1:11-15 The Lord directed the people of Israel to build the tabernacle (Ex 26–31), established the theological significance of the sacrifices (Lv 1–6), and appointed the nation's festivals (Ex 34:18-26; Lv 23). But here Isaiah, speaking in the Lord's name, appears to condemn these God-ordained institutions. Israelite prophets typically expressed themselves in extreme language, so attuned were they to the Lord's sense of betrayal by the people He had chosen. The institutions of Israelite worship were designed so that the people could sense God's presence in their midst, confess their sins, and renew their covenant relationship. They were to participate in these feasts in a heart-felt celebration of His past acts of grace. But the nation had grown careless; its worship had become shallow, carried out as popular custom—a casual "trampling" (v. 12) of the courts of the Lord. There was a profound disparity between the people's professed loyalty to the covenant and the "iniquity" (v. 13) and injustice (v. 15) they tolerated in violation of that very covenant's precepts. Under such conditions, it is hardly surprising that the Lord found their offerings "useless" (v. 13) and was disgusted by their prayer, incense, festivals, and other religious practices. God does not condemn the practices of worship He, Himself, has instituted, only the false motivation that distorts them. He welcomes worship from those who repent of their sins and come to His house to glorify His name.
1:16-20 Isaiah provided God's list of correctives for the social evil and inequality that rendered Israel's worship repugnant to him. These admonitions about just relationships do not imply that following them, alone, would bring God's blessing. The scarlet stain of sin can only be made "white as snow" (v. 18) through divine forgiveness. This happens when people have "willing and obedient" hearts and do not "refuse and rebel" against God (vv. 19-20).
2:2-5 Isaiah declared that war between nations would end "in the last days" (v. 2); the Lord would bring about that peaceful situation among nations through His arbitration (vv. 3-4). A precondition for peace is worldwide acceptance of God's instruction (v. 3), as His Word would prepare people to follow His path of justice and forgiveness. Peace will never result from the efforts of sinful humanity. Apart from the Lord's doing it is only the political slogan of anti-war protestors, the optimistic dream of national diplomats, or a nebulous religious ideal.
2:9 Why would the prophet pray, "Do not forgive them"? First, Isaiah may have been aligning himself with God's holy hatred of sin; divine justice would require that sinners not be excused without suffering the consequences of their disobedience. Second, the verb "forgive/bear" (nasa') is often translated "lift up." The prophet might simply have been asking God to humble these proud people.
2:22 God created humanity in His image (Gn 1:26), and the psalmist affirmed that God crowned man with glory (Ps 8:5). Isaiah was not speaking about a person's intrinsic worth or importance in God's eyes. The issue here was reliance on other people who might not be realizing the dignity God had conferred on the human race. Isaiah was only reminding people that they should not trust in gold, armies, idols (vv. 7-8), other proud people (vv. 11,12,17), or the structures people erect to give them security (vv. 15-16). God alone is worthy of trust; relying on human devices is a waste of time.
3:10-11 God's covenant with Israel established a broad relationship between obedience and blessing, disobedience and curse (Lv 26:1-45; Dt 27–28). The book of Proverbs is based on this fundamental relationship between right actions and beneficial consequences, and the converse. Isaiah reaffirmed this principle, that "it will go well" for the righteous but badly for the wicked. This does not mean that righteousness or innocence, even when consistent, bring an immediate earthly reward—as the Bible's examples of Joseph (Gn 37–45), Job (Jb 1–2), the man blind from birth (Jn 9:1-4) and Jesus' own unjust execution (Mt 27) make clear. But the long-term biblical view (in those instances, and many others) affirms that the principle is valid. In the end, the righteous person is vindicated, in the resurrection (see Ac 10:36-41) if not before.
3:16-24 Isaiah portrayed the judgment of the proud women of Jerusalem in graphic and gruesome word pictures. His description was a realistic portrayal of what would happen should the army of another ancient Near Eastern nation conquer Jerusalem. The enemy would respect neither men, women, nor children, but would savagely abuse and slaughter them. Such would be the Lord's judgment if the wealthy women of Jerusalem, with the leaders of Judah, failed to repent of their pride and oppression of the poor (cp. vv. 13-15). In seeking to move them to repentance, the prophet did not gloss over the possible consequence of continuing disregard for the ways of the Lord. Jerusalem's women would not be excused from punishment, for they participated with their husbands in the corruption of the culture (cp. the women of Samaria, Am 4:1). God will humble the proud and He alone will be exalted (Is 2:12,17).
4:1 So many men in Jerusalem would be killed in battle (3:25) that there will be no husbands left for these rich women. In their desperation to avoid the disgrace of not having husbands, they will stoop to the shameful state of sharing a man with other wives. Isaiah's words were no endorsement of polygamy or multiple sexual partners; he was warning these people of the dire consequences of maintaining their evil ways. His word picture was intended to motivate the people to repentance before this sad condition befell them.
4:2 Some interpreters view the phrase "branch [tsemach] of the Lord will be beautiful and glorious" as a sign of the land's fertility. They view it as a parallel to the next phrase, "the fruit of the land will be the pride and glory of Israel's survivors." Others take the "branch of the Lord" as a messianic title based on other occurrences of the word, used in the sense of the springing forth of salvation (2 Sm 23:5) or "a horn" (Ps 132:17) for David. These passages, because they speak of the continuing line of David, carry a messianic implication. Isaiah, a prophet of Jerusalem close to the royal court, likely knew these songs. Later he called the Messiah "a shoot" (choter) that will come up from the stump of Jesse, even a "branch" (netser) that will bear fruit (Is 11:1). Jeremiah referred to the "righteous Branch" or "Branch of righteousness" from David (Jr 23:5; 33:15) and Zechariah (Zch 3:8; 6:12) used the term "Branch" with a messianic meaning.
5:12,19 Isaiah identified a person who is blind to spiritual realities as one who cannot "perceive the Lord's actions" or has refused to "see the work of His hands." While claiming to welcome the Lord's redemptive action (v. 19), they are unable to understand what He is already doing to enact His judgments. They insist on seeing the Lord at work, according to their own idea of what He is supposed to do, before they will believe in Him. Jesus rejected the idea of doing another miracle, or sign, to prove who He was (Mt 16:1-4). The people already had the Law and the Prophets (Lk 16:29-31). Isaiah understood that, eventually, God would blind the eyes of persistent unbelievers so that they would not be able to see the truth (Is 6:9-10; see Mk 4:11-12; Ac 28:27).
6:1,5 In Ex 33:20 the Lord told Moses that no man could see His face and live; Jn 1:18 confirms that no one has seen God. His eternal essence is invisible (1 Tm 1:17; 6:16); He is Spirit (Jn 4:23-24). Yet Isaiah claimed to have seen "the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne. . . the King, the Lord of Hosts." There are other places in Scripture where people see the Lord; for example, He revealed Himself to Moses and the elders of Israel on Mount Sinai (Ex 24:9-18), and to Ezekiel and John in glorious and mysterious visions (Ezk 1; 10; Rv 4:1-11). These "theophanies" (appearances of God) were typically accompanied by features drawn from the world of nature, such as storm or volcanic activity, and often included the manifestation of God's "glory," an awesome weight or radiance that both revealed and hid His presence. They could be internal visions—experiences of one person not shared by bystanders. Or they could be "literary visions," poetic expressions of the Lord's appearance composed in order to add force to the words of His spokesman. Isaiah's vision occurred in the temple (Is 6:4) and was described in terms of the worship conducted there. The chanting (v. 3) of the seraphim (lit. "burning ones") mirrored the antiphonal singing of the Levitical choirs, while the smoke of the altar (vv. 4,6) filled the air, suggesting a sacrificial ceremony in progress. Whatever the particular nature of Isaiah's vision, it was a pivotal event in his prophetic ministry.
6:9-10 The Lord summoned Isaiah to preach to the people so that they could not hear and see the truth and repent. Negating the possibility of their repentance seems to contradict Isaiah's call for the people to repent in 1:18-20, or his appeal to Ahaz to trust God in 7:9. The prophetic summons to repent had a double function; it invited people to return to the Lord, but also exposed those who, having hardened their hearts to God's appeal, were destined for judgment. Moses, similarly, was told to deliver his message to Pharaoh (Ex 3:1-10) although he would not listen to it (Ex 3:19). The Lord, through Isaiah, gave Ahaz the opportunity to follow His will (Is 7:3-9), but like Pharaoh, Ahaz hardened his heart and refused to follow the Lord's instructions (Is 7:10-13). The Lord is glorified not only by the response of those who heed His call to repent, but also by the consequences that follow for those who ignore His appeal. The NT writers saw the same principle at work in the response to the gospel of Jesus Christ (Mk 4:11-12; Jn 12:37-40; Ac 28:25-28).
7:3-9 Isaiah promised that Ahaz, king of Judah, had nothing to fear even though the armies of Rezin of Aram (Syria) and Pekah of Israel were attacking Judah. On the other hand, 2 Ch 28:5-8 indicates that Judah was defeated, losing 120,000 soldiers with 200,000 people taken captive. Isaiah's prophecy was based on the condition that Ahaz would trust God (Is 7:9), which he failed to do. Thus the consequences of the war were more serious than what they would have been if Ahaz had acted in faith. Consideration of the Syro-Ephraimite War, on the whole, shows that while Judah lost some battles, it did not lose the war. Ahaz foolishly called on the king of Assyria, Tiglath-pileser III (2 Ch 28:16,20).
