1
Isaiah 1â12
Old-fashioned movies and novels start at the beginning of a story and go through it in the order in which the events happened until they get to the end. More new-fangled movies and novels play games with their audiences and readers. They start in the middle, then flash back, then move forward again. They thereby make their audiences think harder. People donât get it unless they focus, and unless they let themselves become involved in the story.
Isaiah 1â12 is not a story in the strict sense, but it works a little like that new-fangled kind of story. Whereas Isaiah 40â55 has a linear arrangement and Isaiah 56â66 is a chiasm, Isaiah 1â12 has features of both these structures (which is one reason why itâs complicated, in the way Luther noted in connection with the Prophets). And something of its theology is conveyed by that combination. On the one hand, the chapters affirm that Yahweh is intent on fulfilling a purpose with Judah and that its story is destined to go somewhere. On the other hand, in practice itâs hard to see any progress in the story; what goes around comes around.
Faithfulness in the Exercise of Power
The opening chapters (Is 1:1â5:30) illustrate this point as they alternate between three themes. Precisely because each small section started off life as a separate message, the themes overlap between the sections, but they can be roughly distinguished as follows:
- Judah is living as if it can ignore Yahwehâs demands on its life (Is 1:2-20; 5:1-24)
- Yahweh will therefore take action against it (Is 1:21-24, 28-31; 2:6â4:1; 5:25-30)
- But Yahweh will restore it and turn it into what it should be (Is 1:25-27; 2:1-5; 4:2-6)
Implicitly, and occasionally explicitly, Isaiah indicates that Judah therefore needs to change its ways (e.g., Is 1:18-20) in order to short-circuit this sequence and make it possible for Yahweh to proceed to (3) without going via (2). But by the time the collage is put together, Judah had failed to change its ways, and (2) had happened. In this circumstance, (3) is the promise for the community to live by, but it will not come about unless Judah now hears the message expressed in (1) and reworks its life.
The problem is expressed most pungently in the âsongâ in Isaiah 5:1-7. Isaiah starts off like a singer entertaining people with a love song, which he says he has composed on behalf of a friend. Itâs a song about a vineyard, an image that love poetry often uses. But the love song veers off in a direction thatâs unexpected and then shocking. The vineyard produces no fruit; in other words, the manâs courting gets him nowhere. He then turns from love to hate and destroys the vineyard. One might imagine other men listening to the singer-poet, sympathizing with him and with his action.
But the imagery of a vine was also familiar in another connection, and people listening to a prophet might have guessed that there was more to his song than met the eye. They would be familiar with the vineyard as an image for Israel, Yahweh being the vinedresser. Isaiah explains that his allegorical poem indeed refers to Yahweh and Israel. Yahweh too had looked for fruit and found only something that tasted nasty.
He looked for miĆĄpÄáč, but thereâmiĆpÄáž„;
for áčŁÄdÄqĂą, but thereâáčŁÄâÄqĂą.
The conventional English translation of miĆĄpÄáč and áčŁÄdÄqĂą is âjustice and righteousness,â so that we might say that when Yahweh looked for miĆĄpÄáč and áčŁÄdÄqĂą, he was looking for social justice, but what Isaiah would mean by âsocial justiceâ has different connotations from those of the English expression. Hereâs a typical definition of social justice, by Innosanto Nagara:
âSocial Justice Workâ is work that we do in the interest of securing human rights, an equitable distribution of resources, a healthy planet, democracy, and a space for the human spirit to thrive (read: arts/culture/entertainment). We do the work to achieve these goals on both a local and a global scale.
These are commitments that Isaiah would sympathize with, but they donât correspond to miĆĄpÄáč and áčŁÄdÄqĂą.
Neither word has an English equivalent, as is the case with many Hebrew words related to theology and ethics. The broad meaning of miĆĄpÄáč refers to government, the exercise of authority and the making of decisions. The King James Bible often translated it âjudgment,â and a positive aspect to this translation is that we expect judgment to be exercised in a way that is just (as we do with government, the exercise of authority and the making of decisions), but we know that it can be exercised in an unjust way. Similarly there can be perverted exercise of miĆĄpÄáč. But âjudgmentâ easily suggests a link with the proceedings of a court; furthermore, âjudgingâ commonly has negative connotations. MiĆĄpÄáč has positive connotations, and the exercise of power to which it refers is by no means confined to the making of decisions by a court.
The fact that miĆĄpÄáč can be exercised in an unjust way links to its pairing with áčŁÄdÄqĂą. Again, the common translation ârighteousnessâ captures an aspect of áčŁÄdÄqĂą, though ârighteousnessâ is inclined to denote individual holiness, whereas áčŁÄdÄqĂą is an essentially relational word. It suggests doing the right thing in relation to other peopleâin relation to God and to oneâs community. âRightâ is thus nearer its connotations, but âfaithfulâ is nearer still.
