Part 46
(Schoors 1973). It has been widely supposed that there must be a specific reference to an individual in the 'victor from the east', and opinion has been divided between the traditional interpretation, which from the Targum onwards has understood this of Abraham, and the usual modern scholarly view, which sees here an implicit reference to Cyrus, who will later be mentioned by name (Jones 1971 sets out some of the
467 ISAIAH
w. 8—9, Jacob/Israel (there seems to be no significance in the inversion in order of the two terms) has become a 'worm' and an 'insect'. The latter description is based on an emendation (cf RSV 'men of Israel') but is likely to be original—it may well have been too offensive for later copiers, because the Akkadian word on which the emendation is based means 'a louse'. God is again described as 'the Holy One of Israel', but a new description is also applied: Redeemer, go'el. In modern usage this word has a predominantly religious sense, but in ancient Israel it was used of a kinsman who owed duty to relatives who through bereavement or other circumstances needed help. This is a strong metaphor to use of God, and bears comparison with the picture of God as mother which we also find in these chapters. The rather confused figurative language of w. 15-16 stresses that Israel has itself an important part to play in the carrying out of God's purposes. The analogy with 'chaff (mds) reminds us of 29:5.
strengths and weaknesses of each approach). But there is an underlying issue which has been less often addressed: how far is it proper to see specific reference to particular individuals and events in poetry of this kind? In the most general terms it is from the east (as in this verse) and the north (so v. 25) that the threats to Israel's safety emerged. What underlies this poem is the conviction that those areas of greatest danger were also those of great promise: YHWH 's power was at work.
NRSV 'who has roused a victor' is rather free, and misses the point that the word translated 'victor' is actually sedeq, a frequent Isaianic word which is usually better understood as 'righteousness' or the like. Though 'victory' (so RSV) is a possible translation, the connotations are not exclusively military, v. 4 emphasizes that YHWH has been active since the very beginning, a clear allusion to his creative role. The following phrase can be literally translated 'and with the last I am he'. T am he' is a designation of YHWH, which may play on the form of his name and is found several times in these chapters. We are reminded that this is poetry rather than a transcript of an actual trial by the fact that the coastlands, summoned as witnesses in v. i, are now referred to in the third person, w. 5—7 describe one—ineffectual—human alternative to the claims made by YHWH. They suppose wrongly that diligence in the making of idols may bring them a reward.
(41:17—20) But whatever part Israel had to play, the decisive acts of deliverance were those of YHWH himself. As in the story of the wandering through the wilderness in Exodus and Numbers it is YHWH himself who will supply water and make the land fruitful. The oracle is a further elaboration of the journey on which YHWH was to lead his people (40:3—5), and the consequence would be that an even wider audience ('all', v. 20) would see YHWH's mighty acts. (41:21-4) We return to the legal language which has pervaded this chapter. The challenge is now put to other gods and their adherents in a way which will be of considerable importance for the understanding of these chapters and of the book of Isaiah as a whole. The gods are challenged to produce evidence of their capacity to predict the future or explain the past, indeed to do anything at all. It soon becomes clear that this is not a real trial; no opportunity is given for the other side to offer a defence. The poem ends with a dismissive condemnation, not only of the gods themselves but even more basically of those who trust in them.
(41:8—13) These verses serve as a contrast to what has preceded, but they also introduce a new theme which will be of great importance. The idea of a 'servant' played a small part in the earlier chapters, being used as a designation of the unworthy Eliakim in 22:20 and of the figure of David in 37:35, but it now comes to the fore as a description of major significance, the noun being used more than 20 times in chs. 40-55. Its first usage is obviously important in establishing the sense in which we are to understand it, and here it is clear that the community of Israel/Jacob is so described. We shall need to consider later, especially when the suffering of the servant is described, whether all the occurrences of the term can be so understood, but in Jewish tradition this interpretation has been the dominant one. In the present context the people are reminded that, just as YHWH has control over enemy forces from the east and north, so in the past he has brought them from distant lands.
(41:25—9) Now the contrasting position is set out: the claim made by YHWH of the effectiveness of his action. He has the capacity to summon conquerors from both north and east ('from the rising of the sun'). 'He was summoned by name' (NRSV) follows the Dead Sea scroll text, where RSV, following MT, had 'he shall call on my name'. NRSV is to be preferred; the idea of YHWH personally summoning those whom he wishes to do his will is characteristic of Isaiah. By contrast with the so-called gods, YHWH has made his purpose clear 'from the beginning' and 'beforehand'. In their present context it seems natural to read these words as referring to the earlier part of Isaiah, which has spread out YHWH's purpose in one great panorama. The theme of the 'herald of good tidings', already hinted at in 40:1-2, will be developed more explicitly in 52:7-10. The section ends with further polemic against the uselessness of other gods. This is expressed so frequently and with such vehemence in these chapters that the threat they presented must have seemed to be a real one. (42:1-4) These verses have attracted much attention since their isolation by Duhm, more than a century ago, as one of four distinct poems known as Servant Songs. (The others are 49:1—6; 50:4—9; 52:13—53:12.) Duhm held that these poems make specific reference to a suffering individual and originate
They are bidden not to fear. This is the same expression as was used to Ahaz (7:4) and Hezekiah (37:6); it is as if the community is here addressed in the same way as kings had been, offering them assurance, setting out the reasons why their confidence is warranted, and giving them orders for their future behaviour (Conrad 1985: 104-5). Just as YHWH has called other kings from earth's farthest corners, so he has summoned his own worshippers as if they too should enjoy royal status. 'Victorious' again conceals a reference to sedeq, as in v. 2—an important reminder that victory must be accomplished by the proper ordering of the conquered world. The reference to those who 'contend with' and 'war against' the people is a further warning against interpreting the beginning of this chapter too specifically of Cyrus, who came to be perceived as a support for Israel.
(41:14-16) Another 'do not fear' oracle follows, but with an important difference in the way that it describes the community. By contrast with the exalted relation to God set out in
ISAIAH 468
therefore be right to see the sense here as a reminder of the obligation laid upon Israel as God's servant-community (so Whybray 1975: 74-5).
from an author different from the Deutero-Isaiah of chs. 4055. His theory has generated a vast literature; North (1948) and Rowley (1952) offer surveys of interpretation up to the mid-century, and the spate has shown little sign of abating since. (Whybray (1983: 68-78 and bibliog.), offers a briefer outline of later views.) Several recent scholars (e.g. Mettinger 1983 and Barstad 1994) have, however, questioned the notion of a distinct collection of Servant Songs. The approach we have tried to follow here renders the notion of a distinct body of Servant Songs problematic on two accounts. First, it has not seemed possible to be specific about authorship of individual sections within the whole poetic library which we call the book of Isaiah. Secondly, the idea of particular poetic sections referring to specific individuals, in principle identifiable, has seemed a very doubtful one. Better, surely, to try to understand this poem, like the others, in the context in which we find it. If that be accepted, we shall immediately think of the servant as the community (cf 41:8), an assumption that goes back at least as far as LXX which has 'my servant Jacob... my chosen one Israel'. A further link with the earlier passage is provided by the use of the verb tamak, 'uphold', both in 41:10 and in 42:1. The community is here described in royal terms. The 'servant of YHWH' is an appropriate description for the king himself (e.g. Ps 89:3). As with the hoped-for king in ch. n the spirit of God is upon the servant; as in both chs. 9 and n the servant's task is to 'bring forth justice to the nations'. This conviction that the king would exercise world-wide justice is found also in the Psalms (e.g. 72); it would be unwise to argue from this, as is sometimes done, to a new understanding of universalism in these chapters. The importance of justice is underlined by the threefold repetition of mispat in the four verses. Not only is it an important part of the royal role, it also is significant in the light of the 'trial' speeches which have preceded this poem. Less obvious is the meaning of w. 2 and 4; some form of ritual humiliation undergone by the king has been suggested, but there is no independent support that such a ritual was ever practised. It has been linked with the theme of suffering and this has led to the servant of these poems being described as 'the suffering servant', but such an association is at best only very indirect.