7:14 The Hebrew word 'almah refers to a young woman before the age of marriage, and is sometimes translated "virgin." Some interpreters claim that Matthew misappropriated this verse (Mt 1:23) in applying it to the birth of Jesus. They believe Isaiah was referring to a woman in the time of Ahaz—either a son born to an 'almah in Ahaz's harem or a son to Isaiah's wife (8:1-4), and that this "Immanuel" was a sign of hope for the future when "God will be with us." Others accept this immediate application, but also view the passage as prophetic of Christ (a "double fulfillment" approach). But Ahaz's good son Hezekiah was already born at this time; and Isaiah already had children, so his wife would not be called a "virgin" at this point in her life. Thus, many believe this prophecy only referred to the future birth of the Messiah. If so, this messianic application was expanded and verified through progressive revelation in 9:6-7, which announced that "a child will be born for us . . . He will reign on the throne of David."
8:6 Why would the people of Judah have "rejoiced with Rezin," the Syrian king who was attacking Jerusalem and whom God had promised to destroy (v. 4)? Some hypothesize that this referred to a group who wanted to join Rezin's revolt against Assyria, and were therefore happy to see the invader's military progress. Other translations emend the text to read "melt in fear" (RSV), picturing the fearful people of Judah terrorized before the Syrian onslaught. The best option is to interpret the people rejoicing over the announcement in verse 4 that the "wealth of Damascus . . . will be carried off," implying Rezin's defeat.
8:14 Paul (Rm 9:32-33) and Peter (1 Pt 2:6-8) applied this verse, together with Is 28:16, to Jesus Christ, who was rejected as Messiah by many of those to whom He came. Some interpreters object that their use of these passages is not consistent with what Isaiah meant when he spoke to his Jerusalem audience. Isaiah was speaking about Israel's attitude toward the Lord. If, in the NT perspective, Jesus is the revelation of the Father and His activity (e.g., Jn 1:1; 14:9; 2 Co 5:19; Php 2:6), then what Isaiah said about God could also be taken in a messianic sense, as applicable to Jesus.
9:6 Although Mt 4:16 applies the passage as a whole (vv. 2-7) to Jesus Christ by implication, the NT does not specifically apply to Him the names, or titles, listed in this verse. Some commentators believe Isaiah was describing a Judean ruler to come during his own time; thus, these names were applied to the reigns of Hezekiah, Josiah, and even Ahaz. But even if the names do not recur, as such, in the NT, they fit the ministry and messianic role of Jesus. As a "Wonderful Counselor," He is a doer of "miracles, wonders, and signs" (Ac 2:22) who sends the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, to continue His work (Jn 14:26). Hailed as "My Lord and my God" (Jn 20:28) in His resurrection, Jesus has been given "all authority . . . in heaven and on earth" (Mt 28:18). As one with the Father (Jn 10:30), He is eternal—"alive forever and ever" (Rv 1:18). As a member of David's royal line (Rm 1:3) He is the Prince who brings peace between Jew and non-Jew (Eph 2:14), whose rule over all kingdoms (Rv 1:5) brings an end to wars.
10:5-7 The Lord summoned the Assyrians to perform His work of judgment against Judah during the Syro-Ephraimite War, while at the same time proclaiming His "woe" upon the northern enemy, whom He will punish for its arrogant acts (v. 12) in despoiling Judah. God appointed Assyria to a specific task, but that nation failed to follow His plan (v. 7), became proud (vv. 8-14), and boasted about its false gods (v. 10). Therefore, even the instrument of the Lord's judgment came under that judgment.
11:6-7 Some interpreters view this prophecy as an exaggeration of the peaceful times under the rule of "the stump of Jesse" (v. 1), meaning the rule of Hezekiah. Since nothing close to these conditions ever characterized Hezekiah's reign, these critics allege that Isaiah's prophecy failed. But it was not uncommon in the ancient Near East to expect the rise of a new political leader to produce an idyllic time of peace (e.g., the Egyptian Prophecy of Nefer-Rohu, and certain Mesopotamian documents) and a return to Garden-of-Eden like conditions. Such a vision for an eventual restoration of paradise is consistent with Hosea's claim that in the last days God will make a covenant with the animals (Hs 2:18), or with the original covenant blessings predicting peace with animals (Lv 26:6). Psalm 36:6-9 speaks of the Lord's preserving both "man and beast" in the context of the "refreshing stream" of God's presence, a phrase that could be translated "Your Edenic streams." Similar promises of restored Eden-like conditions appear in Is 51:3; Ezk 34:25; 36:35.
13:8-16 Isaiah presented a picture of "the day of the Lord" that is coming for the destruction of sinners (v. 9). Although the context was the warfare of Isaiah's time, the prophet described it in cosmic word-pictures: darkness of the sun and stars (v. 10), the shaking of the earth (v. 13). Equally extreme, in typical prophetic rhetoric, is the description of the cruelty to be inflicted upon men, women, and children (vv. 15-16). In reality, such horror was typical of ancient warfare, as ancient Assyrian war records illustrate, and is not unknown in medieval and modern times as well. To describe these pitiless acts, even in the name of the Lord, is not to claim that He approves of them. The prophet merely predicted what sinful people will do to each other.
13:17 Isaiah predicted that the Medes would defeat Babylon, while the historical records indicate that the demise of the Babylonians was not the doing of the Medes alone. Isaiah was not claiming that the Medes were the sole conquerors. The exact date of this conquest is unknown, and some commentators hypothesize that Isaiah was referring to the defeat of the Babylonians by the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III (in 729 b.c.), who had Median soldiers in his army. Some point to Sennacherib's attack on Babylon in 689 b.c., while others believe this passage refers to Cyrus's defeat of Babylon in 539 b.c. If Isaiah delivered this prophecy around 701 b.c. when Babylon was tempting Hezekiah to rebel and form an alliance with them, then Isaiah would be condemning the Babylonian kingdom of Merodach-baladan that Hezekiah was trusting. That kingdom fell in 689 b.c. when the Assyrian King Sennacherib besieged Babylon (23:13), tore down its walls, depopulated the city, and made the location into a meadow. The Medes may have joined the Assyrian army in defeating Babylon.
14:4-21 Isaiah offered a "song of contempt," or taunt, against the king of Babylon. Because the king's name was omitted, commentators have speculated that this passages refers to (1) Tiglath-pileser III, the Assyrian king who declared himself king of Babylon; (2) Nebuchadnezzar or Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon (Dn 5); (3) Merodach-baladan, the Babylonian king who made a treaty with Hezekiah (Is 39); or (4) a symbolic representation of any tyrant, not a specific king. If Isaiah was trying to dissuade Hezekiah from trusting the Babylonians (Is 39), Merodach-baladan is the most likely candidate. This passage has also been taken as a metaphorical reference to the fall of Satan (Lucifer), the "shining morning star" (v. 12). This interpretation is suggested by the Latin translation of "shining star" as Lucifer (lit. "light-bearer"). This later Latin identification has nothing to do with Isaiah's original reference to a real king who would die and be powerless in Sheol, the place of the deceased spirits (v. 15). Calling the Babylonian ruler the "morning star" may have been a sarcastic reference to his pretense and arrogance.
15:1-5 Isaiah's laments in chapters 13–23 were most likely uttered before a Judean audience, not in the lands to which they referred. It may seem that Isaiah laments the demise of Judah's enemies, and some interpreters have suggested that parts or all of chapters 15–16 were ironic laments intended to taunt or mock Moab, Judah's long-time enemy. That view is probably incorrect in light of Isaiah's personal declaration of deep sorrow in verse 5 and 16:9. Isaiah lamented that the Moabites had rejected the possibility of finding refuge from their enemies in Judah's hope, the enduring throne of David (16:4-5). It is worth noting that the Davidic royal family had, in Ruth the wife of Boaz, a Moabite ancestry (Ru 4:13-22). Perhaps the prophet reflected God's sorrow over Moab so the Judeans would recognize the hopelessness of following Moab's path.
16:5 Some commentators assert that the judge who will sit on the throne "in the tent of David" was Hezekiah, who would come to the aid of the Moabites during their time of oppression by the Assyrians. Since this Davidic ruler will "execute justice" and "will sit on the throne forever," his characteristics coincide with those of the Davidic Messiah in 9:6-7 (see 2 Sm 7:12-16). Thus, Isaiah was pointing to someone much greater than Hezekiah.
17:1 Damascus continued to be a city in the OT era (Ezk 27:18), the NT (Ac 9:19-27), and today. This does not negate Isaiah's prophecy, which referred to the destruction of Damascus as the powerful capital of Syria during the Syro-Ephraimite War. His words were consistent with his prophecy about the fall of Damascus in 7:7-8 and 8:4, and the announcement that Assyria defeated Damascus and exiled its inhabitants to Kir (2 Kg 16:9). After many years in ruins, it later became a small city in the Assyrian province of Hamath. Isaiah was not claiming that it would remain a ruin for all time.
18:7 This prophecy came to Isaiah approximately 705–701 b.c. when the Cushite dynasty of Shabaka was in control of Egypt. Isaiah gave a word for the Cushite messengers to relay to their leaders about God's plan to defeat their enemy (compared to pruning branches in v. 5) and leave their dead soldiers for the birds to eat (v. 6). Although the enemy was not identified, the context of this section and historical sources pointed to Assyria. This was the nation that would "roar like the roaring of the sea" (17:12) and then be suddenly gone (17:14), a prophecy that pointed to God's destruction of the Assyrian army that surrounded Jerusalem in one night (37:36). Although no historical documents relate the Cushites' coming to Jerusalem to give gifts to the Lord, this idea is consistent with other prophecies about all nations coming to worship God in Zion (2:2-4), and the specific prophecy that the Egyptians would worship God (19:18-25).