MiĆĄpÄáč and áčŁÄdÄqĂą thus suggests the faithful exercise of power in the community. People with power control resources; they will therefore make sure that ordinary people can share in resources such as land and food. People with power do control decision making in the court, which meets at the city gate; they will see that judicial decisions are made in a fair way. People with power control what happens in community worship; they will make sure that it is offered in a way that is faithful to Yahweh.
The problem is that Yahweh looks for miĆĄpÄáč but sees miĆpÄáž„; he looks for áčŁÄdÄqĂą but sees áčŁÄâÄqĂą. The word miĆpÄáž„ comes only here in the Old Testament, though its connections with other words make its meaning clear enough. It denotes flowingâhere, the flowing of blood that is involved in the oppression that is officially sponsored or tolerated in the community. Isaiah perhaps invented this word in order to pair it with miĆĄpÄáč. It suggests the opposite to the proper exercise of miĆĄpÄáč. Similarly áčŁÄâÄqĂą suggests the opposite to áčŁÄdÄqĂą, in that it denotes an outcry or a cry of indignation or a cry of pain, the cry of the people who are being treated unfairly and oppressively. With horrific irony, it is a word used to describe Israelâs crying out in Egypt, to which Yahweh responded in delivering people from their positions as state serfs there. It is now a cry that Israelites utter against one another.
The crop that Yahweh reaps in his carefully tended vineyard is one that makes him simply wish to abandon it to the elements.
Holiness
The center of the collage (Is 6:1â9:7 [6]) provides a further entry into underÂstanding the dynamic of those opening chapters, by reviewing how Isaiah was involved in addressing people about the process those chapters implied. It begins with Isaiahâs account of how he was commissioned to his confrontational ministry. He saw Yahweh exalted as king. It makes sense to picture Isaiah in the courtyards of the temple in Jerusalem, where in the sanctuary Yahweh was invisibly enthroned above the cherubim. It is the year the human King Uzziah died, an important year of transition as one kingâs reign gives way to another. Isaiah sees the invisible Yahweh (as it were), his robes filling the temple. The Hebrew word for âtempleâ is also the word for a kingâs palace, and the temple in Jerusalem was an earthly representation of Yahwehâs heavenly palace. In Isaiahâs vision, this earthly palace becomes the heavenly palace where Yahweh is enthroned as the real king of the universe. Isaiahâs response is to realize that his lips are polluted; the reference to lips may relate to his being commissioned to use them as a prophet. He also refers to his peopleâs lips being polluted, which must have a different point. His prophecies make clear that their lips are indeed polluted; their worship and social life are characterized by falsehood. After Isaiahâs lips are purified, it becomes explicit that (like a human king) Yahweh is surrounded by his cabinet. This cabinet needs someone to underÂtake a task, and Isaiah volunteers to do so.
Christian reading of the chapter commonly stops when Isaiah says âHere am Iâsend me,â but this reading thus confines itself to the preliminaries of the story. The commission is to tell Judah to listen and listen without understanding, and thereby to make it harder for people to see the reality of their situation and turn to Yahweh. That process will issue in devastation, comparable to the cutting down of a tree. It is no casual analogy, because Israel as the people of God is often likened to a tree.
At this point we have to recall that Isaiahâs account of his commission is designed for Judah itself to hear. An irony is involved. The prophetsâ messages are commonly designed to be self-defeating, at a surface level, to shock people into the change that will mean Yahweh doesnât need to implement them. Their underlying aim is thereby achieved. Unfortunately, the strategy rarely works. (Jesus quotes these verses in Mark 4 in connection with his using the same technique; he also finds that it doesnât work.)
The last line of the chapter presupposes the failure of the shock tactic. The story thus needs to be read at two levels. It reflects the nature of Isaiahâs actual ministry (when the possibility of Judah turning is still open), but it also reflects the later context in which this collage is being assembled (when it is known that Judah has not turned). The tree has been cut down. But the closing line (Is 6:13) adds the comment, âIts stump is the holy seed.â There is the possibility that the tree can grow again.