The phrase 'a light to the nations' has powerful resonances in the Christian tradition, not least from its liturgical use in the Nunc Dimittis, the evening canticle based on Lk 2:32. But it is unlikely that any 'missionary' requirement is here being laid upon the servant. Rather, the confident expectation is that the nations at large will come to see the work that YHWH has wrought on behalf of his own people, and realize thereby the contrast between their own ineffective gods and the capacity of YHWH. Whereas in 14:17 the now impotent earthly ruler had tried to prevent his prisoners from gaining their freedom, here prisoners will be released from captivity. That contrast may be implicit in the 'former things'/'new things' comparison in v. 9. (42:10-13) What follows is a psalm, bearing striking similarities to the Psalms in praise of YHWH as king found in Ps 93; 96—9. We are reminded once again of the close links between the poetry of this collection and what is known of the liturgical tradition of Jerusalem expressed in the Psalms. After an opening identical with Ps 96:1 and 98:1, NRSV follows a very widely favoured emendation to 'let the sea roar', a phrase again found in those Psalms, rather than the Hebrew 'those who go down to the sea', which, though found in Ps 107:23, does not give good sense here. The naming of geographical areas which follows has no precise Psalm parallel, though the theme of universal praise is a common one there. The poem ends with the assertion, again common in the Psalms, of the warlike character of YHWH. The poets of the Hebrew Bible found no difficulty in expressing their belief in this aggressive manner. (42:14-17) The imagery of a woman about to give birth is frequent in the HB, but it usually signifies mortal fear. It is used here uniquely to describe the feelings of YHWH, and its association with the saving acts described in the following verses is a vivid simile. (Pfisterer Darr 1994: 104 argues that w. 10-17 should be taken as one unit, which would juxtapose the themes of YHWH as warrior and as travailing mother even more powerfully.) Here again a figure of speech previously used in the oracle against Babylon is now reused and reapplied in a remarkable way.
(42:5—9) The next oracle is introduced by what is often described as the 'messenger formula', 'Thus says God, the LORD'. In some prophetic collections this leads directly into a—usually very harsh—message. Here by contrast the whole of v. 5 is given over to identifying the source of the message, and when the message itself does emerge it is largely in the form of divine self-praise. It is a literary device of which we shall see many examples in these chapters. God is the universal creator, and the breath and spirit with which the servant-community was endowed come from him. w. 6-7 address the servant once more, first as God's people, then 'as a covenant to the people' (NRSV translation, which is accompanied by the footnote, 'Meaning of Hebrew uncertain'). The words are familiar enough; the uncertainty arises as to their precise force. One possible solution lies in the fact that the Hebrew word berit does not always have the bilateral force associated with 'covenant'. It may sometimes denote an obligation laid upon an individual or a community. It may
The poem goes on to spell out God's saving acts in a way that at first seems negative ('lay waste', 'dry up') but is rapidly transformed into a powerful picture of transformation in language filled with imagery from the description of the Exodus. All this is to be done for YHWH's own people; the poem ends with a renewed warning against those who continue to put their trust in useless human-made images. (42:18-25) The inherent ambiguity of the servant's status is brought out here. We know from 6:10 and later allusions that those who are deaf and blind are the community themselves, imprisoned in their own obstinacy by divine decree. The servant is to be the means of deliverance from these afflictions (cf. v. 7), yet the servant is also the community itself—stricken with blindness and deafness. (In v. 19 the threefold repetition of'blind' is unexpected, and the word translated 'my dedicated one' is ofuncertain meaning—Westermann 1969: 108 leaves it untranslated—but the general sense is clear.)
469 ISAIAH
earlier (2:16; 23:1). It certainly offers a more natural connection to the following passage stressing the control of YHWH over the sea and the mighty waters. The command not to remember the former things is unexpected, since elsewhere that is precisely what the hearers of these oracles are commanded to do. One can only assume that the point is that former things—whether perceived as the earlier oracles in Isaiah or past deeds of history—will pale into insignificance before 'the new thing' that can be expected in the future. That is expressed once again, as in 40:3—4, in terms of'a way in the wilderness'. In all these references there may be an allusion back to the wilderness wandering described in Exodus and Numbers, but they go beyond that; the wilderness is chaos, uncreation, all that is basically most resistant to YHWH's saving power. (43:22-4) An unexpected development follows. There have been many passages in which the community was described as blind and deaf, and ultimately that was due to their failure (6:9—10). But for many chapters there have been no charges against the community for their limitations. Even more surprising is the nature of the accusation now made. Whereas earlier in Isaiah (1:10—17) misplaced enthusiasm for worship had been condemned in terms similar to that of the other prophetic collections (Am 5:18-24; Hos 6:6; Mic 6:6-8), here it is failure to participate in worship that is condemned. One explanation (Whybray 1975) is to stress the word 'me' (repeated 8 times in 3 verses) and to suppose that the passage is concerned with the worship of other gods. In any case this passage should serve as a warning against the supposition that chs. 40—55 have a purely Babylonian setting; presumably there would have been no opportunity there for worship of the kind whose absence is here deplored. (43:25-8) These verses make it clear that the unexpected condemnation of Israel is to be seen in the context of the trial, no doubt in order to stress that the community must not regard itself as free from blame. Now an assurance is given that past sins will not be held against the people, despite their constant proclivity to sin. The 'first ancestor' may be Jacob, also called 'Israel' and thus in a real sense the founder of the people. If, as some have supposed, this is a reference to Adam in the Garden of Eden it would be a rare example of such an allusion in the Hebrew Bible. But it is not clear who are the recipients of the condemnation here; NRSV 'interpreters' might refer to those responsible for the tora (cf. 8:20), or if RSV 'mediators' is preferred the reference might be to prophets who had failed to pass on YHWH's words with integrity. Again something more than ordinary priests seems to be implied by 'princes of the sanctuary', but the detailed nuances escape us. (44:1-5) Though we have expressed doubts about the adequacy of the evidence to identify a prophet active among the exiled Jews of sixth-century Babylon ('Deutero-Isaiah') it seems very likely that the same poet was responsible for most of the material at least in chs. 40-5. The same themes are repeated, the same literary style used. Yet again in these verses, after an introductory summons to the servant Jacob to 'Hear', we find the assertion of the creative power of YHWH and another oracle of salvation characterized by 'Do not fear'. Again the theme which illustrates this care of YHWH for his
The latter part of the poem addresses these inconsistencies. The unhappy fate to which the community had been reduced is spelt out, and it is made clear that this was all part of the divine purpose—a theme which runs right through Isaiah, and indeed through much of the HB. God's anger had been vented against his people, but they had failed to grasp the true meaning of their plight. The shift from first to third person is in places confusing, and it is not always immediately clear to whom each repetition of'him' refers, but what has been said above seems to reflect the main thrust of the passage.