19:18-25 Were there ever five cities in Egypt that swore allegiance to Israel's God, was there ever a Jewish altar in Egypt for worship, did God miraculously send a Savior to deliver the Egyptians, and was there ever a highway connecting Jerusalem, Egypt, and Assyria? Some suggest that the prophecy was fulfilled after the exile when a group of Hebrews fled to Egypt, settled in four Egyptian cities (Jr 44:1) and later built a temple in Leontopolis around 170 b.c. This approach is problematic since most of those who fled to Egypt rejected the Lord or worshiped Him along with pagan deities. Another approach sees these words fulfilled after the spread of Christianity to Egypt during the Byzantine era. A third view is that this prophecy awaits fulfillment during the future eschatological period (Is 2:2-4).
20:2-4 Around 711 b.c. the Assyrians captured Ashdod, the Philistine city that depended on Egypt for help. Isaiah's symbolic act of nakedness was a warning to the people of Judah not to trust Egypt, as the people of Ashdod had done, because before long Egyptians also would be taken away naked as prisoners to Nineveh. The term "naked" can mean one has no clothes on at all (Gn 2:25; 3:7; Jb 1:21), but can also be used in situations where one is almost, but not totally, naked (Is 58:7;Jb 22:6; 24:7). This instruction did not require Isaiah to be "naked" the entire day, but at various times during those three years his dramatic presence would communicate a vivid warning that was more powerful than a verbal message. The text does not reveal what Isaiah said to people as he went about naked.
21:2-9 Some critics who admit that the feasting at the fall of Babylon (v. 5) may coincide with Belshazzar's feast (Dn 5) still see a contradiction between the anguishing battle for Babylon described in Is 21:2-5 and the Cyrus Cylinder that indicates that Babylon fell without a fight in one evening. These contradictory pictures of the fall of Babylon suggest that Isaiah was not prophesying about the future fall of Babylon in 539 b.c. mentioned in Dn 5. Isaiah's mourning over the fall of Babylon also does not fit the 539 b.c. events, for the Jews at that time would be glad to hear that Babylon was being punished. It seems more appropriate to relate this prophecy to Hezekiah's intent to form a coalition with the Babylonian ruler Merodach-baladan (39:1-8). This prophecy about the near fall of Babylon would demonstrate that Babylon was not a trustworthy treaty partner; so Hezekiah should put his trust in the Lord instead. This prophecy fits these events because (1) Merodach-baladan was from the marshy lowland (cp. "desert by the sea," v. 1); (2) Babylon was an ally of Judah at this time, and its defeat would explain the anguish Isaiah expressed in verses 3-4,10; and (3) the Elamites and Medes (v. 2) were allies of Babylon, fighting against the Assyrian King Sennacherib to save it. Thus Isaiah was looking ahead to the conquest of Babylon in 689 b.c. at the hands of the Assyrians.
22:12-14 Why would the people of Jerusalem celebrate (vv. 2,13) when the city of Jerusalem was in danger of being destroyed? Isaiah's description fits the events connected with Sennacherib's attack on Judah in 701 b.c., not the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar in 586 b.c. The people in Jerusalem had prepared their weapons, repaired the walls, and dug a tunnel from the Gihon spring, outside the wall, to the Pool of Siloam within (vv. 8-11; 2 Ch 32:3-4). Now they were celebrating the completion of their preparations for siege (Is 22:2,13). Instead of trusting in God their Creator (v. 11), they were depending on their own efforts to save them. Isaiah found this false confidence appalling. Many people outside Jerusalem had already died, fled, or been taken captive (v. 3) and the land was still occupied by foreign troops (vv. 6-7). Isaiah wept in despair over those who had already lost their lives (v. 4), and those who would soon lose their lives on the day of the Lord (v. 12). If there were no change in the people's trust, God would hold them accountable. Their sin would not be "wiped out" (v. 14), but they would be.
22:15-20 When Sennacherib was about to attack Jerusalem (36:3), Shebna was scribe and Eliakim was steward of the palace, but in this passage Shebna is named as steward. Accordingly, some believe this Shebna is a different man. But in verse 19 Isaiah predicted that Shebna would be demoted. It appears that Shebna was the king's steward during the preparations for Sennacherib's attack, but that Eliakim replaced him before the attack.
23:8-9 The city of Tyre was situated on an almost impregnable island in the Mediterranean Sea (v. 4). It was wealthy (v. 3) and had many colonies to trade with (v. 8). It considered itself invincible. But God's plan was to destroy Tyre (v. 9), and this occurred when Sennacherib overcame Sidon in his third year and put Tyre under siege for five years. An unbeliever may attribute defeat in warfare to poor judgment by leaders, a weaker military, inferior equipment, freak accidents of nature, or the superior strategy of an opposing general. But the believer credits God with planning the defeat of evil nations.
23:15-18 Many doubt that Tyre suddenly reappeared as an important power in exactly 70 years or that the people of Tyre ever dedicated their wages to the Lord. It is impossible to say exactly when this 70-year period began or ended, but if the Assyrians humbled the Phoenicians around 702 b.c. the 70 years would extend to around 630 b.c., when the Assyrian Empire collapsed after the death of Ashurbanipal. Since there are few historical documents about Tyre, no one knows if the city ever sent gifts to Jerusalem. Shortly after the end of the 70 years (630 b.c.), the Judean King Josiah rebuilt the temple in 621 b.c. (2 Kg 22; 2 Ch 34). While there is no specific mention that Tyre assisted in this project, Phoenicia was the normal source for the timber used in the temple's reconstruction (2 Kg 22:6; 2 Ch 34:11), and it is possible that Josiah depended on masons from Tyre, as had Solomon (1 Kg 5).
24:14-18 Some interpreters see an inconsistency between the rejoicing described in verses 14-16 and the context, which pictures the devastation and treachery of war. As a result, they assume Isaiah was mocking those who were praising the Lord. Isaiah was moved to weeping because he foresaw that "terror, pit, and snare" (v. 17) were awaiting the people of Jerusalem because of Sennacherib's attack. But there is nothing in Isaiah's words that would condemn people from the east and west for extolling the Lord's majesty. Though Judah was in dire straits in the present circumstance (vv. 16-18), a day of victory and joy would come.
25:6 Some commentators find Isaiah drawing on ancient Near Eastern mythology when he mentioned a worldwide pilgrimage to Zion (2:2-3) where people will present gifts to God (60:1-22) and celebrate God's kingship at a coronation banquet. This event is not similar to the enthronement of Baal at a feast of the gods on Mount Zaphon or the coronation feast for the Babylonian god Marduk, for these verses in Isaiah make no reference to a pilgrimage, bringing gifts, offering sacrifice, or the crowning of a king.
25:7-8 The theological doctrine about the end of death is often relegated to late postexilic texts (e.g. Dn 12:1-2) and reinterpreted as a simple way of saying that death resulting from warfare will end. If the shroud people wear to mourn their loved ones will be taken away(2 Sam 15:30; 19:5), this implies that death will not happen. Since death is the punishment the enemies of God justly deserve because of sin, once His enemies in heaven and earth are vanquished no one will deserve to die. Other early eschatological passages refer to the life God will provide for His people forever (2 Sm 7:16; Is 51:6; 60:21; Mc 4:7). The complete removal of death will be a central sign of God's reign.
26:14,19 In verse 14 Isaiah declared that "the dead do not live, departed spirits do not rise up." Then, in verse 19 he stated that "your dead will live; their bodies will rise." This apparent conflict vanishes when the statements are placed in context. He referred to past oppressors of Israel, the "wicked" who act "unjustly" (v. 10), the "other lords" who had ruled over God's people and whom God had already "visited and destroyed" (vv. 13-14). These oppressors could no longer attack God's people. The situation changed with verse 19; in the future God's people who die will live. Some interpret this to refer to the revival of Israel after the exile, similar to Ezekiel's description of God's revival of the dry bones (Ezk 37:1-14). The lack of any supporting background in this passage—such as a return from Bab-ylon, reconstruction of ruined cities, or restoration of Davidic rule—renders this interpretation less likely. It is possible to see this as deliverance from Sheol (Ps 16:10-11; 18:5-6; 49:14-15), or never having to experience death. A third approach understands this passage to mean that a person can have life after death. The fact that Elijah and Elisha brought to life two boys who had died (1 Kg 17:17-24; 2 Kg 4:18-37), and that a dead man came back to life when his body touched the bones of Elisha (2 Kg 13:20-21), indicates that individual resurrection from the dead was known and experienced long before the time of Isaiah.
27:1 The name Leviathan is found elsewhere in the Bible (Jb 3:8; 41:1-32; Ps 74:14; 104:26) and appears to refer to a sea creature parallel to Rahab, which symbolized Egypt (Jb 26:12; Ps 87:4; 89:10; Is 30:7; 51:9). The Israelites and the prophet Isaiah were well aware of ancient Near Eastern beliefs about monsters that battle one another (Baal and Mot; Marduk and Tiamat). Biblical use of these mythological creatures as literary symbols does not indicate that the inspired authors believed in them. To the contrary, Isaiah's use of Leviathan as a metaphor for the strong nation of Assyria amounts to divesting the name of any mythological or religious significance attached to it.
28:7-13 Verse 10, often cited favorably in support of the value of consistent teaching, has a virtually opposite meaning. In Hebrew it has the repetitive, monosyllabic tone of baby talk, as the preceding verse ("infants . . . babies," v. 9) suggests. It mimics the babbling of drunken priests and prophets (v. 7) who were mouthing useless instructions to the people. When the word of the Lord came back with the same babbling message (v. 13), the reference was to the undecipherable words of the would-be Assyrian conquerors ("stammering speech and in a foreign language," v. 11). Isaiah was warning the Judeans that if they were receiving only the most infantile, incoherent teaching from their spiritual leaders, they would fall into the hands of an equally incoherent enemy. Paul cited verses 11-12 with reference to speaking in tongues (1 Co 14:21), indicating that while the practice may be beneficial for believers, it is repellent to unbelievers, for whom a direct prophetic word is more convicting.
