General Comments on Isaiah 48-52 Recall in ch. 40-47 there was a strong alternating Justice versus Mercy theme, which is also seen in ch. 48 (Justice) and ch. 49 (Mercy). This complimentary structure in ch. 48-49 also turns it into something of a segue for the subsequent chapters that deal with the establishment of Zion. As such, ch. 48-52 can be grouped together under the main theme of the redemption of Zion. The redemption of Zion is presented in these chapters emphatically: heralds shouting, watchmen singing, and people rejoicing (cf. 48:20-21, 51:3, 52:1-2, 52:7-10). While it is accompained by a somber warning (cf. 48:22, cp. 1 Ne. 20:22), this all occurs despite the rebellions and difficulties described in the preceding and subequent chapters. Why? If Israel and Judah are so rebellious, why does the Lord redeem Zion? Two reasons are given: to preserve the sanctity of His name (cf. 48:8-11, 52:4-6), and to fulfill the Abrahamic (cf. 48:19, 49:18-21, 51:1-2) and Sinaitic Covenants (cf. 48:21, 49:13). Never once is it even suggested or hinted at that the redemption of Zion is because of Israel's righteousness or worthiness. Another prominent theme through these chapters is that of servants. Two different servants are presented: a proselyting servant, and an intercessory servant. The proselyting servant is presented as Israel in general and they are called to be a light to the nations, but they fail in this mission (cf. 49:3-6, 51:7). The intercessory servant is presented as an individual who is tasked to be the Lord's spokesman, a leader and savior of Israel. But this servant is rejected, and thus also unsuccesful (cf. 50:6-7, 53:3-4). The result is the Lord Himself must accomplish the missions tasked to these unsuccesful servants (cf. 49:22, 51:4, 52:6). Note the emphatic usage of the first person pronoun throughout these chapters when the Lord speaks about what He is to accomplish. The ultimate fulfilment of these statements is the Day of the Lord when the Lord will personally reveal Himself. He will be personally involved in the destruction of the wicked and the vindication of the righteous. Up until that point the Lord will employ servants to varying degrees of success. But, the fact remains, Israel has not been successful in proselyting the Gentiles and the Lord's servants (as He Himself was during His mortal ministry) continue to be rejected by the world. Comments on Isaiah 48 Note: this chapter appears in 1 Ne. 20. This chapter is a summary of the Torah, the Law of Moses, in that it reviews the covenant relationship between the Lord and Israel. Many symbols derived from the Torah are employed. Isaiah also interweaves the major subjects from chapters 40-47. Thus, the chapter indicates the Torah serves as the background for the subject of ch. 40-47. Isaiah's usage of symbols derived from the Torah, where the history of ancient Israel is recounted, shows contemporary Israel has the same problems that Israel had anciently. That Israel was still having problems in Isaiah's time seems obvious to us, but the eschatological interpretation is not so appealing as it implies that we are having the same problems as well. This chapter states the Lord has this chosen people which He has to work with, yet they refuse to work with Him (v. 1-2). He has tried everything and it has not kept them close to Him (v. 3-8b). The result is He has to purge them by turning them over to foreign invaders (v. 8c-11), and then provide a deliverer to get them out (v. 14-16). If they would just listen to Him, none of this would be necessary (v. 17-18). Since they cannot listen to Him though, he has to deliver them to foreign nations to be chastised and then deliver them, destroying the wicked in the process (v. 20-22). Much of the subject of this chapter is negative based on Israel's disobedience. Whereas the following chapter is generally positive based on the Lord's mercy. Textual structure of the chapter is as follows: A - (v. 1-2) Introduction - "Listen to this, O House of Jacob" B - (v. 3-6a) Old things - prophecies delivered and fulfilled C - (v. 4) Parenthesis C - (v. 5c-d) Parenthesis B - (v. 6b-11) New things - I will refine you C - (v. 7c) Parenthesis C - (v. 8c-d) Parenthesis A - (v. 12) Introduction - "Listen to Me, O Jacob" B - (v. 13-17) Old things - delivered from Babylon as prophesied C - (v. 18-19) Parenthesis B - (v. 20-22) New things - I will deliver you from your refiner after the wicked are disposed of In the first section (v. 1-11), there are two pairs of parenthesis. Yet in the second section (v. 12-21) there is only a