Comments on Isaiah 28

     Chapters 28-32 form a withering attack on Israel and Judah. 
With chapters 24-26 forming an attack on all of the heathen nations
of the world, and chapter 27 as a transition, we come to a section
where Isaiah lets his own people that they are not off the hook. 
Isaiah's warning is similar to that given by Moses in Deut. 9:3-5
where he says:

     Know then this day that none other that the Lord your God
     is crossing at your head, a devouring fire; it is He who
     will wipe them out.  He will subdue them before you, that
     you may quickly dispossess and destroy them, as the Lord
     promised you.  And when the Lord your God has thrust them
     from your path, say not to yourselves, "The Lord has
     enabled us to possess this land because of our virtues";
     it is rather because of the wickedness of those nations
     that the Lord is dispossessing them before you.  It is
     not because of your virtues and your rectitude that you
     will be able to possess their country; but it is because
     of their wickedness that the Lord your God is
     dispossessing those nations before you, and in order to
     fulfill the oath that the Lord made to your fathers,
     Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. (JPS)

Isaiah says pretty much the same thing as Moses did above, but goes
into much greater detail regarding what Israel and Judah are guilty
of.  Chapter 28 specifically addresses Ephraim, the leading tribe
of the Northern ten tribes.

     By way of summary for chapters 28-32, the following major
themes (there are numerous minor themes as well, idolatry for
example [cp. 28:15, 30:22, 31:7]) are treated:

     Acceptance/rejectance of contemporary prophets and revelation
     (cf. 28:7-13, 29:9-14, 30:8-11).

     Relying on the arm of flesh rather the arm of the Lord (cf.
     29:15-24, 30:1-7, 31:1-3).

     Destruction of the wicked and the concurrent redemption of the
     righteous on the Day of the Lord (cf. 28:2-4, 28:17-22, 29:1-
     8, 30:12-33, 31:4-32:8, 32:9-20).

Given the interweaving of these topics and their repeated usage,
Isaiah equates them in both the historical and eschatological 
interpretation.

v1-6 present a series of strophes following the symbolism developed
in the immediately preceding chapters as well as some novel symbols
presented in the first verse.

v1 presents the image of a wilting garland on the head of some
obese drunkard.  The garland imagery is similar to that employed in
chapter 40 where Isaiah compares the endurance of the flesh with
that of grass that withers each season and flowers that die quickly
after blooming (40:6).  and the political leaders of the world to
plants that are desiccated and swept away with a storm (40:23-24). 
Thus, the garland represents the glory of the world and how quickly
it fades.  That the drunkard is crowned with the glory of the world
would imply that the bloated drunkard here represents the political
leaders.  Concerning the intoxicated state of the character, Isaiah
uses it to represent physical drunkenness (5:11-12), but moreso as
being in spiritual stupor and moral confusion because of the
deceptions taught and heard about the Lord (v. 7, 19:11-15, 29:9,
Joel 1:5).  The bloated condition probably has reference to 
indulgence in physical pleasures at the expense of spirituality.

     That this verse attacks the garland on the head of the
drunkard rather than the drunkard seems odd.  But, in light of the
preceding chapters that detail the overthrow of all wicked nations
in favor of the Lord's Theocracy, an attack on self-promoting
politics is not out of context.  Especially when v. 5 states that
the Lord will be a crown of glory to the remnant of Israel.  Thus,
the elimination of man's glory in favor of the glory of the Lord is
a theme consistent with Isaiah's ongoing message.

     The particular symbolism of the garland may have additional
implications outside of that of the rapidly fading crown of man's
political glory in contrast to the Lord's eternal incorruptible
crown of glory.  It may have reference to idolatrous nature worship
(cp. 27:9, 30:22, 31:6-7, 66:17).  It could possibly be an attack
on Hellenists as Greek Symposiums were drunken festivals where all
of the attenders wore wreaths on their heads.  This seems unlikely
though as Isaiah makes no overt attacks on Grecia proper in a
historical setting.

v2-4 continues with the symbolism of v. 1 to tells us what is to
happen to these crowns of wilted flowers.  The Lord will cast the
crowns of glory to the ground and have them trampled underfoot by
the means of some metaphorical powerful storm (i.e. the invading
onslaught of Assyria as described repeatedly in the immediately
preceding chapters as a raging flood and so on).  Isaiah then
compares the overthrow of these political leaders to the early
figs.  These early figs were available in March, but quickly
withered.  They were much prized for their tenderness, but their
quick spoilage forced early harvest and immediate consumption.  As
Isaiah has employed the image of a harvest as the destruction of
wicked nations (cf. 27:12), he is letting Ephraim know that they
will be very early in the harvest of nations and they will
"consumed" quickly.

