Tag: Oracles

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 81 (Part 1)

Psalm 81

Dead Sea MSS: 4QPse (vv. 2-3 [1-2]); 11QPsd (vv. 5-11 [4-10]; MasPsa (vv. 2-17 [1-16])

This Psalm has a curious hybrid character: part hymn, part prophetic oracle, and a composition that may have had a place in the Israelite liturgy for the celebration of the festivals (esp. Passover, cf. the discussion below). Like other of the Asaph Psalms that we have recently examined, Ps 81 appears to have a northern provenance (indicated by the Israel/Joseph pairing in vv. 5-6).

There is a definite two-part structure to this Psalm, and here the Selah (hl*s#) pause marker serves as a legitimate structural indicator. The first part (vv. 2-8) is a hymn to YHWH, functioning as a call to worship. Within this framework, the historical tradition of the Exodus provides the setting for the prophetic oracle that follows in the second part (vv. 9-17). The words of YHWH begin at v. 6b, and this fact has led commentators, incorrectly I believe, to treat vv. 6b-17 as a coherent division of the Psalm; it is the Selah marker the provides the correct structural point of division, as noted above.

Metrically, this Psalm follows the typical 3-beat (3+3) couplet format, though there are a few exceptions (which will be noted). The heading gives the musical direction tyT!G]h^-lu^, as in Pss 8 and 84; the term tyT!G] could refer to a type of instrument (perhaps a harp), or to a particular melody (or mode).

Psalm 81 is one of the best attested Psalms among the Dead Sea manuscripts, including a MS from Masada where it fully represented. All of the manuscripts are quite fragmentary, however it is perhaps worth noting that there are no variant readings of substance in the portions of the text that are preserved.

As with all of Pss 73–83, this composition is attributed to (and/or associated with) Asaph. The second half of this Psalm is presented as a prophetic oracle, and, as we have seen, a number of the Asaph-Psalms have certain prophetic features; for more on Asaph, and the tradition that he and his descendants were prophets, cf. the earlier study on Ps 50).

PART 1: Verses 2-8 [1-7]

Verse 2 [1]

“Ring out (praise) to (the) Mightiest, our Strength,
give a shout to (the) Mighty (One) of Ya’aqob!”

The opening couplet is a call to worship, calling on the people to sing/shout praise to YHWH. The basic religious and theological principle is that YHWH is the God (Mighty One) of Israel (Jacob); as a result, He is considered as the ultimate source of their strength (zou) and protection. The suffixed word “our strength” is a bit unusual, and it is possible that here the noun zou connotes “stronghold”. Dahood (II, p. 263) reads parallel construct expressions in both lines (i.e., “Mighty [One] of…”) and treats the final <– of <yh!l)a$ as an interposed enclitic <-; in such a case the expressions would, indeed, be parallel: “Mighty (One) of our strong(hold) / Mighty (One) of Jacob”.

Verse 3 [2]

“Lift up music and give (it on the) tambor(ine),
(on the) sweet lyre (together) with (the) harp.”

The call to worship continues with this direction for the people to take up their instruments, in order to sing out praise to YHWH (as directed in v. 2). They are to “lift up” their music (hr*m=z]); curiously, the regular term (romz+m!) designating the Psalm as a musical composition is absent from the heading of Ps 81. The adjective <yu!n` means “sweet, pleasant”, here referring to the sweet sounds that can be produced on the lyre and harp.

Verse 4 [3]

“Blow (the) horn on the (day of the) new (moon),
on the full (moon), for (the) day of our festival.”

The call to worship continues, with the praise being located at the time of a public festival. The term gj^ came to designate the great pilgrimage festivals, such as Passover and Sukkot. Here the timing of the festival coincides with the beginning of the month—the expressions “new (moon)” (vd#j)) and “full (moon)” (hs#K@) are obviously parallel, marking the transition from one month to the next. The Exodus context of vv. 6-11 suggests that the festival in question is Passover.

Verse 5 [4]

“For this (is) an engraved (decree), O Yisrael,
an edict from (the) Mighty (One) of Ya’aqob.”

This couplet refers specifically to celebration the festival (gj^) mentioned in v. 4. If the context is the celebration of the Passover, then the solemn declaration here would be particularly appropriate (cf. the instructions and tradition regarding Passover in Exodus 12). The order to celebrate the festival is here treated as an edict or decree sent down by a king (YHWH), using the terms qj) (denoting something engraved or written) and fP*v=m! (a decision given down by a ruling figure which has the force of law).

This verse demonstrates the wide range of meaning that attaches to the simple prepositions l= and B=. Here, the first prefixed –l is best treated a vocative –l (“O Israel”), though most translators render it flatly as “for Israel”; the vocative better fits the context of a call to the Israelite people to praise YHWH and celebrate the festival. The second –l clearly refers to the decree as coming from YHWH, though it also possible to translate the preposition in this instance as “belonging to”.

Verse 6ab [5ab]

“(As a duty to be) repeated He set it on Yôsep,
in his going out (from) upon (the) land of Egypt.”

The term tWdu@ is parallel with qj) and fP*v=m! in v. 5, referring to the command by YHWH to celebrate the festival; the context here would seem to require that Passover is the festival in view. According to the tradition(s) recorded in Exodus 12, the directions for celebration of Passover were given at the time of Israel “going out from the land of Egypt”.

The noun tWdu@ fundamentally refers to something which is repeated; I take it to be used here with this basic emphasis, referring to the regular/repeated celebration of the Passover festival.

The use of the preposition lu^, in the context of Israel’s exodus from Egypt, is peculiar; one would rather expect /m! as in many other such references (e.g., here in v. 11 of this Psalm). As noted above, many of the Hebrew prepositions have a wide semantic range, and lu^ can occasionally carry a meaning something like “from” in English (cf. Dahood, II, p. 264). Other commentators (e.g., Kraus, Hossfeld-Zenger) translate it here as “against”, but this does not seem appropriate (or correct). I have slanted my translation slightly, to capture the idea of the Israelite people going out from the place where they had been—viz., living upon (or spread over) the land of Egypt.

Verse 6c-7 [5c-6]

“(The) lip of (one) I did not know I heard,
(and) I turned aside his shoulder from (the) load,
and his hands passed over from (the) basket.”

There is an abrupt change of speaker at the third line of verse 6, and it immediately becomes clear that YHWH is now speaking; thus the Psalm shifts to become an oracle, with the Psalmist functioning as a prophet. The setting of the Exodus, introduced in 6b, provides the impetus for this brief but dramatic recounting of YHWH’s role in the Exodus events.

It is, I think, best to treat v. 6c together with v. 7 as a tricolon. It presents a clear narrative progression:

    • God hears Israel’s cry for help =>
      • He responds and takes away the burden =>
        • The people become free from their service/labor

It may seem strange that YHWH would refer to Israel as “(one) I did not know”. This could be an allusion to the sequence in Exodus 2:23-25: the people cry for help in their bondage, and the cry comes up to God, who hears it; the cry prompts Him to remember the covenant He established with Israel’s ancestors (Abraham/Isaac/Jacob). Then in v. 25 we read: “And (the) Mightiest saw (the) sons of Yisrael, and the Mightiest knew (them).” This was the moment when God truly knew Israel as His people.

Verse 8 [7]

“In the (time of) distress you called and I pulled you out;
I answered you (from with)in (the) hiding (place) of thunder,
(and yet) I was tested by you at (the) waters of strife.”
Selah

The oracle continues with a second tricolon that further summarizes the events of the Exodus (cf. vv. 6-7 above). The first two lines here may simply be repeating the general idea of Israel’s cry for help and YHWH’s answer; however, I think it probable that the scene has shifted to the more specific setting of the episode at the Reed Sea (Exod 14-15), where the people cried out to God (14:10), and He answered them, through the hand of Moses (vv. 13-14ff). The reference to “the hiding (place) of thunder” is an allusion to the storm-theophany, applied to YHWH as Creator and heavenly Ruler, with his control over the waters; for more on this ancient cosmological imagery, expressed with some frequency in the Psalms, cf. my earlier article “The Conflict with the Sea in Ancient Near Eastern Myth”. His power over the Sea allowed Israel to escape from Egypt. The thunder-motif, with the theophanous cloud as a ‘hiding place,’ also alludes to the scene at mount Sinai (Exodus 19ff).