single parenthesis. The textual structure would be more orderly and obvious if the same pattern of parenthesis was used in both cases. However, the scattered versus collected parenthetical comments may serve to indicate that ancient, contemporary and eschatological Israel experience the same difficulties throughout their history. And the recurring problems throughout Israel's history were all a result of the same thing: failure to heed the Lord's commands (v. 17-19). The singularity of the v. 18-19 parenthesis may also indicate that only with the Day of the Lord (an eschatologically interpreted v. 14-16, 20-22), when He purges Israel, will unity, peace, obedience, and prosperity be established. Overall, this chapter appears to have suffered the ravages of time with regard to scribal transmission and reproduction. The Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 20 account has several verses that are considerably different from the KJV. These passages will be noted below. v1-11 focuses on the rebellion of Israel and the Lord's reaction to it. In this passage and that in v. 12-22 compare the similar structure as found in 46:3-13 where a summons is issued and various proclamations are made. v1-5 Jesus uses the general thesis of this passage in John 13:19. v1-2 An indictment of hypocrisy where all of Israel is summoned and accused of worshiping the Lord in word alone, cp. 1:11-15, 43:22-25, 66:3. v1 Notice that "Jacob...Israel...Judah" are all implicated in this verse as being summoned by the Lord to pay attention to what is being said. This all inclusive statement would make an interpretation that it is aimed at only the Northern Ten Tribes impossible. The intent of the voice is to indict all of the House of Israel, including Judah, as being guilty of hypocrisy in covenant making. Note the differences between the KJV and BofM (1 Ne. 20): KJV BofM --- ---- Hear ye this, Hearken and hear this, O house of Jacob, O house of Jacob, which are called which are called by the name of Israel, by the name of Israel, and are come forth and are come forth out of the waters of Judah, out of the waters of Judah, or out of the waters of baptism, which swear by who swear by the name of the Lord, the name of the Lord, and make mention of and make mention of the God of Israel, the God of Israel, but not in truth, yet they swear not in truth nor in righteousness. nor in righteousness. In this case the significant BofM addition is "or out of the waters of baptism". Joseph Smith added this to the third edition Book of Mormon (published 1840) to clarify the meaning of the phrase "the waters of Judah". As Jews still practice ritual water immersion called "tevillah", or ritual immersion, in a "mikvah', or baptismal fount, it seems hard to believe that Jewish scribes would be compelled to intentionally remove this as it is not hostile to their traditions. Isaiah rarely, if ever, identifies a symbol by simply stating what it is immediately after it is used. Instead, Isaiah tends to hide it in the text. Thus, Smith's insert is a clearly parenthetical statement identifying a specific interpretation, which was a common practice in the JST of the Bible. v1c "waters of Judah", the Hebrew term here for waters is "umimme", and the Hebrew term for loins is "umimm`e". Isaiah appears to be playing a word game where he is invoking the image of the waters of parturition (i.e. natural Israel), the waters of baptism (i.e. covenant Israel). That Isaiah would implicate those who are Israel via baptism shows he is targeting adopted Israel as well as natural Israel in his indictment in this verse. v2 Note the differences between the KJV and BofM: KJV BofM --- ---- Nevertheless, For they call themselves they call themselves of the holy city, of the holy city but they do not and stay themselves stay themselves upon the God of Israel; upon the God of Israel, The Lord of Hosts who is the Lord of Hosts; yea, the Lord of Hosts is his name. is his name. The BofM rendering is more clearly negative and accusatory of Israel, while emphasizing the Lord's exalted position as over the Hosts of Heaven. v3 This verse indicates that Lord has power over history such that He makes pronouncements and brings them to fulfillment. This is an obvious authority statement, but takes on a different context in its usage in conjunction with v. 4-8. Here the Lord says He announces things before they occur and then brings them about because Israel is so hard hearted that they would otherwise ascribe any good fortune to their idols. Thus, the Lord is showing is exalted and transcendent nature