v5-6  With the destruction of the faded crown of flowers by the
Lord there comes a replacement crown of unfading glory for each of
the survivors of Israel.  The Lord will also provide His spirit to
the leaders of this remnant such that they will judge in
righteousness and defend the remnant will valor.

v7-20  Isaiah changes the target from the political leaders of
Ephraim to the spiritual leaders.

v7-8  Isaiah now identified the spiritual leadership of Ephraim as
drunkards as well.  The priests and prophets are portrayed as
drunken dolts that give perverted judgments.  As detailed above in
the comments in v. 1, the drunkenness implied here has both
physical and spiritual interpretations.  In v. 8 where the tables
are presented as being covered with vomit and excrement, the
spiritual leaders are not only unclean according to the Law, but
are teaching putrid doctrines to the people (cf. Deut. 8:3 where
the Law is equated with food; cp. Mal. 1:12).  Thus, Isaiah draws
a very tight correlation between the behaviors engaged in by
priests and the quality of the doctrines they subsequently teach. 
Isaiah even goes on to end the verse by saying that the tables are
so full of filth "there is no room left".  One would assume this
means there is no room left for real food (i.e. there is so much
false doctrine about there is no place found for good doctrine, it
has been crowded out).

v9-10 presents the response from the drunken priests and prophets
that Isaiah had castigated in v. 7-8.  Rather than addressing the
criticisms leveled against them, they resort to insults aimed at
their accuser.  As their position is indefensible and they are
unwilling to repent, they have little choice.  They attempt to
degrade Isaiah by saying that his teachings are puerile.  Doing so
would imply that they are above the juvenile doctrines taught by
Isaiah, and is thus a statement indicating the pride they take in
their learning.

v10  The translation presented in the JPS version is more of a
paraphrase than a true translation that captures what the drunkards
response to Isaiah is.  The problem is that the Hebrew wordplay is
lost in either the strict translation or in the paraphrase,
whichever one you use it is inadequate.  For example, compare these
renditions on v. 10 which are more strict translations:

     For precept must be upon precept,
     precept upon precept;
     line upon line,
     line upon line;
     here a little, and
     there a little. (KJV, with structure by myself)

     "For he says,
     `Order on order, order on order,
     Line on line, line on line
     A little here, a little there' " (NAS)

The result is that the verbal mockery implied in the response that
is apparent in the JPS rendition is lost in the more literal
translation.  The Hebrew is as follows: "ki saw lasaw saw lasaw qaw
laqaw qaw laqaw".  Kaiser says "[the Hebrew] 'saw' was regarded as
an abbreviation of 'miswa', [meaning] commandment, or of a
conjectural 'sawa', [meaning] precept, while 'qaw' was identified
with the known word [meaning] measuring line, so that the
expression was taken as a mockery of what was assumed to be the
constantly moralizing teaching of [Isaiah]".  Thus, the drunken
priest's response to Isaiah is a juvenile mockery of him.  The
phrase in Hebrew sounds similar to parrot-like repetition or a
schoolmaster having children reciting by rote and would follow the
drunken priest's statement that Isaiah's teaching are only suitable
for children in v. 9.  So, the JPS rendering of "mutter, mutter,
murmur, murmur, now here, now there" carries the implied mockery,
but the more literal translations carry the foundation from which
the mockery is derived.  In either case, one rendition without the
other is incomplete.

v11-12  The JPS rendition on these two verses is notably different
from any other translation I have ever seen.  The NAS rendition is
as follows (and is the typical translation):

     Indeed, He will speak to this people
     Through stammering tongue lips and a foreign tongue,
     He who said to them, "Here is rest, 
     Give rest to the weary,"
     And, "Here is repose," but they would not listen.

Where the JPS translation is:

          Truly, as one who speaks to that people in a
     stammering jargon and an alien tongue is he who declares
     to them, "This is the resting place, let the weary rest;
     this is the place of repose."  They refuse to listen.

