Historical and Exegetical Study of Isaiah 8:23-9:6

Andrew Cross

The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

April 8, 2013

Introduction

ר׃ עם־הזה לאמ רך ה לכת בד י מ נ סר ת היד וי י כחזק ר יהוה אל ה אמ י כ (Isa 8:11a WTT)כ

For the LORD spoke thus to me with his strong hand upon me … (Isa 8:11a ESV)

The prophet Isaiah saw a day when men will seek answers from the dead instead of from the

LORD their God. (8:19b) In their hunger and distress, they will look up to the darkened sky and

curse both God and king. (8:21) But those who were humiliated will receive honor. (8:23) A

great light will dawn on those provinces that were first to fall under foreign domination, Zebulun

and Napthali. (9:1) Rejoicing will once again be heard; as during the harvest; as when men

come home from battle bearing the spoils of victory. (9:2) The yoke of the oppressor will be

lifted from their shoulder and his staff broken. (9:3) For a child will be born who will rule on

David’s throne. (9:5) He will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Eternal Father,

Prince of Peace. He will rule with justice and righteousness forever. (9:6)

Almost every portion of the above paraphrase of Isaiah 8:19-9:6 is disputed. The focal point for

disagreement is the identity of the child in Isa 9:5,6. Deuteronomy Rabbah 1:20 and the Aramaic

Targum1 understand the child to be a messianic figure, as does Derech Eretz-Zuta, a non-

canonical tractate of the Babylonian Talmud. The New Testament does not reference Is. 9: 5,6

1יחא יברא קיים עלמיא מש (Isa 9:5 TAR) אלהא ג

1

but quotes Is. 9:1,2 in the context of the decision made by Jesus to stay in Capernaum ‘in the

land of Zebulun and Naphtali’. (Matt. 4:15,16) The early church fathers and most Christian

exegetes until recent times interpret the passage as a messianic prophecy fulfilled in Christ.

On the other hand, the tractate Sanhedrin in the Babylonian Talmud identifies the child as

Hezekiah. Medieval Jewish exegetes such as Rashi and Ibn Ezra also identify the child as

Hezekiah. Many modern scholars likewise take this passage to refer to a historical Judean king.

The question of the identity of the child in Is. 9:5,6 rests upon the answers given to the following

questions.

1. Does the oracle concerning the birth of a king begin with 8:23 or 9:1? If it begins with

8:23 then why does the prophet single out Zebulun and Naphtali as the recipient of

blessing?

2. Does the judgement described in 8:19-22 have anything to do with the birth of a king in

9:5,6? If so, then what historical events, if any, correspond with the judgement?

3. Is there any connection between the promise of the birth of a king in Is. 9:5,6 and the

children given to the prophet as signs of judgement and redemption in Isaiah 7 and 8?

4. Does the description of the righteous king look forward to an ideal future ruler or is the

text employing hyperbole to describe a historical king?

5. Should Isa 9:5,6 be related to other passages in Isaiah that look forward to an age of

peace and restoration under the rule of a righteous and just king?

In addition to these questions, there remains a fundamental question of methodology. Is there an

inherent conflict between the historical-critical method and a messianic interpretation of the

passage?

2

This paper will argue that 1) the birth pronouncement in Isaiah 9:6,7 forms the conclusion of a

larger literary unit that begins with a description of darkness in 9:19-22. 2) The geographical

information found in 8:23 and the placement of the oracle within the first historical section of

Isaiah suggests that the sitz im leben for the oracle is the invasion of Tigleth Pileser III. 3) The

description of the king who will rule on David’s throne reflects an awareness of Assyrian court

propaganda thus providing another historical contact between the oracle and a time when

Assyrian propaganda circulated throughout the ANE. 4) The names listed in the birth

pronouncement (9:5 - Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace)

could not have been spoken on the occasion of a Judean kings ascension to the throne. 5) The

language and the context of the birth pronouncement in Isa 9:5,6 suggest that it belongs with

eschatological expectations found elsewhere in Isaiah 1-12.

While seeking to understand the text in its historical context, this paper does not assume that

messianic expectations are a product of the exilic or post-exilic period.

