THE JUSTICE DUE ME: A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF ISAIAH 40 48

Introduction
At the beginning of his ministry, Jesus read from the scroll of Isaiah the prophet (Isa
61:1-2), The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me to bring
good news to the poor (Luke 4:18). His subsequent declaration, Today this Scripture has
been fulfilled in your hearing (Luke 4:21), sent shockwaves to his hearers, both then and
now, in light of the clear implications of His claim to be the long-awaited fulfillment of
Isaiahs Messianic prophecy, a prophecy that in the larger context of Isaiah 61 was given to
comfort all who mourn in Zion with the assurance that they shall build up the ancient
ruins (Isa 61:2-4). Other than the Psalms, the New Testament directly or indirectly quotes
from the book of Isaiah more than any other portion of the Old Testament (Bullinger cites 85
direct quotations and allusions1). One fruitful approach to intertextuality called metalepsis
shows how "one portion of an Old Testament passage quoted or alluded to in the New
Testament evokes the wider context.2 Interpreting Isaiahs Messianic message in its proper
historical context is thus foundational both for proper Old Testament exegesis and for
understanding its New Testaments use in the Gospel message. One interpretive tension in
Christs declared fulfillment of Isaiah 61, for example, relates to how those needing comfort

The Companion Bible : The Authorized Version of 1611 with the Structures and Critical,
Explanatory, and Suggestive Notes and with 198 Appendixes (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Publications, 1990),
appendix 80.
2
Peter R Rodgers, Exploring the Old Testament in the New (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2012).;
Rodgers' definition of metalepsis draws from the work of Richard Hays (pg. 20 of Echoes): "When a literary
echo links the text in which it occurs to an earlier text, the figurative effect of the echo can lie in the unstated or
suppressed (transumed) points of resonance between the two text"; he further supports his assertion that this
approach is fruitful by quoting studies from Joel Marcus' The Way of the Lord, Rikkie E. Watts' Isaiahs New
Exodus in Mark, and J. Ross Wagner's Heralds of Good News (pg. 18).

in Zion during the Assyrian crisis of Isaiahs day heard and responded to this clearly
eschatological promise that could only be ultimately fulfilled Christ himself appeared.
Another tension rises in light of the subsequent prophecy related to the day of vengeance
that was yet unfulfilled at Christs first coming. In other words, the prophet Isaiah was given
the charge to declare his prophetic words in a historical Jerusalem far removed from the
Jerusalem of the second temple, but the nature of the word that he proclaimed was
historically far-reaching in its eschatological reach. The crucial challenge of the exegetes
task is honoring both the historical immediate context as well as the wider redemptive
context of the message. The difficulty in interpreting prophetic books, according to R. Reed
Lessing, first stems from the fact that these books are far removed from their original
historical, sociocultural, epistemological and religious milieu and secondly stems from the
sheer diversity of literary forms and styles used by the prophet.3 The Comfort portion of
Isaiah that most scholars call Deutero-Isaiah (40-66) provides a perfect place to show how
radically different interpretations are affected by assumptions of authorship and provenance.
In addition to the threat of impending exile that the pre-exilic Assyrian context
suggests, the over-arching rhetorical context of a covenantal lawsuit as suggested in Isaiahs
opening words, Listen, O heavens, and hear, O earth; for the Lord speaks, Sons I have
reared and brought up, but they have revolted against me (vs. 2) is emphasized in Isaiah 40
48 by allusions to the covenant language of Deuteronomy (i.e., the Song of Moses in
Deuteronomy 32). This covenant lawsuit language provides an important backdrop to rightly
interpret Isa 40 48 because in such a context of deserved judgment, Gods sovereign and
gracious purpose to restore, deliver, and justify His people is revealed to be entirely
unconditional. That is, the comforting announcements of salvation in this section are based
emphatically upon His work and on account of His Namespecifically, through the
3

2004), 1.

R Reed Lessing, Interpreting Discontinuity: Isaiah's Tyre Oracle (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns,

righteousness of the coming ideal Servant. Pauls New Testament usage of Isaiah strongly
supports this emphatic contrast between Gods delayed wrath on His unrighteous
Servantcorporate Israelwith Gods undeserved promise of forgiveness based on His
anointed righteous Servant. Of the sixteen Isaiah citations in Romans, for example, eleven
are clustered in Pauls Romans 9 -11 discourse regarding Gods faithfulness and sovereignty
over the salvation of both Jew and Gentile. Douglas Oss notes, The single most striking
aspect of the thematic grouping of Paul's citations from Isaiah is the concentrated use of the
citations in Romans to deal explicitly with the issue of Jew and Gentile in Christ.4
This paper will demonstrate that Isaiahs use of prophetic covenant lawsuit language
is incorporated into the rhetorical structure of Isaiah 40 48. This will be shown by
examining in greater detail how the specific strophe structure of Isaiah 41 and 42 serve as
Gods extended response to the opening complaint of Isaiah 40:27, Why do you say, O
Jacob, and assert, O Israel, my way is hidden from the Lord, and the justice due me escapes
the notice of my God? The repeated contrast of the covenant faithfulness and incomparable
sovereignty of God with the covenant unfaithfulness and utter weakness of Israel sets the
stage for the Messianic hope of the Servant (Isa 42:1-9) whose work is progressively revealed
in what follows (Isa 49 66). Before such a rhetorical structure is proposed, however, a brief
discussion on methodological approach will lay out this papers assumptions on how literary
context and historical context are both required for a proper exegesis of Isaiah. The proposed
rhetorical structure will be demonstrated as consistent with a historical setting of King
Hezekiahs Jerusalem sometime after Judah was mercifully delivered from an Assyrian siege
(Isa 37:36) in 701 BC, yet still under the shadow of a delayed judgment that was both future
and certain (Isa 39:6-7). Such due judgment is confirmed historically: despite Isaiahs
majestic warnings of Gods jealous zeal for His glory as well as His merciful promise of

Douglas A Oss, "A Note on Pauls Use of Isaiah", Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992): 105-112.

salvation, the wickedness of Judahs idolatry surfaces after Hezekiahs death under the reign
of his evil son Manasseh (2 kings 21:1-9). In sum, following a methodological overview of
rhetorical criticism and a historical overview of the Assyrian imperial ideology of Isaiahs
day, a proposed rhetorical analysis of Isaiah 40 48 will show how the lawsuit language of
chapters 41 and 42 must be understood contextually with what comes before and after.

Methodological Considerations
One of the crucial exegetical issues in analyzing the structural organization of Isaiah
40-48 is clearly laying out ones assumptions regarding authorship and the composition and
arrangement of the entire book. As Childs notes, There is no more powerful example of the
impact of the historical-critical method on the study of the Old Testament than the challenge
to the traditionally held unity of the book of Isaiah.5

Form-Critical and Redactional Approaches

The form-critical approach laid the foundation for such a method, building on
Gunkels assumptions about prophetic oracles being a collection of short independent units
distinguishable by form. The first scholar to apply form critical methodology to DeuteroIsaiah was H. Gressmann (1914) who basically viewed the entire corpus as a collection of
speeches; S Mowinckel (1931) refined the approach by studying the arrangement of the
utterances primarily on the basis of catchword connection. Melugin notes, This mechanical
means of association has no significance for understanding the prophets message, for there is
no progression of thought in the juxtaposition of units.6 Roy Melugins study of Deuteron-

5
6

Brevard S Childs, Isaiah (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 289.
Roy F Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 (Walter de Gruyter, 1976), 3.

Isaiahs use of trial speeches in Isaiah 40-48 led him to conclude that the forms are shaped
less by traditional genres and more by Deuteron-Isaiah himself.7
In addition to form critical approaches, an explosion of redactional critical studies
posited different views of the compositional history of Isaiah. Elligers attempt to isolate a
Third Isaiah in Isa 40-55 and Isa 56-66 was followed by other scholars such that no real
consensus has yet emerged.8 Joseph Blenkinsopp of the Anchor Bible Commentary holds to
a definition of Isaiah as a collection of miscellaneous material deriving from a number of
anonymous (or pseudonymously Isaianic) authors, compiled over a long period of time, from
the 8th century B.C.E. to perhaps as late as the 3rd century B.C.E."9

Literary and Rhetorical Approaches

The literary approaches of Muilenburg and Westermann provided a revolutionary
shift from the way that isolated units were studied under form critical techniques. With Isaiah
40-66, in particular, they concluded that DI is not a chain of sporadic compositions but a
planned book.10 This shift in method encouraged the reading of the individual units of Isaiah
in light of the contextual whole. The shift also produced more studies in compositional
techniques rather than mere genre analysis. The criteria for delimiting prophetic units within
the larger sections of Isaiah relied primarily on internal stylistic features as opposed to the
form critics emphasis on linguistic markers and/or features typical of specific genres.11
Muilenburg referred to his approach as rhetorical criticism by his insistence that when form

Ibid., 63.
Childs, Isaiah 290.
9
Reed Lessing, "Messianism Within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah", Concordia Journal, 36, no. 4
(2010): 384-386.
10
Yehoshua Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 (Linguistica Biblica Bonn,
1981), 21.
11
Ibid., 24.
8

are imitated, not only by the prophets but also by historians and lawgivers, they undergo
transformation.12
R. Reed Lessings Interpreting Discontinuity: Isaiahs Tyre Oracle highlights the
radical difference of assumption and logic between redactional and rhetorical approaches by
comparing their answers to two questions: First, to what extent is a prophetic text the
product of a single rhetorical event by a single author or the product of multiple events by
multiple redactors? Second, is the present shape of a prophetic text the intention of an
original author or the editorial result of ongoing redactional activity?13 Lessing argues that a
rhetorical approach positing a single author reaps more cohesive results.
Gitays analysis synthesizes the various form critical and rhetorical methods into two
basic approaches to Deutero-Isaiah: The first approach considers DI to be the product of a
planned writing activity and sees the book as composed of larger units. The second approach
argues that DI delivered his addresses orally [as} a collection of small units which once
existed independently.14 Both approaches fall short in Gitays estimation of considering the
prophecy as public address and something that must be studied as a communicative
discourse designed to appeal to its audiencethat is, rhetoric with an emphasis on rhetoric
as the art of persuasion rather than Muilenburgs emphasis on rhetoric as a stylistic device
for structural analysis.15 If, as he claims, the correct rhetorical reading of Isaiah 40-48
depends on an appeal to the audience, the most significant exegetical issue is determining the
correct author with the correct audience. His assumption of an exilic author and a Babylonian
audience rests on shaky grounds: The absence of any negative announcement for Israel of
punishment, disaster, or judgment in DIs prophecy is a striking phenomenon in light of the
fact that one of the major motifs of the pre-exilic prophets is to proclaim Israels punishment
12

Chris Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading (Winona Lake, Ind.:
Eisenbrauns, 1994), 10.
13
Lessing, Interpreting Discontinuity: Isaiah's Tyre Oracle 2.
14
Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 5.
15
Ibid., 27.

as Gods judgment.16 This type of subjective reasoning dangerously flattens the reading of
Isaiah 40-66 by re-interpreting the difficulties and minimizing the stern warnings that include
the harsh tone of judgment against unbelief even in the comfort of hope that begins Isaiah
40.
Richard Cliffords approach is similar to Gitays more classical rhetorical reading in
that he insists that the author must be be read as an orator and that Isaiah 40-48 consists of
long complex speeches: His eloquent monotheism, his skill in consoling, the force of his
ideas and images, long celebrated by commentators, are all subordinate to his task of
persuading That the prophet is fair-spoken, i.e. eloquent and lyrical, is admitted by all.
That he is at the same time persuading, i.e. practical, given to sustained argument to move
people to specific actions, is by no means a common interpretation.17 Chris Franke adopts
Cliffords basic method in her study of Isaiah 46, 47, and 48 without agreeing with his
assumption that Isaiah was more of an orator than a prophet. Her conclusion is that Isaiah 4066 can be examined from the perspective of rhetorical or literary criticism, with far more
fruitful results than those from form-critical studies because such a critic pays attention to
what is atypical, original, or unique and proceeds on the basis of peculiarities in the text.18

The Effect of Historical Setting on Rhetorical Criticism

The approach of this paper uses a similar rhetorical approach as Gitay and Clifford
without bringing into the text their baggage of a post-exilic author who is different than the
Isaiah of the 8th century BC. Because rhetorical approaches tend to shift the attention away
from historical context to the text itself, observation of shifts and breaks can help bring out
the movement of the prophets intended message across different passages. However, in the
16
17

Ibid., 34.
Richard J Clifford, Fair Spoken and Persuading: An Interpretation of Second Isaiah (Paulist Press,

1984), 89.