28:15,18 It makes little sense for anyone to "cut a deal with Death" (lit. "make [cut] a covenant with death") or to say "we have made falsehood our refuge." Isaiah was mockingly putting words in the mouths of his audience. Hezekiah's ill-considered political agreement with Egypt to gain protection from the Assyrian attack of Sennacherib in 701 b.c. was stylized as a "deal with death" because the rulers of Judah were hoping that Egypt would rescue them from Assyria. It was a false and deceptive hope, because historically Egypt was always an unreliable ally. The phrase "deal with Death" may be the background for Paul's phrase "ministry of death" in 2 Co 3:7, where he applied it to a false reliance on the old covenant, or law of Moses, which cannot give life (see 1 Co 15:56-57).
28:16 Paul (Rm 9:33) and Peter (1 Pt 2:6-8) applied this text in the Greek version, together with Is 8:14, to Jesus Christ. Isaiah, here, said that God and His promises are a sure foundation for the believer, who "will be unshakable." The Greek translation takes the Hebrew verb yachish "have haste, anxiety" in a different sense; the NT texts, following the Greek, have "will not [or never] be put to shame" and apply the idea of the "cornerstone" to Christ. Hebrew verbs are typically rich in their range of meanings, depending on their forms, and translators into another language (e.g., English or Greek) often have to choose words that may not incorporate the same nuances. On the application of the "precious cornerstone" to Jesus, see Ps 118:22.
29:9-10 Although people shut themselves off from God's truth, in the larger perspective the understanding of God's sovereignty required the prophet to recognize their refusal to hear as the action of God Himself for purposes of judgment. Isaiah was confronted with the same issue in 6:9-10. When people, even supposed prophets and seers, blind themselves to the genuine message from the Lord and fall into a drunken-like stupor, eventually God will shut their eyes to the truth and judge them (see Rm 1:21-25).
29:15-16 The ancient Israelite skeptics were people who tried to hide from God, imagining that God did not really see what they were doing (v. 15). They set themselves up as equal to God, the master creative Potter, denying that God made them and rejecting His sovereign knowledge and control over their world.
30:7 On references to ancient Near Eastern mythological monsters in the Bible, see note on 27:1.
30:18 The prophet clearly indicated that Judah was sinful in relying on Egypt (30:1-5) and in rejecting God's message to them (30:12-14). In view of this, it did not seem "just" for the Lord to have compassion on these sinful people (30:18). God's justice, in the OT, is not an abstraction, but an aspect of His covenant with His people. First, the nation will experience God's judgment through the attack of the Assyrians, pictured as the collapse of a wall and the shattering of a jar (30:13-14). But once the people had suffered the consequences of their lack of faith, the Lord would "show you mercy" because the covenant, grounded not in their obedience but in His grace, still stood.
30:26 If the sun were, literally, to burn seven times brighter than at present, everything on earth would be burned up. The prophet was using a poetic image to affirm that instead of darkness, destruction, and lack of fertility, there would be abundant water (v. 25) and light for the healing of the land (see Mal 4:2).
30:28 How is it just for God to deceive people? The Assyrians were brought by God to carry out His judgment against Judah (10:5); they were likened to a destructive torrent of roaring flooding water from God's mouth (cp. 8:8; 28:2,15,17 where Assyria was pictured as a mass of water). But the Assyrians did not follow God's plan; instead, they acted in pride (36:4-20; 37:21-29). In a picturesque image, Isaiah compared the results of God's action against the people of Assyria to putting a bridle in the mouth of a horse to lead it astray. This implied that God was leading Assyria on a path that would result in its own destruction because of its sins (see1 Kg 22:22-24).
31:8-9 The event that caused the withdrawal of the Assyrian king and his army was not military action byJudah or Egypt, but the intervention of angel of the Lord who slew 185,000 fighters in one night (37:36). It was fear that motivated the Assyrians' "rock" (their king) to flee back to Nineveh with his forces.
32:1-20 The description of a coming righteous king fit Hezekiah, but it would be an exaggeration to claim that features described in verses 15-20 were fulfilled in Hezekiah's time. The promise of God opening the eyes of the blind (v. 3; 35:5; 42:18), pouring out His Spirit (11:1), transforming nature (30:23-26), and inaugurating a new age of security and peace (2:2-4; 9:6; 28:12) are all associated with the time when the Messiah will reign in Zion. These features indicate the messianic thrust of this passage.
34:1-17 The prophet was one who had been admitted to the counsels of God, to whom the Lord had opened His heart. He saw that, while the Lord was grieved over His people's lack of trust in Him, He was equally incensed at the hostility pagan nations—in this instance, Edom—had displayed toward Zion (v. 8). Isaiah painted a vivid word picture of the wrath to come upon the enemies of Judah because of the Lord's anger. His poetic imagery extended even to cosmic phenomena ("the heavenly bodies will dissolve," v. 4). Once the Lord's sword had "drunk its fill in the heavens" (v. 5) it would move on to a "slaughter" in Edom, whose land would be "soaked with blood" (vv. 6-7). Isaiah drew on the mineral resources of the adjacent Dead Sea region to portray the land as "burning pitch" (v. 9). So great would be the devastation that Edom's territory itself would become barren, fit only for a catalog of desert creatures (vv. 11-15). Only such highly charged language could begin to hint at God's wrath in store for those who reject the truth (Rm 1:18; 2:5). New Testament writers (e.g., the book of Rv) borrow OT prophetic imagery of this sort to portray the destiny of sinful people and cultures. God loves the world (Jn 3:16) and, through Christ, has made it possible for those who have rejected His way to be reconciled to Him (2 Co 5:19). But persistent opposition to His program of redemption will eventuate in judgment, whether in the literal terms described in this passage or in some other, but no less devastating, form.
35:1-10 A shift of scene occurs here. The desert that Edom had become (34:8-15) was no longer in view; this passage was a poetic image of the wilderness of Judah coming to life again, with the return of "the ransomed of the Lord" to Zion (v. 10). Jerusalem did not fall during Isaiah's time, so a "return" did not occur then; therefore, many interpreters consider that, in this passage, Isaiah was looking ahead to the time of the Jews' return from exile in Babylon more than a century and a half later. Some commentators consider this passage the work of an inspired, but unnamed, disciple of Isaiah (his disciples were mentioned in 8:16) who wrote during the exile, though there is nothing here that specifically points to a later date of composition. Other interpreters view this passage as a picture of the time when God will establish His kingdom (2:2-4), and His people "will see the glory of the Lord" (35:2). The promise that "God Himself will be with them" (Rv 21:3) and "they will see His face" (Rv 22:4) is reinforced at the end of the NT; the same writer also affirmed that, in Christ, "we observed His glory" (Jn 1:14).
36:1 Chapters 36–39 duplicate 2 Kg 18:13–20:19, with variations. Isaiah 36:1 says that Sennacherib captured all the fortified cities of Judah, while verse 2 indicates that the fortified city of Jerusalem was not yet captured. The verb taphas means to "lay hold of, seize." Although Sennacherib's forces had surrounded Jerusalem and seized control of its surrounding territory, they never entered the city itself to capture it.
36:7 The Rabshakeh, Sennacherib's representative, claimed that Hezekiah had removed the high places (rural sanctuaries) and destroyed the altars of Yahweh. Being ignorant of the religious history of Canaan, he was unaware that the altars of the high places were pagan altars, not places where Yahweh was worshiped. Hezekiah had removed the high places (2 Kg 18:4) but had not destroyed altars of the Lord.
37:7,38 Isaiah's prediction of the elimination of Sennacherib by the sword did not have immediate fulfillment, but eventually two of his own sons killed him (v. 38). The Babylonian Chronicle records that this occurred about 20 years later, in 681 b.c., when Sennacherib's son Arad-ninlil assassinated him and Esarhaddon became king of Assyria.
37:9 Two historical problems exist in this verse: (1) Tirhakah did not become king of Egypt until 690 b.c., more than ten years later than this event; (2) Sennacherib's Assyrian records indicate a battle with the Egyptians at Eltekeh before the siege of Jerusalem, not after it started. It is true that Tirhakah was only the military commander of Egyptian forces in 701 b.c., but since he later became king the prophet refers to him by this better-known title. As to the second problem, possibly there was a second Egyptian conflict with the Assyrians; or perhaps Tirhakah threatened war, but the two armies never actually fought.
37:26,28 Some question whether God knows the future and doubt that He has planned what will happen in history. The Lord revealed to Isaiah the comforting news that all of Sennacherib's past and future actions were known and planned, so that He is sovereignly in control of history, not Sennacherib (vv. 24-25).
37:36 Some find the claim that 185,000 fighters died in one night unbelievable, particularly since it is unconfirmed by any Assyrian document. But it was standard practice for Assyrian rulers like Sennacherib to omit mention of embarrassing defeats in their annals. This was a large number of soldiers, so some prefer to interpret the word 'eleph not as a numeral but a term for a military unit, not necessarily equaling a thousand men in strength. Whatever the case, the incident was a clear demonstration of the Lord's power over the Assyrians.
38:1 The introductory phrase "in those days" was probably a general time marker covering the earlier reign of Hezekiah; verse 6 seems to indicate that Hezekiah's illness occurred shortly after Sennacherib's attack on Jerusalem, although the text had already narrated the Assyrian withdrawal (37:37). Isaiah's narrative followed the same order as 2 Kg.