(43:1—7) An oracle of salvation follows, with the elaborate structure characteristic of these chapters. (The repetition of 'Do not fear' in w. i and 5 has led some to suppose that two originally separate oracles have been joined here, but we may properly take it as one passage, with the repetition designed to emphasize the message.) The message is a very straightforward one of reassurance. There is no mention of the wrongdoing of the community, or of divine punishment. Instead YHWH is completely in charge. He had created them; he had made them part of his family (the root g-' 4, as we have already seen (ISA 41:14-16) has strong family implications); in both past experience and future hope he was active in delivering them from every kind of danger. There have been a few comparable passages earlier in the book (11:11—16 is one such, Williamson 1994: 126-8), but the unconditional confidence of this passage is striking. The references to Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba in v. 3 have been understood as allusions to the expected conquest of those lands by the Persians, but it seems more likely that they function to express distant, alien territory. Together with the four compass-points in w. 5-6 they show the totality of YHWH's expected triumph.
(43:8—13) We return to the language of a trial with the demand for witnesses. As in 42:18 Israel itself is blind and deaf, yet it retains the capacity to bear witness to YHWH's acts on its behalf. Indeed, all the nations can offer no different witness. This concern for reliable witnesses reminds us of 8:2, and points to the internal consistency of the very diverse elements which make up Isaiah (Clements 1985: 107). Thus in these verses the three themes of the blind and deaf, the community as servant, and the need for witnesses are all interwoven, with the purpose of bringing out yet another assertion of the incomparability of YHWH. Again we may feel that the perceived need for so constantly reiterating this theme may suggest that there were many who questioned it. In particular, the reference to 'no strange god' in v. 12 may suggest that there were or had been those within the community itself who upheld the claims of gods other than YHWH.
(43:14—21) The reference of chs. 40—55 to a group exiled to Babylon has been very widely assumed, but this is the first explicit reference to Babylon in these chapters. In fact Babylon was last mentioned at ch. 39, and this passage may be taken as an indication that the triumph of the Babylonians there implied will not be a lasting one. The reference to 'lamentation' in NRSV is a speculative emendation of the text, said in the footnote to be uncertain. The Hebrew text and older translations have a reference to ships ('in ships is their rejoicing', RV); it may be the inappropriateness of this to Babylon that has led to the emendation. Perhaps it is not too fanciful here to see a link with the condemnation of false trust in ships found
ISAIAH 47°
offence would be caused, but these verses seem to have been accepted without question in both the Jewish and the Christian tradition. The last three verses (18—20) sum up the points already made, emphasizing the folly of those who suppose that objects made by human hands can have saving power.
people is the transformation of the wilderness. The metaphor is then modified, so that the people themselves are likened to a wilderness which may look forward to renewed prosperity. Jeshurun is a rare synonym for Israel, found elsewhere in the HB only in Deut 32 and 33. Unusually, v. 5 appears to envisage those not of Israelite origin claiming to join the community of Israel, and this is likely to be what underlies the reference to writing on the hand. Though it would give a misleading impression to describe these chapters or any other part of the HB as missionary-minded, there are occasional references to foreigners being so impressed by YHWH's work for his own people that they wish to join them (cf. Zech 8:20-3; 14:16-19).
(44:21—2) Poetic forms are resumed, with this passage, as we have seen, being possibly the original completion of w. 6-8. The emphasis is on remembrance, not a mere calling to mind of past deeds, but their application as present reality. Servant language is used, and the overall message is close to that of 40:1-2. Past wrongdoing was real enough, but its impact has now been put completely out of sight. (44:23) A psalmlike passage comparable to 42:10-13 follows. As in that earlier passage the whole created order is summoned as witness to God's past ('has redeemed') and expected future ('will be glorifed') work. (44:24-8) The messenger-formula at the beginning leads us to expect a prophetic oracle, but there is no message in the usual sense. T am YHWH' in the opening verse is followed by no fewer than 14 participial clauses (in NRSV relative clauses introduced by 'who') characterizing the mighty acts of the Lord. They begin with further assertions of his creative power. More specific claims follow, with v. 25 reminding us of earlier rejection of earthly wisdom (cf. 29:14). The reference to 'his servant' in parallelism with 'his messengers' in v. 26 is unexpected, and it may be that we should follow Greek and other versions which have 'servants', a general reference to the prophetic succession. But it is also possible either to interpret 'the word of his servant' in terms of the commissioning set out in 42:1-4, or, following a suggestion of Clements (1985: 108), to see here a reference back to 6:11 which had warned of the laying waste of cities. That had taken place in accordance with the word of God's servant who had proclaimed that threat; now restoration could confidently be anticipated, v. 27 retains the cosmic note, but it is surrounded by images of restoration. Both before and after it we have a renewed promise for the future of Jerusalem; this should not be taken as implying a specific date for this passage, since we know that as late as the mid-fifth century Nehemiah still had the task of rebuilding the city's walls. Here also we find specific reference to Cyrus, king of Persia 550-529 BCE. He extended Persian rule into much of Asia Minor and the surrender of Babylon in 539 was the climax of his reign. Whether Persian rule was also effective in Palestine during his lifetime remains unknown, but there was a strong tradition that he gave permission to the Jerusalem community to restore its temple (Ezra 6:3-5), and that seems to be the picture which dominates this poem. Though never a worshipper of YHWH (despite the impression given by 2 Chr 36:23; Ezra 1:2) he became something of an idealized figure in the tradition of Israel, even to the extent of supposing that he authorized a mass return of exiles. (See Kuhrt 1983 for an account of Cyrus's policy which notes the extent of this idealization and attempts a more balanced picture of his policy.) It seems appropriate therefore to take the treatment of Cyrus here as a reflection from a later period and as the mirror-image of the account of Sennacherib in chs. 36— 7. Each was equally under the control of YHWH, Sennacherib as a warning to the community of the threats involved in their
(44:6-8) It is possible that this is part of a larger oracle, with its completion in w. 21—2, the intervening prose section being regarded as an insertion. However there is no textual support for this view, and it seems best to treat the material in the form in which it has been handed down. These verses repeat forms and themes already familiar: the messenger-formula; the use of'redeemer' language; the assertion by YHWH of his own incomparability; the demand for evidence in support of rival claims; the salvation formula 'Do not fear' (though in this case it is a different verb which is so rendered). YHWH is here (and again at48:i2) described as 'the first and the last'and Williamson (1994: 69-70) has drawn attention to the links with 9:1. The same words are there found (NRSV 'the former time'/'the latter time'), and it may be right to read this passage in the light of the claims there made for YHWH's saving power.