The Oracle in it Literary Context

The birth pronouncement in Isa 9:5,6 forms the conclusion of the first historical section of the

book of Isaiah (Isa 6-9:6). This historical section recounts Isaiah’s commission and his first real

test as a prophet. This test came in the form of an attempt by Israel and Syria to forcibly replace

king Ahaz on the throne with a foreign king. (See below for more on the ‘Syrio-Ephraimitic

Crisis’) Isaiah met king Ahaz and gave him a series of promises – each of which was connected

with the name given to a child who was already born or had yet to be born. Two of the children,

Shear-Jashub and Maher-shalal-has-baz, clearly belong to the prophet. The identity of the third

3

child, Immanuel, is not stated in the text. The names of the children serve as reminders to the

people of the events foretold by the prophet.

It is not clear how the birth pronouncement in Isa. 9:5,6 is related to the birth pronouncements in

chapters 7 and 8. One reason to separate them is that Isaiah seems to conclude the historical

section in chapter eight with the statement that he and his children are ‘signs and portents for

Israel’ (8:18). Another reason to consider the birth oracles separately is that Maher-shalal-hash-

baz and Shear-Jashub are clearly children of Isaiah who were given as ‘signs and symbols’ for

Israel whereas the child in 9:5-6 does not belong to Isaiah and his names do not signify events

foretold by the prophet. A final difference between the oracles is that the child in Isa 9:5-6 is

given four ‘titles’ rather than a single ‘name’. Thus the oracle in Isa 9:5,6 contains distinct

elements that separate it from the other birth oracles.

Despite these differences, the birth pronouncement in Isa 9:5-6 is best interpreted within the

context of the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis and the subsequent invasion of TP III. The primary

reason for this is that Zebulun and Naphtali are singled out in 8:23. These were northern regions

of Israel that lay along the invasion route of Tiglath Pileser III when he attacked Damascus in

733-734 BC. The use of Gideon’s victory over Midian in the north (9:3) as a ‘type’ for

deliverance in 9:3 further highlights the attention this section of text gives to the northern tribes

of Israel. A final reason we should be cautious before removing the birth pronouncement in 9:5-

6 from the context of the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis is that the birth pronouncement is clearly a part

of the first historical section of Isaiah (6-9:6). (see Excursus B)

R. Killian argues that the prophet Isaiah was a prophet of doom called to render the hearts of the

people insensitive (Isa 6:10). Therefore, "all that could be acknowledged as authentic must

4

indeed be understood against the background of the commission of hardening and be brought in

harmony with this commission."2 According to this theory, eschatological expectations and

messianic prophecies in the book of Isaiah belong to a late expansion of the text. Similarly O.

Kaiser posits that the original Isaiah texts of Isa 6-9 are the sections written as a 1st person

‘memoir’ (6:1-11; 7:18-25; 8:1-4-8,11).3 Thus, if Isaiah 9:5,6 is to be given a messianic

interpretation then it is generally assigned to a later period.

On the other hand, Wildberger accepts the 8th

century context of the birth pronouncement in Isa

9:5,6 but gives it a liturgical function. Rather than a promise of future redemption, the names

given to the child in Isa 9:5,6 are comparable to the throne names that were given to the Pharaoh

upon his ascension to the throne.4 Or, as A. Alt puts it, Isaiah 9:5,6 does not refer to the literal

birth of a king but was “hyperbolic idiom of royal ascension comparable to Egyptian coronation

liturgy that refer to qualities desired of the new monarch.”5

A third interpretation is that the Isaiah 9:5,6 are the authentic words of the 8th

century prophet

Isaiah who looked forward to a future redemption that would accompany the rule of a Great

King. The redemptive parts of Isaiah are not to be assigned to a later period but are rather an

intrinsic part of the prophet’s message. The very structure of the indictments in Isaiah 5:18-30;

9:8-10:4 looks forward to salvation. (see Excursus B)

The literary context of Isa 9:1-6 bears all the marks of a prophetic oracle in which redemption

and judgement appear together and cannot be separated. Darkness, despair, hunger and exile are

2C. Brekelmans, ed. Deuteronomic Influence in Isaiah 1-12, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum

Lovaniensium Lxxxi (Leuven University Press). 3 Otto Kaiser, Isaiah 1-12 : A Commentary, 2nd ed., The Old Testament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press,

1983). 4 Hans Wildberger, Isaiah : A Continental Commentary, 3 vols., Continental Commentaries (Minneapolis: Fortress

Press, 1991). 5 A. Alt as quoted in: Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis, Studies in Biblical Theology 2nd Ser., 3

(London,: S.C.M. Press, 1967).