38:1,5 The Lord's word to Hezekiah, that "you are about to die; you will not recover," was modified by His later word, "I am going to add 15 years to your life." It is not always easy in Scripture to distinguish between conditional and unconditional predictions or promises. However, Jr 18 indicates (as does the story of Jonah) that God will sometimes have compassion and not carry out His threats if people repent and intercede for divine mercy. A prophet's announcement of judgment was often intended to motivate people to avoid that judgment by correcting their disobedient behavior.
38:8 The text does not say that the sign involved the stopping of the sun or the interruption of the earth's rotation. The sign involved the reversing of the shadow on the sundial built onto the palace steps. No explanation is given for how this occurred. Today one can only speculate about a miraculous interference in the refraction of the sun's rays, or the introduction of a new source of light in a location different from that of the sun. Whatever the cause, that which seems physically impossible is not so for God.
38:21 Was Hezekiah's healing from this sickness real-ly a miracle or was it just the result of some common ancient medicinal practices? Both Isaiah and Hezekiah understood that it was the Lord who spared the king's life. The application of a common remedy to healthe skin did not undercut the miraculous nature of the deed any more than Jesus' application of mud on the eyes of the blind man (Jn 9:6) reduced the nature of that miracle.
39:1 This verse comes after the Assyrian threats against Jerusalem were resolved through God's miraculous defeat of the Assyrian army in chapters 36–37. The phrase "at that time" appears to place these events after 701 b.c., but Merodach-baladan was king only from 721–710 and 704–703 b.c., so a date after 701 is unlikely. Some suggest that Hezekiah's sickness should be dated as early as 711 b.c. while others maintain a date around 703 b.c. All that is certain is that the events of chapter 39 occurred after those related in chapter 38, for the letter and gift came after the Babylonian king heard that Hezekiah had recovered from his sickness. The same order of events occurs in 2 Kg.
39:7 The defeat of Judah and exile in Babylon took place in 605, 597, and 586 b.c., so how could Hezekiah's son go into exile? Manasseh, Hezekiah's son, was taken to Babylon (2 Ch 33:11), but the term "son" can also refer to grandsons and subsequent descendants.
39:8 Hezekiah seems to be saying that since God's judgment did not affect him personally, the future consequences for his actions were acceptable to him. Such an attitude seems self-centered and uncaring about those who would follow him. It is possible to take his words this way, but some interpreters understand them as Hezekiah's submissive and a reluctant acceptance of the long-term results of his mistake.
40:2 Some interpreters view Jerusalem's "time of servitude" that would end as the 70 years of the Babylonian exile, a century and a half after the time of Isaiah. Accordingly, they conclude that the following chapters were the work of one or more later disciples (8:16), whom critics sometimes call Deutero-Isaiah or Trito-Isaiah. Nevertheless, since Isaiah was a prophet, God could reveal to him that the nation's exile would end long before it occurred (see Am 3:7). On the other hand, the word tsava' can mean "warfare," a translation that relates the prophecy to the end of Sennacherib's attack on Judah.
40:3 The writers of the NT Gospels (Mt 3:3; Mk 1:3; Lk 3:4) connect these words with the ministry of John the Baptist. Isaiah saw a general picture of someone making preparation for the Lord's coming (v. 5), while Malachi later specified that this person would be "My messenger" (Mal 3:1). Although Isaiah and Malachi were not given the messenger's name, John the Baptist fulfilled the role in preparing the way for Jesus, the Son of God. The announcement that "all humanity will see" God's glory (v. 5) suggests that Isaiah was talking about an event of greater scope than the Jews' return from exile—that is, an event of universal significance for the coming of the kingdom of God.
40:3-11 Comparisons between Isaiah's call in these verses and in 6:1-8 have convinced some that another prophet, perhaps a later unnamed disciple of Isaiah (8:16), was here relating his call to proclaim the Lord's message. There are verbal similarities: a voice was calling (the seraphim in 6:3, unspecified in 40:3); all flesh would see the glory of the Lord, similar to His glory filling the earth (6:3; 40:5); and the "good news" (v. 9) reversed the terrible news in Isaiah's call (6:9-10). Although someone was instructed to speak "good news," this message was not contrary to what Isaiah had already spoken (2:2-5; 4:2-6; 9:1-7; 11:1-6; 14:1-3; 19:18-25; 32; 35). There is no indication that a different prophet was being called to ministry in this passage, and the oldest Isaiah manuscripts (from the Dead Sea Scrolls) show no break between chapters 39 and 40. Those who were summoned to proclaim the good news were the people of Zion and Jerusalem (v. 9), not a new prophet.
40:10-11 Isaiah depicted the salvation to come for Jerusalem with two metaphors for the Lord's action: the warrior-king bringing gifts to his people, and the shepherd who cares tenderly for his flock. This is not a mixed metaphor; in the ancient Near East kings were often compared to shepherds, a connection made in the original prophecy of David's enduring dynasty(2 Sm 7:7-8). The NT saw this prophecy realized in Jesus Christ, who is both the good shepherd (Jn 10:11-15) and the mighty warrior King (Rv 19:11-16).
40:12-26 In a passage celebrating the surpassing power and wisdom of the Creator God, Isaiah ridiculed man-made objects of worship (vv. 19-20). In pagan religions the idol was a symbol of a divinity—not the deity itself. The image stood for the mythological qualities and abilities of the "god" it was supposed to represent. In their critique of idolatrous religions, Israelite writers never mention that fact. Instead, as in this passage, they focus on the idol itself as a product of human artifice and imagination (see Ps 115:4-8; Is 41:7; 44:9-19; 46:1-2,6-7). It is a way of pointing out that the whole polytheistic religious system—like the block of stone or of wood overlaid with precious metal—is only a human creation. The sincerity of the idol-maker cannot make his religion valid, for no real divinity is behind it. Only the God who has revealed Himself in His creation, and His redemptive acts in the history of His people, is worthy of trust and worship.
40:22 Isaiah spoke of God who "is enthroned above the circle of the earth." Some commentators have cited this as evidence that biblical writers were aware that the earth is a globe, not a flat surface. While the shape of the planet was not Isaiah's concern here, his phrase is a reminder that modern critics should be cautious about ascribing a "primitive" or "pre-scientific" outlook to Scripture, as a way of discounting its relevance to contemporary cultures.
41:8-9 Although God's choice of one nation to be His special people may seem unfair to other nations, that choice came with the heavy responsibility for the people in that chosen nation to live holy lives and function as God's servants in this sinful world. It was through the seed of Abram that God would bless the rest of mankind (Gn 12:3). The people of Israel frequently failed to be God's servants, for they were not always faithful to His calling to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation—one that would obey Him and keep His covenant (Ex 19:5-6). Israel's past failures did not nullify God's love (Dt 7:6-8), nor did His judgments for their disobedience nullify God's plans for His people.
41:14 Genesis 1:28 and Ps 8:5-8 present a picture of mankind as created in God's image and given charge of the management of the earth. Calling Jacob (Israel) a "worm" appears to negate humanity's exalted status. In this poetic context, the prophet was not stating that people are worthless; he was merely comparing a weak and fearful people to the glory and power of their holy God, who is able to redeem them. Some interpreters have suggested that "worm" was not a belittling expression, but a term of endearment.
41:17-20 On the surface, these words appear to promise a topographical transformation of the land, either of the Judean wilderness or the Arabian desert through which the returning exiles would travel. (Since no location is specified, Isaiah may have been speaking of a world transformed in the kingdom of God.) Warfare and depopulation turned much of the land of Palestine (ancient Israel and Judah) into unproductive wilderness, but—as modern Israeli reforestation and agriculture have demonstrated—the land is capable of greater productivity when well managed. Nevertheless, Isaiah may have been speaking metaphorically about the effect of the "water" of renewed worship of the Lord on the spiritual productivity of His people (cp. Ezk 47:1-12; Jn 4:10; 7:37-39; Rv 22:1-2).
41:22-26 The Lord gives insight to His prophets, who in His name are able to interpret the past and see into that which is to come. Israel's God has declared from the beginning what would happen. Other "gods" are powerless; they can neither describe the distant past nor predict the distant future. Those who choose to worship them are as "detestable" as they are (v. 24).
42:1-7 The chosen "Servant" was identified as Israel in 41:8; therefore, many commentators would identify Israel as the "Servant" in this passage also. There are similarities between God's servants as Isaiah described them, and the prophet may have been purposely leaving his hearers with some ambiguity (he was called to preach in such a way that they might not understand, 6:10). But in contrast to Israel, God's blind servant (42:19), this Servant will establish justice in the earth, a theme associated with the role of the Messiah (9:7; 11:3-5; 32:1). In addition, the role of this Servant does not fit what Israel did. In Mt 12:18-21 Jesus applied these words to Himself.
42:21 The future glorification of God's "instruction" in the law (torah) does not contradict NT reference to the limited value of the law of Moses (e.g., 1 Co 15:54; Gl 3:1-23). The instruction of God is not limited to what He revealed on Mount Sinai. In this context God's people were blind to what God said to them (Is 42:18-20), but in the future the righteousness and justice of God's way of dealing with people will be understood, as the deeper meaning of His instruction becomes clear (Mt 5:17-20). Even the NT upholds the "law of Christ" (Gl 6:2) and the "royal law" (Jms 2:8).
43:2 These promises were metaphors of God's protection and help as His people passed through times of difficulty. In the same way, God had helped their ancestors pass through the waters of the Red Sea when they were suffering oppression in Egypt.