The implied reference to the waters of the Reed Sea is paralleled by the reference, in the final line, to the episode at the “waters of strife/Merîbah [hb*yr!m=]” (cf. Exod 17:1-7; Num 20:10-13). Dahood (II, p. 265) is almost certainly correct in his assessment that injba needs to parsed as a passive (Niphal) form with dative suffix (of agency)—i.e., “I was tested by you”. This act of faithlessness by the people is meant as a stark contrast with the faithfulness of YHWH in answering them and rescuing them from their bondage in Egypt (lines 1-2). My translation above brings out this contrastive emphasis: “…(yet) I was tested by you at (the) waters of strife”.

This ending of the Psalm’s first half, on a negative note highlighting the people’s lack of trust in God, sets the stage for the second half (vv. 9-17), in which YHWH, in another prophetic oracle, brings forth a complaint (in the tradition of the ‘covenant lawsuit’) against His people for their lack of loyalty and trust.

References marked “Dahood, I” and “Dahood, II” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), and Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968).
Those marked “Kraus” are to Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalmen, 2. Teilband, Psalmen 60-150, 5th ed., Biblischer Kommentar series (Neukirchener Verlag: 1978); English translation in Psalms 60-150, A Continental Commentary (Fortress Press: 1993).
Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51-100, translated from the German by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary series (Fortress Press: 2005).

Sunday Psalm Studies: Psalm 75

Psalm 75

Dead Sea MSS: No surviving manuscripts.

This relatively short Psalm is difficult to classify, as most commentators admit. It probably has most in common with the poetry of certain prophetic oracles. The overriding theme of YHWH’s Judgment on the earth—specifically upon the wicked of the nations—shows obvious thematic and stylistic similarities with the judgment-oracles in the Prophets. In this regard, it is worth noting again the tradition that associates Asaph (and his sons) with prophetic inspiration (1 Chron 25:1-2; 2 Chron 20:14ff; 29:30). A similar prophetic tone and style can be seen in other Asaph-Psalms (e.g., 50, 81, 82).

This the third in a sequence of 11 Psalms (73–83) attributed to Asaph; on whom, cf. the earlier study on Psalm 50.

There are several dozen Psalms that are also referred to as a “song” (ryv!). As any musical composition (romz+m!) with words could be called a “song”, it is not entirely clear why only certain Psalms have this designation. In this instance, it may denote a poem that is set to an existing melody, rather than being an original musical composition, in spite of the fact that the term romz+m! is also used (cp. the heading of Ps 46). Here, the melody is that of tj@v=T^-la^ (“Do not destroy”, or “May you not destroy”), apparently the name of a well-known lament. The miktams Pss 57-59 are sung to the same melody; cf. the study on Ps 57.

The meter of Psalm 75 is irregular, but tends to follow a 3-beat (3+3) couplet format. The poetic and thematic structure of the composition will be discussed in the notes below.

Verse 2 [1]

“We cast (praise) to you, O Mightiest;
we cast (praise), <calling on> your name,
recounting your wonderful (deed)s!”

A three-beat couplet is followed by an additional 2-beat line, added for dramatic effect, producing a tricolon. The first-person plural verb indicates a communal worship setting, such as that in which the Psalm might be performed.

As Kraus (p. 103) and other commentators have noted, the LXX reads kai\ e)pikaleso/meqa to\ o&noma/ sou (“and we call upon your name”) in the second line, suggesting that the underlying Hebrew was imvb arq rather than MT imv bwrq. In which case, arq should perhaps be read as an infinitive (ar*q=). I tentatively follow Dahood (II, p. 210) in reading wrps as an infinitive in the third line; if his suggestion, that the W– postformative element represents an archaic ending for the infinitive, is correct, then perhaps the infinitive in the second line originally had a similar form (warq), which could have been reduced to wrq. If that were so, then the MT would not need to be emended at all, only redivided: imvb wrq.

On the idea of declaring the “wonderful deeds” of YHWH, see Ps 9:2[1]; 26:7; 73:28; cf. Hossfeld-Zenger, p. 253.

Verses 3 [2]

“When I take (the) appointed place,
I will judge (with all) straightness.”

In verses 3-4, it is apparently YHWH who is speaking, meaning that the verses represent a Divine oracle and mark the prophetic character of the Psalm (on which, cf. above). As is fitting for a judgment-oracle, YHWH announces His intention to take His place as Judge. The noun du@om means “appointed place” —here, the place appointed for the Judgment. Probably a great level place is envisioned, where the assembled people will stand before Him. This levelness corresponds with the “straightness” (rv*ym@) with which God Himself judges—i.e., fairly, with justice and equity. The plural form <yr!v*ym@ should probably be understood as an intensive/emphatic or comprehensive plural  (with “all straightness,” i.e.,  total justice and fairness).

Verse 4 [3]

“(The) earth trembles and (those) sitting on her,
(while) I measure (out) her standing (post)s.”
Selah

YHWH is still the speaker in v. 4, continuing to announce the coming Judgment. The earth and its inhabitants are made to tremble (vb gWm Niphal), as God “measures” the columns/pillars (lit. “standing [post]s”). There is a dual meaning to the imagery in the second line. On the one hand, YHWH measures the pillars of the earth, alluding to His power and activity as Creator; at the same time, He is now busy preparing the place for His coming activity as Judge, where He will “measure out” the judgment for the earth (and its people). There is some syntactical wordplay that is almost impossible to translate fully in English; note the parallelism of the suffixed participles in each line:

    • h*yb#v=y) “(those) sitting (on) her”, i.e., those dwelling on her, the earth’s inhabitants
    • h*yd#Wmu^ “(those) standing (on) her,” i.e., her standing pillars/columns

The precise meaning of the verb gWm is not entirely certain. The Arabic root m¹³a (“surge, shake, totter”) is probably related, suggesting that the basic meaning is something like “shake, tremble”.

The Selah (hl*s#) pause marker at the end of v. 4 probably serves to demarcate the shift in speaker—from YHWH to the Psalmist. Since the first line of v. 5 begins (“I say/said…”), the pause helps the listener to realize that a different “I” is now speaking.

Verse 5 [4]

“I say to the (one)s boasting: ‘Do not boast!’
and to the wicked: ‘Do not lift high (your) horn!'”

The Psalmist, filling the role of prophet, gives a warning to the boastful (vb ll^h* II) and wicked people on earth. For poetic concision, I have translated the imperfect (jussive) verb forms as imperatives.

Verse 6 [5]

“Do not lift up your horn to the place on high,
(nor) speak against (the) ancient Rock!”

In my opinion, there is some clever wordplay in this couplet that resists simple translation. To begin with, in the first line, which otherwise repeats v. 5b, the word <orM*h^ (lit. “the place on high”) connotes “the One dwelling on high”. This results in a double meaning: (a) lifting up one’s “horn” to the place up high (i.e. where YHWH dwells); and (b) lifting it up against YHWH Himself, as an arrogant challenge to His sole authority over the nations.

In the third line, the adjective qt*u* has the basic meaning “old, ancient”, but can also be used in combination with the verb rb^D* (“speak”) as an idiom indicating bold and arrogant speech, characteristic of the wicked (cf. for example, 1 Sam 2:3; Psalm 31:19[18]; 94:4). The preceding word in the MT is raW`x^b= (“with [the] neck”), but the LXX has “against God”, which suggests that the Hebrew is rWxb= (“against [the] Rock”), with rWx (“rock”) as the familiar Divine title. Whether the MT or LXX more properly reflects the original, it seems likely that the Psalmist is intentionally giving a double meaning to the line:

    • “do not speak with a stiff neck”
      (i.e. arrogantly) /
      “do not speak against the ancient Rock [i.e. against YHWH]”
Verses 7-8 [6-7]

“Indeed, not from (the) going forth and darkening (of the sun),
nor from (the) out back (to the) mountains,
(is there any) but (the) Mightiest judging,
the (One) who brings low,
and the (One) who lifts high.”

Verse 7 of the MT, as it stands, is obscure. Dahood (II, p. 212f) would vocalize al as al@, rather than MT al) (negative particle), reading it as a verbal adjective or noun (participle) of the root yal meaning “prevail”. It thus designates YHWH as the “one prevailing”. This is an intriguing suggestion, but with relatively little evidence to support it.