The NAS translation would present Isaiah's comments as derivative
of two excerpts from the Torah, Deut. 28:49 (a classical covenant
curse indicating that the alien nations will overrun them, hence
the foreign language) and Deut. 12:9-10 (the offering of rest and
peace in the promised land).  But the JPS would present it as a
statement by Isaiah that characterizes the unwillingness of Ephraim
to heed the prophet's council to avoid political alliances with
heathen nations (see the JPS footnotes on v. 12 and 13 which are in
reference to the historical situation detailed in chapter 7).  The
JPS also tends to ignore that the words employed in the taunting
are derivative of the hebrew words for "precept" and "line" and
would rather se them as nonsense words of babel as indicated by
their reading on v. 11.  In this case, I will favor the NAS
translation rather than the JPS on the basis of Isaiah's tendency
to use material from the Torah (this is just too similar to be a
coincidence), the historical rather than eschatological
interpretation the JPS is forcing onto the text, and the latter-day
revelation that makes use of these verses.  However, one could say
that the JPS is the historical reading and the NAS is the
eschatological reading if they wanted to be diplomatic.

     So, what these two verses are saying is that since Ephraim
would rather mock the Lord's prophet than listen to him, He will
"speak" to them via invading armies (cp. 19:18, 33:19, 36:11).  He
offered them peace and security, but they chose to walk in their
own ways.  Also compare Zech. 3:9 where after the day of the Lord's
blazing wrath the people will worship Him with pure speech.

v13  To those that refuse to listen, the words of the lord will
just be "mutter, mutter, murmur, murmur, now here, now there" and
the result is that they will fall, and be captured by their
adversaries.  Here, Isaiah makes use of the irony in the mockery of
the drunken priests.  They mock him "precept on precept, line upon
line" as though he were teaching children, yet that is precisely
how the Lord reveals His will to man (cf. D&C 128:21).  As such,
the mocking priests are caught in their own taunting and their own
words turn against them (this is the same kind of ironic turnabout
that appears in 21:3-5).  This context is used in 2 Ne. 28:30-31
where the KJV Isaiah rendition is employed and expounded on with
good detail.  Also note that given the context of this passage the
Lord is reserving the right to reveal things as He sees fit through
His prophets and those who reject it are rejecting Him.

v14-20  Lest those at Jerusalem think that they are off the hook
with Isaiah's condemnation of Ephraim (who were Judah's enemies
during Isaiah's ministry), he now turns on Jerusalem as well. 
While Judah has been doing better than Ephraim, it is made clear
that they are not doing as well as they might be.  Isaiah is quick
to draw parallels between Judah and Ephraim and starts out the
strophe with one and ends the strophe with one.  He starts is out
in v. 14 saying that the rulers at Jerusalem are "men of mockery"
just as the men of Ephraim are shown to be (also note the JPS
footnote on v. 14 line c).  The strophe is ended with v. 20 where
Jerusalem is identified as being in the same unrested condition as
Ephraim is.  This kind of bracketing in the text which uses the two
main attacks on Ephraim indicates that Judah is guilty of the same
stuff from v. 7-13.

v15 is a quote from the rulers at Jerusalem.  Heschel (p. 66) goes
so far as to attribute this to Ahaz as a cynical quote captured by
Isaiah.  Herbert says of the word "Death" employed in this verse:
"there is a word-play here, for the Hebrew word suggests both death
and the canaanite deity Mot.  We might paraphrase: You have allied
yourself with a dead god, instead of the living God; inevitably
therefore he will bring you to the place of the dead (Sheol)". 
Kaiser states "The idea of being safe from death altogether lies
outside the realism of Old Testament anthropology.  The two
exception, Enoch and Elijah (cf. Gen. 5:24 and 2 Kings 2:11), are
meant at best to remind men that they themselves are only ordinary
persons, subject to death".  Thus, we see that the rulers at
Jerusalem are being implicated in idolatry and self-deception.

     Isaiah makes repeated reference to the flooding scourge, which
is both ancient and eschatological Assyria (cp. v. 2, 27:1, Hosea
5:8-10), but there are also a number of latter-day references to
flooding scourges as well, see D&C 5:19, 45:31 and 97:23.

v16-20 form a quote from the Lord is reply to the quote from the
leaders at Jerusalem.  Quite interesting considering the leaders in
Jerusalem are saying "Oh, well we have covenanted with Death and
Hell, so we are safe".  And the Lord says "Oh, really?  I thought
I told you in Ex. 34:12 not to do that."