by foretelling events and controlling history in order to manifest His power and humble Israel. Compare 1 Ne. 9:6. The BofM has "I did show them suddenly", where the KJV has "I did them suddenly". v3b "mouth", the Lord's prophet is frequently characterized as the mouth of the Lord, cp. 6:6-7, Jer. 1:9. v4 Contrast 3:8-9 and cp. Exod. 32:9, Deut. 9:27, Deut. 10:16, Jer. 3:3, Ezek. 3:7. The symbol of having a stiff neck is based on the stubbornness of a draft animal that refuses to turn its direction when the master has it bridled or under a yoke. v5 Compare 41:26, 42:9, 43:12, 44:7, Deut. 32:37-41. v6a The JPS rendering of this line offers a good interpretation of an obscure statement in the KJV. The challenge is also reminiscent of the legalistic trials from ch. 40-47, except here Israel is called as a witness against itself. The BofM has "Thou hast seen and heard", where the KJV has "Thou hast heard, see all this". v6b-8 Compare 41:26, 42:8-9, 45:20-22, 46:10 for similar statements. v7 The new act is performed in the eyes of the people, an act they are not familiar with. Their ignorance of this new act seems to be a result of their resorting to idols (v. 5) and their spiritual stupor (v. 8a-b), and not because the Lord failed to foretell it (v. 6). This new acts is probably referring to the liberation, gathering and restoration of Israel, by way of parallel with v. 20- 22. v8a-b Compare 6:9-10 where Isaiah's prophecy results in their spiritual stupor. The very act of prophesying and predicting results in a condition of mental dulness in the rebellious such that they cannot perceive what is said to them. v8c-10 The WB states, "Here Israel's sinfulness is a permanent state (v. 8c-d). She deserved to be cut off (v. 9c). But for his name's sake God defers his anger (v. 9a-b), and the judgement he brings upon her is only a refining (v. 10). v8c-d The theme developed here is that from Gen. 25:22-26 where Jacob as a baby struggled in the womb with Esau. Also cp. 43:27 and Hosea 12:2-4. Israel is characterized as rebellious from the very start, probably an allusion to the golden calf incident in Exod. 32 as idolatry is referenced throughout the text. v9-11 Compare 12:4, 24:15, 25:1, 29:23, 42:8. The theme is derivative of Num. 14:11-19, Exod. 32:11-14, Deut. 4:20. v9 The BofM has "refrain from thee", where the KJV has "refrain for thee". v10 For similar usages of purging symbols cp. Deut. 4:20, Jer. 9:6, Jer. 11:4. The BofM omits the phrase "but not with silver", which appears in the KJV. v11 The BofM has "I will not suffer my name to be polluted", where the KJV has "how should my name be polluted". Verse 11 is similar in content to v. 9. v11c "to another", making reference to an idol, cf. 42:8. v12-22 focuses on the election and redemption of Israel as accomplished by the Lord. The corporate election of Israel occurred at Sinai (Exod. 19), so Isaiah invokes Sinaitic imagery in this passage. v12 See my comments on 44:6c, also cp. Rev. 22:13. v13-14 The Lord summons the heavens and the earth, His creation, and asks them a question (v. 14b) and they respond back (v. 14c-e). Derivative of the Sinai covenant, cp. 1:2, 42:10-12, 44:23, 55:12, Deut. 4:26. Deut. 19, Deut. 30:19. v14-16 Because of the ambiguity in the text, some questions arise concerning whom this passage is referring to. Given a historical setting, one would naturally interpret this passage as referring to Cyrus. Using the context of 49:1-6 for a figurative interpretation, one could say this character is Israel in general, Zion in specific. Given an eschatological interpretation, one would apply it to the gentiles who are raised up to deliver Israel from Babylon (i.e. the eschatological "Cyrus") as well as the Lord at the Day of the Lord when he comes to annihilate wickedness (i.e. "Babylon") from the earth. It seems like the text was purposely left ambiguous to have wide application so the number of witnesses (i.e. deliverers sent to Israel) against rebellious Israel would increase. v14 Babylon is to be sacked and Israel delivered from it, which is the subject of the previous chapter. Compare the differences between the KJV and BofM accounts: KJV BofM --- ---- All ye, assemble yourselves, All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; and hear; which among them who among them hath declared these things? hath declared these things unto them? The Lord hath loved him: The Lord hath loved him; yea, and he will fulfill his word which he hath declared by them; he will do and he will do his pleasure on Babylon, his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans. shall