It seems better to take vv. 7-8 together, as comprising a single syntactical statement. The basic message is that there is no one in the entire world besides YHWH who is capable of serving as Judge. The first line of v. 7 establishes the full scope of the earth from east to west—lit. from the “going forth” of the sun to its sinking (“darkening”). The second line does the same, moving from the “place out back” (outback, i.e., ‘wilderness, desert’) to the “mountains” (<yr!h*). The word <yr!h* could be taken as a verbal noun (Hiphil infinitive) of the root <Wr (“be high”), parallel with the imperfect form <yr!y` at the end of v. 8. In my view, this not correct, though the Psalmist likely is utilizing some wordplay again here, playing on the two possible meanings of <yr!h* (“mountains” / “lifting high”).

As the Sovereign Judge of all Creation, YHWH is the one who “brings low” (vb lp^v* Hiphil) and “lifts high” (vb <Wr Hiphil); thus, no human being should dare to lift one’s self up high (vv. 5-6, cf. above), acting in the place of God.

Verse 9 [8]

“For (there is) a cup in (the) hand of YHWH,
and wine foaming, full of mixed (spices),
and He pours out from this—
how He shall squeeze out its dregs!—
(and) all (the) wicked of (the) earth shall drink.”

This verse is rather complex in its structure: a three beat tricolon (lines 1-2, 5) is expanded into a quintet, with the addition of a pair of 2-beat lines (3-4) that builds suspense and heightens the dramatic effect. The Psalmist, functioning as a prophet delivering a judgment-oracle against the nations (i.e., the wicked), indicates that the great Judgment is about to take place. The cup of judgment is in God’s hand, and he is about to pour it out, upon the earth.

This image of judgment as a cup of wine that is poured out can be found in the Prophets (Isa 51:17ff; Jer 25:17ff; 51:7ff; Ezek 23:31-33; Hab 2:16; Zech 12:2, etc). It was adapted most vividly in the book of Revelation (14:10; 16:19; cf. 17:4; 18:6). The association between red wine and blood is obvious, and serves as a natural image for destructive/violent judgment (e.g., Joel 3:13ff; Rev 14:15-20).

Verse 10 [9]

“But I—I will put forth (praise) to (the) Eternal (One),
I will make music to (the) Mighty (One) of Ya’aqob.”

The Psalmist’s declaration of his intent to give praise to YHWH matches the opening announcement in v. 2 (cf. above). I follow Dahood (II, p. 215f) in reading <l*ou here as a Divine title. Properly, the noun refers to either the distant past or the distant future, often connoting the sense of “etern(al)ity” when applied to God. The expression <l*oul= certainly could be taken here to mean “(in)to the distant (future)” (i.e., forever), as it often does in the Old Testament. However, the parallel with the expression “the Mighty One of Jacob” in line 2 strongly suggests that we are dealing with another Divine title here.

The verb dg~n` (in the Hiphil) literally means “put in front (of someone)” (in this case, in front of God); for poetic concision, I have translated the verb here as “put forth”.

Verse 11 [10]

“Indeed, all (the) horns of (the) wicked I will cut down,
but (the) horns of (the) righteous (one) shall be lifted high!”

The Psalm ends with another Divine oracle, announcing the coming Judgment. It thus functions in tandem with the oracle in vv. 3-4 (cf. above), framing the judgment-oracle of the Psalm as a whole. The contrasting fates of the wicked and righteous are clearly described, using the same motif of the animal’s horn (/r#q#), along with contrastive idiom of bringing low / lifting high, found throughout the Psalm. On the horn of the bull or wild ox as a symbol of honor and strength (especially for a king or human leader), cf. Ps 18:3[2] [par 1 Sam 22:3]; 89:18[17], 25[24]; 92:11[10]; 132:17; 148:14; Jer 48:25; Ezek 29:21; Dan 7:8ff; 8:5ff; Lk 1:69.

The parallelism of “horns of the wicked” vs. “horns of the righteous” is precise, but the syntax differs slightly:

    • “two horns [i.e. horn-pair, dual] of the wicked [plural]”
    • “horns [plural] of the righteous [singular]”

The judgment comes on the wicked collectively, as a group; they each have a pair of horns (like the bull/ox). By contrast, the blessing/exaltation of the righteous comes to each one individually, with the implication that a great single horn will be raised up for each, resulting a multitude of horns (indicating honor) for the righteous as a whole. On the other hand, it may be that the plural tonr=q^ is meant as a comprehensive or intensive plural, alluding to the greatness of the honor (“horn”) for each righteous person.

References marked “Dahood, I” and “Dahood, II” above are to, respectively, Mitchell Dahood, S.J., Psalms I: 1-50, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 16 (1965), and Psalms II: 51-100, vol. 17 (1968).
Those marked “Kraus” are to Hans-Joachim Kraus, Psalmen, 2. Teilband, Psalmen 60-150, 5th ed., Biblischer Kommentar series (Neukirchener Verlag: 1978); English translation in Psalms 60-150, A Continental Commentary (Fortress Press: 1993).
Those marked “Hossfeld-Zenger” are to Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51-100, translated from the German by Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia Commentary series (Fortress Press: 2005).

 

January 7: Isaiah 9:5-6

Isaiah 9:5-6, concluded

The reference to the royal child (and his kingdom) in verses 5-6 [EV 6-7] (cf. the previous notes) is striking, and is (of course) quite familiar to Christians as a Messianic prophecy, applied to the person of Jesus. Assuming the historical setting of Isa 6:1-9:6 to be the years leading up to 732 B.C. (and prior to 722), a Messianic interpretation of the child in vv. 5-6 would seem to be out of the question (in terms of the primary meaning of the passage; see the specific context in 8:23 [9:1], discussed previously). Is it possible to identify the child with a particular historical figure? The grandeur of the titles in v. 5, and reference to the “throne of David” in v. 6, would require, at the very least, a king of Judah (that is, from the Davidic line).

The only person from Isaiah’s own time (c. 735-700) who seems to fit is Hezekiah, son of Ahaz. The birth and/or accession of a new king could be a time of great hope and promise, but also of tremendous danger, as princes and vassals may see the moment as an opportune time for revolt (cf. Psalm 2). Following the reign of his father, Ahaz (who “did not do what was right in the eyes of YHWH”), Hezekiah is a positive figure, even under the withering judgment of the book of Kings (2 Kings 8:3ff: he finally removed the “high places”, which his ancestors failed to do). He will also become a central figure in the book of Isaiah, and focal point of the key historical moment: the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem under Sennacherib in 701 B.C.

Some scholars would identify Hezekiah also as ±Immanû-°¢l (“God-with-us”) of the prophecy in 7:10-17 (cf. also 8:5-10). Arguments in favor would be: (a) parallel with 9:5-6, as both prophecy the birth of portentous children containing a promise of salvation; (b) the name is suggestive of the words of 2 Kings 8:7 (“and YHWH was with him…”); (c) the subsequent use of the name/phrase in 8:8,10. Arguments against: (a) there is nothing in the two passages which specifically identifies the two children; (b) the other symbolic names in chs. 7-8 still seem to be real names applied to specific children, so Immanuel, if a real name, most likely belongs to a different child than Hezekiah; (c) Immanuel as a child of Isaiah (or even as a purely symbolic/collective name) remains a possibility. I am by no means convinced that Immanuel, even if a child of Ahaz, is the same as the (royal) child of 9:5-6. In some ways there is even a closer parallel between the child of 7:14-17 and Isaiah’s child in 8:1-4, but few (if any) commentators would equate the two.