(44:9—20) This extended section is printed as prose by NRSV and most versions, and this is probably right, though part of it is regarded as poetry by BHS. As we have noted previously the distinction between prose and poetry in biblical Hebrew is not always a clear-cut one. However that may be, the theme is a clear and familiar one: the mockery of those engaged in the manufacture and worship of idols. The point is made in general terms in w. 9—11, after which there follows a description of idol-making and its absurd consequences in w. 12—17, and a conclusion poking fun at those who are so deluded as to engage in such practices in w. 18-20. The reference to their blindness in v. 18 reminds us of previous such descriptions of the Israelite community, and suggests that that may be the intended application here. The reference to 'witnesses' in v. 9 provides a link with what has preceded. Whereas YHWH's own community were true witnesses (v. 8), these witnesses are ignorant and will be put to shame. 'The artisans are merely human' (v. n) is a possible rendering of the Hebrew but seems odd in context: who would have supposed that workmen were anything other than human? An emendation is possible which would read 'incantations' for 'artisans', aptly bringing out the point that all the claims associated with idols are of merely human creation. This would then lead naturally into the—perhaps rather laboured—account of the actual making of the idol. How far it is possible to read these verses as a reasonably accurate description of manufacturing processes in the ancient world is disputed; vivid effect rather than precise description seems to have been the concern of the writer. In any case the point is that what is worshipped as a god is actually no more than a left-over piece of wood. If one were to say the same of a crucifix venerated by Christians great
471 ISAIAH
as part of the one larger unit, but they also have their own internal coherence. The theme hinted at in 44:5, of other nations being so impressed by what YHWH has achieved for Israel that they wish to share in the benefits, is now made more specific. Both the idea expressed and the geographical allusions show links with Ps 72:8—10, and these lands have already been mentioned in 43:3. The Egyptians, the oppressors of Israel up to the Exodus, will now come as a subject people. The Sabeans were probably also an African people; in Ps 72:10 they are distinguished from 'Sheba' (whose queen was Solomon's famous visitor), but one wonders whether the difference went beyond different spellings of the same far-off and largely unknown land. In v. 15 a theme first set out in 8:17 is picked up again. There God's hiddenness was a cause of bewilderment and uncertainty, alleviated only by the 'signs' of his continuing presence. Here the 'God who hides himself is also the Saviour. The link with w. 16-17 is not
sinfulness, Cyrus as the beneficent instrument through whom God's goodness to the community could be shown. (45:1^7) The role of Cyrus as YHWH's instrument in furthering the good of the community is now developed in greater detail. His work is described in such positive terms that we might be tempted to identify him as YHWH's servant, if we did not already know that Israel was that servant, a point reiterated in v. 4. Meanwhile, just as the Assyrians had been enabled by YHWH to carry out their destructive work (ch. 10), so Cyrus is given power to restore wholeness. He is first described as the anointed one, the 'messiah' (mastah). The evocative power of this title was tragically illustrated as recently as 1993, when the leader of the Branch Davidian sect who was killed at Waco, Texas, took the name David Koresh
(Koresh is the Heb. form of Cyrus) as part of his claim to divine endorsement. To those who first heard Cyrus thus described it must have seemed as astonishing a claim as that which described Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon as 'the servant of YHWH' in Jer 27:6. Yet all the military victories which tradition credited to him were simply 'for the sake of my servant Jacob'. The tradition embodied here recognizes that Cyrus knew nothing of YHWH; he was an unwitting instrument of the divine purpose, which, in a way left unspecified, would be recognized in Cyrus's achievements. The poem ends with a strong assertion of YHWH's uniqueness as creator. The poet evidently saw no problem in describing YHWH as the creator of woe; indeed it is implicit in the way that divine agency has been put forward as the reason for the people's misfortunes.
an obvious one—these last verses return to the theme of the folly of idol-worship. It may be that in the poet's mind these foreigners were associated with such false worship.
(45:18—19) The section extending to the end of the chapter has been understood as another of the trial-scenes found in these chapters (Schoors 1973: 233-8). As so often the messenger-formula is used, but there is no real message. Instead we have words put into the mouth of YHWH asserting once again his incomparable status as creator, carrying out creative acts with a deliberate purpose of overthrowing chaos and establishing a properly inhabited land. In a characteristically Isaianic way this is specified as sedeq (NRSV 'the truth').
(45:8) Christian liturgical use of this verse, especially in the season of Advent, has given it an eschatological dimension. In its Isaianic context, however, it is a brief inter jected hymn of praise. Righteousness (sedeq) and salvation (yescf), those key words through so much of Isaiah, are envisaged as flowing out from God's created order. (45:9-17) The theme of the prose section, 44:9-20, is now taken up from a different angle. There it was taken for granted that a piece of wood was available for the ironsmith and carpenter to use as they wished. Here, using a different but very popular metaphor, that of the potter, the absurd situation is envisaged of the pot arguing with its maker. NRSV obscures the link with 5:8—23 and other earlier passages by translating the same word as 'Ah' there and 'Woe' here. There are very close links also with 29:16 (and there the same introductory word in v. 15 is translated 'Ha!'!). Then in v. 10 for the first time in these chapters YHWH is directly referred to as 'father'. This way of referring to God has become so basic in later Jewish and especially Christian tradition that we are apt to forget that it is a comparative rarity in the HB itself. Nearly all the texts that use the term are late ones; perhaps by the later period the danger of using obvious sexual imagery in the description of God seemed less acute. Then, even more strikingly, YHWH is referred to as a mother bearing a child. In w. 11-13 me rather general reference of the 'woe' passages becomes specific: the community is still tempted to question YHWH's purpose and his capacity to carry out that purpose. There is no specific reference to Cyrus in v. 13 (MT has 'him'), but it is natural in this context to suppose the reference to be to Cyrus, without forgetting the larger capacity of YHWH to use any instrument deemed appropriate to carry out his will. w. 14-17 can be seen
(45:20—1) Witnesses are now invited to challenge this claim, but before they can do so they are dismissed as ignorant worshippers of false idols. Once again we are reminded that this is religious polemic, not an attempt to arrive at some impartial, balanced judgement. 'Who told this long ago?' may well here, as in other comparable rhetorical questions in this part of the book, represent a claim that the warnings made in the earlier part of Isaiah had been vindicated. This leads to the assertion of YHWH's uniqueness; he alone is saddiq ('righteous'). (45:22-3) The trial is in effect over; what hope is there for the nations who have been found guilty of worshipping false gods? The answer given in v. 22 has been interpreted in very different ways. Many Christian commentators have seen this as a message of universal salvation offered to all people and have built elaborate doctrinal structures on such a basis, but there seems little justification for this in the main thrust of the book of Isaiah. Others have seen here an invitation to the dispersed Jews, exiled to distant parts of the world, to return to the true centre of the worship of YHWH. This is not impossible, but such a meaning owes much to imaginative reconstruction. More probably 'all the ends of the earth' is to be understood cosmically; the whole created order will recognize YHWH as having vindicated his people (Whybray 1975: 112). The same phrase is found at 52:10, where this cosmic understanding comes over more clearly. 'Vindicated' is a less theologically charged translation than 'saved'; 'the English versions have been produced under strong universalist influence' (Snaith 1967: 160). The passage is quoted in Rom 14:11
ISAIAH 472
in v. 8 above) their attitude seems more negative. They are 'stubborn of heart', refusing to believe that YHWH's deliverance (or 'victory'; once again the word is sedaqa) could be imminent. It is obviously possible that this refers to the release of Babylonian exiles, but the reference to 'salvation in Zion' makes it more natural to think of a community established in Jerusalem but still uncertain of the carrying out of YHWH's promises spelt out in the whole book of Isaiah.
and alluded to in Phil 2:10, in senses that seem far removed from their understanding in their present context.