18

Franke, Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading 13.

case of Isaiah, without adequately grounding each passage in its proper historical context as
well as its larger book context, subjective factors allow for countless theories on not only the
proper arrangement of Isaiah 40-48 but on the proper provenance by which to interpret this
section. This papers approach, then, is closest to R. Reed Lessings approach where he
assumes that the text is a literary artistry, composed for oral delivery in a specific historical
situation.19 One can also infer from the strong evidence of an opening and closing inclusio
that repeats the warning of rebelling against the Lord that Isaiah himself arranged the book at
some point during his prophetic ministry.20 The Neo-Assyrian historical context of Isaiahs
prophetic career is centralized in the city of Jerusalem within the kingdom of Judah, primarily
under two Davidic kings, Ahaz (his biographical historical narrative in Isaiah 7 highlights his
unbelief despite his miraculous sign; this precedes the announced Messianic hope of the
book of Immanuel in Isaiah 7 -12) and Hezekiah (his biographical narrative in Isaiah 36-39
highlights his Babylonian compromise despite his miraculous sign; this precedes the
announced Messianic hope of the Servant passages in Isaiah 40 -53).
Furthermore, the timeline of Isaiahs prophetic commission began at the death of
King Uzziah in approximately 740 BC (Isa. 1:1; 6:1) and extended at least as far as the death
of Sennacherib in approximately 681 BC (Isa 37:38), which would mark the beginning of
Manassehs reign. The book of Isaiahs internal evidence strongly affirms that the only
context from which a proper literary analysis can be made is the expanding Assyrian empire
that God allowed to destroy Israels capital, Samaria, and carry away its inhabitants into exile
before the watching eyes of Judah. The later defeat of Egypt and the destruction of Ashdod in
613 BC by Sargon, and eventually, Sennacheribs ruthless attacks on numerous cities in

19

Lessing, Interpreting Discontinuity: Isaiah's Tyre Oracle 112.

Gary V Smith, Isaiah 1-39 (Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman, 2007). Smith agrees with Seitz
as suggesting a date when Manasseh was co-regent with his father Hezekiah, concluding that Isaiah most likely
added chap. 1 when his sermons were collected, edited, and put in their present form (pg. 95); he supports his
assertion by noting 19 parallel vocabulary and thematic connections between chapter 1 and chaps. 65-66 (pg.
99).
20

Judah in 601 BC sets up the rhetorical impact of Isaiahs emphasis in chapters 40 - 48 on the
incomparability of God who sovereignly reigns upon His throne over nations that are but
drops in the bucket and kings who are but grass and flowers. This revelation of God
interwoven with repeated anti-idolatry declarations and salvation oracles serves to shine light
of the Messianic hope revealed in every section of the book.

Historical Context for Isaiahs Prophetic Ministry

It is not so difficult to situate the historical context of the Assyrian crisis in the earlier
portions of Isaiah based on specific historical references (i.e., 734 BC references to Pekah
and Rezin in Isa 7) or even in the prophetic warnings to not make alliances with Egypt in
Isaiahs succession of six woes of Isa 28 - 35, a message that perfectly fits the historical crisis
during Sennacheribs invasions of the Levant after Sargons death in 705 BC. Clearly, the
Assyrian advance looms large in the earlier context, and the threat of exile is not just possible
but probable in light of Samarias fall, the trampling of Ephraims crown (Isa 28:3). In light
of Jerusalems blindness and defective worship (Isa 29:9-24), Isaiah calls for a remnant under
the threat of another imminent Assyrian attack during Hezekiahs reign to not take refuge in
Egypt, but to keep waiting and trusting on YHWH alone rather than compromise like Ahaz
who had sought deliverance by yoking himself to the very Assyrians who now threatened
Jerusalem with the same destruction and deportation of Samaria twenty years earlier.
Because of the shift in tone from judgment (Isa 1-39) to comfort (40-66), many
exegetes do not give sufficient attention to the continuity between two halves of Isaiah.
Whether the historical narrative interlude of Sennacherib and Hezekiah (36-39) serves as a
bridge or an introduction to Isa 40 66 has been thoroughly discussed.21 Most scholars infer
that the non-chronological placement of Hezekiahs guided tour of the Babylonian envoys
21

See, for example, J Barton Payne, "The Unity of Isaiah: Evidence From Chapters 36-39", Bulletin of
the Evangelical Theological Society 6 (1963): 50-56. and Matthew Seufert, "Reading Isaiah 40:1-11 in Light of
Isaiah 36-37", Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 58, no. 2 (2015): 269-81.

10

and Gods subsequent announcement of Judahs exile to Babylon serve as a transitional

marker from a pre-exilic Assyrian provenance (1-35) to a post-exilic Babylonian provenance
(40 66), concluding that a latter prophet or disciple of Isaiah exiled in Babylon wrote the
latter part of Isaiah. Other scholars suggest that the 8th century Isaiah of Amoz wrote the
portion of Isaiah 40 -66 during the days of Hezekiah, but the message was based on a vision
of the future that was primarily given for the sake of the exilic audience in Babylon needing
comfort and encouragement to return and rebuild. Although a clear message of salvation and
hope does mark Isaiah 40 66 especially in light of the suffering Servants promised ministry
(Isa 53), the central thrust of this passages warning to Gods blind and deaf servant
certainly applies to the stubborn pre-exilic survivors in Judah during the Assyrian crisis,
especially after God mercifully spared them from the disastrous fate of Samaria. Isaiahs
repeated message is to respond in humble and obedient repentance to Gods redeeming
mercy, especially in light of the vivid object lesson of Gods righteous judgments against
Israel. Judah is reminded that they were not spared because they were more righteous, but as
the Lord declared, for the sake of My name I delay My wrath (Isa 48:9-11).

Under the Shadow of Exile

The Neo-Assyrian context for Isaiah cannot be under-estimated. The opening of the
book explicitly declares that this portion of Scriptures is a vision that Isaiah saw in the days
of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah (Isa. 1:1). This simple affirmation
provides the provenance for the entire book under the authorship of Isaiah. The critical
theories that propose multiple authors or lower dates are more numerous to count. Some are
built on anti-supernaturalist assumption that Isaiah as a prophet could not have predicted
Cyrus by name (Isa 45:1) 160 years before the fact. However, as O. T. Allis has so forcefully
argued on structural grounds, Isaiahs naming of Cyrus is clearly a climax of definiteness

11

in line with his aim to demonstrates Gods incomparability with idols: without divine
foretelling the rhetorical force of the entire passage is taken away. Allis notes, If it had been
the aim of the poet to represent the desolations of Israel as already taken place, the exile as
nearly ended, and Cyrus as already present the structure of the poem is ill-calculated, to
say the least.22 Cyrus as a future tool to deliver a future remnant is revealed to not only
reveal Gods omniscience but even more emphatically to show Gods omnipotent control of
judgments and deliverance.
The historical context of Isaiah 7-12 clearly focuses on the impending exile of
northern Israel in light of Assyrias war machine ominously threatening to attack. But even as
early as Isaiah 6:11, one reads of Isaiahs prophetic vision of Judahs exile: Then I said,
How long, O Lord? And he said: Until cities lie waste without inhabitant, and houses
without people, and the land is a desolate waste, and the LORD removes people far away,
and the forsaken places are many in the midst of the land (Isa 6:11-12). According to
Archer, the following references to a remnant, both directly in speech, and by the sign of
Isaiahs son Shear-Jashub, point to a far future fulfillment for Judah (i.e. Davidic line).
Archer adds another example at the time of Hezekiah: To this should be added the clear
prediction made by Isaiah himself to Hezekiah (Isa 39:5-7) that some day all of this
wealth would be carried off to Babylon, along with Hezekiahs own descendants, who would
have to serve as slaves there.23 From the first part of the book of Isaiah, then, Judah felt the
prophetic threat of exile by the outworking of Assyrias aggressive advance westward and the
final fall of Samaria and subsequent deportation of the Israelites in 722 BC. The delay of
Judahs own judgment in light of such a fearful object lesson was designed to humble Gods
people to repent of their defective worship and their self-righteousness. The amazing
assurance of Gods faithfulness and love is reiterated through the repeated covenant language
22
23

Oswald T Allis, The Unity of Isaiah: A Study in Prophecy (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2000), 79.
Gleason L Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago: Moody Press, 1985), 343.

12

of Fear not for I am your God (Isa 41:10; 44:2, 8). However, even while reminding them
that He is their redeemer, God uses the lawsuit language to show how His delivering mercy
was not something they earned or deserved. For example, in 43:22-28, after repeating a
similar indictment of the defecting worship of chapter 1, You have become weary of Me, O
Israel, Isaiah declares these gracious words: I, even, I am the one who wipes out your
transgressions for My own sake, and I will not remember your sins (vs. 25).
In light of the account of Hezekiahs great zeal to restore worship and reinstate the
Passover in Jerusalem, Isaiahs audience were reminded again and again of Gods historical
redemption from Egypt and the privilege of being part of His covenant people. However, the
evidence of self-righteous religious externalism and hypocrisy creeping in even after Gods
merciful deliverance at the hand of the Assyrians is emphasized in the repeated refrain,
There is no peace for the wicked at the end of chapter 48 and chapter 57. Isaiahs message
thus includes a strong emphasis on repentance at each of these seams of the major divisions
in Isaiah 40 66. In Isaiah 48:18, Isaiah pleads, If only you had paid attention to my
commandments! and in chapter 58, God explicitly tells Isaiah to raise your voice like a
trumpet, and declare to my people their transgression (Isa 58:1); Gods indictment of such
people are that they seek Me day by day and delight to know my ways as a nation that has
done righteousness and has not forsaken the ordinance of their God (Isa 58:2). The fact that
their fasting and Sabbath observance neglected the weightier matters of the Law indicates a
time of seeming revival but without corresponding fruit of righteousness. This audience fits
perfectly with a Judah, who like their king Hezekiah, gave no return for the benefit he
received because his heart was proud; therefore, wrath came on him and on Judah and
Jerusalem (2 Chron. 32:25). Even after such ungrateful sin, both the king and people
received undeserved mercy: However, Hezekiah, humbled the pride of his heart, both he and

13

the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the Lord did not come on them in the days
of Hezekiah (2 Chron. 32:26).