As far as arguments against identifying Hezekiah with the child of 9:5-6, three are especially significant:

    1. The message of deliverance and restoration in vv. 1-4 was not fulfilled in Hezekiah’s reign, particularly not for the Northern kingdom (the territories mentioned in the setting of 8:23). And, while Hezekiah was a good and faithful ruler (according to the testimony of 2 Kings 8:3-7ff), achieved some military success (2 Kings 8:8), and stood against Assyria (2 Kings 8:7, 13–chap. 19 and par.), an appraisal of his reign would not seem to match the glowing language of Isa 9:6. Indeed, in 2 Kings 20:16-19 [par. Isa 39:5-8], Isaiah himself prophecies the future Babylonian captivity—there will be only limited “peace and security” (20:19, contrasted with Isa 9:6). However, these points are weakened somewhat if one considers the character of the oracle in 9:1-6, which does not seem to carry the same predictive force found earlier in chapters 7-8: there are almost no specific historical details, no time indicator, indeed no clear sign of an immediate fulfillment. The perfect verbal forms, typically understood as prophetic perfects (indicating the certainty of what God will do), could also have a gnomic sense (indicating what God always does).
    2. It has been said that the weighty titles listed in Isa 9:5 are too lofty to be applied to a human king. However, similarly lofty, theologically significant names and titles were regularly applied to rulers in the ancient Near East. The most extensive evidence comes from Egypt, and the names applied to the Pharaoh during enthronement rituals (some of which are roughly parallel to those in Isa 9:5, cf. the discussion in the prior note). No similar ritual is recorded as such for kings of Israel/Judah in the Old Testament, but there are a few hints in the Psalms and elsewhere; Psalm 2 is perhaps the most striking example, a setting similar to that in the Egyptian ritual, where the Deity addresses the new ruler as His “son” (Ps 2:7). For more on this Psalm, see below.
    3. The very lack of specific historical details (see point 1 above) could be taken as a strong argument against identifying the child with Hezekiah. Certainly, it could apply at least as well to later rulers (such as Josiah, cf. below) or a future Messiah. If one accepts the basic interpretation of 9:5-6 as reflecting the enthronement/accession of a new king (that is, the language and symbolism of it), it has a timeless quality which could apply to any anointed king (the same is true of Psalm 2, etc). Only the historical context of the passage (c. 730-700 B.C.) would make it apply specifically to Hezekiah.

As mentioned above, there have been attempts at identifying the child (and the date of the poem) with Josiah, nearly a century later (c. 648-609 B.C.). According to 1 Kings 13:2ff, the coming rule of Josiah was prophesied, specifically in connection with the religious-political reform that he would undertake. There was, indeed, in Josiah’s reign a reawakening of aspirations for establishing control over the Northern territories for the kingdom of Judah, and this would fit the basic message of the oracle here. Moreover, the final collapse of the Assyrian empire, apparently prophesied (or at least alluded to) in vv. 3-4, did take place during the time of Josiah’s reign, though not because of anything done by the Judean kingdom. Ultimately, of course, Josiah’s kingdom fell short of the prophetic ideal promised by the poem no less than the kingdom of Hezekiah. Cf. Roberts, p. 152.

If one separates the poem from the narrative introduction in 8:23, there really are no historical details present which can allow us to date the poem with any sort of precision. The general character of the royal theology and exalted language could apply to the coronation of almost any king, as mentioned above. The accession of a new king offered hope for a time of joy and peace in the land, including deliverance from surrounding enemies (actual and potential). The imagery of light/darkness is also typical in this regard. One may cite Near Eastern examples, going back to at least the time of Hammurabi, where we find such language used in the prologue to his famous lawcode, in which he describes himself as one who “caused light to go forth over the lands…”, and that the gods made him king for this purpose:

“to cause justice to prevail in the land, to destroy the wicked and the evil, that the strong might not oppress the weak, to rise like the sun…and to light up the land” (Roberts, p. 149)

Messianic (Early Christian) Interpretation

Even though Isa 9:5-6 is not cited in the New Testament, 8:23-9:1 [EV 9:1-2] are quoted in Matthew 4:15-16, at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee; and, though not specified, an identification of Jesus with the child in 9:5-6 would seem to be implied. This is certainly how early Christians would come to understand the passage (Justin is perhaps the earliest surviving witness [c. 140-160], cf. First Apology §33 and Dialogue §76). More broadly, it would come to carry a Messianic interpretation, though there is little surviving pre-Christian Jewish evidence of this.

Even though no commentary on Isa 8:23-9:6 [EV 9:1-7] survives from Qumran, there is an allusion to v. 5 in the “Thanksgiving Hymns” (Hodayot) 1QH. In Hymn 9 [XI, formerly III], the author compares his distress to that of a woman giving birth (verse 7ff): “9and the woman expectant with a boy is racked by her pangs, for through the breakers of death she gives birth to a male, and through the pangs of Sheol there emerges, 10from the «crucible» of the pregnant woman a wonderful counsellor with his strength, and the boy is freed from the breakers”. He goes on to contrast the (righteous) birth of a boy with the (wicked) birth of a serpent (verse 12ff), a reflection of the strong ethical dualism found in many of the Qumran texts.

A comparison of Isa 9:1-6 [esp. vv. 5-6] with Psalm 2 (discussed above) is noteworthy:

    • Both passages are understood (in their original context) as relating to the enthronement/accession of a new (Davidic) king. The positive side of the event (light, joy, deliverance from [current] oppression) is stressed in Isa 9:1-6, the negative side (danger from rebellious princes/vassals/allies) in Ps 2.
    • Both speak of a birth (Isa 9:5; Ps 2:7). This may mean that the ‘birth’ in Isa 9:5 is symbolic of the king’s accession/enthronement, rather than a literal physical birth.
    • Both speak of (the king) as a son. The king as God’s son (i.e., “son of God” though the phrase is not used) is explicit in Psalm 2 (cf. also 2 Sam 7:14), while only implied, perhaps, in Isa 9:5-6.
    • Following the ‘announcement’ of birth/sonship, both passages have God’s declaration of royal inheritance and sovereignty (Isa 9:6; Ps 2:8-12)
    • Both passages came to be understood as Messianic prophecies, and were applied to Jesus by early Christians—Ps 2 (along with Ps 110) already, on several occasions, in the New Testament itself.

An examination of these parallels is also instructive for understanding how the language and imagery of the Old Testament developed over time, from the original historical context and meaning, to a broader symbolism related to the idea of the Davidic kingship and covenant; then follows the hope/promise of a restoration of Davidic rule (in the post-exilic period) under a new Anointed figure (Messiah), traditions of which are preserved and transmitted in Jewish thought and belief, until the time of Jesus Christ (Yeshua the Anointed [Messiah]).  In the light of this new (incarnate) revelation, new meanings and applications of the Scriptures were opened up to believers—it is hardly surprising that at least a few of these would appear to relate so beautifully to the marvelous birth of our Savior.

References above marked “Roberts” are to J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, Hermeneia (Fortress Press: 2015).

January 6: Isaiah 9:6

Isaiah 9:5-6, continued
Verse 6 [7]

“His rule will be great,
and no end to its fullness,
over (the) ruling-seat of David,
and over his kingdom,
to make it firm and establish it,
in justice and in rightness,
from now until (the) distant (future).”

The emphasis on the rule (hr*c=m!) of the new king, and the exalted royal titles given to him (in connection with his coronation/accession), were discussed in the previous note (on v. 5 [6]). Here the same word, hr*c=m!, is used again, as verse 6 [7] further expounds the nature and character of this rule.

There is a textual difficulty in the opening word, mainly due to the occurrence, in the Masoretic text, of a final mem (<) in the middle of the word—hB@r=<^l=. This indicates that the received text was divided into two words hbr <l, which the Masoretes then ‘corrected’ as one word, vocalizing it hB@r=m^l=, “for (the) greatness/increase of”. The Qumran Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) supports the Masoretic vocalized (corrected) reading (q§r¢°). It is probably best (and simplest) to follow the q§r¢°, reading hbrm as a verbal noun—i.e., “being great, increasing (greatly)” —which, for poetic concision, I translate above as “will be great”.

The greatness of this king’s reign, and the expansion of his domain, is further characterized as a near-limitless <olv*. This noun is often translated “peace,” as I did for the final royal title in v. 5 (“Prince of Peace”). However, properly, it means “completion, fulfillment,” and so I have rendered it here as “fullness,” as a fitting parallel to hB@r=m! (“greatness, increase”). There can be no question that peace is an important attribute of this rule, and that this king’s reign also be characterized by a lengthy period of peace; thus the line can equally well be translated “and no end to its peace.”

The next two lines form a precise parallel: “over the throne of David / over his kingdom”. Clearly we are dealing with the Davidic line of the Judean kingdom, and the royal theology associated with it. This new king will confirm and strength the Davidic line, enhancing its glory and prestige. The verbs (/WK, Hiphil “make firm”) and du^s* (“[give] support”) are given in the form of purpose/result infinitives: “to make firm…to support”. This establishment and strengthening of the Judean kingdom will be done through justice (fP*v=m!) and rightness (or righteousness, hq*d*x=). The noun hq*d*x= (and root qdx) often connotes faithfulness and loyalty to the covenant with YHWH. It is this fulfillment (the fundamental meaning of <olv*) of the binding agreement with God that guarantees Divine protection for the kingdom—and, with it, deliverance for the people and victory over their enemies. In the context of the oracle (8:23 [9:1]), this protection and deliverance will be extended to the ‘remnant’ of the shattered Northern Kingdom.