(45:24—5) The final and predictable verdict of the trial is now announced. Once again 'righteousness' (this time in the curious plural form sedaqot, possibly suggesting the translation 'victory/ies'), is to be ascribed to YHWH.
(46:1-2) We shall divide this chapter according to the paragraphs of NRSV, but there is a real sense in which it forms a unity. The condemnations of idols, previously very generalized, now become more specific. Bel, the Akkadian equivalent of Baal, was another title regularly applied to Marduk the chief Babylonian god. Nebo was another Babylonian god, particularly honoured in the sixth century, whose name can be seen as an integral part of the imperial names Nebu-chadrezzar and Nabo-nidus. The processions in their honour are here mocked. Those who associate these chapters with a specific prophet active among the exiles in Babylon (Deutero-Isaiah) have to suppose that this part of the prophecy was an underground satire (ABD i. 653); a more natural view is that this poem originates from a later period, when the veneration of these gods was a thing of the past. Cyrus attributed his victories to Marduk, but among his successors Zoroastrianism took hold, and against that religious belief there is no satire in the HB. As elsewhere (cf. 40:19) it is simply assumed that the idols are the gods. There is no victory for them; instead of bearing their worshippers' burden, they themselves become that burden.
(47:1—4) There has already been one taunt directed against Babylon, in chs. 13—14. The mockery there was mainly of the king of Babylon; here the city itself is the victim. As Begg
(1989:124) notes, chs. 14 and47 reflect the same gloating over the fate of Babylon, a fact which is the more remarkable in that in some other parts of the HB the presentation of Babylon is neutral or even positive. Here, just as daughter Zion had once been apparently abandoned to its fate (1:8), so now daughter Babylon will be put to shame. Daughter Zion was restored (37:22); no such hope can be entertained by Babylon. Demeaning labour and sexual humiliation is to be its fate. Though the exact meaning of T will spare no one' is uncertain, the overall picture is clear, of gloating revenge against oppressors, for which the credit is to be given to the 'Holy One of Israel'. The title is another link with the earlier chapters of the book. (47:5-7) The following sections elaborate further on the miserable fate awaiting Babylon. Just as YHWH delivered his own people from darkness (42:7), so Babylon would be cast into darkness. It had not recognized that its success had been due to YHWH's own decree; its cruelty and pride would now reap their own reward.
(46:3—4) The use of remnant language, rare in these later chapters, offers a direct link back to the beginning of the book. The element of threat in the idea of remnant found in somepassages (e.g. 10:22-3) is now completely overlaid by the notion of the vindicated remnant. Where Bel and Nebo were totally incapable of bearing any burden, YHWH will do this throughout their lives. The word 'bear' here is from the same root as 'burden' in v. 2.
(47:8—9) The image of the city as a 'daughter' is now taken further by picturing the greatest losses which could come upon a woman: widowhood, and the loss of children. It was an inevitable fate, for Babylon had made claims which were proper only to YHWH (cf. the T am' saying here with 43:11). This picture is linked in a somewhat arbitrary way with renewed condemnation of false religious practice. Though in line with the condemnations of idolatry in earlier chapters, there has been no specific reference previously to 'sorceries and... enchantments'.
(46:5—7) The comparison thus made leads into a rehearsal of some familiar themes: the incomparability of YHWH, and the folly of trusting in human-made idols. There are close similarities both of theme and of language between v. 5 and 40:18 and between w. 6—7 and parts of44:9—20. The poet(s) ofthese chapters certainly believed that the message needed to be hammered home.
(47:10—11) Confidence in human wisdom is once more condemned, and associated with the same blasphemous claim as was found in v. 8. Babylonian expertise in magical arts is useless; they have failed to foresee the inevitable disaster.
(46:8-11) v. 8 is suspect textually, as the verb translated 'and consider' is of uncertain meaning, and it is not clear who the 'transgressors' are who are addressed at its end (though cf. v. 12). The remainder of the passage has similarities with 44:21-8, beginning with the summons to 'remember', then spelling out the incomparability of YHWH, and concluding with a reference to the summoning of those who will carry out the divine purpose. In ch. 44 that was specifically identified with Cyrus; here no specific reference is made, though 'bird of prey' is a regular metaphor for military conquerors, and there is no difficulty in identifying 'the man for my purpose from a far country' with Cyrus. It is all to be understood as part of God's purpose.
(47:12—13) The tone turns to mockery, analogous to the way in which Elijah mocked the prophets of Baal (i Kings 18:27). But the 'perhaps' is heavily ironical; there is no doubt at all in the poet's mind—all the supposed expertise of the Babylonians will in fact be useless. The point has been reiterated that gods other than YHWH cannot tell what will happen, and so attempts to predict the future by means of heavenly observations will achieve nothing. (The expertise of the Babylonians in astronomy was in fact considerable, but that is another story which cannot be pursued here.)
(47:14—15) With a reference back to the (mis)use of wood in ch. 44, and the implication that Babylon might be destroyed by burning, the mockery reaches its climax. This marks the
(46:12-13) So far the community has been addressed as those who needed persuasion of YHWH's ability; here (and possibly
473 ISAIAH
reasserted; and the whole series of events is claimed to be in accordance with the divine plan.
end of an important element in Isaiah: the words directed against foreign nations. They have played a prominent part from ch. 10 onwards. There will be virtually no further concern for nations other than Israel in the latter part of the book. (An apparent exception to this, the references to Edom in ch. 63, is not a true exception, as we shall hope to show when we reach that point in the commentary.) One obstacle in the way of the community has been removed; the remaining difficulties in its becoming the true people of God are internal.
(48:17—19) A different strand of thought is introduced. YHWH is here pictured as bewailing the people's stubbornness, in a form of words ('O that...') more usually put into human mouths as a prayer imploring YHWH himself to take action (cf. 64:1). Whereas in w. 9—11 the imperishable name of YHWH himself had been at the centre of concern, now it is that of the people. Their folly had led to the real possibility that they would no longer be remembered.
(48:1-2) The next development is an unexpected one, so much so that many commentators in the historical-critical tradition have doubted whether the whole of this chapter can originate from 'Deutero-Isaiah'. From ch. 40 on the tone in address to the community has been one of comfort. There have been several trial scenes in these chapters; perhaps the poet was anxious to avoid giving the impression that Israel was never more than an innocent victim and witness. Here, in a way reminiscent of the earlier part of the book, the community is itself accused of falsity in their commitment to YHWH. False trust, a theme often mentioned in the earlier chapters, appears to be the cause of complaint here.
(48:20—1) We return to more characteristic modes of expression, with the hope for a return from exile in Babylon comparable with the Exodus from Egypt. It is dangerous to mistake these prophetic longings for a statement of historical fact; there is no independent evidence, and little inherent likelihood, that such a return ever did take place. In poetic form, however, this section forms an indusio with 40:1-5, the redemption of God's servant pictured in terms of the wasteland being made fertile and prosperous. (48:22) This verse may be regarded as a kind of editorial comment. It serves at least two purposes. First, it warns against any complacency that the promises spelt out in the preceding chapters might have induced. Secondly, it has an important structural function. It is repeated in almost identical words at 57:21, and, as we noted at 39:8, has an important link with Hezekiah's confident expectation ofsaldm. This has the result of inviting us to see chs. 40-8 and 49-57 as blocks of material with their own integrity, even though important cross-references to other parts of the book are by no means to be excluded.