Two Davidic Kings

Not only can the book of Isaiah not be understood apart from Gods covenant dealing
with His people, it cannot be rightly understood without seeing the repeated emphasis that
God is sovereign over history and the nations. Indeed, John Oswalt asserts that the central
core of the books message is the relationship of Jerusalem/Zion to the nations.24 Barry
Webb agrees when he writes, It is not history-denying but history-affirming It draws
back the curtain and shows us that history, with all its confusing particulars, is the stage on
which a great drama is being enacted, a drama scripted and directed at every point by God
Himself.25 While Assyria and Babylon take center stage in terms of emphasis, the repetition
of Assyria as Gods rod is brought emphatically to bear in relation to the survival of the
Davidic throne. Just as Assyria is Gods rod of judgment as revealed in 10:5, His intention to
break Assyria within my land (14:24) is also promised. The simple question put to Ahaz in
Isaiah 7 of whether or not he will trust God is placed in a prophetic climactic statement that is
also repeated to Jerusalem throughout the book of Isaiah: If you will not ( hiphil of
amen means trust), you will not ( niphal of amen means to be made firm). Oswalt
restates this theme in relation to the nations: Will they trust God and become the means of

24

51.

25

John N Oswalt, "The Nations in Isaiah : Friend or Foe; Servant or Partner" 16, no. 2006 (2006): 41-

Barry G Webb, The Message of Isaiah : On Eagles' Wings (Leicester, England ; Downers Grove, Ill.:
Inter-Varsity Press, 1996), 27.

14

declaring His glory to the nations? Or will they trust the nations, having been seduced by the
nations glory, and be destroyed by them?26
Ahaz and Hezekiah are both brought forward as two Davidic kings who failed in their
responsibility to uphold Gods honor before the nations. Ahaz is the central focus at the
beginning of the book (1-12); Hezekiah takes center stage towards the end of the first part of
Isaiah (36-39). The silence of Sargon toward Judah is a very strong indication that Ahazs
early pattern of seeking to maintain his alliance with Assyria by paying tribute was
maintained throughout his evil reign.27 His words to the king of Assyria reveal his defection
from his true calling as the YHWHs Davidic servant: I am your servant and your son.
Come up and rescue me from the hand of the king of Syria and from the hand of the king of
Israel, who are attacking me (2 Kings 16:7). The vision of the coming King who would be
both the branch and root of David is revealed in the same context as the failure of Ahaz to
believe God (7-12). The eschatological promise of Messiah is thus delivered in the historical
failure of the line of David.
Hezekiah, in contrast to Ahaz, seeks to restore the kingdom to its former glory. The
great Passover feast symbolizes his heart to restore worship and destroy the idolatry that had
remained in Judah. 2 Kings 7:7 emphatically declares that Hezekiah rebelled against the
king of Assyria and would not serve him. Snyman makes a similar observation: Ahaz and
Hezekiah are intentionally depicted as opposing each other. Ahaz is presented as the
unfaithful representative of the house of David (Isa. 7) and Hezekiah as the faithful one (Isa.
36-37). Reference to David becomes explicit when Jerusalem is promised to be spared for

26

Oswalt, "The Nations in Isaiah: Friend or Foe; Servant or Partner", 43.

Shawn Zelig Aster, "Transmission of Neo-Assyrian Claims of Empire to Judah in the Late Eighth
Century BCE", Hebrew Union College Annual 78 (2007): 1-44.: The decision to submit and to pay tribute
began a period of intense communication between Judah and Assyria, such that in 732, Ahaz journeyed
personally to Damascus to greet the victorious Tiglath-Pileser III.
27

15

YHWH's own sake and for the sake of his servant David (37:35).28 However, even Hezekiah
falls short of Gods standard by proudly pandering to Babylonian envoys who were sent from
Merodach Baladan. This rebellious Babylonian monarch had been ousted by Sargon in 710
BC, but made a limited attempt to rebel against Assyrias yoke in 703 BC. Most likely,
Hezekiah is approached as a possible ally, and because he boastfully showed them all of the
treasures as if they were his own achievements, God pronounces judgment against the house
of David: Behold the days are coming when everything which is in your house and what
your fathers have treasured away, up to this day, will be taken to Babylon (Isa 39:6). Just as
the eschatological hope of the future kingdom was woven into the earlier passages (Isa 9-11)
following Gods judgment against Ahaz, the comforting promise of the eschatological
coming of YHWH as the shepherd of His people (Isa 40) now follows the prophetic warning
of judgment that Judah would be exiled to Babylon.

Assyrian Imperial Ideology

The importance of the Davidic covenant directly relates to the revelation that the
future branch of David is in fact the root of David. Isaiahs central affirmation of the
divine glory of the Gods promised future Davidic king bringing the kingdom of God to earth
is described as light coming into the darkness (Isa. 9:1-2), where justice will dwell in the
wilderness and righteousness will abide in the fertile field (Isa 32:16). In dark relief to this
promised kingdom, the Assyrian kingdom threatened to swallow up Judah and all
surrounding vassal states by promoting an imperial ideology that elevated their god Asshur as
more powerful than the gods of their vassal kingdoms and as the true power behind their
conquering king. This Assyrian ideology was an idolatrous counterfeit to Isaiahs revelation
of the Holy One of Israel possessing exclusive reign over all the nations. The religious
28

Fanie Snyman, The Lion Has Roared : Theological Themes in the Prophetic Literature of the Old Testament
(Eugene, Or.: Pickwick Publications, 2012), 57.

16

connection between Assyrian kings and their worship of idols is highlighted by a 1999
dissertation by Katherine Kravitz entitled Divine Trophies of War in Assyria and Ancient
Israel. Her study of Sargons capture and humiliation of a Urartian god reveals the Assyrian
belief that a kings power is inseparable from his gods image. The image of Haldi that
Sargon carried off was the very one that presided over the Urartians coronation, and by
evicting Haldi from the temple in the kingdoms capital, he had also evicted Rusa from
kingship.29
This king-god belief system explains why Merodach-Baladan, king of Babylonia from
721 to 710 BC, removed the divine images of Ur, Uruk, Eridu, Larsa, Kissik, and NemedLaguda from their city shrines and took them with him while retreating from Sargon in 710.
Whether for protection, or for preventing the Assyrian king to adopt their gods and claim
legitimacy for taking over the Babylonian cities in the Sealand, this action reinforces the
claim that The presence of the gods image indicates divine approval of the king, and
therefore legitimizes him.30 The Assyrian Narratives thus equate the military triumph of the
king as proof of divine legitimation of the king. In the case of Sargon and Sennacherib,
superior military power reflects the superior power of their god, Assur. This explains why
Tiglat-Pileser offered sacrifices to various Babylonian gods and twice assumed the
traditional role of the Babylonian king in the annual akitu festival at Babylon, "taking the
hand of (the god) Bel.31 He was trying to win Babylonian support. Sargon later followed the
same example in building and repairing Babylonian temples and sending gifts to Babylonian
gods.32 In contrast to the traditional aktu, it is the Assyrian king, rather than a god, who is
at the center of the cultic events. The meaning of the festival was to enact the kings

29

Kathryn Kravitz, "Divine Trophies of War in Assyria and Ancient Israel" (Dissertation, UMI, Ann
Arbor, MI, May, 1999), 87.
30
Ibid., 87.
31
Barbara Porter, "Symbols of Power: Figurative Aspects of Esarhaddon's Babylonian Policy (681-668
B.C.)" (Dissertation, UMI, Ann Arbor, MI, 1987), 41.
32
Ibid., 43.

17

territorial claim of controlling the universe.33 The Assyrian religious worldview that fostered
worship of many gods is vividly illustrated by those that were sent to settle Israel after the
initial deportation. They brought their gods as well: But every nation still made gods of its
own and put them in the shrines of the high places that the Samaritans had made, every
nation in the cities in which they lived. The men of Babylon made Succoth-benoth, the men
of Cuth made Nergal, the men of Hamath made Ashima. (2 Kings 17:29)
The Assyrian empires unique imperial ideology was not only polytheistic, but
asserted a hierarchy of authority among the gods. The core element of this ideology was the
the universal kingship of the god Asshur and his representative, the Assyrian king.34 This is
consistent with the biblical record of Sennacheribs official who was sent to negotiate the
terms of surrender with Hezekiah. Merrills explanation of the purpose for this negotiation
clearly points to an imperial ideology that equated the kings military power with the name of
their god, a war machine that had no respect for god or men. One of Assyrias central cultic
strategies to maintain political legitimacy was the strengthening of the position of the
Asshur temple as the religious center of the empire. The establishment of a system of regular
deliveries to the Asshur temple provided the daily offerings to the god Asshur. These
deliveries were contributed in a fixed rota by the various provinces of Assyria, and the
economic relationship they produced between Assyrias cultic center and the provinces was
vital to fostering the experience of political belonging and obedience to Asshur, the supreme
god of the Assyrians.35 Aster notes how the kings reign is the earthly hypostasis of
Asshurs king as reflected in the following royal hymn and coronation ritual: Asshur is king
indeed Asshur is king! Assurbanipal is the [representative] of Asshur, the creation of his

30.

33

Aster, "Transmission of Neo-Assyrian Claims of Empire to Judah in the Late Eighth Century BCE",

34

Ibid., 12.
Beate Pongratz-Leisten, Religion and Ideology in Assyria (2015), 40 (1.3).

35

18

hands!36 This divine kingship aspect of imperial Assyrian is the context for Gods revelation
of his divine incomparability in Isaiah 40-48.
The claims of divine superiority of their gods as the core element of the Assyrian
imperial ideology worked itself out through an extensive propaganda program exercised
along with the deportation and administration of conquered nations. The taunts of Rabshakeh,
for example, specifically mention the puny strength of the gods they defeated. Where are the
gods of Hamath and Arpad? Where are the gods of Sepharvaim? And when have they
delivered Samaria from my hand? (Isa 36:19). Judahs God is then lumped in with the other
defeated gods. This sheds light on why Isaiahs message to Judah in the opening section of
Isaiah 40 - 48 takes the words of their empty taunt, Have you not heard? (37:26) and
repeats them in light of Gods own incomparable glory (Isa 40:21). But this is nothing new.
Assyrias proud propaganda is often turned around by the prophet and used in the form of
prophetic judgment:
If the Assyrian kings boast about their expeditions west to cut down junipers, cedars,
and other prized woods, Isaiah asserts that this is a 'mocking' of the Lord (Isa 37:24);
Thus, in Isaiah 14:8, the junipers and cedars are seen rejoicing at the death of the
conqueror. If Isaiah's use of the yoke owes something to Assyrian idiom, then while
the Assyrian rulers talk constantly about putting their "yoke" upon their subject
peoples ... the prophet turns this sin inside out with YHWH's defiant pun And His
yoke shall depart from them (14:25; 10:27).37
The evidence that Isaiah knew and used language from Assyrian royal inscriptions
and other Assyrian propaganda is strong evidence for a unified pre-exilic authorship: his
familiarity with the conquest of 733-732 BC is seen in naming his son Maher-shalal-hashbaz in light of the impending fate of Damascus and Samaria (Isaiah 8:2-4); the reference to
Tartan (the tartan is translated commander but in 2 Kings 18:17 Tartan is the name of the
captain from Sargon) coming to Ashod (20:1) as well as the practice of presenting prisoners
36

17.