The bookâs opening critique of the people was expressed in terms of their being people who have infuriated âIsraelâs Holy Oneâ (Is 1:4). Just before the account of the commission, Isaiah has spoken of the scorn for âIsraelâs Holy Oneâ that peopleâs attitude implies (Is 5:19, 24). We have noted that this distinctive title for Yahweh recurs elsewhere in the book, and the word holy plays a key role in the story of Isaiahâs commission. As well as being a vision of Yahweh as king, Isaiahâs vision emphasizes that Yahweh is the âholy, holy, holyâ one. The fact that Yahweh is king points toward the connotations of holiness. It suggests Godâs distinctively supernatural, dangerous, almost frightening, divine nature, which should make people bow their head simply because they are creaturesâlet alone because they are people polluted by their wrongdoing.
The point is further underlined by the association of the phrase âYahweh Armiesâ with the phrase âIsraelâs Holy One.â English translations usually have âLORD of Hostsâ for the first of these two descriptions. They thus follow the usual practice of replacing the name Yahweh with the noun âLORDâ (elsewhere in Isaiah 6, the word âLordâ printed thus does represent the regular Hebrew word meaning âLordâ). The word for âhostsâ is the regular Hebrew word for armies, the word that appears on the back of Israeli military trucks. The expression looks as if it literally reads âYahweh of Armies,â which is an odd expression in Hebrew as in English, but one way or another it denotes the fact that Yahweh possesses or embodies all dynamic and forceful power, earthly and heavenly.
The holy God can associate earthly entities with him, and they then become holy, and also become dangerous. Itâs unwise to mess with them because God has identified with them. So Yahweh made Israel his holy people. That fact introduces danger into their own trivializing or compromising of their holy status, but it also adds to the rationale for Yahwehâs not simply giving up on them (see Is 4:3 as well as Is 6:13). They are the holy seed.
Trust
Isaiahâs account of his commission leads into a story about his confronting the earthly king (Is 7). Judah is under pressure from Ephraim and Syria, and King Ahaz is out inspecting Jerusalemâs defenses. The pressure from Ephraim and Syria links with the broader international context of pressure from Assyria, which wants to extend its empire westwards. Syria, then Ephraim, then Judah, are in its gun-sights.
Isaiah takes with him a son named âLeftovers-will-return.â The idea of leftovers is important in Isaiah, and there are several ways in which people could understand it. Yahweh is capable of dealing with Judahâs foes in so radical a way that only leftovers will survive to go home and tell the tale; such is the promise Isaiah goes on to give Ahaz. But the account of Isaiahâs commission has also given a warning that Yahwehâs action against Judah itself will mean that only leftovers will survive. Isaiah 10 will later speak of the challenge to such leftovers to return to Yahweh.
Isaiah urges Ahaz not to be afraid but rather to trust in Yahweh. He makes the point by means of a neat double use of the Hebrew verb âÄman, which the New Revised Standard Version captures nicely: âIf you do not stand firm in faith, you shall not stand at allâ (Is 7:9). Trusting Yahweh is a key motif in Isaiahâs message. It is a key to Judahâs avoiding a devastating fate. Isaiah also sees it as the proper response to that declaration concerning what Yahweh can do to Judahâs attackers. He addresses the king as âDavidâs household,â which gives a further clue concerning why Ahaz should trust Yahwehâs promises rather than being fearful. Yahweh had made a commitment to David and his successors. Isaiah puts before Ahaz a demandingly impractical expectation: that Israel should live its life in the world on the basis of trust in Yahweh rather than on the regular principles that nations and communities accept.
Isaiah adds further support for trust in inviting Ahaz to ask for a sign from Yahweh. Accepting a sign will put Ahaz in a difficult position, and he appeals to the Old Testament disapproval elsewhere of people testing Yahweh. Yahweh gives him a sign anyway. There is a girl who is going to have a baby, and when he is born she will be able to call him âGod-is-with-us,â in light of the way Yahweh has fulfilled his promises. Isaiah reiterates the same point by a different sort of sign when he himself begets a son (perhaps it is the same child) whom he names âPlunder-hurries-loot-rushesâ (Is 8:1-4). The name promises the total defeat of Syria and Ephraim.
Ahazâs refusal to trust Yahweh means the deliverance will do Judah no long-term good. The name âPlunder-hurries-loot-rushesâ is also double edged: in the absence of trust by Ahaz, Judahâs possessions, not those of Syria and Ephraim, will become loot. Isaiah restates these alternatives in a metaphor. Jerusalemâs defenses crucially included its defense of its water supply, which came via the stream issuing from the Gihon spring and flowing to the Pool of Siloam. Those relatively placid waters provide an image for Yahwehâs provision for Judah. But Judah has chosen not to trust in this provision. It will therefore find itself drowning in a more overwhelming flood.
There is a link between trust in Yahweh and the holiness of Yahweh. While any people might describe its gods as holy ones, and Israel is also prepared to describe other supernatural beings as holy ones, Yah...