for the last part of the verse is omitted by the ancient Greek translation, the Septuagint, and interpreters through the ages, including modern translations, have differed sharply in their understanding. (NEB bracketed part of the verse and omitted the last phrase entirely.) In the first part of the verse it seems as if the disaster outlined in the preceding verses is intensified: even if a tenth survived they would be subject to further destruction. The last phrase introduces a note of hope for the 'holy seed'. Though no doubt a later addition this chimes in well with the hopefulness of the final form of the book as a whole.
'earth'? Whatever the original intention, the larger claim soon came to be established. Kabod (glory) is also a significant word, being closely associated with the Jerusalem temple and its worship: 'in his temple all say "Glory"' (Ps 29:9; cf. 72:19). (6:4-7) v4> me language here is very characteristic of the theophany, the manifestation of the divine presence to humanity: the shaking, the smoke, v. 5, appropriate to the theophany, too, is the human response, expressing fear and inadequacy in the divine presence: cf. Moses in Ex 3:33, Samson's parents in Judg 13. Both points are brought out in 'my eyes have seen the king': human limitations in the presence of the divine, but also fear, since to be brought into the presence of any king might be a situation of danger. The literary input becomes clear with the reference to 'a people of unclean lips'. The prophet himself will have his uncleanness purged, but in this vision at least there is no such reprieve for the people. It needs the whole book, and the promise of the end of punishment in ch. 40 in particular, to bring about any such remission, w. 6—7, there follows the rite of purification. Though the details of the language and actions described are quite different, there are similarities here with the accounts of the call of Jeremiah and of Ezekiel. No particular theory of atonement for sin is here implied; it is the fact of such cleansing that is all-important. (6:8-10) Here we see a difference from Jeremiah and Ezekiel; they express reluctance, whereas here the prophet is pictured as actively volunteering. There is an obvious link with another passage describing the divine council, i Kings 22 with its volunteering spirit, and this similarity extends to the content of the message. In the i Kings passage the recipients are misled because the spirit is lying; here again the messenger is to prevent the people from receiving the true import of the message. If this passage were autobiographical we should have to suppose that the prophet was speaking with heavy irony; much more likely these are the reflections of a later editor, seeking to find a possible explanation for an otherwise incomprehensible series of events leading to the exile and accompanying disasters. So v. 10 emphasizes that every possible way by which 'this people' (here, as often, used in a dismissive way) could have grasped the message has been blocked. There was then no way in which disaster could be avoided. But that is, of course, not the end of the story; in 43:8 and elsewhere in the latter part of the book we shall hear of a glorious future for this people who are so blind and deaf.
(7:1-9) The difference between commentators, already noted at the beginning ofch. 6, continues here. Whereas this narrative account has traditionally been seen as part of the Isaiah
Denkschrift, or memorial, deriving substantially from the prophet himself, others have seen here a late narrative, dependent on 2 Kings for its outline, and part of an Isaiah 'legend' found also in chs. 20; 36—9. Its particular concern is to show Ahaz as an unworthy member of the Davidic line in sharp contrast to his much more worthy son and successor Hezekiah.
v. i, the reference to the attack by foreign kings on Jerusalem is based on 2 Kings 16:5; the episode is often referred to as the 'Syro-Ephraimite war'. It is often supposed that the objective of the two kings was to draw Judah into a coalition which might resist the Assyrian threat, but this remains speculative—there is little direct evidence in support of this interpretation (Tomes 1993). In the last phrase the Hebrew actually says 'he [i.e. presumably Ahaz] could not fight for it', which might imply that Jerusalem had been captured, but the Dead Sea scrolls Isaiah and most of the versions read 'they could not fight against it', bringing out the idea that Jerusalem was inviolable, v. 2, there are difficulties in translation also with this verse. 'Allied itself with' is not at all the normal meaning of Hebrew nahd (guide), and most translations have been shaped by their general sense of the overall context. There is actually no reference to Ahaz in this verse; it is the 'house of David' whose heart shook, v. 3, 'Shear-jashub' means 'a remnant shall return', an expression found also in 10:21. The name is significant as showing that there will be those who survive the inevitable disaster. It is striking that the encounter with Ahaz takes place at exactly the same spot as that with Hezekiah in 36:2. While it is obviously possible that this was a recognized place for diplomatic business to be carried out, it seems much more likely that the link was a literary one, aimed at bringing out the contrast in subsequent behaviour between Ahaz and Hezekiah.