37

Aster, "Transmission of Neo-Assyrian Claims of Empire to Judah in the Late Eighth Century BCE",

Peter Machinist, "Assyria and Its Image in the First Isaiah", Journal of the American Oriental
Society 103, no. 4 (1983): 719-737.

19

of war naked (20:4) points to Sargons campaign of 713-12 BC; the narrative of Isaiah 36-37
which is repeated in 2 Kings points clearly to Sennacheribs campaign in 701 BC. Parpola
provides further example of Assyrias influence on Judah through a letter (ND 2765) from
the governor of Calah to Sargon that mentions Judah as one of the tribute-bearing vassals.
The letter states that the emissaries from Egypt, Gaza, Judah, Moab and Ammon entered
Calah on the 12th of the month with their tribute.38
Morton Cogan, in his dissertation, Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and
Israel in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries B.C., claims that the giving of tribute reinforced
the belief that every lesser god had a duty to honor Asshur. In addition, an enemys defeat
was not merely because they had been abandoned by their gods, angered at some wrong, but
rather because his gods had left their homes to journey to Assyria in order to dutifully praise
Asshur.39 However, behind the religious ideology was the motivation to control vast areas
and provinces by exacting oaths of loyalty from defeated rulers; thus, the captured gods
were held hostage until the defeated ruler begged for their return, a public sign of submission
to Assyria. The gods were then returned, and their cults restored with no interference,
excepting the inscriptions placed upon them.40 Securing such guarantees of loyalty (as with
Ahaz in 733 BC), drove much of the Assyrian foreign policy, and their religious ideology
propaganda was used to reinforce this control.

The Historical Context of Isaiah 40 - 48

Having considered the 8th century BC historical context of Judah during the time in
which the Assyrian imperial ideology was in full operation as Assyrian rulers attempted to
control its ever expanding empire, the question now arises as to whether this context should
38

23.

39

Aster, "Transmission of Neo-Assyrian Claims of Empire to Judah in the Late Eighth Century BCE",

Morton Cogan, "Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and Israel in the Eighth and Seventh
Centuries B.C" (Dissertation, University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1971), 79.
40
Ibid., 79.

20

only be applied to Isaiah 1 39? Is there evidence that Isaiah wrote Isaiah 40 66 in such a
pre-exilic context or does evidence require reading this portion as if it were directed to a
Babylonian exile audience? There is an amazing diversity of approaches that attempt to
explain the transition of theme and tone at chapter 40, both with those hold to single Isaiah
authorship and those who dont. Robert B. Chisholm Jr., for example, thinks that in chapters
40-55 Isaiah projects himself into the future and speaks to the exiles.41 Those that posit a
second Isaiah during the Babylonian exile base their argument on the following:
a) The complaints of the exiles (40:27; 45:9-10);
b) Information about Babylonian life, religion (43:14; 46:1-47:15; 49:24);
c) Knowledge of Cyrus, the Persian king who defeated Babylon in 539 BC (44:28;
45:1);
d) Verses where Jerusalem was pictured as a city in ruins (44:26), as a widow who
has lost her children (49:15; 52:1-3; 54:1-3).42
While certainly the Babylonian context suggests a possible rhetorical situation
consistent with the opening announcement that Jerusalems warfare is accomplished and
that her iniquity is pardoned; however, the following announcement to prepare and make
straight a way for the LORD Himself (vs. 3) with the climactic emphasis on His reign (vv.
10-11) points to a far greater eschatological promise of comfort than a return from exile
would encompass. This is why such scholars as Charles Torrey (1928) have been joined by
recent scholars like Christopher Seitz in questioning the consensus that this portion is
directed to an audience in Babylon. Seitz asserts that Isaiah 40 55 is better understood as
Jerusalemite both in orientation (as many have admitted) and in origin (as most have not).43
Leclerc summarizes his position : According to his analysis, the break comes between
chapters 33 and 34 and is structured around the typological theme of former and new

41

Seufert, "Reading Isaiah 40:1-11 in Light of Isaiah 36-37" 271.

Gary V Smith, Isaiah 40-66: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture (B&H
Publishing Group, 2009), 41-42.
43
Christopher R Seitz, "On the Question of Divisions Internal to the Book of Isaiah", SBL 1992
Seminar Papers 32 (1993): 260-66.
42

21

things: Zions deliverance in 701 is the promise of her ultimate vindication.44 This would
not be the first time that the prophets message of eschatological hope was given during a
day of distress (note the Immanuel promise in ch. 7-12).

Isaiah 40 48 in the Context of the Whole Book

In addition to stressing the arguments for seeing exilic references as evidence for a
new audience, most commentators make much of the strong thematic shift of emphasis from
judgment to salvation in Isaiah 40 - 48, especially in light of Gods repeated assurance to
restore and uphold His elect servant Israel. However, such sweeping generalizations has the
tendency of minimizing the repeated assurances of comfort amidst the earlier judgment
oracles, especially the exhortations to the believing remnant in Isaiah 1 - 35 to keep hoping
and taking refuge in God; conversely, the labeling of Isaiah 40 66 as consolation/comfort
can also cause the reader to gloss over the many warnings of judgment to the obstinate,
unbelieving and blind Israel right along with the judgments on Babylon in Isaiah 40 - 48.
The exhortation to not fear that is explicitly directed to Gods elect servant Israel
(41:10; 44:2, 8) is the same message in the earlier part of the book that Ahaz heard (7:4) as
well as the believing remnant heard (8:12), as well as an assurance to those in Zion who
witness the destruction and deportation of Israel by the rod of Assyria (10:24). The invitation
to find refuge in Zion is also scattered through the judgments to the nations (14:32; 16:5).
This language of promise is tied to the repeated affirmation that YHWH of Host will preserve
a remnant (1:9; 28:5-6) and restore Zion (1:26). Gods glorious worldwide purpose for Zion
is also repeated in 2:1-4, 4:2-6 when the oppression of suffering is removed with the
installation of the promised Messianic Son (7:14; 9:16; 11:1-16). The later reference to the
future kingdom in which Zions cornerstone (28:16) is placed for stability to those who trust
44

Thomas L Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice : Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah (Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 191.

22

in Him. The mention of my people living in Zion (10:24) along with the remnant of Israel
(10:20-23) are assured of Gods compassion (14:1-3), deliverance from Assyria (14:24-27),
Salvation in which eyes and ears are opened suggests a divine reversal of the initial gloomy
promise of certain judgment on unbelief (32:3-5).
The significance of the command to wait expectantly for YHWH in 8:17 is rooted
in the repeated affirmation that YHWH of Hosts is a sanctuary and Rock for those who trust
in Him. The remnant are thus defined as a people with hope. The first word for wait ( is
joined with a synonym to look eagerly for () . The first word is repeated twice in 30:18
and 64:4 while the second is sprinkled throughout (5:2, 4,,7; 25:9; 26:8; 33:2; 40:31; 49:23;
51:5; 59:9,11; 60:9; 64:3). The climactic response to those in Isaiah 40:27 who complain,
My way is hidden from the LORD, and the mishat (justice) due me escapes the notice of my
God is simply a reaffirmation of what He has been repeatedly saying to the remnant of faith
who wait on the Lord, take refuge in Him, and wait for His salvation rather than trust in
falsehood. Their song is similar to the songs of deliverance in the latter chapters: Behold this
is our God. In Him we have waited upon to save us. We will exult and rejoice in His
salvation! (Isa. 25:9).
The book unfolds more like a musical symphony with judgment always followed by
the affirmations of hope and affirmations of Gods sovereignty and salvation that are waiting
to spread to the ends of the earth. Thus the prophetic affirmations of Gods reign repeat and
expand in their affirmation of future glory. This future hope is set forth gloriously in chapter
2, 4, 9, 11, and finally with the climactic hymn of chapter 12 closing off this first book of
Immanuel section of Isaiah. But it does not stop with the judgment oracles to the nations.
The glorious future hope even extends throughout the nation oracles in 14:1-4, 16:5, and
19:19-24, with another climactic crescendo of Gods glorious reign revealed in Isaiah 24:2327. Again, the warnings in Isaiah 28-35 find their heightened climactic declaration of the

23

hope of a future righteous king and kingdom in chapters 32 and 33. Following the final
judgment of chapter 34, another climactic peak of future hope is declared by the joyful
singing of the redeemed in chapter 35. When one finally arrives at Isaiah 40-48, Isaiah again
declares this glorious hope with the announcement that YHWH Himself is coming to deliver
Israel from all unrighteousness, but now the glorious hope of the reigning Davidic king is
revealed in the form of the righteous suffering Servant who will establish justice and bring
Gods salvation to the end of the earth.

Isaiah 40 48 in the Context of the Historical Interlude (Isa 36 39)

The intervening chapters of 36-39 find significance in positioning Gods climactic
announcement of future salvation in the aftermath of the remnants mighty deliverance from
Sennacherib. Oswalt summarize the central question that arrives at chapter 40: Can Yahweh
do what He promised in chs. 10,11,14,19, 27, 29, 30, 33, and 35? That is, can he restore a
remnant of his people from among the nations, and can he do it in such a way that it will
make his glory manifest to the nations?45 In addition, the declaration of Gods
incomparability in chapter 40 serves as an extended response to proud Assyrias boast of
incomparability: Sennacherib had said that God could not compare with him, the
representative of all human glory. Now God says that the nations cannot compare with him;
they are a drop in a bucket, dust on a scales, grass-hoppers on the earth, in fact, less than
nothing (40:15-17,22-23).46
The significance of the transition of Isaiah 36-39 is that the very real message of
restoration/salvation that is heard during Hezekiahs historical crisis will eschatologically
extend across history, not only to the believing remnant in Babylon who will return in faith to
rebuild the temple and the walls of Jerusalem, but even more significantly, will be heard with
45
46

Oswalt, "The Nations in Isaiah : Friend or Foe; Servant or Partner", 47.

Ibid., 47.