5

intentionally contrasted with light, joy, harvest, and restoration. There are no valid grammatical

or syntactical reasons to take 8:23 as a late gloss used to introduce a poem that begins with 9:1.6

Instead, 8:23 should be taken as a prose transition between the more poetic descriptions of

darkness in 8:19-22 and the dawning of light in 9:1-6. To separate out the redemptive part of a

prophetic oracle and call it ‘royal hyperbole’ or ‘language of the court’ is to ignore its literary

context.

Isa 8:19-22 - Judgement Isa 8:23 - Transition Isa 9:1-6 - Redemption

Darkness -

“they have no dawn” (Isa 8:20

(21) NAS)

But there will be no more

gloom for her who was in

anguish… Isa 8:23a (1a)

NAS)

Light -

“The people walking in

darkness have seen a great

light” (Isa 9:1 (2) NAS)

Despair and Hunger -

“hard pressed and hungry”

(Isa 8:21 (22) NAS)

Joy and Plenty –

“They will be glad in Thy

presence as with the gladness of

harvest” (Isa 9:3(4) NAS)

Cursing of the King -

“they will be enraged and

curse their king” (Isa 8:21 (22)

NAS)

Praise for the King -

“and the government will be on

his shoulders” (Isa 9:5 (6) NAS)

Exile –

“driven away into darkness”

(Isa 8:22 (23) NAS)

Restoration -

“For Thou shalt break the

yoke…” (Isa 9:4 (5) NAS)

The Oracle in its Historical Context

It is surprising how many words for ‘darkness’ and ‘distress’ are employed – some of which are

rarely used elsewhere.

6Blenkinsopp writes, “with regard to background and date, it would be prudent to consider the poem independently

of its prose introduction [8:23].” Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1-39, vol. Isaiah 1-39, The Anchor Bible (Garden

City, N.Y.,: Doubleday, 1964).

6

ה anguish’; in Mishnaic Hebrew ‘pit’ (HALOT); usually found in' – (Isa 8:22 WTT) צוק

parallel with cärâ (‘distress’ cf. Pro 1:27, Isa 3:6); found 3 places – 2 of them in Isaiah.

ואפלה (Isa 8:22 WTT) – ‘darkness’; found 10 places – 3 of them in Isaiah.

ה .need, distress, anxiety - opposite of salvation - (Isa 8:22 WTT) צר

מועף (Isa 8:23 WTT) - gloom, with no brightness (words with the same root: glimmer,

tired)

ק narrow or cramped place; used elsewhere of casting metal, or of - (Isa 8:23 WTT) מוצ

water turned to ice; only Job 36:16 uses word in similar sense of ‘distress’.

שך darkness - (Isa 9:1 WTT) ח

ות shadow of death. According to popular folk etymology it - (Isa 9:1 WTT) צלמ

combines cal (shadow) and mäºwet (death). (HALOT)

What historical events, if any, correspond with the description of darkness, despair, hunger and

possibly even exile? Candidates might include the long years of oppression when Judah was

dominated by Israel, Sennacharib’s campaign in Judah, or even the Babylonian exile. However,

the mention of Zebulun and Naphtali in 8:23 provides us with a historical reference point that fits

only one period time - the Assyrian invasion of Israel by TP III (733-734 BC). It may be helpful

at this point to review the historical events that finally led to the Assyrian invasion led by TP III

in order to understand why Isa 8:19-23 reflects conditions in the northern kingdom of Israel.