(6:11—12) To use a further question is a frequent stylistic device (cf. Moses in Ex 3), here used less as a request for information than as a way of stressing the totality of the inevitable disaster. The form of the question, 'how long', reminds us of the lament Psalms (e.g. Ps 79:5), as the community begins to realize the full impact of the disaster. The reference to exile, implicit in what has preceded, becomes explicit with v. 12. As in 2 Chr 36 the exile is here pictured as total, with 'emptiness in the midst of the land'. This is a poetic way of expressing the seriousness of what occurred rather than a precise statement of prosaic fact. (6:13) This verse presents a major textual problem which cannot be dealt with in detail here (see Emerton 1982 for a 34-page study of this one verse which apologizes for its super-
w. 4-6, the message 'be quiet, do not fear' in many ways encapsulates the Isaianic message; cf. 30:15, where the same word for 'quietness' is used. It is making religious claims, as against the 'evil plotting' of the community's enemies. Pekah is referred to dismissively as 'the son of Remaliah' and not given his own name: perhaps a sign of southern hostility to northern pretensions. We know nothing for certain of'the son of Tabeel', but it is at least possible that he was a member of the Tobiad family, referred to in various post-exilic texts (cf. Neh 2:10) and known as rivals ofthe Jerusalem establishment (Mazar 1957). The original form of this pretender's name is
445 ISAIAH
that is quite apart from the division between conservative and critical scholars which is here very deep-seated.)
uncertain (perhaps Tab-el, 'God is good'), but it is—surely deliberately?—misspelt in the MTto mean 'son of a no-good'.
If the passage is seen as a contemporary memoir, then it would most naturally refer to a young woman who was pregnant at the time it was uttered, and this in effect means the wife of either the prophet (so Clements 19800) or the king, with the possibility that Hezekiah, as the child to be born, is being alluded to. If, as is suggested here, the passage originates from a later period, then precise reference to a particular young woman is not required, and it may be better to translate 'a young woman' with the sense of 'any young woman'. The word 'alma may well have reference to the social status of the woman referred to, but it does not imply virginity. The Greek translation of Isaiah, for reasons which are still unknown, here used the word parthenos, which does mean 'a virgin', and it was that tradition which was followed by Mt 1:23, and has been of enormous importance in the Christian interpretative tradition; its use in countless Christmas services still attests its evocative power. If historical-critical criteria are to be paramount this should be regarded as a mis-interpretation; if a reader-response approach is accepted it is presumably a perfectly proper way to read the text.
w. 7—9, the poetic oracle in v. 7 is so generally worded as to be applicable to a variety of situations, and the particular point of the passages naming the 'head' of the different countries is not clear, though it is surely derogatory. Inserted in the middle is what is usually taken to be a prose gloss, alluding to an event which took place 65 years after the Syro-Ephraimite war. Possibly the reference is to the campaigns in Palestine of Esar-haddon of Assyria c.66g BCE (cf Ezra 4:2). An alternative understanding of this and other passages that specify a period of time for their fulfilment (e.g. 7:16; 8:4) is to note their similarity with the Mesopotamian divinatory texts known as adannus. These laid down a period of time during which the 'prophecy' could be regarded as valid (Cryer 1994: 293).
The obscurities of the first part of these verses suddenly clear away with the categorical statement in v. 9. The Hebrew is even more dramatic than an English translation can be, with a wordplay which NRSV does hint at. The verb (the same in each clause) translated 'stand firm' and 'stand at all' is that from which the word 'Amen' derives: Tf you will not be firm, you will not be confirmed.' The sentence is taken up by the Chronicler and made the basis for a sermon (2 Chr 20:20).
w. 15—17, 'curds and honey' could imply a desperate search for food in a devastated land, but they could be royal food (as is perhaps better implied by the 'butter and honey' of AV) (Ringgren 1956: 27 for the idea of this as food of the gods in Babylonian texts), v. 16 is difficult, and it looks as if in part at least an addition has been made to provide an explicit link with the Syro-Ephraimite conflict. There is no obvious sense in which the two kings could be said to have 'a' land. In v. 17, too, there has been elaboration, particularly in the abrupt reference to the king of Assyria. We can see in these verses a tension between a historicizing approach, wishing to give the section a specific rooting in the events of the eighth century, and a thematic understanding more concerned with the hope for the future of the community. (7:18-25) These four short oracles bring back the 'in that day' theme, but our approach to it is inevitably affected by the context. The 'day' is no longer simply the unpredictable 'day of the LORD' of ch. 2. Now the understanding is shaped by, on the one hand, the threat posed by Assyria and other foreign enemies, and on the other by the hopes expressed through the birth of the child. But the predominant note is one of threat. v. 18 envisages threats from both Assyria and Egypt—the latter, often a hoped-for ally, is unexpected in the context. The verse should be read in the light of the much more optimistic picture in 19:23—5. It has been suggested (Matthews and Benjamin 1993: 104) that the reference to shaving the 'hair of the feet' (i.e. genitalia) (v. 20) is a euphemism for castration. There is irony in the suggestion that Assyria, traditionally hired as Ahaz's protector (2 Kings 16:7) should treat its dependant thus. w. 21—2 offer the possibility of reading either a threat or a promise; 'curds and honey' reflects back to the similar ambiguity of v. 15, and the remnant theme could be either hopeful or threatening. But there is no ambiguity in w. 23—5: general dereliction is inevitable. We are reminded of the 'briers and thorns' of 5:6, and recognize that the passage offers its fullest sense in the context of the devastation of the exile.