(48:3-5) A familiar mode of address, stressing YHWH's control of'former things' is here put to new use: as an attack on the community itself. They themselves are guilty of the kind of idolatry which has been so harshly condemned in other nations. It is scarcely possible to engage in detailed sociological analysis in a commentary of this nature, but it may well be that we have one of those pointers to divisions within the community which called itself Israel, signs of which become more marked in chs. 56-66.
(Chs. 49-55) As we have just noted, there are indications within the book itself that the next section to be considered should be chs. 49—57. Historical-critical scholarship, however, has often regarded 49—55 as the next unit. It is usually regarded as part of Deutero-Isaiah, even though there are important differences from 40-8: for example, no more references to Cyrus or the supposed historical situation of the exiles, and much less use of'new Exodus' language. The speeches of judgement against the gods play no significant further part, and there are also some noteworthy stylistic differences (Merendino 1981: 2—9). From now on Jerusalem rather than Babylon becomes the centre of attention.
(48:6—8) Themes characteristic of the preceding chapters are again used here but with very different emphases. At one level it would be possible to take the openings of w. 6 and 8 as flatly contradicting one another and to decide that one must be a later insertion. But that only raises the question of why a later inserter should have produced this contradiction. Better to see here a poetic technique analogous to that used in ch. 6, where the people's initial failure to hear had led to their consequent inability to do so. We should also remember that the servantcommunity was described as deaf and blind in 42:18-25, yet that did not exclude its use as God's instrument.
(49:1—4) The first six verses of this chapter were identified by Duhm and those who have followed him as the second of the Servant Songs. We look first at w. 1-4, not only because of the NRSV paragraphing, but also because there is an inherent tension between v. 3 and v. 5 in the matter of the relation of Israel to the servant. The servant has previously been described in the third person; here words are put into his mouth, a literary device which has certainly strengthened the impression that an individual is being spoken about. The first two verses certainly lend support; the claim that the call of YHWH went back to the time before birth is strongly reminiscent of accounts of a prophetic call; NB particularly Jer 1:5. This impression is strengthened by the reference to 'my mouth' in v. 2, for the prophet was essentially a speaker. Yet in v. 3 we find the unambiguous identification of the servant with Israel. Textual criticism is normally thought of as a strictly
(48:9—11) The stress in this section is on what is done 'for my name's sake'. 'Name' may simply stand for nature or character, as it appears to do in Ezekiel, where this imagery is frequently found. But it is also possible that there is reference to the use and abuse of the divine name YHWH, again with different groups claiming to be his true worshippers. One could envisage, though there is no proof, that this was the kind of situation which led in the later biblical period to the abandonment of use of the name itself.
(48:12-13) A fresh summons to attention, again using the language of the lawcourt, reminds the hearers of YHWH's incomparability and his creative power.
(48:14—16) This reads like a reminder of some of the themes in the preceding chapters. It is natural to read the 'him' of w. 14-15 as referring to Cyrus; Babylon's overthrow is
ISAIAH 474
(49:13) The technique, already employed at 42:10 and 44:23, of interjecting a brief psalm-like passage into the series of oracles, is here used again. In terms very close to 44:23 heavens and earth are called upon to witness God's concern for his people.
objective exercise, but it has been employed here in a very dubious fashion to get rid of the word Israel, either by claiming that it is superfluous to the metre (a notoriously uncertain guide) or by following a single manuscript, otherwise of no special importance, which omits the word. On all normal criteria, 'Israel' must be accepted as a defining part of the text in the account of the servant. (For a contrary view, persuasively set out though in my judgement not finally convincing, see Whybray (1983: 71-2).) It is by means of what God has accomplished in and through Israel that he will be glorified. We have seen various occasions (e.g. in ch. 48) when God's dissatisfaction with Israel was expressed; here, correspondingly, the servant's own dissatisfaction is put into words. All the loyal service which Israel claims to have offered to its God seems to have been in vain, nothing better than chaos (tdfiu; NRSV 'for nothing'). But the passage ends with the expression of confidence that despite outward appearances the servant's mispat (NRSV 'cause'; notice the use once again of legal language) is in God's care. (49:5-6) An additional reason for dividing these verses from what precedes is that they are presented as a divine answer to the servant's plea. Here, by contrast to v. 3, a distinction seems clearly to be made between the servant and Israel, since the servant apparently has a mission to Israel. This may well be a further pointer, in addition to those already noted, towards divisions within the community. The author(s) of these poems saw it as part of the servant's role to restore all Israel to what was perceived to be the true service of YHWH. As in 42:6 what God has achieved through his victory (which may give the sense better than NRSV 'salvation') will be seen as a light by distant nations, even to what was poetically described as 'the end of the earth'.
(49:14—18) A different literary form is now employed: the lament of Zion is quoted with the divine response following. Closely analogous forms will be found in w. 21 and 24. Laments in the Psalms and in Lamentations frequently call upon God to 'remember' (Ps 74:2; Lam 5:1); here is expressed the obvious corollary, that in the past he has forgotten (cf. Ps 42:9; Lam 5:20). Ancient Israelites were more prepared to make direct accusations against God than are most modern believers, especially in the Christian tradition. The charge of forgetfulness is indignantly denied in words which many will recall from their use in Cowper's hymn 'Hark, my soul, it is the Lord'. The metaphor of Zion as inscribed on the palms of God's hands has no obvious parallel elsewhere in Isaiah, but we should probably see a link with 54:11-13, and both passages may be linked with the idea that a God might be 'crowned' by the walls of his own favoured city (Pfisterer Darr 1994: 200—2). In v. 17 NRSV has 'builders' (bonayik) for the 'sons' (banayik) of the Hebrew text; this gives a better contrast with 'destroyers', but the idea of the children of the city, already referred to in v. 15, being under the divine protection is also appropriate. Perhaps we have here a deliberate wordplay. The command to 'lift up your eyes and see' is found again at 60:4. As we near the end of the book greater emphasis comes to be placed upon the unfolding of God's work to human vision.
(49:19—21) The transformation theme, found frequently in these chapters, is developed further. The land was reduced to desolation, Israel itself bereaved and separated from its homeland, yet now the very first command of the Bible, to 'Be fruitful and multiply' (Gen 1:28) has been fulfilled in an unbelievable way. It would probably be a misreading of a poetic passage to see behind the 'too crowded' language of these verses disputes about land rights between those who had been in exile and those whose forebears had never left
(49:7) The theme of the previous verse is here developed. Westermann (1969) and other commentators have proposed elaborate rearrangements of this and the following verses to provide an overall structure which may indeed seem more logical to us, but does not necessarily reflect the less tidy literary views of the original author(s). This verse starts from the 'despised' and 'abhorred' state to which Israel had been reduced. Its 'servant' status meant simply doing the bidding of other rulers. NRSV stresses this by translating febed here as 'slave', but it is the same word as that regularly rendered 'servant' and it is better with RSV to retain that translation here. By contrast to that status the saving acts of YHWH will lead to the rulers of the nations acknowledging Israel as their superior. (49:8-12) There are striking similarities between this poem and 42:5—9, and links also with those other passages which have envisaged the transformation of the wilderness (cf 40:3; 41:18). The most striking new development occurs in v. 12, where we find references to the gathering together of those of the community who had been dispersed to distant lands. MT sinim was taken in traditional interpretation as a reference to China (Skinner 1910: 93), but the Dead Sea scroll has given added weight to an old hypothesis that we should read here sewlnim, that is 'Syene', modern Aswan in Egypt—a less romantic but much more plausible identification. There is evidence of Jewish groups in Egypt from the sixth century onwards.