24

John the Baptists voice crying in out the wilderness to repent and prepare the way for the
Lord. In other words, Isaiahs very words heard by the inhabitants of Judah, either in the
midst of or in the aftermath of a very serious threat of exile under the Assyrian aggressors,
now in chapter 40 repeat with dramatic emphasis the eschatological message of hope that he
had already prophetically announced in earlier visions that foretold of Messiahs coming.
J. Barton Payne notes how the chronologically earlier narrative of the Babylonian
envoys of chapters 38 and 39 are positioned after the Sennacherib narrative of 36 and 37 to
move from the promise of captivity to the message of deliverance from captivity in chapter
40. He concludes that Chapter 40 thereby constitutes an authentic prophecy of Isaiah,
datable to 701 B.C., and directed to that chastened remnant of Judah which survived
Sennacheribs devastations and deportations, seemingly more massive even than those of
Nebuchadnezzar, exaggerated as the Assyrians claims of over 200,000 captives may be.47
Payne is not alone.48 Gary Smith suggests that historical hints (war, hiding in caves,
destruction of the temple) demonstrate a pre-exilic setting. He notes, The fear that grips the
people in a war situation in Isa 41:10-14 does not match the peaceful exilic situation in
Babylon, but it would match the reaction of the people of Jerusalem when the Assyrian army
stood around Jerusalem preparing to attack;49 The spoil, plunder, and fierce battle in Isa
42:24-25 could refer to what happened when the Assyrians attacked Judah and the ransom in
Isa 43:3 could allude to the Assyrian battle with a Cushite king Tirhakah (Isa 37:9).50
Paynes list of correspondences between 36-39 and 40-48 reinforce the unity and
singular authorship of the pre-exilic Isaiah:
47

Payne, "The Unity of Isaiah: Evidence From Chapters 36-39", 54.

Smith, Isaiah 40-66: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture 45.; C. Seitz
suggests Judah as the most likely provenance of the writer of 40-55, basing his conclusion on the relationship of
chaps. 40-66 with Lamentations, Zechariah 1-8, and numerous Psalms; J. D. Smart notes how he may be
countering idol worship in Judah and was looking forward to an eschatological restoration; H. C. Spykerboer
concludes that "the whole work is meant for the same group of people, i.e. primarily for Israeilites in
Jerusalem."
49
Gary Smith, "Isaiah 40-55: Which Audience Was Addressed?", Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 54, no. 4 (2011): 701-713.
50
Ibid., 713.
48

25

1) Literary correspondence as in Isaiah's continued use of "the Holy One of Israel"

(37:23 and 41:14, 16, 20), the "grass of the field" (37:27 and 40:6);
2) Ceremonial references to a central altar (36:7 and 56:7; 60:7), the temple (37:1a dn
44:28; 56:5), and prayer therein (37:4, 15-21 and 56:7);
3) Parallel concepts as in the remnant (37:4, 31, 32 and 46:4);
4) Hezekiah's prayer (37:16-20) unfolds the repeated references of God's unique
sovereignty over all the kingdoms of the earth (40:22-23), creation, "Thou hast made
heaven and earth" (40:28; 42:5), the folly of idols as the "the work of men's hands,
wood, and stone" (40:19-20; 21:24, 29); and the universal misssion to the nations,
"That all may know that Thou are YHWH, even thou alone" (45:6; 49:29).51

Isaiah 40 48 in the Context of Idolatry and Defective Worship in Judah

A careful rhetorical analysis of Isaiah 40-48 further strengthens the case for a preexilic 8th century Isaiah writing the whole book to an audience in Judah. The argument for
Gods incomparability and the folly of idols is not written merely to console exiles who must
be convinced that God can and will deliver them from Babylon. In fact, the reference to the
prediction of Cyrus is presented in the context of God extending salvation to the end of the
earth. Before and after the Cyrus announcement, God shows the futility of idols. In Isaiah
44:1-23, Gods sinful but redeemed people are again brought forth as witnesses to Gods
incomparable faithfulness and Gods gracious undeserved salvation; In Isaiah 45:14ff, again
God takes away the shame of idolatry from Israel and re-affirms His salvation as only Savior
and only Lord in whom all will confess that Only in the Lord are righteousness and
strength (Isa 45:24).
In addition, the concluding warning of no peace to the wicked at the end of this
section is repeated in Isaiah 57:21 as a clear link with the books opening and closing
warnings to rebels (see 1:2 and 66:24). John Olley believes that these structural clues raise
very significant issues: The final verse appears also to be an intensification of the twofold
"'There is no peace', says YHWH/my God, 'for the wicked"' (xlviii 22; lvii 21), coming at the
51

Payne, "The Unity of Isaiah: Evidence From Chapters 36-39", 55-56.

26

end of major blocks. At issue is how the refrain, including lxvi 24, functions in the context of
the Book of Isaiah: who are the "rebels/wicked", and what is the intent of such an ending? Is
it consolation or warning?52 The fact that Isaiah 39 ends with this word, shalom, spoken by
Hezekiah strengthens the argument for noting the threefold warning of no peace in Isaiah
40 66 as directed to hypocritical Israelites who scorn Gods word. Thus, the rebels and
the wicked are people within Israel/Zion who by their actions are hindering YHWH's
purposes for Zion to be the city of righteousness to which the nations stream.53

Isaiah 40 48 in the Context of Mosaic Law and the Song of Moses

The fact that Gods message of peace and consolation can include a strong warning to
not persist in unbelief and sin is entirely consistent with the warnings of life and death in
the Mosaic covenant. Isaiahs many allusions to Deuteronomy 32 (i.e., Jeshurun) along with
Gods repeated emphasis on His election of Israel in Isaiah 40 48 point to a message of
repentance to His wayward covenant people, a people who God indicts as blind and deaf
(42:18; 43:8), sinful (42:24) and obstinate (46:12; 48:1-4). Isaiah 40-48 uses a similar
summons (Isa 1:2; 41:1) along with covenant lawsuit language as Deuteronomy 32.
Deuteronomy as the final book of the Torah served as a re-affirmation of the covenant God
revealed with Moses. Like a Suzerainty Treaty, the two parties in covenant lay out the terms
of their relationship as a great king (suzerain) might do when he conquered a smaller nation
(vassal). The last part of such a treaty listed curses and blessing for not fulfilling covenant
obligations as well as arrangements for seeing that the covenant was continued in succeeding
generations. After the curses and blessings are brought home in driving force in chapters 2730, Moses explains that Israel is going to fail (Deut. 29; 31:16, 27), but that God will restore
Israel in the end (Deut. 30:1-6).
52

John W Olley, " No Peace" in a Book of Consolation. A Framework for the Book of Isaiah?", Vetus
Testamentum 49, no. 3 (1999): 351-370.
53
Ibid., 364.

27

After the Song (Deut. 32) is recited, Moses tells the people that they are to set their
hearts on all Gods Words for they are your life (32:47). The explicitly stated purpose for
giving the Song of Moses is that it will serve as a witness. This treaty language would
correctly emphasize the sovereignty of YHWH as the Master and Sovereign King of Kings
over His vassal chosen nation. This divine kings righteous character is proclaimed in vss.
3-4 as The Rock, blameless in His working, for all of His ways are justice, the God of
faithfulness in whom there is no injustice. Righteous and upright is He. The word for justice
is mishpat, and in the context of Deuteronomy, the lexical emphasis falls on the making of
righteous verdicts. In other words, all of His ways are right and His decisions are never
mistaken. Even as the wrath of God is promised for the peoples defection and idolatry, Deut.
32 reveals that Gods wrath is a righteous wrath. The two adjectives ascribed to God,
upright and righteous, are contrasted with unrighteousness of His vassal people, Israel,
whom He ironically names Jeshurun (vs. 14) or upright one. The peoples judgment is
heightened in light of the gracious electing and redeeming purpose of God: Is He not your
Father who bought you? He Himself made you and established you (Deut. 32:7); YHWH
alone led him and there were no foreign gods with Him (Deut. 32:11). The heart of the
indictment is climactically reached in Deut. 32:15-25 in the judicial declaration that
Jeshuruns guilt is the guilt of one who set aside the God who make him, he lightly
esteemed the Rock of his salvation. How will this sin be evident? Moses writes, They
provoked Him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations, they angered Him.
The similarities with Isaiah 40-48 are striking. YHWH speaks first of His
incomparable glory, but then addresses Jacob and Israel as my chosen servant. The
rhetorical question in Isaiah 40:27 includes the word for justice. Why do you say O Jacob,
and speak, O Israel, My way is hidden from the LORD and my mishpat is disregarded by my
God? Thomas Leclerc in his book Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice explores every reference to

28

Isaiahs use of mishpat. According to him, Isaiahs use of mishpat in Isaiah 40 :27 cannot be
understood apart from the verbal link with Gods rhetorical challenge in vs. 14, Who taught
him the path of justice, and taught him knowledge, and showed him the way of
understanding? He writes, The questions that are posed and the issues that are raised in vv.
12 -26 are all directed toward the dramatically delayed lament found in 40:27.54 Melugins
analysis is similar in his conclusion that Isaiah 40:12 -31 is a unified attempt to deal with
one subject under dispute, Israels complaint that Yahweh has forsaken her.55 The idea of
complaint is derived from defining mishpat in vs. 27 as the cause or right of a plaintiff
(similar to the servants use of the word in Isaiah 49:4). When compared with Isaiahs
affirmation of Gods inherent possession (based on the assumed answer that God was never
taught) of the path of mishpat (vs. 14) in a context that reveals His incomparable rule over
kingdoms (12-17) and princes and rulers (18-24), Isaiah basically has God answer Israels
complaint before it is raised in vs. 27. God who is incomparable to the nations and their gods
in wisdom, power, and omniscience is also incomparable in justice. That Judah who has
repeatedly forsaken God and the covenant along with justice should be the one to raise this
question is ironic in light of Gods previous verdicts of their condition. This same Judah is
the unfruitful vineyard that God had planted and was now deserving of judgment (Isaiah 5:16). Their lack of justice is brought out in Isaiahs play on words for justice and murder:

( Isaiah 5:7 declares, God looked for justice

but behold, murder; for righteousness but behold, an outcry.) Additionally, the specific
words used in conjunction with Gods path of mishpat in Isaiah 40:13-14 are Spirit of
YHWH, counsel, understanding, and knowledge, all of which are refer to the rule of the
promised Messianic king: And the Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the Spirit of
wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge (Isa
54
55

Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice : Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah 95.

Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 30.