In the early days of the reign of King Ahaz, Judah was threatened by an alliance between Pekah,

king of Israel, and Rezin, king of Syria. Judeans watched in dismay as Pekah, supported by 50

men from the land of Gilead, violently seized power in Samaria by assassinating Pekahiah. In

what must have seems like a suspiciously short period of time, Pekah formed an alliance with

Rezin, king of Syria, and began to amass an army on the southern border with Judah. 7 It is

7 Pekah was probably from Gilead and may even have ruled as a local chieftain there under Syrian authority before

seizing power in Samaria. According to a summary inscription found at Calah from the reign of Tiglath Pileser III,

territory ascribed to ‘the house of Hazael’ included Gilead in the northern Transjordan.

7

generally assumed that Rezin and Pekah’s primary goal in attacking Judah was to bring Judah

into an anti-Assyria coalition by placing Ben-Tobeel on the throne in Jerusalem (Isa 7:6). Based

on a reference to “the Land of Tabel” in the Assyrian letter (ND 27773) it is possible that Ben-

Tobeel was a local governor in the Trans-Jordan.8 The attempt by Ben-Tobeel to claim the

throne in Judah with the support of Aram is comparable to the already successful palace coup

made by Pekah – a ruler who seems to have also originated from the Trans-Jordan and received

support from Aram.

Although the Bible does not say anything about an anti-Assyrian alliance, the existence of such

an alliance is implied by an Assyrian inscription that records a rebellion against Assyria that

included Hiram of Tyre, Pekah of Israel, Rezin of Damascus, Hanunu of Gaza, Mitinti of

Ashkelon, Samsi queen of the Arabs and Hanno of Gaza. Irvine notes that, “Ahaz of Judah was

one of the few Palestinian rulers who did not join the rebellion.” 9 If Ahaz was the odd man out,

then it is understandable why he would be singled out for attack.10

Having ignored Isaiah’s counsel, Ahaz sent tribute to Tiglath Pileser III (TP III) with the hope of

receiving support from Assyria(2 Kings 16:7). This payment may be the one recorded in an

Assyrian tribute list from TP III’s campaign of 734-732.11

It also mentions the payment of

tribute from the kings of Philistia and Transjordan.12

The kings of Syria and Israel are noticeably

absent from this tribute list, probably because they remained in rebellion against Assyria even

after the kings who ruled cities along the coast had already fallen.

8 B. Oded, "The Historical Background of the Syro-Ephraimite War Reconsidered," Catholic Biblical Quarterly

34(1972).162 9 Stuart A. Irvine, Isaiah, Ahaz, and the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis, Dissertation Series / Society of Biblical Literature

(Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1990).70 10 According to 2 Chronicles 28 Edom and Gaza also joined in the attack on king Ahaz. 11

Irvine, Isaiah, Ahaz, and the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis. 42 12

Ibid. The tribute list must date before 733-732 because it mentions Mitinti, king of Ashkelon, who was

overthrown in 733-732.

8

It is not clear when Pekah and Rezin formed an alliance against Judah. Irvine makes a case that

the Syro-Ephramite crisis was the culmination of a several year attempt by Syria to form an

alliance against an ever more menacing Assyria. According to this view, the crisis probably

occurred shortly after Pekah’s ascension in Tishri 734 although it is possible that it occurred

earlier.13

B. Oded offers a much different reconstruction of the events surround the Syrio-

Ephraimitic Crisis by arguing that the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis was not caused by the looming

threat of Assyria but rather stemmed from a long standing conflict of interest in the Trans-

Jordan. 14

Oded argues that it is a mistake to assume that Judah was a weak or secondary power

during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham and Ahaz. Rather than Judah being subject to the northern

king, Jeroboam II, the two kingdoms enjoyed peaceful relations that allowed them to share

spheres of influence in the Transjordan. After the death of Jeroboam II and the dissolution of the

northern kingdom, Uzziah assumed complete control of the Transjordan and exerted influence as

far north as Damascus. Evidence to support this reconstruction may be found in an Assyrian

annal text that records a battle between Assyria and an anti-Assyrian coalition led by ‘Azriyau’.

If Oded is correct in identifying the ‘Azriyau’ of the inscription with Uzziah (also called Azariah,

cf. 2 Kings 15:17 ) then it is likely that Uzziah’s successors, Jotham and Ahaz, continued to exert

control over parts of the Trans-Jordan – even as Aram began to re-exert power in the region.