The idea that the king’s peaceful and blessed reign would last from the “time (now)” (hT*u^) until the distant future (<l*ou) is typical of the exalted (and hyperbolic) coronation language used in the poem. The exaggeration expresses both an ideal and a hope for the future. This language is perhaps even more important in relation to the continuation of the Davidic royal line. The Old Testament traditions alternate, in their royal theology, between the promise of an unconditional kingship for the Davidic line, and a promise that is conditional upon each ruler remaining faithful/loyal to the covenant. The latter view dominates much of the Deuteronomic history (including the books of Kings) and the Prophetic writings.

Verse 6 [7] concludes with a final declaration, which could be a secondary addition to the text (cp. at 37:32): “(The) ha*n+q! of YHWH of (the heavenly) armies will do this”. Whether or not it is original, the statement serves as a safeguard, so as to credit any success (and military victory) for the Judean king to YHWH, rather than the human ruler (and his forces). The ancient title “YHWH of (the heavenly) armies [toab*x=]” may have referred originally to El-Yahweh as the Creator of the heavenly/celestial entities (retaining the verbal force of the name hwhy). However, the idea that those entities would fight (for Israel) at His command (e.g., Judges 5:20) perhaps allows us to fill in the title, at least as it came to be used in the traditional narratives and poetry, as “YHWH, commander of the heavenly armies”.

The noun ha*n+q! is a bit difficult to translate (I have left it untranslated above). The basic meaning of the root anq entails having a strong emotion, usually in relation to the possession of something. Often it signifies the idea of jealousy or envy, and it is certainly used this way in the Old Testament as a Divine attribute—viz., of YHWH’s jealous guarding of His people (as His possession), etc. Priority should probably be given to the fundamental aspect of the intensity of the emotion, in which case a translation like “ardor” for ha*n+q! would be proper; in passages where jealousy/envy is not clearly indicated, the noun is often translated “zeal”.

In the next daily note, the final note in this set, we will examine further the poem as a royal oracle, a prophecy regarding the new king of Judah and his reign. We will give consideration to the identification of the king in question, from the standpoint of the original historical context, and then touch briefly upon the passage as a Messianic prophecy, applied to the person (and birth) of Jesus.

January 5: Isaiah 9:5

Isaiah 9:5-6
Verse 5 [6]

“For a child has been born to us,
a son has been given to us,
and rule is come to be upon his shoulder,
and his name shall be called:
Wonder-Counselor,
Mighty-Warrior,
Father of ‘Long-Life’,
Prince of Peace.”

As with vv. 3-4 (cf. the previous note), vv. 5-6 begin with the particle yK! (“for…”, “[it is] that…”), a conjunctive particle often used with emphatic (or asseverative) force. Here it clearly relates the announcement of the new king (in Judah/Jerusalem) to the deliverance of Israel from her foreign oppressor (vv. 3-4). Indeed, the rule that his upon his shoulder is in stark contrast to the yoke of servitude that had been upon the shoulder of the Israelite people. Even so, the precise relationship between vv. 1-4 and vv. 5-6 may be debated. Is the birth of the child (or accession of the king) the means by which God will bring about the things detailed in vv. 1-4? Are 8:23-9:4 the reason for the birth? Or are the events of vv. 1-4 juxtaposed with the birth as parallel aspects of God’s action?

The first two lines may be summarized simply:

    • Wnl*ÁdL^y% dl#y# yK! (“For a child has been born to/for us”)—the etymological connection of dly is lost in translation: “a (thing) born has been born”, “a (thing) brought-forth has been brought-forth”.
    • Wnl*Á/T^n] /B@ (“a son has been given to/for us”)—a point of (synonymous) poetic parallelism with the previous phrase.

The noun hr*c=m! occurs only here (and in v. 6) in the Old Testament. It is presumed to derive from a root (hrc II) meaning “rule,” but based entirely upon the context here (and by the LXX translation of a)rxh/). It may also be related to rc^ (translated “prince”, as in the fourth title at end of the verse, cf. below). The mem (-m) preformative element could either be the mark of a verbal noun (“ruling”) or a locative indicator (place of rule, i.e., kingdom, dominion). Given the contrastive parallel with the instruments of slavery (yoke and shoulder/pinion bar) in v. 3, hr*c=m! is best understood here as signifying the ruling power and authority given to the king (and possessed by him). A royal staff, resting upon his shoulder, would make a fitting parallel to the oppressor’s authoritative staff/rod (fb#v@). In any case, we are most likely dealing symbolic emblem[s] of rule, along with the names applied to the king (cf. below), being ritualized aspects of sovereignty.

What of the titles or names in Isaiah 9:5b? There are four: the first two have nouns in juxtaposition, the second two are effectively construct forms:

    • Ju@oy al#P# (pele° yô±¢ƒ), typically translated “Wonderful Counsellor”
    • roBG] la@ (°¢l gibbôr), typically “Mighty God”

However, the English rendering is a bit misleading, as if the first words were adjectives modifying the second. The nouns juxtaposed are not related syntactically in quite this way. The noun al#P# refers to something extraordinary, i.e. a wonder, marvel, miracle, etc. The relation between the nouns is perhaps better expressed by a comma, or hyphen: “Wonder, Counsellor” or “Wonder–Counsellor”. The noun roBG] refers to a strong (man) or warrior. la@, usually translated “God” (El), has an original meaning something like “mighty” (“Mighty [One]” = “God”); the plural form <yh!l)a$ (Elohim) is probably an intensive plural, roughly “Mightiest”. “God Warrior” is a fairly accurate rendering of the second name, or, translating even more literally “Mighty One, Warrior”.

    • du^yb!a& (°¦»î±ad), familiar translation “Everlasting Father”
    • <olv*Árc^ (´ar-sh¹lôm), “Prince of Peace”

In the third name, the two words have been joined (without a maqqeph [‘hyphen’]), the second of which is difficult to translate. du^ indicates, more or less literally, the passing or advancing of time, either in the sense of (a) into the distant past, (b) into the [distant] future, or (c) in perpetuity [i.e. continually]. As such, it is roughly synonymous with the word <lou (see v. 6). “Everlasting” is not especially accurate, but it is hard to find an English word that is much better. In the context of a royal title, something along the lines of “long life” is probably implied (similar to Egyptian titles, i.e. “living forever”, “good in years”, etc). This would create a parallel with the two names: “Father of ‘Long-life'”, “Prince of Peace” —two aspects of the promised time of renewal. However, there is a sense of du^ which also indicates “ancient” or “eternal” (Hab 3:6, etc) as long as one is careful not to infuse the latter rendering with an exaggerated theological meaning.

These four titles are included under the formula: “and he/they will call [or has called] his name…”

It is not entirely certain whether we are dealing here with the birth of the new king, or to his coronation/accession (as a ‘birth’), or both. The identity of this figure, and his relation to the child in 7:10ff, will be discussed in an upcoming note. In my view, vv. 5-6 here do draw upon the traditional language of coronation rituals in the ancient Near East. For more on this, cf. the discussion by Roberts (pp. 150-3) and the earlier studies he cites. In particular, parallels with the Egyptian coronation service have been noted (cf. specifically the texts related to Hatshepsut, Amenhotep III, and Haremhab). The exalted titles in verse 5 are comparable to a number of the Egyptian crown-titles that are attested—e.g., “ready in plans” (cp. ‘Wonderful counselor’), “great in marvels,” “good god,” “great in strength,” “living forever,” “(he) who gives life,” etc (Roberts, p. 151f).

References above marked “Roberts” are to J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, Hermeneia (Fortress Press: 2015).

January 4: Isaiah 9:3-4

Isaiah 9:3-4 [4-5]
Verse 3 [4]

“For (the) yoke of his carrying,
and (the) pole of his shoulder—
(the) rod of (the one) pressing on him—
you have broken, as (on the) day of Midyan!”