29

11:1-2). Gods possession of the characteristics of the ideal king in Isaiah 40:14, then,
indicates that mishpat is the defining mark of His reign and the defining standard of His
kingdom. This is also affirmed by the psalmist, Righteousness and justice are the foundation
of your throne (Ps 89:14). Therefore, in light of Gods justice being a divine attribute and
the mark of His sovereign rule in both Deuteronomy 32 and Isaiah 40, Israels lawsuit is
turned on its head and transformed into Gods lawsuit in the chapters that follow, Isaiah 41
48, to contrast His faithfulness with His elect servants unfaithfulness. By alluding to the
Song of Moses (Deut. 32), Gods lawsuit in Isaiah not only demonstrates how His justice is
affirmed in His recent judgments of His people by fulfilling what He formerly declared, but
also how His mercy in salvation is affirmed as not being based on any righteousness of their
own.
In addition to the covenantal emphasis on Gods justice, Isaiah 44:1-8 alludes back to
the Song of Moses, by other verbal parallels. The rare reference of Israel as Jeshurun in
Deuteronomy is used only here in Isaiah: Dont be afraid, my servant Jacob, Jeshurun,
whom I have chosen! (Isa 44:2). Isaiah also uses the same language of Deuteronomy to call
people back to the true Rock from the idols that proved less than useless to deliver them.
After the Lord through Moses asks, Where are their gods, the rock in whom they sought
security? Two verses later, the Lord declares, See now that I, indeed I, am He! says the
LORD, and there is no other god besides me (Deut. 32:37, 39).
The contrast of the ideal servant who will establish justice with the blind and deaf
servant, a people plundered, is followed up with the same message of Deuteronomy 32:
Who gave up Jacob to the looter, and Israel to the plunderers? Was it not the Lord, against
whom we have sinned? (Deut. 42:24). Isaiah 47 mocks the specific sin of exchanging the
God who carried them for the worthless idols of Babylonian that must be carried. The
twofold repetition that they are stubborn of heart is mentioned in Isaiah 46:12 and 48:4 as

30

the indictment that they are far from righteousness (repeated in Isa 59) and needing God to
justify them (45:24-25). The final lament serves as a warning to repent and to return to the
Lord. While the entire section includes Gods gracious promise to save His people, the use of
the covenant lawsuit allusions to Deuteronomy are designed to magnify the peoples
unrighteousness in turning away from God, their gracious Redeemer, for worthless idols.
The shocking aftermath of Hezekiahs death will soon reveal how the next generation
under Manasseh will throw aside all restraints and turn back to crass idolatry in a flagrant
hard-hearted despising even of the compassionate promises of Gods salvation, even the
announcement of a righteous servant who would be crushed in the place of His people (Isa
53). Archer notes that A decisive testimony to the righteousness and sovereignty of YHWH
as the one true God could be made out only if His acts of punitive judgment and subsequent
redemption were solemnly announced by special revelation long before the occurrence of the
fulfillment So it was the degenerate age of Manasseh, which threatened to extinguish
completely the testimony of Israel, presented a set of circumstances which altogether
demanded an extended series of predictive prophecies as contained in Isaiah 40-66.56

Structural Division of Isaiah 40 48

A structural analysis of Isa 40-48 can easily be manipulated by emphasizing certain
genre or stylistic markers over parallelism, or vice versa. Whether one accepts Melugins
form critical stress on genre markers, or one uses Gitays classical rhetorical grid by he
comes up with his division of units, there is undoubtedly a danger of subjectivity in the
process of structural analysis. For example J. Oswalt sees a parallelism between the two units
that challenge the gods in 41:1-7 and 41:21-29 as well as two servant units of 41:6-20 and
42:1-9. However, the key question hinges on whether the author intended the units to begin

56

Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction 343.

31

and end at that point. The proclamation of salvation in chapter 41 as well as the heightened
description of the ideal servant in chapter 42 may suggest that the division should end at
41:29 and begin the new structural unit at 42:1. Fortunately, there are objective delimitation
tools that assist in making such delimitation decisions. By examining the macrostructure
features of key words, themes, patterns of repetition, in line with delimitation markers of the
Masoretic text in comparison with division markers of other ancient witnesses, a proposal
will be laid out for the proper division of the units in Isaiah 40-48 that highlights Isaiahs
intended contrast between Gods unfaithful nation servant and the faithful anointed servant.
A brief rhetorical analysis of Isaiah 41-42 as studied in the context of the larger structure of
Isaiah 40-48 will reinforce the unity of this section with other parts of Isaiah.

Structural Division Markers

One helpful resource written with the sole objective of analyzing and delimiting the
poetry passages of Isaiah is entitled The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40-55,
written by two Dutch Old Testament scholars, Marjo Korpel (Utrecht University) and
Johannes C. De Moor (Professor of Semitic languages at the Theological University of
Amsterdam). Their work lays out principles for delimiting the pericopes, making use of text
divisions found in ancient Hebrew, Greek and Syriac manuscript of Isaiah 40-55.57 In
comparing these texts, they place much weight on whether more than one of the ancient
manuscript witnesses testify to a divider. Their rationale for such use is based on the value of
comparing older divisions with the Masorettic tradition. The authors assert, Scholars
generally ignore the divisions of the text found in ancient manuscripts ... It took a major
effort by J. Oesch to demonstrate that the Hebrew tradition of paragraphoi, petuhot and
57

Marjo Christina Annette Korpel and Johannes Cornelis De Moor, The Structure of Classical Hebrew
Poetry: Isaiah 40-55 (Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill, 1998), 5.; The four major uncials other than the Masoretic
text used in their work are the Codex Sinaiticus, the Codex Vaticanus, the Codex Alexandrinus and the Codex
Marchialianus, with major divisions noted by petuhot and setumot and/or lines projecting into the left margin
and usually headed by a capital letter, as is the case in the much older Minor Prophets Scroll from Nahal Hever.

32

setumot dates back to several centuries BCE.58 In addition to the Masoretic colometry, they
list the following particles and syntactic constructions as the most important markers for
identifying the beginning and end of strophes: deictic particle(s), interrogative pronoun,
repetitive verse-line parallelism, demonstrative pronoun, jussive(s), imperatives(s), marker of
direct speech, swapping (subject or object), vocative, independent personal pronoun.59
Although these tools are useful for examining formal structural markers and strophe patterns
that may not have been noticed, their method is limited in comparing larger units. Thus, their
delimitation observations provide an objective check to structural divisions based on the
analysis of thematic parallelism, repetition, and the intentional use of inclusios.
Gary Smith observes the importance of hymns as marking the end of four sections in
Isa. 40-48:
40:12-42:13
42:14-44:23
44:24-45:25
46:1-48:22

ends with a hymn in 42:10-13

ends with a hymn in 44:23
ends with a hymn in 45:24-25
ends with a hymn in 48:20-2160

While these markers work relatively well for the first two sections, Korpel and De
Moor observe that the inclusio references of Cyrus at the end of Isaiah 46, calling a bird of
prey from the east, with the Cyrus references at the end of chapter 44 and the beginning of
chapter 45 suggest that Isaiah 45 and Isaiah 46 should be kept together as a single unit.61 This
is confirmed by the repetition of bowing in 46:1-2 (Babylonian idols) following the statement
in 45:23b: To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance. In addition,
the Masoretic division agrees with other textual witnesses in marking a unit division
58

Ibid., 2.They see more value in the poetic books Since petuhot and setumot are found less
frequently in the historical books and these dividers are evidently used to delimit sense units there, it must be
concluded that their higher number in the prophetic books has to do with the poetic nature of this type of
literature
59
Ibid., 14.
60
Smith, Isaiah 40-66: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture 84.
61
Korpel and De Moor, , The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40-55 329. In addition to
the Cyrus inclusio, they note the language of lawsuit and texts dealing with Gods justice in both chapters (45:8,
19, 21, 23-25; 46:12).

33

immediately following Isaiah 44:28 (something that Allis also noted in the climactic naming
of Cyrus at the end of chapter 44), despite the repeated name reference in 45:1-13.

A suggested structure for Isaiah 40 - 48 that takes into account the strophe analysis of
Korpel and Moore would be as follows:
40:1-29

Prologue: Comfort in the Sovereign Lords Coming

Behold your God, the incomparable Creator!

41:1-29

The Sovereign Lords Greatness

Behold your Gods righteous and sovereign control over nations/idols

42:1-25

The Sovereign Lords Justice:

Behold your Gods zeal to establish justice through His anointed
servant

43:1-28

The Sovereign Lords Covenant Faithfulness:

Behold your God, the Redeemer of Israel

44:1-28

The Sovereign Lords Salvation:

Behold your God, the sovereign Creators control over nations/idols

45:1-46:13

The Sovereign Lords Throne:

Behold your God, the only righteous King

47:1-15

The Sovereign Lords Judgment of Babylon:

Behold your God, the righteous Judge

48:1-22

The Sovereign Lords Chastening of Judah:

Behold your God, the righteous Creator sovereign over nations/idols

Rhetorical Analysis of Isaiah 41

Both Masoretic markings and key division markers confirm the proposed division of
Isaiah 41 and 42 as separate poetic units. Some scholars, noting the repeated mention of the
chosen servant, would attach the first part of chapter 42 with chapter 41. Gitay notes that the

34

particle rarely stands at the beginning of a new discourse; rather the customary opening
occurs at vs. 5 in the phrase Thus says God, Yahweh.62 The radical contrast from the last
chapter seems to warrant the division, however, especially in light of the contrasts that are set
up with the unit before and after. The of 41:29 points out the proud rulers and their idols
are as nothing in contrast with Gods ideal Servant of 42:1.
The three sub-cantos of chapter 41 can be divided as follows:
41:1-7

Gods lawsuit against the nations and their leaders

41:8-16

Gods covenant promise to His chosen people

41:17-29

Gods deliverance of His people and condemnation of idolatry

The key emphasis in chapter 41 is to expose the nations who boast in idols as nothing.
The structural arrangement vividly points to the utter foolishness of idolatry by utterly
contesting their failure in the first and last stanzas. In addition, all three include reference to a
lawsuit (for example, is used for a case or lawsuit in Isa 41:21). The first
verse opens with a summons to the isles or coastlands with a strong Hiphil imperative to be
silent: . The next jussive verb repeats the phrase, to renew strength that was
graciously promised to those in Judah who wait upon the Lord in chapter 40:21: .
This verb in the piel means to exchange ones strength for anothers. The summons directed
to the coastlands in 49:1 follows the same pattern as here in chapter 41, thus confirming its
function as a delimitation marker of a new unit.
Earlier in Isaiah 34, when the nations and peoples were summoned before the Lord, it
was a fearful declaration of wrath that encompassed the entire eschatological day of
vengeance for the cause of Zion. (34:8). The next jussive invites these coastlands to come
near for , (mishpat), indicating the continuation of the lawsuit motif in which the
Lords incomparable greatness of 40:18-20 again exposes the utter emptiness and foolishness
62

Gitay, Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48 123.

35

of idols. The two rhetorical questions that begin with the interrogative pronoun echo back
to the series of disputation questions in chapter 40 that were used to show Gods
incomparability. In connection with Yahweh and His acts this type of rhetorical question is
frequently used in the poetic parts of the Old Testament--though rarely in the prose parts--as
an effective way of expressing the immutability of His word, the finality of His decisions and
the incomparability of His being. In connection with the finality of His decisions and acts it is
said For Yahwh of Hosts has purposed--who can annul it? His hand is stretched out--who
can turn it back (Isa 14:27); I work--who can hinder it? (Isa 43:13).63 The combination of
lawsuit and disputation are uniquely joined by Isaiah to call forth not merely the true verdict
of Gods incomparability, but more importantly, to call forth the faith that will trust God to
help in the midst of a threatening crisis.
The first question is often translated Who stirred up one from the East whom He
calls in righteousness? However, there is no preposition before righteousness and this
phrase, , can be literally translated Who has aroused from the East
righteousness or justice? If righteousness is lexically defined as victory, the translation
becomes Who has aroused from the East one who meets or encounters victory. Because the
following lines emphasize an unstoppable king to whom God will both deliver up nations
and who will subdue kings and reduce them to chaff, the verb to arouse or awaken
righteousness fits in the context of Gods sovereign control over raising up His rods for
judging and destroying other nations (10:26; 13:17; 51:9); The emphasis on being a tool for
Gods mission is seen in the usage of awake in Isaiah 50:4, where the servants ear is
awakened as a disciple to fulfill a mission. The fact that this king is not named, but
identified as from the East suggests Gods sovereign control over Assyrian kings (10:5) as
well as any king he so chooses to use for His righteous purpose. The fact that Cyrus will be
63

1966), 26.