43:3-4 There is no record of a time when God gave Egypt, Cush, and Seba as a ransom for Israel—and surely God does not need to pay off anyone to redeem His people. Some believe this verse referred to the Persian defeat of Egypt, but this occurred in the reign of Cambyses, after Cyrus had already decreed that the Israelites could return home (Ezr 1:1-3). This passage can be taken as a symbolic affirmation that, because of God's great love for His people (Is 43:4), He will do anything to redeem them.
43:11-13 The Lord offers a clear statement of His oneness; Judah has no other Savior, because He alone is God. The theme is reminiscent of the Ten Commandments: "I am the Lord your God . . . Do not have other gods besides Me" (Ex 20:2-3). Some critics have suggested that the Ten Commandments and the Sinai covenant were traditions associated more with northern Israel than with Judah. A passage of this type reveals how even a Judean prophet stood firmly on the covenant commandments given to Israel. Reference to the people as "witnesses" (see Jos 24:22) strengthens the association of this passage with covenant language.
43:14 Was this prophecy ever fulfilled? Since Cyrus was welcomed into Babylon without much resistance when he defeated the nation, why would the Persians need to take away defeated Babylonians as fugitives in ships? There is no record in the Bible or secular history of this taking place when Cyrus defeated Babylon, so one could: (1) take this as symbolic picture language of defeat that was applied to the future situation of Babylon; or (2) conclude that the prophet was predicting a different defeat of Babylon, not the Persian conquest of the area in 539 b.c.
43:20 While wild animals would not be aware of honoring God, Scripture in several places mentions them in connection with the created order's testimony to His greatness (e.g., Jb 38:39–39:30; 40:15–41:24; Ps 104:10-30; cp. the "living creatures" of Ezk 1:5-11; Rv 4:6-8).
43:23-24 It was not literally the case that the people never brought the Lord sacrifices; Isaiah had earlier indicated that, from the Lord's standpoint, they had brought too many (1:11-14). But a right sacrifice requires a pure heart, repentance of sin (see Mal 3:3), and devotion to the Lord alone (see Am 5:25), or it is no sacrifice. Isaiah was saying that, because these were lacking, all God saw in their sacrifice was their sin.
44:6-8 On the covenant associations of this passage, see 43:11-13.
44:9-19 Worshipers of idols bow down to artifacts of their own making because the Lord "has shut their eyes so they cannot see" (v. 18). Of course, the makers of images can see perfectly well to perform their craft; what they cannot "see" is its futility, because their idols represent false religious concepts. On the Lord's being responsible for their lack of understanding, see 6:9-10; on the OT critique of idols, see 40:12-26.
44:28–45:1 Because this prophecy refers expressly to the Persian ruler Cyrus, some interpreters argue for its composition by a later disciple of Isaiah (8:16) who was active at the time of the return from Babylonian exile. It is possible that God would give specific information about distant events to one of His prophets (40:2). This phenomenon is unusual in Scripture, but not unknown. Other instances in the Bible include the specific prophecy about Josiah more than 300 years before he was born (1 Kg 13:2) and the prophecy of the Messiah being born in the city of Bethlehem (Mc5:2-3).
45:1 Ordinarily the OT reserves the idea of being "anointed" for Israelite leaders—priests, kings, and prophets (Isaiah himself, 61:1). Anointing, however, was the Lord's commissioning for a special task. In this case Cyrus, though a pagan ruler, was "His anointed" for the purpose of releasing the Lord's servant people ("Jacob," v. 4) from exile.
45:7 The Hebrew word for "evil" (translated "disaster") represents natural calamity as well as moral evil. God, in His perfection, does nothing morally evil. But, since all events are subject to His control, He is ultimately responsible for all events in history and nature. Moral evil derives from the choices of human beings and angels.
45:15,19 The claim that God hides Himself is the opinion of the nations (v. 14) before their conversion. The Lord corrected their false understanding: "I have not spoken in secret" (v. 19). Warped worldviews and false beliefs cause people to misunderstand what is really happening in the events of history; God's activity is hidden from them and misunderstood until they are exposed to His word of truth.
45:20-23 Isaiah returned to his expression of the basic principles of Yahweh's covenant with Israel (43:11-13; 44:6-8). Here, he added the treaty-like aspect of swearing allegiance in the form of an oath and of bowing down in homage to the great King. Paul borrowed this language in speaking of Jesus' exaltation after His humiliation on the cross (Php 2:9-11). The affirmation of covenant loyalty and obedience is the fundamental theme of biblical worship.
46:1-2 History records that when Cyrus subjugated Babylon without a battle, the Babylonian people welcomed him because he reestablished their traditional worship of Marduk (Bel). When Isaiah spoke of the Babylonian gods' going into captivity, this should be seen as a general picture of defeated gods that could not protect Babylon; being subject to a foreign power, they were still in "captivity" even if not removed from the territory. In any case, the Babylonian deities eventually dropped from the scene.
47:6 For the Lord's chosen people, Israel and Judah, to be defeated might be taken as evidence that the Lord is powerless to protect His own, or even that He does not exist. In this passage, the Lord explains that He allowed the Babylonians to destroy them because He, Himself, was angry with them. In so doing He showed no approval of Babylon. That nation, steeped in pride and false religion, was not the judge of Judah but would itself be overthrown because of its sin. God, alone, controls the historical circumstance of His people and of all nations.
47:13 The tendency to look to astrology—interpreting the movements of heavenly bodies—for advice is a rejection of God's revelation in His Word. Astrology had a long history in Babylon; the Tower of Babel, "with its top in the sky" (Gn 11:4), may have been planned as an elevated map of the heavens for the purpose of seeking advice from the stars. Isaiah reaffirmed the biblical view, that prophecies and predictions based on astrology are useless (see Dt 4:19).
48:8 Isaiah used the metaphor of birth to describe Israel's rebellion against the Lord from its earliest days. His reference was to the complaining of the people soon after they left Egypt (Ex 15:24; 16:2; 17:2) and the sin of making the idolatrous golden calf at Mount Sinai (Ex 32). The prophet was not speaking of the Judeans as individuals, or suggesting that newborn infants can make moral choices.
49:1-7 In this passage, Isaiah seems to be using the word "servant" with several simultaneous meanings. Verse 3 identifies the servant with Israel (41:8; 44:1,21), which was called in Abraham to bring blessing to all nations (v. 6; cp. Gn 12:3). Yet this servant has been called, even before birth, to bring Israel back to God (v. 5); the prophet here spoke of his own role as the spokesman of the Lord (see Jr 1:5). Then, like the messianic Servant of Is 42:1-7, this servant will experience rejection and suffering, and in the end the servant will be honored (49:7). All these meanings overlap in Jesus Christ. As the Servant who suffers for the redemption of Israel, He is also a prophet seeking Israel's return to the Lord, and in His resurrection He incorporates the true, renewed Israel into Himself. In this sense, Isaiah's words here were a messianic prophecy. Nevertheless, in Ac 13:47 Paul and Barnabas applied Is 49:6 to themselves, as proclaimers of the gospel to the Gentiles.
49:19-21 Isaiah suggested that the land would be "too small for the inhabitants," with an abundance of children seeking land for themselves. Ezra 2 indicates that only about 50,000 people returned from the Babylonian exile, so the land of Palestine (Judah) was hardly overpopulated at that time. It is not clear from the context when Isaiah expected this prophecy to be fulfilled, but it need not apply exclusively to the period of the return from exile. The dramatic changes in nature and in people's hearts, and the inclusion of foreigners (vv. 22-23), suggest that this was a prophecy about some future fulfillment of the kingdom of God. Another possibility was the use of a dramatic, exaggerated word-picture on the prophet's part to underscore the certainty of the Lord's redemptive action in days to come.
49:26 In a vivid metaphor, God declared that He would cause Judah's oppressors to eat their own flesh and drink their own blood. The meaning seems to be that the oppressive, vile, and vicious enemies who slaughtered the people of Israel would end up expending their bloodthirsty savagery upon each other. This statement does not approve of brutality, cannibalism, or the drinking of blood. It was a graphic description of the destiny of Judah's enemies, intended to encourage those who were feeling hopeless.
50:1 The Lord asked His people, rhetorically, to produce the legal evidence that He had divorced them and sent them away; then He declared that they "were sold for [their] iniquities." This appears to be a contradiction, yet the context of the passage makes clear that any such breach of the covenant was not the Lord's purpose ("Do I have no power to deliver?" v. 2). The Lord demanded to be shown the hypothetical certificate in order to verify that it was not He who was to blame for this divorce; the separation was the result of Israel's own rebellion, acting as an unfaithful "wife."
50:4-11 As in 49:1-7, the prophet spoke of the servant of the Lord in language capable of more than one simultaneous interpretation. In verses 10-11, the servant could be viewed as the people of Israel who suffered by being sent into exile. Yet in the earlier verses, this servant's obedience stood in contrast to Israel ("I was not rebellious," v. 5), and the suffering is consistent with the picture of the "messianic" servant in 49:7 and 53:1-10. The description in verse 6 resembles what happened to Jesus during his crucifixion (Mt 26:67; 27:30).
51:3 The land of Israel, though capable of outstanding productivity when well managed and supplied with water, has never seen anything close to the fertile and lush topography ascribed to the Garden of Eden. This promise appears to apply not the period when the Jews' return from captivity in Babylon, but to a later time in the future fulfillment of the kingdom of God. A Christian interpretation must take into account that in the NT, the territory of Canaan had been replaced, as the inheritance of God's people, by the life of resurrection power (Eph 1:18-23), of which the Holy Spirit is the earnest or guarantee (Eph 1:14). This new life is the Edenic "restoration of all things" (Ac 3:21) which Christ brings; it will be experienced in "Zion," the assembly of Christian believers (Heb 12:22). Isaiah's words can be taken as a geographic description of a spiritual reality.