(7:10—17) Here we have a new section in which Isaiah is not mentioned by name at all. NRSV refers to him at v. 13, but as the margin makes clear he is not named in the Hebrew text; the 'he' of that verse is YHWH. The whole of this section, together with w. 18—25, is a reflection on a common theme rather than a continuous narrative, v. n, if a link with w. 1-9 is intended the sign envisaged will have been something to show the discomfiture of the two kings. The biblical use of 'signs' is a complex one: they are sometimes regarded as an important way of showing the divine intention, whereas at other times (not least in the NT) they are regarded with suspicion (Mt 12:39!). Zechariah asks for a sign (Lk i) and is struck dumb for it. v. 12, Ahaz's answer here appears to be wholly admirable; one might expect that Hezekiah would be condemned for asking for a sign (38:22) yet his action is apparently commendable. Quasi-psychological explanations claiming that Ahaz had the wrong mental attitude are not based on anything in the text. The whole episode is extremely artificial in historical terms. It is, as it were, pre-determined that Ahaz's attitude will be wrong.
w. 13—140, the strongly negative wording in this section prepares us for as strongly threatening a sign: the condemnation of the 'house of David' (cf. v. 2); the 'wearying' of God, with the implication that the divine patience will soon run out; the 'therefore', often used to introduce a threat. All these features suggest that a negative outcome will follow, v. 14/7, in line with what has just been said some scholars have attempted to construe the original meaning of the sign in negative terms. The name Immanuel could be translated 'May God be with us', a prayer for deliverance; and the food ('curds and honey') be taken to imply all that was available in a devastated land. Overwhelmingly, however, the interpretative tradition has taken this sign as one of promise and hope for the future, and it is that tradition that will be followed here.
(Werlitz 1992: 241, lists 29 different issues which have divided critical scholars in their interpretation of this verse, and
ISAIAH 446
material. In the context of claims to political solutions to the community's problems the Isaiah tradition is maintaining that the prophetic testimony and teaching (torn) will in God's good time be seen as offering the true solution to problems, even if it is necessary to wait for and hope in the Lord, whose presence seems to be hidden. This theme of the hiddenness of God as compatible with saving power will be taken further at 45:15, but remains a problem for the faithful community throughout the book (64:5). Meanwhile, both the prophet himself and the children who have been referred to (Shearjashub; Maher-shalal-hash-baz; perhaps also Immanuel) are clear signs that God's presence remains in Jerusalem. This fairly standard religious message maybe less exciting than the elaborate compositional theories, but seems better to express what is actually said. It also fits the context of the following verses better; there is no need to take 8:18 as a major closure. (8:19-22) This passage serves as a kind of appendix to the main unit just completed, expressing in new language the familiar Isaianic theme of the right resources to use to ensure God's favour. Ruled out here is any kind of necromancy, magical practices which claimed that the dead could somehow give them solutions to the uncertainties of life. The last part of v. 19 can be seen as a continuing search by the people for answers by turning to false gods, or it may be part of the answer, in which case we should read 'God' for 'gods'. However that may be it is clear that the answer is found in v. 21: it is in the tora and the instruction of the prophetic tradition (cf. v. 16) that God's will can be found. An awkward transition leads into a warning: nowhere else can deliverance be found. The climax of the threat, in v. 22/7, is very similar to that already expressed in 5:30. (9:1) is 8:23 in the Hebrew; the natural division comes within this verse. Its first part (down to 'anguish') relates to the threat that has preceded. But the difficulty with this verse is in what follows. Some contrast is clearly implied between 'former' and 'latter' time. One understanding that has been very influential (Alt 1953) is that this was an introduction to the poetry that follows. Where once Zebulun and Naphtali, in the north of Israel, had been oppressed, soon there would be a glorious deliverance. Whether so precise a historical reconstruction is feasible must remain doubtful (Kaiser 1983). Part of the problem arises from the fact that the two verbs ('brought into contempt', 'will make glorious') could be understood quite differently, because the basic meaning of the second verb (k-bd) is to 'make heavy', and so it would be possible to read this verse as saying that the burden already imposed on the far north will become even heavier as it spreads south, into the 'way of the Sea', Transjordan, and Galilee. These names may be those of Assyrian provincial districts. If that reading is right the transformation from threat to glorious promise does not begin until v. 2.
(8:1-4) We revert here to the first-person material, found in ch. 6 but not in 7. The general sense of the requirement here is clear, though the detail is obscure. The expression translated 'in common characters' is literally 'with the pen of a man' (thus AV, RV). It may imply ordinary human writing, or a very slight emendation would give 'unerasable writing' (DCH 344). Of the two cited as witnesses Uriah is mentioned also in 2 Kings 16:10, Zechariah is more confusing. The same parentage is attributed to the prophet Zechariah (1:1, 7) and to the Zechariah referred to in the NT as an innocent martyr