come on the Chaldeans. The BofM account emphasizes the fulfilment of the prediction pronounced in the ears of Israel. The "them" in "who among them... declared by them" is referring to Israel, the one whom "[t]he Lord hath loved". The Lord Has announced His will to them, and told them what He will be doing. No other has the power to predict and fulfill such events. v15 The BofM has "I have called him to declare", where the KJV has "I have called him". This would tend to favor the interpretation of this verse as being in reference to Israel rather than Cyrus as Israel was called to be a witness of the Lord and a light to the nations, cp. 49:1-6. v16-17 Note the differences between the KJV and BofM text: KJV BofM --- ---- Come ye near unto me, Come ye near unto me; hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret I have not spoken in secret; from the beginning; from the beginning, from the time that it was, from the time that it was there am I: declared have I spoken; and now the Lord God and the Lord God, and his Spirit, and his Spirit, hath sent me. hath sent me. Thus saith the Lord, And thus saith the Lord thy Redeemer, thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; the Holy One of Israel; I have sent him, I am the Lord thy God the Lord thy God which teacheth thee to profit, who teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way who leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go. thou shouldest go, hath done it. The BofM account emphasizes the calling of the servant in v. 16 by making it clear the Lord has sent him in v. 17. The Lord does not hide Himself from His people, He declares His will to His people through His servants who are called and impelled by His Spirit (v. 16). The Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, sends servants to teach and lead Israel (v. 17). Compare Amos. 3:7. v16d This endowment of the Spirit has not been applied to Cyrus previously in Isaiah. Isaiah has employed other charismatic labels to Cyrus (cp. 41:2-3, 44:28-45:5, 46:11), even that of being anointed. But, Isaiah has also identified Cyrus as being in ignorance of the Lord (45:4). This would suggest the blessing of the Lord's Spirit upon him would be presumptuous (assuming a historical interpretation), but one could argue that his being "anointed" means that the Spirit guided him to some degree in his actions. In a historical reading this is a forced reading in light of Cyrus' ignorance of the Lord and the general blessed condition of those who enjoy the anointing of the Spirit. Thus, we again have text indicating a broader interpretation on who this character is to represent. If one were to develop a more figurative interpretation on Cyrus where he represents the Gentiles who assist in the gathering of Israel (an alternate interpretation I argued for in the comments on ch. 45), then applying the Spirit to this figure would be more tenable. v17 The Lord has established and provided for Israel and given them council in how they should act. Compare Hosea 11:1-3. On the way prepared for Israel, cp. 40:3. v18-19 A prophetic lament employing a typical set of covenant benedictions, cp. 1:19-20, ct. 10:22. This passage invokes the Abrahamic covenant is derivative of Gen. 22:17, Gen. 32:13, Lev. 26:3-13, Deut. 28:1-14. Also compare Ps. 81. The lament here is also ironic. The Lord is powerful enough to announce His will and bring it about (v. 3), yet He cannot get Israel to keep His commandments. v18b-c "like a river...like the waves of the sea", cp. 1 Ne. 2:9 where Lehi laments the sad condition of Laman and Lemuel. The intended image is to be that of something that is ongoing or perpetual. v20-21 Compare 13:3, 52:11-12 for a similar call from Babylon. The references to water in v. 21 are largely derivative of Exod. 17:6-7, as well as an allusion to the subject of 43:2, 44:3-4. Also cp. Ps. 126. v22 The opposite of the Torah's statements about righteous Israel entering in to the Lord's rest (cf. Deut. 12:10). Compare a similar statement in 57:21, also compare 2 Ne. 23:22. KJV BofM --- ---- And notwithstanding he hath done all this, and greater also, There is no peace, there is no peace, saith the Lord, saith the Lord, unto the wicked. unto the wicked. The lengthier BofM account connects the phrase better with the idea of delivery from Babylon. It indicates that even though the Lord is going to deliver his people from Babylon, the wicked are not off the hook. Also, see the BofM account of Isa. 13:22 which appears in 2 Ne. 23:22 where a similar phrase to the one above is retained.