Again we have a pair of 3+3 couplets (cf. the previous note on vv. 1-2 [2-3]), though the rhythm is, in actuality, slightly irregular. The first three lines involve construct phrases, the first two of which are in synonymous parallelism:

    • “the yoke of his carrying” (olB=s% lu))
      “the pole of his shoulder” (omk=c! hF#m^)

The image is the same: that of a yoked animal serving as a beast of burden. The lu) (used also in 10:27; cf. 14:25) denotes the thrusting of the (animal’s) head into the yoke, while the hF@m^ (also in 10:24) refers to the extended pole, or bar, that rests upon the neck and shoulder. The root lbs denotes the carrying or dragging of a weight (i.e., load or burden). Human beings are being forced to act like beasts of burden, referring to a harsh and wearisome condition of servile labor. The construct phrase in the third line builds upon (and further expounds) this image:

    • “the rod of the one pressing [on him]” (cg@N)h^ fb#v@)

The rod or staff (fb#v@, also in 10:24) represents both the ruling (superior) position of the oppressor and the instrument used to oppress the slave. The verb cg~n` essentially refers to the pressing/driving of someone to do work; it can be used in the concrete sense (as here) of forcefully driving an animal (or human slave), or with the more generic meaning of making demands on someone.

The final like declares the dramatic reversal of this situation:

“…you have broken, as (on the) day of Midian!”

The allusion is presumably to the historical traditions narrated in Judges 6-7, and, if so, then the idea would doubtless be of an unexpected victory over a superior force, made possible through the power of YHWH. Indeed, God will have “broken” (tt^j*, Hiphil causative stem) the foreign oppression over Israel, as He did in the Exodus, and as described in the accounts of deliverance in the book of Judges.

The perfect tense here, as throughout verses 1-4, is an example of the prophetic perfect—i.e., events that will occur in the future (being prophesied) referred to as things that have already happened.

Verse 4 [5]

“For every shoe stomping with a quake,
and (every) garment rolled with blood,
indeed shall be for burning,
(for) being eaten up by fire.”

A 3-beat couplet is followed by a short/terse 2-beat (2+2) couplet. The overall imagery alludes to a military victory over Israel’s foreign oppressor.

In the first two lines, the reference is to the foot-gear and clothing of soldiers. Both parts of the cognate noun-verb pair (/oas=, and participle /a@s)) occur only here in the Old Testament, and likely are Assyrian (or Babylonian) loanwords (Akkadian š¢nu, “shoe, sandal”). This may well be intentional, given the context of the Assyrian conquest of the Israelite Northern Kingdom (cf. the prior note on 8:23 [9:1]). It is almost impossible to translate literally the cognate relationship between noun and verb; the verb is denominative from the noun (“shoe”), and thus would mean something like “use the shoe” or “shoe along” (i.e., step, stomp, tread). Since the feet of the soldiers are ‘stomping’ on the ground enough to make the ground “quake” (noun vu^r^), a large military force is implied.

That this force has been (i.e., will be) defeated, is indicated by the second line, with the image of clothing (singular [collective] noun, hl*m=c!) that is “rolled” (vb ll^G`) in blood. The plural form <ym!D* (lit. “bloods”) almost always refers to acts of bloodshed—that is, killing or violent action taken against someone. With the army of the foreign oppressor defeated, and (presumably) many of the soldiers dead, their shoes and garments will be used as fuel for the fire—which is the image in the final two lines.

We can see that the joy that will come to the oppressed Israelite people (vv. 1-2) will be, in large measure, due to the military defeat of their oppressors, which will thus result in deliverance for the people. The defeat of the oppressing nation could come from the action of another foreign nation; however, what follows in vv. 5-6 strongly indicates that it will be the Judean kingdom, led by God’s chosen ruler, which brings about the deliverance and restoration of Israel. This will be discussed in the next note.

 

January 3: Isaiah 9:1-2

Isaiah 9:1-2 [2-3]

Verses 1-6 [2-7] comprise a prophetic poem that brings the section 6:1-9:6 to a close. On the introductory verse in 8:23 [9:1], cf. the previous note; this verse establishes the context for the poem, framing it as a message of hope for the conquered Northern Kingdom of Israel.

Verse 1 [2]

“The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
(for those) sitting in a land of death’s shadow
a light has shone upon them.”

The poem begins with a pair of 3-beat (3+3) couplets, which are clearly in parallel (synonymous parallelism). The darkness/light motif was established in the introductory verse (8:23 [9:1], cf. the previous note), as well as at the conclusion of the prior oracle (8:22). In this respect, 8:23 is transitional between the oracle in 8:19-22 and the poem in 9:1ff. In the poem, the darkness of the earlier judgment-oracle gives way to a new message of hope. The people “walking in darkness,” based on the context of the section (and specified in 8:23), are the people of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Parts of Israel were annexed by Assyria, following the conquests of 734-732 B.C., and turned into Assyrian provinces. A ‘remnant’ of this kingdom persisted for another decade, until the fall of Samaria in 722/721.

The dual motif of “walking” (vb El^h*) and “sitting” (bv^y`, i.e. dwelling, remaining) in darkness is all too appropriate as a figurative description of the Israelite survivors and exiles. In the second couplet, the general image of “darkness” (Ev#j)) is described even more dramatically (and tragically) as “death’s shadow” (“shadow of death,” tw#m*l=x^). The contrast with darkness, naturally enough, is light (roa). Light shines (vb Hg^n`) on this devastated people, bringing hope of salvation and restoration. This Isaian light-theme (2:5; 10:17; 13:10; 26:19; 30:26, etc) will be developed further in the Deutero- (and Trito-)Isaian poems, applying the message of the 8th century oracles to the situation of Judah’s exile (and eventual return) in the 6th century—cf. 42:6, 16; 49:6; 51:4; 58:8ff; 60:1-3ff, 19-20, etc.

Verse 2 [3]

“You multiplied the(ir) rejoicing,
you made great the(ir) joy—
they have joy before you,
as (the) joy in the harvest,
as when (men) circle (in joy)
in their dividing (the) plunder!”

Textual Note: With most commentators, I read hl*yG!h^ (“the rejoicing”) in line 1, rather than MT (also in 1QIsaa) al) yoGh^ (“the nation / not…”).

The meter in verse 3 shifts, from a pair of 3-beat couplets, to a trio of 2-beat (2+2) couplets.

The light that shines upon the people produces an experience of joy. Two parallel roots are used to express this. The first (lines 1 and 5) is lyG], which literally means “to (move in a) circle”, i.e., to dance and circle around joyfully. The second (lines 2-4) is jm^c*, which refers more generally to a feeling of gladness and joy. Two illustrative images are then used to depict the joy that these people feel: (a) the joy experienced with the coming of the harvest, and (b) the military imagery of victorious soldiers rejoicing when they receive a share of booty/plunder (ll^v*) after the battle.

The perfect tenses of the verb refer to the coming restoration as some which has already taken place; this is not uncommon in Old Testament prophecy, but should be distinguished from use of the precative perfect, more common in the Psalms, where one expresses what one wishes (or expects) to happen as though it has already occurred.

January 2: Isaiah 8:23ff

Isaiah 8:23-9:6 [9:1-7]

The poem in 9:1-6 [EV 2-7] brings the section of 6:1-9:6 to a close. It functions as an appendix to the section, and, in its literary setting, offers a message of hope to the survivors and exiles of the shattered Northern Kingdom. The poem is preceded by a narrative introduction (8:23 [9:1]), which clearly sets the message of the poem in the context of the 8th century Assyrian crisis. The Assyrian conquests of 734-732 remain the primary focus throughout this section; however, as we have seen, the fall of the Northern Kingdom (722/721) and the devastating invasion of Judah (701) are also in view. The compilation of 6:1-9:6 as a whole almost certainly took place after 701.

There are certain textual questions in 8:23 which need to be addressed.

Isaiah 8:23a—[Wum* can be derived from [ou (“fly, flutter”) or [ou (“be dark”); the former would indicate a negative situation (“there will be no flying/fluttering” [that is, release/escape, or perhaps poetically as “daybreak”]), the latter a positive one (“there will be no darkness”). The referent for the feminine suffix Hl* is unclear: it could refer to any of the feminine nouns in verse 22 (Jr#a# [“land”], hk*v@j& [“darkness”], or parallel hr*x*/hq*ox [“distress, oppression”]), or it could look forward to the “land” of 8:23b/9:1. The preposition could have the sense of “for her” or “from/by her”.

Isaiah 8:23b—Does /ovar!h* (“the head” [i.e. the first, former]) modify the prior common/feminine noun tu@ (i.e. “as at the first/former time, [when] he…”), or does refer to an implied (masculine) subject (i.e. “as at the time [when] the first/former one…”); this affects the parallelism with /orj&a^h* (“the following” [i.e. the later]): is it a former/later time or former/later person? The verbs llq and dbk (in the Hiphil) mean “make light” and “make heavy” respectively; the former can either have the sense of “treat with contempt/dishonor” or “lighten, make easier”, the latter “treat with honor” or “make heavier [i.e. more difficult]”. Then, is the parallelism synonymous or antithetical? In the historical context, how do these verbs relate to the territories of Zebulon, Naphtali, the Transjordan and Galilee?