51:9-10 On references to ancient Near Eastern mythological monsters in the Bible, see note on 27:1.
51:22-23 The final line of verse 22 claims that the people of God will never drink the cup of God's fury again. History is filled with occasions when the Jews suffered greatly at their enemies' hands after the return from Babylonian exile, from the time of the Syrian ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes (second century b.c.) onward. Christians, likewise, as "the Israel of God"(Gl 6:16), have seen repeated persecution. The prophetic statement can be viewed in several ways. (1) God was indicating that they would not drink any longer from the Babylonian cup of God's wrath, since He would remove that cup from their hands. (2) This promise could be seen as a promise for God's fulfillment of His kingdom. (3) The statement could be interpreted to mean that the Judeans did not need to drink from this cup again, implying that a close walk with God would prevent it from ever happening again. That, indeed, was the thrust of Jesus' warning, "Unless you repent, you will all perish" (Lk 13:3).
52:3 To be "sold for nothing" (see Ps 44:12) is an expression of the people's utter worthlessness, as to their ability to consistently obey the Lord. Isaiah used it to show the Lord's grace in redeeming them at no cost to themselves.
52:13–53:12 Some commentators have identified this servant with personified Israel, with Moses, or with one of the prophets who suffered (Jeremiah, or Isaiah himself). But the servant's acts of suffering were in behalf of God's sinful people, similar to His role in 42:1-7, 49:1-7, and 50:4-11. Philip, one of the seven (Ac 6:5), applied this prophecy to the death of Jesus in Ac 8:30-35, and that has been the usual Christian understanding of the passage. Isaiah's "suffering servant" concept has little or no follow-up in later Jewish interpretation; only the understanding that "God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah" (Ac 2:36) could bring clarity to these words.
52:13,15 If this passage refers to Jesus, when was He "greatly exalted," and when did kings "shut their mouths because of Him" or ever really understand who Jesus was? Jesus was not exalted during His earthly ministry, but after His death and resurrection He was exalted to the right hand of God (Mt 22:41-45; Ac 2:33-35; Php 2:9; Heb 1:3). Revelation calls Him "ruler of the kings of the earth" (Rv 1:5). Scripture often speaks "proleptically," or in anticipation, of things yet to be fulfilled.
53:3 In the Gospel narratives, Jesus was not "despised and rejected" by everyone; until the events just before His crucifixion He was regarded by many as a popular teacher and miracle worker, and even as the "Son of David" (Mk 10:47-48). It was the religious leaders of the community—the scribes, Pharisees, and priests—who, on the whole, despised Him (Mt 12:14; Mk 14:1; Jn 11:53) as well as those who beat and crucified Him (Mk 14:65; 15:15,19).
53:7 Jesus did not always remain silent before His accusers, for He did answer Pilate's questions (Mk 14:62; Lk 23:2; Jn 18:33-37). But Jesus was silent when the chief priest made accusations against Him (Mt 27:12-14; Mk 15:1-4) and His few words to Pilate did not refute His accusers. The silence was concerning those who would accuse Him (see 1 Pt 2:23).
53:9a Isaiah saw, in generalities, what would be more precisely revealed in the circumstances of Jesus' death. The two clauses of this half-verse should be understood as poetically parallel phrases, intended to suggest the same idea about the servant's death. In the view of the prophets of Israel, the rich were often equated withthe wicked. The authorities no doubt intended to dispose of Jesus' body in a common pit with criminals. But, though He died with "the wicked" (two brigands or revolutionaries, often erroneously called mere "thieves"), His burial was in the tomb of a rich man, Joseph of Arimathea (Mk 15:45-46).
53:9b The servant "had done no violence," although Jesus drove the money changers from the temple (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-18; Jn 2:14-16). The two clauses of this verse are in poetic parallel; the "violence" of the first line is defined as speaking "deceitfully" in the second. Jesus was stern with those who defiled the temple, but His words on that occasion—being a quotation, in fact, from the books of Is (Is 56:7) and Jr (Jr 7:11)—were anything but deceitful. But since the temple was a major financial institution under watchful Roman supervision, Jesus' disturbance of its activities was perceived as "violence" and a threat to an already unstable political situation. In Roman eyes it might have been enough to justify His execution, even without the accusations brought by the Jewish authorities.
53:10 Isaiah declared of the servant that the Lord "will prolong His days." Clearly, the servant of this passage was being persecuted to His death (v. 9). His days could be prolonged only through being raised from the dead. Isaiah's words describe the outcome of Jesus' passion, His vindication by the Father (Ac 2:23-24).
54:1-3 On the spread of the Judean population through the land of Israel, see note on 49:19-21.
55:8-9 The statement that God's ways and thoughts are different from those of human beings does not mean that people can never expect to understand anything about Him or follow His ways. He reveals what His people need to know to return to Him (vv. 6-7) and to obey Him (see Dt 29:29), and what He has in store for those who love Him (1 Co 2:9-10). The statement needs to be understood in the light of where Isaiah was carrying this thought: Unlike human ways and thoughts, God's will produce the results He desires in the restoration of His people (Is 55:12-13). It is through His word that He will accomplish His purpose; it will "return to Me" (v. 11). God's word does not coincide with human worldviews which are all off center. But when His people return God's word to Him, they are changed people. They have received God's word and it has done its work within them. It has transformed both heart and mind.
56:3-7 The Lord's word to Isaiah here in effect canceled the directives of Dt 23:1-8, which excluded eunuchs, Ammonites, and Moabites from the congregation of Israel. The law of Moses was given when Israel was about to occupy the land of Canaan, a time when strict separation from pagan religious practices and from anything symbolic of spiritual imperfection or rebellion against the Lord, was of highest priority. The law (torah) is "instruction" or "teaching," not legislation in the modern sense. It was given through a prophet, and while its commandments were in general "holy and just and good" (Rm 7:12) the Lord can reinterpret the specifics of the law through a word to a later prophet. (In the NT, Paul cited the book of Is as "the law," 1 Co 14:21.) What God originally sought of His people, through the law, was purity of heart and righteous behavior, Now, hundreds of years later, He graciously allows anyone who loves Him, regardless of physical or ethnic characteristics, to enter the temple and worship Him.
56:9-12 Isaiah leveled a general indictment of Judean political leaders (shepherds, v. 11) and religious leaders (watchmen, v. 10) as selfish, lazy, and greedy. Some interpreters consider these words a later prophet's criticism of corrupt leaders in the postexilic Jewish community. While Ezr 1–6 and the prophecies of Hg and Zch reveal that Zerubabbel the governor and Joshua the high priest were not the most effective leaders, their evaluations of them do not fit the accusations of this passage. This text is not sufficient evidence to support the "Trito-Isaiah" hypothesis of some modern commentators.
57:1-2 How can the righteous perish because of evil leaders in verse 1 and then the righteous be at peace in verse 2? Isaiah said that they were "swept away from the presence of evil." This change could refer to a future hope of peace when God establishes His kingdom (2:2-4;57:13,19), or to the peaceful sleep of death that the righteous will enjoy.
57:17-18 On the one hand God was angry and wanted to punish His people for their disobedience (v. 17), but on the other hand He wanted to heal and comfort them (v. 18). The prophet was sensitive to the "pathos" or deep feelings of the Lord; His people's rebellion grieved Him to the point that He spoke of judging them, yet because of His love for them He recoiled from that judgment (see Hs 11:1-9; Am 7:1-5). The context brings out that God's purpose was to revive His oppressed and humble people (Is 57:15), judge the wicked who did not repent (vv. 20-21), and transform and heal those who would return to Him through His grace (vv. 18-19). That God seemed to act alternately out of love and wrath reveals the extent to which He had revealed His "feelings" to the prophet.
58:1-8 The people who had been fasting questioned its value since it seemed to have brought no result (v. 3). In spite of their supposed "delight" to know God's ways (v. 2) and their desire for His righteous judgments, He had not responded. The prophet's explanation suggested that their fasting was a religious ritual that made no difference in how they conducted their lives; they continued to quarrel and to oppress the weaker members of their community (vv. 3-4). The "fast" the Lord wanted, and to which He would respond, was to deal with the inequities that had broken the solidarity of the covenant community (vv. 6-7). God is not to be coerced by rituals that seek to bend His will to that of the worshiper, as pagan rites were intended to do. He responds to heartfelt commitment to His purposes, as defined in the covenant. The law had said, "There will be no poor among you" (Dt 15:4).
59:1-3 The Bible encourages people to seek God in prayer, but also explains that some prayers go unheard because of barriers people erect (see 1 Pt 3:7). God does not listen to the prayers of sinful, unrepentant people (Is 59:2-3), because their trust is not truly in Him but in their own empty words (v. 4).
59:16 In context (vv. 1-15), the description of sinfulness in the land shows how depraved the nation had become and how far it had strayed from God. Isaiah did not excuse himself from this picture (6:5); "no man," not even the prophet, was standing up against injustice and ungodliness and interceding for the sinful community. The "man" God looked for, but did not find, could be (1) a righteous king like Hezekiah, (2) some other leader, besides Isaiah, who might respond to His messages through the prophet, or (3) no "man" at all, since the nation's problems were beyond human solution and God must bring salvation Himself (vv. 16-21).