Casper Jeremiah Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Brill Archive,

36

climactically revealed in 44:28 has led some suggest this ruler is Cyrus. However, some
disagree, claiming that the later reference in Isaiah 41:25 that describes this same ruler with
the phrase calling on My name points to an individual other than Cyrus who is described in
Isaiah 45:4 as one girded for strength though you have not known Me.64
Leaving the ruler unnamed serves to redirect the reader to the repetition of who has
called this forth? The revealed answer is the title of I, the LORD, am the first and the last, a
phrase that will be repeated three times in Isaiah 40-48 (the other two references are 44:6 and
48:12; the additional confessions of His uniqueness is found in 41:4, 26; 43:10; 45:5-7, 2122) to stress the absolute sovereignty of God from the beginning of time to the last event in
history. In this final strophe of the first stanza (4-7) the work of God is contrasted to idols.
However, the fear of the idol-makers is suddenly contrasted to the servant who is told not to
fear in 41:8-16. The use of repetition with servant and do not fear along with the parallel
use of grabbed with held in verses 9-10 reinforce the unity of this middle stanza as well
as the intended audience for the entire chapter. Judahs special covenantal election is with the
God who summons the nations and their idols and who are shown to be utterly silent and
empty before the First and the Last! In addition to parallelism, the final strophe makes use
of antithetical parallelism by referring to Jacob as a powerless worm who will be made into
a powerful threshing sledge because of their relationship to the all-powerful God.
The final canticle (17-20) makes use of the imagery of water for the thirsty. Again,
the assurance of Gods ability to provide water and good will be contrasted with the futility
of the powerless idols. The parallel references of the Holy One of Israel in vss. 14-16 is
repeated once again in vs. 20. These titles compressed in this section highlight Isaiahs
favorite title for God, pointing to the unique glory of God reigning on His throne (Ch. 6:1-4).
64

Smith, "Isaiah 40-55: Which Audience Was Addressed?", 704.Smith notes the Targum interpretation
of this ruler as being Abraham; Smith also notes, A second problem arises with the identification of this
person with Cyrus if this one from the east who subdues kings in Isa 41:2-3, 25 is connected to the war
mentioned in Isa 41:11-12. In this context, some enemy is attacking the Hebrew people, but in the end this
enemy will become nothing.

37

The emphasis on Kingship is reinforced by identifying the one who summons the idols and
their makers as the King of Jacob. Thus, the lawsuit (in comparing the climax of the first
canticle in vs. 7 with this last section) is designed to expose how the gods cannot help, they
can do nothing good, and with a final ironic taunt that they can nothing at all-- good or evil.
The Behold of vs. 24 is repeated in vs. 29 so as to contrast the omniscient, all-wise King of
Jacob who is able to help His people with the governors of nations who are left with no
counselors (vs. 28).
When the rhetorical structure of chapter 41 is placed on the backdrop of the Judah of
Hezekiahs day, possibly trapped in their besieged city, fearing for their lives in light of the
Assyrian threat, the rhetorical force of Do not fear must be heard in light of Gods
sovereign power, not only to accomplish his righteous purposes in judgment, but also to be a
strong refuge for His chosen people. The emptiness of the attackers taunts would certainly
be laid bare by contrasting the worthless help of those who rely on idols with the help that
God promises to His people. The reference to those who war with you (vs. 12) makes more
sense in the pre-exilic shadow of exile rather than those already taken into exile. In addition,
the repeated references to election and being a descendant of Abraham is meant to bring to
remembrance the gracious privilege of being part of Gods covenant. The repetition of the
names Israel and Jacob clearly suggest that this reference to servant is corporate Israel. The
title of the Lord as being First is tied to Gods unique power to declare something from the
beginning as well actually accomplish it. Conversely, the empty boasts of the Assyrian and
Babylonian rulers are exposed by the utter emptiness of their gods.
Here God points out the predictive mark of the prophetic message that is so central to
the argument of Gods incomparability with the nations idols. This predictive element is a
prominent mark in Isaiahs ministry. He already had given what Motyer terms interim

38

fulfillments,65 that is, predictions that could be verified and fulfilled within a set period of
time. This giving of prophecies with near fulfillments along with the more remote day of the
Lord eschatological prophecies served to remind the people of the certainty of all of Gods
prophetic Word. The overthrow of Damascus and Samaria, for example, that was promised in
Isaiah 8:2-3, was fulfilled in the lifetime of those who heard the original oracle (722 BC).
Other examples of interim fulfillments include the linking the prophecy of Moabs downfall
to a time limit (16:13-14) as well as the acting out of the fate of Egyptian captives before the
Assyrian campaign at Ashdod took place (20:1-6). The final miraculous defeat of the
surrounding Assyrian army that he had earlier predicted (Isa 10:12-16; 14:24-26) would thus
serve as a vivid demonstration of Gods claims in this chapter.

Rhetorical Analysis of Isaiah 42

The transition from beholding the worthless idols of chapter 41 to beholding the
priceless servant of chapter 42 is rhetorically emphasized by the repetition of .
The next
chapter (42) encompasses four canticles of strikingly similar strophe length with a clear
contrasting inclusio that begins with the ideal servant who will successfully accomplish the
Lords work to establish justice and concludes with the sinfully blind servant who is
plundered and given up for spoil. The three sub-cantos of chapter 42 can be divided as
follows:
42:1-9

Gods righteous servant who upholds Gods glory

42:10-17

Gods zeal for His glory

42:18-25

Gods unrighteous servant who falls short of Gods glory

65

J A Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah : An Introduction & Commentary (Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity Press, 1993), 134-135. If God cannot demonstrate his management of history in what people see
before them, why should they trust Him for what they cannot see Prediction and fulfillment prove the
required demonstration.

39

Structurally, each of the three sub-cantos is broken up into two canticles, the first
containing three strophes and the second containing five strophes). To demonstrate this
regularity, the verses will be laid out poetically in Hebrew followed by a rhetorical discussion
of the individual verses.
The identify of the servant is clearly
set in contrast with both the former references
by the absence of the reference Jacob as well
as the heightened description of a servant
greatly loved by God. The first reference to
in whom My soul delights is a translation of
. Its meaning of being accepted or finding
pleasure in is used elsewhere to refer to Gods
accepting of sacrifices (Mal. 1:8; 10) or God
not accepting sinners.
The reference of the Spirit is also significant. Lessing, who interprets servant
corporately in chapter 42 but individually in chapter 49, still notes the significance of the
Spirit in both passages: the suffering servant who speaks for the first time in 48:16b, But
now Lord Yahweh sent me endowed with his Spirit. The connections between 48:16b and
49:1-6, as well as with 50:4-9, are clear. The title Lord Yahweh appears again in 50:4, 5, 7,
9, while but now in 48:16b anticipates a similar word usage in 49:4. Moreover, the theme of
"Spirit" reaches back to the first song in 42:1.66 The significance of the Spirit anointing this
Servant points back to the earlier references of the promised Davidic Messiah: The Spirit of
the Lord will rest on Him (Isa 11:2).

66

Reed Lessing, "Isaiah's Servants in Chapters 40-55: Clearing Up the Confusion", Concordia Journal,
37, no. 2 (2011): 130-134.

40

When the Spirt reference is combined with final description of his mission to bring
forth justice to the nations, , one is immediately brought back to the
prophetic promise of 9:7, There will be no end to the increase of His government or of
peace, on the throne of David and over His kingdom to establish it and to uphold it with
justice and righteousness from then on and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will
accomplish this. The fact that mishpat is repeated three times in four verses makes this the
defining mark of this Servant. The inclusio reference to the coastlands at the end of this
canticle corresponds with the nations in vs. 1. As mentioned previously, the entire section
of Isaiah 40-48 begins by raising the question of whether Israels mishpat had escaped Gods
notice (40:27). The irony of Gods chosen servant who cant be crushed or extinguished in
faithfully bringing forth justice is seen in the contrast of servant Israels condition at the
end of the chapter who are not willing to walk in His ways and whose Law they did not
obey (42:24). To heighten this ironic contrast, God reveals through Isaiah that the
coastlands are waiting expectantly for His Law (42:4). The Hebrew term mishpat can be
translated judgment or justice as well as cause (as in 40:27). Because it is paired with
the law in verse 4, the lexical meaning stresses the judgment aspect of mishpat in the
bringing forth of Gods standard with decisive authority. Not only is justice the defining trait
for God in Deuteronomy 32 and Isaiah 40, it is also the defining trait of the promised
Messiah and His kingdom (Isa. 16:5, 26:8; 28:6, 17; 32:1; 33:5; 61:8). As it emerged earlier
in the book, in chs.11 and 25, God's purposes for the nations are not merely to punish them
for their pride and their unwarranted cruelty. He wishes to establish his mishpat, his rule of
justice, among them. He is not the God of Israel alone but the God of the whole earth.67
Leclerc puts significance in the result of the lawsuit from the previous chapter: The context
from ch. 41 with its judgments against impotent idols is now carried into ch. 42: the servants

67

Oswalt, "The Nations in Isaiah : Friend or Foe; Servant or Partner", 48.

41

mission is to bring forth from the courtroom and to establish throughout the world a twosided judgmentthat the gods are nothing and that YHWH alone is sovereign.68
Not only is the Servant divinely qualified to bring forth justice in contrast with the
earthly servant, His manner of bringing forth justice depicts Gods righteousness. He comes
in meekness (vs. 2) and compassion (vs. 3). His glory is seen most conspicuously in
displaying these two attributes: grace and truth (John 1:14). His grace is seen in the
imagery of the bruised reed and the smoking flax. He comes to those broken and flickering
souls, the poor in spirit, who are not too proud to receive His grace. The fulfillment of
these verses are explicitly declared to have occurred in Christs earthly ministry (Matt. 12:1721). What guarantees the mission is the declaration that He will not be crushed or
flickering. Here the same words used for the crushed reed and the flickering wick are
applied negatively to him: His zeal will not be extinguished, nor will anything break His
strength, till He shall have secured for right a firm
standing on the earth ( ) .
The shift in the speakers point of view in Isaiah
42:5 marks the transition from the description of the
servant to the commission of the servant. The definite
article introducing God points back to the uniqueness of
God and His unique glory as Creator and sustainer of all.
Whereas the task in vv. 1-4 is to bring justice to the
nations, here the servants task is describes as being a
light to the nations. This servant is referred to as the
covenant and a light (vs. 6). The One who made the
covenant with Abraham, is Himself the sum and

68

Leclerc, Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice : Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah 108.