These questions are important for establishing the basic context for the poetic oracle that follows. Compare the very different renderings of two modern critical commentaries (by J. J. M Roberts [Hermeneia, 2015, p. 144] and Joseph Blenkinsopp [Anchor Bible, 2000, p. 245-6]:

Roberts/Hermeneia

…Surely it will be without daybreak to the one distressed by it.

As at the former time he treated with contempt
<The Sharon and the land of Gilead,>
The land of Zebulon and the land of Naphtali,
So at the latter time he has honored the way of the sea,
Trans-jordan, Galilee of the nations.
The people who were walking in darkness
Have seen a great light…

Blenkinsopp/AB:

There is no gloom for her who is oppressed. At that time the earlier ruler treated with contempt the territory of Zebulon and Naphthali, and the later one oppressed the way of the sea, the land across the Jordan, Galilee of the nations. The people that walk in the dark Have seen a great light…

In my view, Roberts is correct in understanding a contrast between the verbs (in the Hiphil) ll^q* (“make light [of]”) and db^K* (“give weight [to]”), in the sense of “disregard” vs. “honor”, and that YHWH is the implied subject. In allowing the Assyrian conquests to take place, God was “making light of” Israel, but now He will “give weight to” (i.e., honor) her. Here is my translation of the verse:

“(It is) that (there is) no darkness (now) for (the one) whom (there had been) distress for her; as (in) the former time (when) He made light (of) the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, even (so in) the later (time) He has given weight (to the) way of the sea, (the land) across the Yarden, (and) Galîl of the nations.”

However, there is no contrast between the territories mentioned. All five designations refer equally to the Northern Kingdom, but the last three specifically refer to areas that were turned into Assyrian provinces after 732: D¥°ru (Dor, “the way of the sea”), Gal±azu (Gilead, “[the land] across the Jordan”), Magidû (Megiddo, “Galilee of the nations”); cf. Blenkinsopp, p. 247; Roberts, p. 147f. The implication is that God will restore honor to these territories, by restoring them within a united Israelite Kingdom, under the leadership of a new king in Judah/Jerusalem. This is the focus of the poem that follows.

There are fewer problems of interpretation in the poem proper, the stanzas of which can be outlined as follows:

    • V. 1: Light shines for those in darkness
    • V. 2: Joy will be increased, with two-fold motif: (a) harvest, (b) army dividing spoils
    • V. 3: Three connected symbols of oppression—yoke, cross-bar, and rod/whip—will be smashed
    • V. 4: The signs and remains of warfare and conquest (shoes, blood-caked garments) will be burned
    • V. 5: Announcement of the birth of a child (son), along with symbol(s) of government and (royal) titles
    • V. 6: A promise to establish/maintain the greatness and (eternal) rule of the Davidic kingdom

With regard to this poem, critical scholars have given various dates to it, ranging from Isaiah’s own time (c. 730-700 B.C.) down to the post-exilic period. An exilic or post-exilic date would make a Messianic orientation much more plausible, but I find little evidence in these verses for such a setting. The closer one comes to Isaiah’s own time, the much less likely a future (Messianic) interpretation would be as the primary sense of the passage. This is particularly true if we take seriously the overall context of Isa 6:1-9:6, which is set rather securely in the period c. 740-732 B.C.

Assuming this context still applies to 8:23, the regions mentioned (Zebulon, Naphtali, Transjordan [Gilead], Galilee and the northern coastal plain [“way of the sea”]) represent areas which suffered under Assyrian attack 734-732 B.C., and were effectively annexed to become Assyrian provinces (cf. above). The message of 9:1-6 is directed, in part, to the Northern kingdom (“the people who walk in darkness”)—there is no indication that Samaria has fallen completely yet. Of course, Assyria still threatened the Southern kingdom of Judah, and would launch a devastating attack some years later (this will become the central event of the remainder of the first half of the book [up to ch. 39]). Here God promises (expressed in the prophetic perfect: “he has increased joy”, “he has smashed”, etc.) to deliver Israel/Judah from her enemies, bringing a renewed period of peace and prosperity.

January 1: Isaiah 8:11-22

Isaiah 8:11-22

There are three pieces to this section, which bring the oracles of chapters 7-8 to a close. They seem to be only loosely connected, though thematically they all relate, we may assume, to the 8th century Assyrian crisis. The pieces may be outlined as follows:

    • Vv. 11-15—A message of warning from YHWH to the prophet, emphasizing the need to trust in Him alone
    • Vv. 16-18—A biographical notice, referring to the sealing of Isaiah’s oracle(s)
    • Vv. 19-22—A message of warning to people (Isaiah’s audience) against relying on other religious means (rather than trusting solely in YHWH’s word) in time of crisis.
Verses 11-15

The first unit begins with an introductory notice of a powerful inspired (prophetic) state that grips Isaiah:

“For thus said YHWH to me, as (with) a firm grasp (of the) hand, and disciplined me (away) from walking in (the) way of this people, saying…” (v. 11)

The central verb in the MT is rs^y` (“discipline, correct, rebuke”), yn]r@S=y]w+ (“and He disciplined me”), which fits the forceful image of God taking firm hold (qzj) of Isaiah with the hand. The idea would be of a parent forcefully disciplining a child. However, the Qumran Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) has yn]r@ys!y+ (“He turned me [aside]”), a Hiphil form of rWs (“turn [aside]”). This would fit the motif that follows, of walking on a certain path (or avoiding it). Thus, both verbs would fit the context, and it is difficult to decide between them; unfortunately, the other Qumran fragments do not contain this portion of v. 11, so there is no additional help to be found there (cf. Roberts, p. 136). I think that the context slightly favors rsy, with the overriding sense that YHWH is giving a stern warning to Isaiah.

He is to avoid “the way of this people”, where the expression “this people” should be understood in light of the earlier occurrence in v. 6 (cf. the discussion in the prior note). Assuming that we are still dealing with the historical context of the Syro-Ephraimite crisis, Isaiah was caught in the middle of this situation. Some of “the people” supported the anti-Assyrian coalition, while others would have preferred to ally themselves with Assyria. There is some indication that king Ahaz of Judah vacillated between these two positions. The prophetic message of Isaiah ran contrary to both of these practical political/military approaches, and here YHWH is warning him against falling into such worldly ways of thinking.

A key word in this message is the noun rv#q#, from the root rvq, which fundamentally means “bind [together]”. In the context, it refers to a political (and/or military) alliance, such as the anti-Assyrian coalition, formed by Aram-Damascus and Israel, which sought to force Judah (through military pressure) to join it. The prophet is directed not to think or speak in such terms, and he is also exhorted not to be afraid, nor to fear the kinds of things people fear during such times of crisis (v. 12). Rather than turning to political solutions, Isaiah and his supporters are to place their trust in YHWH alone (vv. 13ff).

The root vdq, denoting holiness and separation/ consecration, provides a contrast with rvq, and there is even a kind of alliterative wordplay between the two. It connotes the covenant bond between YHWH and His people, along with the protection that He provides for those who are faithful and trust in Him. For the faithful ones, God serves as a holy place of protection (vD*q=m!), but for others, He is a stone that trips them up and causes them to fall.

One is reminded of the use of vv. 14-15 (along with Psalm 118:22) as applied to the person of Jesus in the Gospel tradition (Luke 20:18 par; cf. also the declaration in 2:34 of the Infancy narrative). Here the  warning of judgment is equally comprehensive, addressed to the kingdoms of Israel and Judah alike—and, indeed, both would experience considerable destruction and suffering at the hands of Assyria. None of their political machinations would help them to avoid this fate, and only a remnant—including the city of Jerusalem (where YHWH’s holy sanctuary [vD*q=m!] resides)—would survive.