v16 is a famous verse that gets quite a bit of use in the NT and
has obvious reference to Jesus Christ.  But, the presentation
Isaiah is making here is bound up in the concept of a sure
foundation and a strong structure whereas most NT writers hit one
or the either of the symbols at a time.  Jesus made use of this
passage numerous times, most notably in his parable of the two
builders (Matt. 7:24-27) which employs the strong foundation aspect
and in his statements concerning his replacing the temple at
Jerusalem (John 1:51 and 2:19).  This sure and sturdy structure is
come to replace the man made structure in v. 17.

v17  As the measuring lines and counterweights are employed to
measure off the structure of v. 16 for its foundation, they are
also employed to measure up and judge the structure in this
chapter.  We are informed that the structure here is founded on the
deceptions and treachery of v. 15.  Thus, this shelter is
intrinsically weak and doomed to be razed.  Note what forms the 
plumbline and weights (see the JPS footnote cross refs.) and
compare 34:11 for a similar application.  Also cp. Amos 7:7-9, 
Micah 2:4-5.

v18-19 is a series of condemnations saying their covenant with
death is totally useless and the oncoming scourge is going to
course through the land day and night with no reprieve whatsoever
and wipe out the Lord's enemies.  The last two lines in the verse
emphasize that the flooding scourge is going to be so bad that the
even hearing the news of it will be horrifying to the listener.  As
the historical siege of Assyria did not sweep over Jerusalem, this
section is ripe for eschatological interpretation.  But, one could
develop the argument that the sack of Jerusalem by the Babylonians
and much later by the Romans was enough to fulfill it.

v20 invokes the symbolism of v. 12 where the people of Ephraim
reject the peace of the Lord, except here Judah is the target.  The
conditions under which Jerusalem will find themselves will be such
that they cannot find peace or rest anywhere or anyway outside of
the Lord.  No matter what they do it will not work. Also compare
Ps. 37:7 and 95:11.

v21-22  Isaiah councils Judah to stop mocking himself and the Lord
because he has heard the Lord's decree of destruction and it will
be as bad as those events as occurred as Gibeon and Perazim (cf. 2
Sam. 5::19-25; 1 Chron. 14:9-16).  The exception here is that
Israel will be the targets rather than their enemies.

     For the "strange work" of the Lord cp. 66:8, Ezek. 38:21, D&C
95:4, D&C 101:95.

v23-29  Isaiah inserts a rather interesting parable into the text
that presents a very common sense situation to the two parties he
just addressed.  The parable is arranged in two strophes that have
synoptic endings, but they are complementary in their settings.

v23  Isaiah is obviously addressing the reader in this literary
plea for them to pay close heed to the following parable.  He is
also warning the person to be careful about the interpretation
as it is a parable will spiritual application and not just some 
good rules for farming.

v24-26 form the first strophe with the setting of plowing and
seeding.  Isaiah presents a logical progression and rhetorically
asks if the farmer is acting in a wise manner.  First the farmer
plows, but he doesn't plow incessantly, he plows it once, breaks up
the clods, then levels the surface.  Once that is done he moves to
the next step, namely planting.  Rather than continue plowing, as
that would be stupid, the farmer then plants his crops according to
their relative needs and yields.  This strophe then ends and states
the farmer acts in wisdom because the Lord has taught him wisdom.  
The implication is those who are not heeding the Lord are not 
acting in wisdom.

v27-29 then continues on with the parable, but the agricultural
setting is moved to the subsequent harvest of the farmer's field
from the preceding verses.  Here again Isaiah asks the reader
rhetorically if cumin is properly threshed with a sledge or with
a flail, and since cumin has a very small seed the answer is a
flail.  Then Isaiah says it is cereal that is threshed with a
sledge because even if it is smashed by the sledge, which is 
driven by horses, it is not destroyed.  In this case Isaiah is 
referring to heavier cereal grains like corn where the entire ear 
is threshed with the sledge because the force involved will remove 
the kernels from the ear, but the kernels are large and durable 
enough to survive the process.  

     This strophe then ends with content similar to that of v. 26, 
except Isaiah makes it more forceful by saying "That, too, is 
ordered by the Lord of Hosts".  This statement of the command of 
the careful harvesting follows closely the harvest images used in 
the immediately following chapters where the destruction of the 
wicked is the primary harvest and the gleaning is the gathering of 
the righteous remnant (cf. 27:12).  Thus, the parable has the 
simple reading of the Lord's servant being practical and heeding 
the council of the Lord and His prophet, but the larger and more 
powerful reading is that the Lord has planted Israel and is now 
preparing to harvest it (cp. 5:1-7, 27:2-6 and also 17:4-6, 21:10 
for additional "harvest" refs.).