42

substance of the covenant. The servant is appointed as covenant emphasizing His role as
mediator. The reason for making him a light to the nations is declared in Isaiah 49:6: So
that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth (6b). Herein, the certain outcome of the
Servants mission is described and rooted in YHWHs unique glory of being able to declare
the future and accomplish what He says (this same glory was stressed in the earlier lawsuit
against the idols in 41:26-28 and now climactically repeated in vs. 9). Opening blind eyes and
releasing prisoners is a step above what Cyprus could do for the Israelites after being held
captive in Babylon. Here the Servant is describing freedom from the darkness of injustice
as well as the darkness of blindness (two repeated motifs that God has repeatedly ascribed to
Judah/Israel and particularly significant in that they are mentioned in this very chapter of his
blind and deaf servant). The darkness of Judahs sin is graphically described in Isaiah 59:
We grope as if we had no eyes; We stumble at noonday; Justice is far from us; Our
transgressions are multiplied before you; Truth is fallen in the the street (Isa. 59:9-15).
This darkness, then, is evidently spiritual, vividly portrayed here in connection with being
locked in a dungeon. Again, one cannot miss allusions to the earlier prophesies of the
promised Davidic king: The people who walk in darkness will see a great light; Those who
live in a dark land, the light will shine on them (Isa 9:2).
The reference to declaring new things is repeated in 43:19 and 48:6, and the zeal to
act for His own Name sake is contrasted with the praise to graven images. This reference to
idolatry once again points to the situation of Isaiahs
day.
The division between vs. 9 and vs. 10 suddenly
shifts from the saving mission of the servant to a
summons of the earth to praise. The song has striking
parallels with the hymn in Isa. 12 in its placement after

43

the announcement of Gods salvation. Melugin lays stress on the eschatological nature of this
hymn that begins with an imperative call to praise and is followed by jussives (11-12) that
are in the imperfect (as compared with the perfects of 44:23; 48:20; 49:13; and 52:9-10).
Melugin notes that the choice of imperfects here make the hymn an eschatological summons
to praise YHWH for deeds He is to perform in the future.69 The global call to praise echoes
the lofty language of Psalms 96:1 and 98:1, even summoning such enemies as Kedar (Psalm
120:5-7) and Sela of Edom (Isa 21:16-17).
Some scholars would attach vs. 13
to the above hymn as a picture of His zeal
to bring praise to His Name. They find it
difficult to combine the warrior image and
woman in labor. However, the similes are
effectively combined to capture different
aspects of the Lords zeal to not only
accomplish salvation but to judge idolatry.
The hymns invitation to the ends of the
earth to worship the Lord is followed by a
vivid illustration of his zeal to accomplish
His purpose. The zeal is specifically
aroused in relation to idolatry. The
juxtaposition of judgment and salvation imagery climaxes in the declaration that those who
trust in idols will be turned back and be greatly ashamed. These same phrases are used in
direct contrast of the ideal Servant who trusts in the name of YHWH in Isaiah 50:10 who
does not turn back (50:5) and is not put to shame (50:7).

69

Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40-55 99.

44

Just as the beginning of Isaiah 41 summoned

the coastlands to listen, the final two stanzas of Isaiah
42 use two imperatives to summon the deaf to hear
and blind to look. That this passage follows
immediately after the warning to idolaters brings to
focus the rhetorical purpose of Gods lawsuit in
chapter 41. Now, however, in deliberate contrast with
Gods promised Messianic servant, sinful Israel is
summoned before the divine tribunal of Gods judgment. The hiphil imperative is followed
by an infinitive purpose clause: in order to see () . Just as the blind Israelites were judged
for not seeing and hearing (Isa. 28:1-13), God had already indicted the people of Judah for
drawing near with their words but removing their hearts far from me. The same court
language will be repeated in Isaiah 43:22-28 and 50:1-3. Melugin claims that the passage in
chapter 43 imitates an appeal-to-trial form that is a response to Israels complaint and implicit
assertion of righteousnessthat is Isaiahs main concern is disputationalto dispute
Israels right to expect a positive answer to their complaint and plea on the basis of their
righteousness.70 Certainly the promise of deliverance and forgiveness from sin (43:25) is
granted not because of what they earned. So also in this final closing stanza of chapter 42, the
judgment against Israel is directly attributed to their forsaking of Gods Law, and their utter
hardness of heart in not even recognizing the LORDs chastening hand.

70

Ibid., 49.

45

The Lord is said to act for the sake of His

righteousness to privilege His people as custodian of
His Law. The neglect of the Law is graphically
illustrated by what the Law itself warned would
happen if people chose to disobey God. The final
rhetorical questions serve to invite the sinful people
of Judah to repent. Even after punishing His people,
some refused to repent. Their foolishness is captured
in the contrasting clauses of the last strophe: And it
burned him, but he paid no attention (vs. 25).
This unresponsive people are similar to those
of whom Moses said, For they are a nation lacking in
counsel, and there is no understanding in them.
Would that they were wise, that they understood this,
that they would discern their future! (Deut. 32:28-29). Isaiahs final words in this first
section of Isaiah 40 48 carry the same plea for repentance: Oh that you had paid attention
to my commandments! Then your peace would have been like a river, and your righteousness
like the waves of the sea (Isa 48:18).

Conclusion
Isaiahs commission required him to Go and tell this people, keep on listening, but
do not perceive; keep on looking, but do not understand. Render the hearts of this people
insensitive, their eyes dim, otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,
understand with their heart and return and be healed (6:9-10). After Gods mighty
deliverance of Jerusalem from the Assyrian king, Sennacherib, the towns of Judah not only

46

had to rebuild their cities, but even more importantly, they were prophetically told to restore
their hearts in worship to their incomparably glorious God. But alas, even then, the peoples
righteousness was as filthy rags. Just as Isaiah set forth the glorious promise of a Davidic
king who would establish a kingdom of justice despite the repeated failures of their kings, so
also the word of the Lord through Isaiah revealed that only one suffering Servant could fulfill
the righteous mission of bringing salvation and establishing justice to the ends of the earth, a
mission that faithless Israel desperately needed herself. That a merciful God would crush His
own innocent servant in the place of the blind servant deserving judgment will forever silence
Israels complaint that my mishpat is ignored by my God. The context of the threat of exile
in light of a holy Gods covenant provides an essential backdrop to rightly understand
Isaiahs words of comfort in Isaiah 40 48. Even as Gods justice brings certain judgment,
His zeal for His glory secures merciful salvation for the people He has redeemed. This
salvation was declared from beginning to end of Isaiahs long prophetic ministry in Judah as
being fulfilled in the coming of the promised glorious Messiah: Behold, I am laying in Zion
a stone, a tested stone, a costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who
believes in it will not be disturbed (Isa 28:6).

47

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allis, Oswald T. The Unity of Isaiah: A Study in Prophecy. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2000.
Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody Press, 1985.
Aster, Shawn Zelig. "Transmission of Neo-Assyrian Claims of Empire to Judah in the Late
Eighth Century BCE." Hebrew Union College Annual 78 (2007): 1-44.
Childs, Brevard S. Isaiah. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.
Clifford, Richard J. Fair Spoken and Persuading: An Interpretation of Second Isaiah. Paulist
Press, 1984.
Cogan, Morton. "Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and Israel in the Eighth and Seventh
Centuries B.C." Dissertation, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 1971.
The Companion Bible : The Authorized Version of 1611 with the Structures and Critical,
Explanatory, and Suggestive Notes and with 198 Appendixes. Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Kregel Publications, 1990.
Franke, Chris. Isaiah 46, 47, and 48: A New Literary-Critical Reading. Winona Lake, Ind.:
Eisenbrauns, 1994.
Gitay, Yehoshua. Prophecy and Persuasion: A Study of Isaiah 40-48. Linguistica Biblica Bonn,
1981.
Korpel, Marjo Christina Annette, and Johannes Cornelis De Moor. The Structure of Classical
Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40-55. Leiden, the Netherlands: Brill, 1998.
Kravitz, Kathryn. "Divine Trophies of War in Assyria and Ancient Israel." Dissertation, Ann
Arbor, MI: UMI, May, 1999.
Labuschagne, Casper Jeremiah. The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament. Brill
Archive, 1966.
Leclerc, Thomas L. Yahweh Is Exalted in Justice : Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah.
Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001.
Lessing, Reed. "Isaiah's Servants in Chapters 40-55: Clearing Up the Confusion." Concordia
Journal, 37, no. 2 (2011): 130-134.
. "Messianism Within the Scriptural Scrolls of Isaiah." Concordia Journal, 36, no. 4
(2010): 384-386.

48

Lessing, R Reed. Interpreting Discontinuity: Isaiah's Tyre Oracle. Winona Lake, Ind.:
Eisenbrauns, 2004.
Machinist, Peter. "Assyria and Its Image in the First Isaiah." Journal of the American Oriental
Society 103, no. 4 (1983): 719-737.
Melugin, Roy F. The Formation of Isaiah 40-55. Walter de Gruyter, 1976.
Motyer, J A. The Prophecy of Isaiah : An Introduction & Commentary. Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity Press, 1993.
Olley, John W. " No Peace" in a Book of Consolation. A Framework for the Book of Isaiah?"
Vetus Testamentum 49, no. 3 (1999): 351-370.
Oss, Douglas A. "A Note on Pauls Use of Isaiah." Bulletin for Biblical Research 2 (1992): 105112.
Oswalt, John N. "The Nations in Isaiah : Friend or Foe; Servant or Partner."16, no. 2006 (2006):
41-51.
Payne, J Barton. "The Unity of Isaiah: Evidence From Chapters 36-39." Bulletin of the
Evangelical Theological Society 6 (1963): 50-56.
Pongratz-Leisten, Beate. Religion and Ideology in Assyria. 2015.
Porter, Barbara. "Symbols of Power: Figurative Aspects of Esarhaddon's Babylonian Policy
(681-668 B.C.)." Dissertation, Ann Arbor, MI: UMI, 1987.
Rodgers, Peter R. Exploring the Old Testament in the New. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2012
.
Seitz, Christopher R. "On the Question of Divisions Internal to the Book of Isaiah." SBL 1992
Seminar Papers 32 (1993): 260-66.
Seufert, Matthew. "Reading Isaiah 40:1-11 in Light of Isaiah 36-37." Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 58, no. 2 (2015): 269-81.
Smith, Gary. "Isaiah 40-55: Which Audience Was Addressed?" Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 54, no. 4 (2011): 701-713.
. Isaiah 1-39. Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman, 2007
. Isaiah 40-66: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture. B&H
Publishing Group, 2009.
Snyman, Fanie. The Lion Has Roared : Theological Themes in the Prophetic Literature of the
Old Testament. Eugene, Or.: Pickwick Publications, 2012.
Webb, Barry G. The Message of Isaiah : On Eagles' Wings. Leicester, England ; Downers
Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996.