Verses 16-18

The inclusion of this biographical notice is curious, and originally it was probably part of the tradition in vv. 1-4 (cf. the prior note). There is certainly a continuation of the themes from that earlier passage, namely: (1) a notarized written record of Isaiah’s prophecy, and (2) the association of the oracle with Isaiah’s child. In this particular scene, there is a further juxtaposition between the presence of Isaiah’s disciples (<yd!WMl!, v. 16) and his children (<yd!l*y+, v. 18)—presumably the two children, with the symbolic names, connected with the oracles in 7:3-9 and 8:1-4. The disciples are associated with the binding (vb rWx, i.e., securing) and sealing (vb <t^j*) of the prophecy—i.e., a written record of one or more of Isaiah’s oracles, which doubtless served as a primary source for the document of 6:1-9:6 as a whole.

The children, by contrast, are associated with the message of the oracle(s), as the symbolic names and connected signs indicate. This is specified in verse 18, referring to the children as those “…whom YHWH gave to me for signs [tota)] and for portents [<yt!p=om] in Yisrael”. The oracles, and the accompanying child-signs, relate specifically to the judgment coming upon the kingdom of Israel (along with Aram-Damascus), which was fulfilled by the Assyrian conquests of 734-732 B.C.

The central statement of the episode (in v. 17), emphasizes the prophet’s trust in YHWH, contrasted with the general faithlessness of the Israelite kingdom:

“I will wait [vb hk*j*] for YHWH, the (One) hiding His face from (the) house of Ya’aqob; indeed I will wait [vb hw`q*] for Him.”

The prophet’s two declarations that he will wait for YHWH, using two different verbs, bracket the statement alluding to God’s judgment against Israel (“…hiding His face from the house of Jacob”). The ‘hiding’ (turning away) of God’s face essentially refers to the removal of His covenant-protection from the people, thus allowing for their conquest by the Assyrians.

Verses 19-22

In the first unit, the focus is on how people respond (out of fear) in a time of crisis, turning to political/military alliances as their source of hope and protection. Another way of responding is to seek out (vb vr^D*) other religious sources, apart from simply trusting in the prophetic word of God. That is the focus here in the third unit, which matches the first as a message of warning against following in the path of the people at large. The first message was addressed to Isaiah himself; the second, here, is presented as an oracle, by Isaiah, to an audience: “And (it is) that they will/may say to you…”.

The implied “they”, as the subject of the verb, are the people at large (and their leaders). In time of crisis, people will often seek out various superstitious practices to gain answers and find a sense of hope and security. Among these can be included various forms of divination—most of which are specifically prohibited in the Torah. The one mentioned here in vv. 19-22 is necromancy—attempts to obtain information and guidance from the spirits of the dead. Such things were outlawed by the Torah (e.g., Lev 19:31; 20:6, 27; Deut 18:11), but they continued to be practiced throughout Israel’s history (cf. 19:3; 26:13-19; 28:14-22; 29:4; Blenkinsopp, p. 245). The most famous Old Testament example is the episode at En-Dor in 1 Samuel 28.

The message of warning concludes on a dark and chilling note (v. 22), promising that those who resort to necromancy, looking down into the darkness of the underworld, will themselves be thrust down into deep darkness.

References above marked “Roberts” are to J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, Hermeneia (Fortress Press: 2015).
Those marked “Blenkinsopp” are to Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1-39, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 19 (Yale University Press: 2000).

December 30: Isaiah 8:5-10

Isaiah 8:5-10

“And YHWH proceeded to speak to me again, saying…” (v. 5)

Verse 5 begins a new oracle, though the references to Rezin and “the son of Remalyah” (i.e., Pekah) in v. 6 make clear that we are still dealing with the Syro-Ephraimite crisis (735-734 B.C.) which was the setting of the prior oracles. There are, indeed, a number of points of contact with the four previous oracles, including the river/canal imagery here, which may allude to the locale of the first oracle in 7:1-9, when Isaiah met Ahaz at the canal of the Siloam pool (v. 3).

“(In) response for (how) this people has refused (the) waters of the offshoot traveling softly, and having rejoiced with Rezin and (the) son of Remalyah, indeed for this (reason), see! My Lord is bringing up over them (the) waters of the (great) River, mighty and manifold—(the) king of Aššur {Assyria} and all his weight—and (they) shall come up over all its channels and travel over all its banks.” (vv. 6-7)

The basic contrast here is clear enough—between a soft/gently (fa^) moving stream and a powerful flood of water overflowing its banks. The noun j^l)v! literally means something like “offshoot”, or “branch”, but in context here certainly refers to a water-canal. It may be the name of a specific canal carrying water from the Gihon spring to the pool of Siloam (cf. the locale of the oracle in 7:3, mentioned above). This canal is contrasted with “the River” —that is, the Great River (Euphrates), with its mighty (<Wxu*) and many (br^) waters. Obviously, the Assyrian empire is being referenced, which would have been clear to the audience, even without the specific mention of the “king of Assyria”, which could conceivably be a secondary gloss.

Because “this people” refused (vb sa^m*, also in 7:15-16) the gentle-moving and beneficial waters of the canal, YHWH is bringing upon them instead the powerful and destructive waters of the Euphrates. This ‘refusal’ is defined in terms of “rejoicing” (vb cWc) with Rezin and Pekah, i.e., the kings of Aram-Damascus and Israel. There is some textual uncertainty regarding the form cwcm. The Masoretic Text (supported by the Qumran MSS 4QIsae-f) vocalizes it as a construct noun (vovm=), while the great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) apparently reads a Hiphil participle (cyc!m*). In any case, a verbal noun (from the root cwc), would seem to be correct.

The idea of “rejoicing” with Rezin and Pekah surely means, in context, supporting the anti-Assyrian coalition of Aram-Damascus and Israel. Some commentators (e.g., Roberts, p. 133f) would identify “this people” as the people of the northern kingdom of Israel, but this does not seem to be correct. The overall context (of chaps. 7-8), in my view, overwhelmingly argues for the oracle addressing the people of the southern kingdom of Judah. There must have been a portion of the Judahite population (and its ruling class) that would have been in favor of joining the anti-Assyrian coalition, and, indeed, there is some evidence that Ahaz himself vacillated between the two positions. The thrust of the condemnation is that such people are relying upon the political/military forces of the coalition, rather than placing their trust on YHWH for protection.

“And it shall pass on in(to) Yehudah, shall wash (past) and (flood) over, (even) up to (the) neck it shall touch. And he shall be stretching out his wings, filling (the) breadth of your land, Mighty-with-Us!” (v. 8)

No specific mention is made of the judgment against Aram-Damascus and Israel. Rather, it is simply assumed that the floodwaters of the Assyrian army will (or has already) overrun the northern kingdoms, and will now reach all the way “into Judah”. The entire Judean kingdom will be flooded, using the image of a person standing in water up to his/her neck. The lone ‘head’ that is left above the waters certainly alludes to the city of Jerusalem and the ‘remnant’ of Judah that survives the Assyrian invasion (in 701 B.C.). Possibly, at the historical level, this oracle is to be dated to a time after the conquest of the northern kingdoms (at least after 733-732), and thus more clearly anticipating the coming invasion at the end of the 8th century. The survival of the Judean kingdom (and the city of Jerusalem) is alluded to by the mention of the name la@-WnM*u! (±Imm¹nû °E~l, “God [is] with us”); cf. the earlier notes on 7:14.

“Know (this), O peoples, and be shattered,
and give ear, all distant (part)s of (the) earth:
Gird yourselves and be shattered!
Gird yourselves and be shattered!
Devise a plan, and it shall be split (apart),
Speak a word, and it shall not stand—
for (the) Mighty (One is) with us!”

Commentators who view vv. 9-10 as a later poem, inspired by the Isaian oracles, are probably correct. It certainly fits the way the Isaian traditions (of the 8th and early 7th century) seem to have been utilized and developed, by the author/editor(s) of chapters 2-39 (not to mention the Deutero/Trito-Isaian poems of chaps. 40-66). The promise of divine protection for Judah/Jerusalem, in the context of the 8th century Assyrian invasions, is here expanded to encompass all the nations of the earth, anticipating the culmination of the Isaian nation-oracle traditions that we find in the so-called ‘Isaian Apocalypse’ of chapters 24-27. Attempts by the nations to attack or threaten God’s people are doomed to fail, because YHWH is with His people. Here, the sentence name la@-WnM*u! (±Imm¹nû °E~l) needs to be understood as a definitive statement, rather than a name: “The Mighty One [la@, i.e. God] is with us [WnM*u!]”.

These lines will be discussed in a bit more detail in the next daily note.

References above marked “Roberts” are to J. J. M. Roberts, First Isaiah, Hermeneia (Fortress Press: 2015).