Israel and Judah. More natural is to see in these verses the reversal of the threat in 6:12. There the emptiness was 'vast' and the inhabitants of the land were sent 'far away'. Now the land is crowded and it is the destroyers who are sent 'far away'
(Williamson 1994: 53—4, who also draws attention to links with 5:8-10). (49:22-3) Again it is natural to read this passage as a deliberate reversal of a threat found earlier in the book. At 5:26 God had raised a signal to a distant nation, calling it to carry off Israel like prey. The promise of a reversal of that threat, already implicit at 11:12, is now carried a stage further—instead of acting as oppressors, foreign rulers are now to grovel before Israel. There is no universalism here; the once enemy nations are to be reduced to impotence. Such a vision has never been achieved historically; we are moving into the kind of visionary language which can be called eschatological. (49:24-6) This vision is taken a stage further. The theme of prey, already used at 5:29 (though with a different Heb. word; cf. Davies 1989: 115), is reused to show the magnitude of YHWH's achievement. Most translations, including NRSV,
475 ISAIAH
rich imagery used in the surrounding chapters to describe the saving work of YHWH. We may note only that the series of rhetorical questions and the use of such words as 'adversaries' suggest that the context is still the lawsuit. (50:10-11) Reference to the servant, implicit in w. 4-9, now becomes explicit. Here, more clearly than previously, divisions within the community are indicated. The difficulty in interpretation rests largely in knowing who is addressed as 'you'. Two groups seem to be envisaged. One is the godfearers, identifiable as the servant community, trusting in God despite the lack of present light. The other is condemned in general terms in v. n. They have lit a fire which will in fact destroy themselves. Whether some specific point of dispute underlies this metaphor, or whether it is better understood in more general terms as rival views of the community's standing, cannot be established on such slender evidence. We have a pointer forward to the last chapters of the book where this rivalry between different groups will become still more acute.
follow the Dead Sea scroll I saiah and many ancient versions in reading 'tyrant' for the 'righteous one' of the Hebrew text. This makes a natural balance with v. 25, where 'tyrant' is found in all forms of the text, but MT is also possible, with YHWH himself being regarded as the mighty and righteous one whose captives cannot be taken away. The chapter ends with a revolting picture of cannibalism, a desperate way of declaring the saving and redeeming power of YHWH. (50:1-3) Though this reads like a new start it can also be seen as a continuation of what has preceded. YHWH speaks as if to answer a legal challenge against him. The 'children' of Zion are addressed; they, not he, have been responsible for the 'divorce' of their mother. Their own sinful behaviour had led to the parting, but the power of YHWH brings about restoration, pictured once again in language appropriate to a new Exodus deliverance.
(50:4—6) The passage extending usually to v. 9, sometimes to v. n, has regularly been characterized as another Servant
Song. The word 'servant' is not used, but there are obvious similarities in presentation with 49:1—6, so that for those who maintain the theory of a distinct collection of songs, it is a natural inference to include this passage within it. But it is also perfectly possible to continue to take Israel, or some constituent part of Israel, as the servant (the links with ch. 49 are valid, and justify us in seeing implicit reference to the 'servant' here) and to see these verses as setting out the community's understanding of its situation before God. There is tension in much of the Hebrew Bible between the sense that the people were themselves responsible for their own unhappy history because of their sins (thus the Deuteronomistic History, Joshua-2 Kings), and the feeling that they had been unjustly used through no fault of their own (thus many Psalms and the book of Lamentations). Each side of that tension is represented in Isaiah; the preceding verses have stressed 'sins' and 'transgressions'; here innocence is affirmed. The servant has been punished as a means of increasing his awareness of God's redemptive activity. Whether or not NRSV is right in correcting the first 'those who are taught' to 'a teacher', the phrase occurs again at the end of the verse, and provides a link back with 8:16. We saw then (see iSA8:i6— 18) the hope that in God's good time solutions to the anxieties facing the community would be revealed; now that conclusion has come a significant stage nearer. Again, in 8:17 the complaint was that God had hidden his face; here the servant avows that he has not hidden his face, even though the exposure subjected him to 'shame and spitting'. Language of this kind may well reflect the experience of an individual who had been the subject of insulting treatment; that does not preclude its applicability to a larger group. This maybe strengthenedbythe contrast drawn between the 'rebellious people' of 30:9 and the claim here that the servant was not rebellious. There is much repetition in these verses, and it is difficult to know to what extent that is intended as a deliberate poetic device, and how far errors have crept into the text. (50:7-9) But the servant's obedience in the face of insult is not to be understood apart from the aid provided by YHWH. These verses are clear assertions of the confidence that such aid will be forthcoming; they are less clear in specifying how it will take place. Perhaps that is not surprising in view of the
(Ch. 51) There is dispute here as to the extent of the units. Kuntz (1982) has made a persuasive case for seeing w. i—16 as a complete unit, but that involves calling w. 9-11 an 'interlude'. There is also a sense in which the natural unit is w. 1-8, a structured poem with three parallel introductions in w. i, 4, and 7, though what follows is certainly closely linked. We shall follow the NRSV divisions. (51:1-3) This is not regarded as a Servant Song but the introductions are strikingly similar to 49:1, which is so reckoned. Within this larger framework we may look at each element separately. Summons to recall the past are common in the prophets; much rarer are specific references to individuals as here in v. 2. The recall of Abraham features prominently in the NT; much less so in the HB outside Genesis. Perhaps the Abraham stories did not reach their normative form until the
Second Temple period. Divine blessing and the hope of progeny were the basis of the Abraham story (Gen 12:1-3) and so
they can be the basis for restoration as envisaged here (Van
Seters (1975: 275—6), though he makes nothing of the remarkable fact that Sarah is also specifically mentioned here). The 'making many' of Abraham was obviously an important element in the tradition concerning him; it is also picked up, negatively, in Ezek 33:24. The use of Genesis themes goes further with the reference to Eden; there is an increasing sense, strengthened by the references to the Exodus, of a body of sacred traditions to which the poet could allude.
(51:4—6) 'Listen' in v. 4 is a different word (NRSV translates it 'pay attention' in 49:1), but the form is the same. Here once again is the theme of YHWH's deliverance being recognized by 'the peoples' (cf. 42:4, 6), but it is placed in an eschatological context. The existing order may come to an end, but God's salvation has no end.
(51:7—8) This brief strophe aptly rounds off what has preceded, with a number of phrases and themes repeated from the earlier verses. The one different element is the metaphor of the moth and the worm, but the first has already been used in 50:9. The word sas, translated 'worm', is of uncertain meaning and occurs in the HB only here.