60:1-3 It is difficult to see this passage as reflective of conditions in the postexilic era, as some interpreters hold. The period after the return from Babylon was not a time of great glory but of difficulty. The people struggled economically, and did not finish rebuilding the temple until about 22 years later (Ezr 1–6; Hg 1–2). The nations did not flow to Jerusalem; in fact, only a small group of Israelites returned from captivity in Babylon. Because of these factors, it is best to see this chapter as descriptive of eschatological (2:2-4; 14:1-3), rather than postexilic, events. The NT understands the coming of the "light" to be fulfilled in Jesus Christ and His followers (e.g., Mt 5:14; Lk 1:79; Jn 1:5; 3:19; 8:12; Ac 13:47; 26:23; 2 Co 4:6; 1 Th 5:5; 1 Jn 2:8-10; Rv 22:5). The popular tradition that the wise men from the East who visited the infant Jesus were kings riding camels probably owes its origin to verse 3, which mentions kings coming to the light, together with verse 6 which mentions caravans of camels carrying gold and frankincense. There is no mention of eastern kings or of camels in the Gospel text (Mt 2:1-12).
60:14 Bowing down, in the OT, was not necessarily a gesture of worshiping a deity; it was an act symbolizing respect and humility before a superior authority, which may have been a human agency. Bowing in worship was borrowed from secular practice, because the deity was a "king" or greater authority. For the descendants of Judah's oppressors to bow to the Judeans would not be worship. It will be the recognition that those who are faithful to God, whom their enemies had dishonored or afflicted, had now been vindicated. Further, those who come to submit to God's people are fundamentally coming to God's light (vv. 1-2), coming to honor the Lord with the tribute due a King (vv. 6,9). They are really submitting to God, for Zion is His holy city.
60:16 In a metaphor for receiving sustenance and support from a nurturing authority, Isaiah spoke of God's people nursing on "the milk of nations" and "the breast of kings." The help the people will receive was compared to the care of a nursing mother, even if the kings and their regimes were not feminine. Whereas kings and foreign nations formerly destroyed God's people, one day they will look out for their needs. It is possible to see some historical fulfillment in the provisions Cyrus, and other Medo-Persian rulers, made for the community of returned Jews.
60:19-20 Taking this expression literally, Isaiah would be picturing a major disruption of the solar system in which life on the planet would not survive. The sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies often have a symbolic function in Scripture. Isaiah was comparing God's light and the light of these bodies; their radiance, in the physical sense, cannot compare with the holy radiance of the presence of the Lord. The same thought recurs in the Bible's final pages, where the Jerusalem from heaven is illuminated not by the sun and moon but by "God's glory" (Rv 21:23). Isaiah was looking ahead to that time.
61:1-3 This song has many similarities to other "servant songs," though it does not use the word "servant." The one spoken of here and in 42:1 were both filled with the Spirit to bring a message of hope, justice, and restoration (42:7; 49:6; 11:2-5). It is not necessary to attribute this passage to a hypothetical "Trito-Isaiah," as do some commentators. Jesus took this passage as referring to Himself in a declaration that "the year of the Lord's favor" had finally arrived (Lk 4:16-21).
62:6-7 Isaiah used a figure of speech calling on the city's watchmen to remind the Lord of His promise to restore Jerusalem. It was a poet's colorful way of communicating the assurance that God would never forget to do what He had promised. Jesus used similar literary devices. Although He taught that the Father knows our needs before we ask Him (Mt 6:8), He still told a parable comparing God to a judge who grants a widow' pleading because of her persistence (Lk 18:1-8). Such comparisons in the Bible are not intended to answer questions about the nature of God, apart from His relationship with His people; they are given for the purpose of encouraging faith in God as it operates at the human level.
63:1-6 If God is a God of love (1 Jn 4:8,16), it seems out of character for Him to express such anger and wrath against people, in this case the Edomites. In raising this issue, what tends to be overlooked is what the Bible means by "love." In Scripture this is a covenant-related concept; God's love (Hb hesed is the most important word for it) is His faithfulness to a relationship He has granted to those who have pledged themselves to Him. The NT concept of agape love depends on this covenantal idea (e.g., 1 Jn 4:20-21). God loves His world in a general way (Jn 3:16) but His faithful love extends especially toward those who belong to His covenant; because of His faithfulness to them, His judgment falls upon their enemies. Edom was a long-term enemy of Israel, and all such enemies (Edom represents them here) need to know that God's wrath is real and will come upon those who reject His truth and stubbornly refuse to repent (see Rm 2:5). God's anger flares precisely because of His love, not in spite of it.
63:9 Interpreters have had difficulty with the idea that God suffers, which seems to contradict His divinity. The Hebrew text is difficult, so several solutions have arisen. (1) The written Hebrew text has "He did not (lo') afflict." (2) The Targum (Aramaic translation) has "He did not (lo') afflict him/them." (3) The Hebrew text was read, with a marginal scribal note, to say "there was affliction for him (lo')" (HCSB follows this reading). This refers not to the suffering of the Servant of the Lord (chap. 53) but to God's own tender identification with His people's troubles and sorrows during their oppressive slavery in Egypt (Ex 2:22-25; 3:7; 6:5). The Lord cares for His people, and the prophet was sensitive to His grief when they suffer.
63:10 Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit would be given after He left them in bodily form (Jn 14:16; 15:26; 16:7-13) and promised a special outpouring of the Spirit that was fulfilled at Pentecost (Ac 2). This does not mean the Holy Spirit was inactive before that time. The NT mentions His activity in relation to John the Baptist before his birth (Lk 1:15), Mary's virginal conception of Jesus (Mt 1:18), Zechariah's prophecy (Lk 1:67) and the song of Simeon (Lk 2:25). Jesus' ministry was a ministry of the Holy Spirit from His baptism onward (Mt 3:16; Lk 4:18; Ac 10:38). In the OT, Bezalel was given the ability to make the tabernacle through the Spirit (Ex 31:3), the Spirit caused Balaam to prophesy good things for Israel (Nm 24:2), and Samuel anointed David to be king and he was filled with the Spirit (1 Sm 16:13). The Spirit of God was active throughout the OT period, even from the creation (Gn 1:2), though there is a limited amount of revelation about His work in OT texts.
63:11,14 The account of the exodus contains no reference to the Holy Spirit under that name, but apparently Isaiah understood the "Angel of God" (Ex 13:21; 14:19) who was in the pillar of fire and cloud to be the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit that guided them may refer to the "Angel" that went before them (Ex 23:20; 32:34; 33:2); the Angel was identical to "My presence" (Ex 33:14). Paul stated, expressly, that "the Lord is the Spirit" (2 Co 3:17), so such exchange of terminology should not be considered problematic.
63:17 Isaiah apparently quoted a prayer of the people—or ascribed it to them as a literary device—who complained that the Lord caused them to stray and hardened their hearts. It is possible to interpret this complaint in several ways: (1) God eventually hardens the hearts of those who continually reject Him through their own choice (see 6:9-10). (2) The people, in their prayer, were inappropriately blaming God rather than taking responsibility for their poor choices. (3) The verb could be translated in a tolerative sense, "Why do you allow us to stray?" rather than in a causative sense. God gives people freedom to obey or disobey Him; when humans choose to ignore Him and run counter to His directives, it is not primarily God's doing. But God may eventually give them over to their own sinful inclinations simply by withdrawing His hand from the situation (Rm 1:18-25).
64:6 Isaiah strikingly compared the "righteous acts" of the people to a "polluted garment"; that is, a cloth used by women to receive their menstrual discharge. Ritual uncleanness kept a person from entering the place of worship or from beholding the face of the Lord (cp. "You have hidden Your face from us," v. 7). Even despicable human beings can do a few good things for people they care about, but God does not look on their good deeds with favor because their motivation is corrupt and self-centered. In this passage, the people were confessing their sins, admitting they did not listen to God (v. 4) or call on his name (v. 7). They realized that the good things they did—their own righteousness—could never compare with the righteousness of a holy God, which is infinitely greater.
65:5 God wants people to be holy, separated from evil and dedicated to Him, but these people who claimed to be holy were involved with pagan religious practices (vv. 3-4,7). They considered themselves holier than others. In reality, however, they were not separated from falsehood and dedicated to the Lord, but dedicated to pagan practices and separated from the true worship of the Lord.
65:17-25 Isaiah presented a word picture of the restoration of God's creation, with some features drawn from the Bible's description of conditions in Eden and humanity's early history—long lifetimes, animals living together without being carnivorous (Gn 1:30; cp. 2:19), the serpent crawling in the dust (Gn 3:14). At the same time, the prophet incorporated terminology from Israel's covenant structure. He referred to a new heaven and a new earth—the witnesses to the covenant (Dt 4:26; 30:19; 31:28). He described the undoing of the covenant curses—such as building a house but never living in it (Dt 28:30), planting vineyards but not enjoying the fruit (Dt 28:39), begetting children who will be taken as prisoners (Dt 28:41). This renewal of both creation and covenant centers in Jerusalem, to be created anew (Is 65:18), the site of God's "holy mountain" (v. 25). Elements of Isaiah's vision for the future are taken up in the NT, especially in the description of the Jerusalem from heaven, as "a new heaven and a new earth" (Rv 21:1-2).
66:21 According to the law, only Israelites could serve in the temple, but Isaiah envisioned people from a list of pagan nations (v. 19) becoming priests and Levites in the Lord's house. These people could be understood as faithful Israelites who had lived dispersed among the nations for many years (see Ac 2:5-11). More likely, Isaiah saw God giving the non-Israelites in His kingdom equality with Israelite believers. That is certainly what the apostles believed and taught in the NT; Paul celebrated how Christ has broken down the division between Jew and non-Jew (Eph 2:13-16), who together make up the new temple of the Lord (Eph 2:19-21). Just as God took the Levites from among the Israelites and gave them as gifts to the Israelites (Nm 8:6-19; 18:6) so God will choose non-Israelite believers in the future, taking them "into captivity" in Christ (see Eph 4:7-8).