(51:9—11) The passage begins with a double imperative; this stylistic feature is characteristic of this part of the book (cf.
ISAIAH 476
(52:3—6) This brief prose passage, with its fourfold use of 'says the LORD' (in two slightly different Heb. forms), is unusual in this overwhelmingly poetic block of material. Whereas previously Zion was addressed in the feminine, here 'you' is masculine. The passage links Egypt and Assyria in a manner found in 11:15—16 but rarely elsewhere. Assyrian oppression is a frequent theme in the earlier part of the book (e.g. ch. 10), though there it was made clear that there was indeed 'cause' for the Assyrian invasion: the sin of the people. That is now treated as a matter of the past. The reference to the rulers howling has not been satisfactorily explained. REB understands it as illustrating the misery of those carried into exile; others have supposed that it is the Babylonian rulers who are here referred to.
v. 17, and 52:1, n). Once more we have the recall of God's saving activity as the clue to the confident expectation of his continuing power to save. We last met Rahab in 30:7, where Egypt was mocked for its incapacity. That reference is now taken up into a much larger context. The overthrow of Egypt is linked not only with the Exodus but with the whole act of creation. It is quite impossible to decide whether the 'waters of the great deep' refer to primordial chaos or to the waters of the sea in which the Egyptians were drowned; both pictures are present. We have seen that these later chapters of Isaiah stress YHWH's activity as creator; here that is pictured, as in some Psalms (e.g. 74:12-17, where the same word tannin, 'dragon', is used) as a victorious struggle against evil monsters. The theme is the same as that of Gen i; the way in which it is expressed differs greatly. All this is translated in NRSV with past tenses, and that may be inevitable in English. But it is noteworthy that the verbs are participles, as if YHWH is envisaged as continuing to carry out these saving acts. In any case they are seen as a foretaste of the anticipated act of salvation: the pilgrimage to Zion of those who have been ransomed by God. This theme which has run right through the book from 2:2—4 onwards here reaches its climax.
(52:7—10) This hymnic passage is strongly reminiscent of Nahum 1:15 (MT 2:1), where its cultic context emerges even more markedly. As in the parallels with Micah in ch. 2 and those with Jeremiah in ch. 15 and elsewhere, so this passage reminds us that there must have existed bodies of traditional material which could be taken up and used as appropriate in different prophetic collections. The messenger announces YHWH's entry into his holy place, thus symbolizing the downfall of Assyria. The cry of triumph, 'Your God reigns' also reminds us of those Psalms (93; 96-9) which proclaim the kingship of YHWH; the word malak, here translated 'reigns', is found in the Psalms as 'is king'. The whole passage is a song proclaiming the victory achieved by YHWH. Read in the context of the book as a whole, it asserts that the redemption of Jerusalem, adumbrated as early as 1:27, is now being achieved.
(51:12—16) God is now pictured as speaking to his people, but in terms different from those we have experienced so far. He offers encouragement in their anxieties with words of 'comfort' (cf. 40:1). The people's enemies, the 'oppressor bent on destruction' are no more than mere mortals, just as was the Assyrian in ch. 10. The creative power of YHWH is not something abstract; it is integrally bound up with his commitment to his own people.
(52:11—12) Yet another repeated imperative pictures God as the protector of the purified community in its 'going out'. If these chapters are regarded specifically as composed by an exiled Deutero-Isaiah it will be natural to see them as envisaging return from Babylon. In a larger Second Temple setting the whole theme of a diaspora one day being able to join together in Jerusalem will commend itself. (52:13-53:12) No passage in Isaiah, or indeed the whole HB, has attracted more attention than this the fourth and last of Duhm's Servant Songs. It is disputed to what extent it was the subject of speculation and interpretation within Judaism before the Common Era. Certainly the portrayal of the servant here was applied to Jesus within the NT, most notably in Acts
(51:17-20) Another double imperative introduces the next divine word, addressed directly to Jerusalem, but in significantly different terms from what has preceded. What was briefly expressed in ch. 12, of comfort following divine anger, is now elaborated more fully. God's anger is often regarded as the result of human sin, but that element is not prominent here; it is regarded as an unpredictable burden which human beings, Israel not excepted, may have to bear. The image used is that of the 'cup of wrath', a theme found elsewhere (e.g. Zech 12:2) as a warning against Jerusalem itself, but here applied to its enemies.
(51:21—3) Divine anger does not disappear, but it may be transferred. In the legal case which is again alluded to here God and Israel are on the same side; God's anger will therefore be transferred from his own people to those who have been their tormentors. They will have to experience the punishment they have inflicted upon Israel.
(cf. 8:32—5) and in i Peter (e.g. 2:22), and probably in many other places as well; in view of what we have said in the introduction about the importance of the reader, it would be quite wrong to dismiss such understandings as illegitimate. This is what the Christian reader may well discern in these verses. Characteristically Jewish tradition has given a corporate interpretation to this poem, seeing it as prefiguring the persecution undergone by the Jewish community. Until the last century Christians in general followed the NT in applying it to Jesus. The rise of critical scholarship has led to an enormous variety of suggested 'identifications' of the servant (North 1948 and Rowley 1952 offer surveys of scholarship). More recently the tendency has been to suggest that 'historical-critical scholarship is bound to mistreat a cryptic poetic text when it regards it as a puzzle to be solved' (Clines 1976: 2 5). In its place different literary readings have been proposed.
(52:1—2) Yet another double imperative, a feminine form of the same verb 'ur, to awake or be roused, as was used in 51:9, 17, is addressed to Zion. The exclusion of the uncircumcised and the unclean warns us that we should not stress too greatly the supposed universalism of this part of Isaiah. The Judaism of the Second Temple period laid much stress on the need for circumcision as a distinctive feature of the holy people; and the exclusion of the unclean is strongly reminiscent of Leviticus. If in v. 2 the Hebrew is followed (see NRSV fn.) it will consist of an invitation to Jerusalem to be enthroned.
477 ISAIAH
be committed Christians the use of w. 3—6 in Handel's Messiah will still have familiarized them with such an interpretation. In its original context, however, mundane as this may seem, a less exalted interpretation may be appropriate. As Whybray (1978: 58) has noted, the words translated 'infirmities' and 'diseases' are 'eminently suitable to express the broken state of the nation after the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC'. Indeed, as he points out, the word holi, here 'infirmities', was already found in 1:5 in the description of the ravaged state of the community: 'the whole head is sick
As we shall see these have particular value in recognizing the ambiguity of much of the language: questions such as 'Who is the servant? Did he die?' and still more such loaded theological issues as 'Should the suffering be seen as atoning for the sins of others?' may not be as readily susceptible of an unambiguous answer as interpreters have often supposed. In particular we need to consider the placing of this poem within the book as a whole. Unless Isaiah is seen as a completely random anthology there will be significance in its present placing within the book. But here more than anywhere else in Isaiah one must acknowledge that space limitations exclude many considerations one would like to pursue. A century ago a great scholar, S. R. Driver, abandoned his commentary on Isaiah, not just for space reasons but 'because this part of his subject overwhelmed him' (North 1948: i). The problems in writing on these verses have not diminished since then.