Although the identity of ‘Azriyau’ in the region of Hamath is problematic, 15

this reconstruction

makes sense of the statement in 2 Kings 15:37 which states that Pekah and Rezin had already

begun to attack Judah in the days of Jotham.

13

Ibid. in loc. 14

Oded, "The Historical Background of the Syro-Ephraimite War Reconsidered." 15

It was once thought that this Asriyau was from the ‘Land of Yaudi’ based on fragment K. 6205. This fragment

has since been connected with another annal fragment dated to the reign of Sennacharib or Sargon. See Mordechai

Cogan and Hayim Tadmor, Ii Kings : A New Translation, 1st ed., The Anchor Bible (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday,

1988).

9

According to the Assyrian annals, the campaign of TP III penetrated as far south as the ‘brook of

Egypt’. It is not known whether TP III moved this far south in response to a looming threat from

Egypt or whether his primary goal was to secure Philistine seaports and overland trade routes. If

Ahaz was a powerful king, as Oded suggests, then it is not impossible that he was able to

influence the actions of TP III in the western Levant.16

Isaiah also mentions some form of bribe

when he refers to Assyria as ‘a razor that is hired beyond the River.’ (Isa 7:20) What is

important is that both Biblical and extra-Biblical sources agree that Ahaz was one of the few

kings in the region who did not take part in a rebellion, that Ahaz sent money to TP III, and that

at some point in the years 733/732, TP III turned his attention towards Damascus and flattened it.

According to the Eponym Chronicle, the siege of Damascus lasted two years. After it fell, TP III

turned Syria into a province under the control of an Assyrian governor. In response to the defeat

of Damascus, the inhabitants of Samaria removed Pekah from the throne and made Hoshea king

in his stead. There is some question as to the fate of the Galilee at this point and it has some

bearing on how we interpret Isaiah 8:19-23. Did TP III take the Galilee from Israel or from

Syria? Irvine maintains the latter and suggests that it is inaccurate to view the invasion of TP III

as an oppressing force in the lives of the Israelites living in the Upper Galilee. They had fallen

under Aramean dominion long before they were ruled by Assyria.

However, if we accept Oded’s reconstruction of events, then Aram was greatly weakened during

the reign of Uzziah and only gained hegemony over the northern Transjordan after they had

forced Jotham out of the region. There is no indication that Israel lost sovereignty over the upper

Galilee before the invasion of TP III. Two very broken fragments list the towns in the Upper

16

Irvine argues that the story of Ahaz bribing Assyria to attack his enemies belongs to a later redaction that mirrors

a similar incident in which Asa, king of Judah, bribed Benhadad, king of Syria, to attack Baasha, king of Israel.

However, Menaham is also said to have paid TP III for protection against Rezin. It seems that in ancient times, as

today, bribery was nine tenths of diplomacy.

10

and Lower Galilee conquered by TP III during his campaign of 734-732 and the number of

captives taken from each. The names of the towns that were destroyed are difficult to decipher

but it remains striking testimony to the devastation wrought by TP III on the Galilee in 733-732.

The text further states that TP III “utterly destroyed” the “[... 16 districts of the land of Bit-

[Humria].”17

If this reconstruction is correct, then there is good reason to believe that the upper

Galilee was a part of Bit-Humria (the house of Omri) when it was attacked by TP III.

The regions of Israel directly impacted by TP III’s invasion are also listed in the book of Kings.

In the days of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-pileser king of Assyria came and captured

bIjon,

cAbel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of

Naphtali, and he carried the people captive to Assyria. 2 Kings 15:2918

Evidence of this destruction has been uncovered by Y. Yadin at Hazor. He describes it as,

“worse than any I can remember in archaeological excavations. The entire area was covered by

a layer of ashes 1 meter thick and still black!”19

TP III was the first to permanently annex the tribal inheritance of Israel. Only in this context can

we understand ‘the contempt’ that was brought on Zebulun and Naphtali and the darkness that

covered the land. (Isa 8:23) 20

17

Mordechai Cogan, The Raging Torrent (Jerusalem: Carta, 2008).76 18

The invasion route of TP III probably followed the Via Maris. 19

Yigael Yadin, Hazor: With a Chapter on Israelite Megiddo, The Schweich Lectures, (London, New York,:

Oxford University Press for the British Academy, 1972). 176 20

Luckenbill writes, “What methods did the Assyrians employ to hold their empire together? Did it ever occur to

them that at sound economic policy and social justice might help? If so, the records of it have perished.” See

introduction: Daniel David Luckenbill, The Annals of Sennacherib, The University of Chicago Oriental Institute

Publications, (Chicago, Ill.,: The University of Chicago Press, 1924).

11

Notes on the Grammar and Syntax of Isaiah 8:23-9:6 and a Proposed Translation:

But there is no gloom for her who was in anguish. For in the former time he humbled the

land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali but in the latter [time] he will honor the way of

the sea along the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. (23)

Following the KJV and JPS, Blekinsopp translates hikBîd negatively - ie. “[...] oppressed the

way of the sea, the land across the Jordan, Galilee of the nations.” 21

The ASV, ESV, NAB

translate hikBîd positively – ie. “[...] has made glorious the way of the sea, the land beyond the

Jordan, Galilee of the nations.” (9:1 ESV)

Blenkinsopp argues that häri´šôn (masc.) cannot qualify et (fem.) because they do not agree in

gender. Instead he translates häri´šôn and wühä´aHárôn substantively and makes them the

subjects of hëqal and hikBîd (Isa 8:23 BHT). His translation reads:

"There is no gloom for her who is oppressed. At that time the earlier ruler (häri´šôn)

treated with contempt (hëqal) the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and the later

one (wühä´aHárôn) oppressed (hikBîd) the way of the sea, the land across the Jordan,

Galilee of the nations."

According to this translation, v. 23 refers to two phases of military disaster. The 'time of the

earlier ruler' may refer to Hazael or Ben Hadad who attacked the tribal territory of Zebulon and

21

Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1-39, Isaiah 1-39.

12

Naphtali in the Upper Galilee. The 'later one' is Tiglath-pileser III whose invasion of Syria

resulted in the formation of three new provinces: Duru (Dor, "the way of the sea") Galazu

(Gilead, the land across the Jordan) and Magid (Maegiddo, "Galilee of the nations). Miller and

Hayes take a similar approach although suggesting that the ‘latter one’ is a reference to Rezin.22

Ibn Ezra also sees two stages of military defeat in this passage. His translation reads, "The first

time that the king of Assyria came, he afflicted the land of Israel only slightly, by taking the

districts of Zebulun and Naphtali; but the last time he afflicted it heavily, and took the whole of

Galilaea."23

There are a number of problems with making häri´šôn andwühä´aHárôn the subjects of hëqal

and hikBîd. Firstly, the hiphil form of hikBîd is usually translated ‘honored’ or ‘made great’

when it has a person or place as its direct object (cf. Jer 30:19). Because the direct object in this

passage is a place, hikBîd is best translated in the positive sense of ‘honored’. Secondly, hikBîd

and hëqal mean quite literally ‘to make heavy’ and ‘to make light’ respectively. When they

appear in parallel, they stand opposite each other. Thus in Isa 3:5 the niphal form of these two

verbs are translated: ‘the despised’ and ‘the honorable’. (wühanniqlè BannikBäd ) The

antithesis anticipated in 8:23a in the words ‘no gloom’ (lö´ mû`äp) and ‘anguish’(mûcäq) is

continued in 8:23aβ with the contrast between ‘despised’ (hëqal) and ‘honored’ (hikBîd) and

receives its fullest expression in 9:1 - “The people walking in ‘darkness’ (Höºšek) have seen a

great light (´ôr Gädôl)!” To translate hikBîd and hëqal as degrees of oppression completely

misses the antithesis. Thirdly, the lack of agreement between häri´šôn and et is also found in Is

22

J. Maxwell Miller and John H. Hayes, A History of Ancient Israel and Judah, 2nd ed. (Louisville, Ky.:

Westminster John Knox Press, 2006). 372 23

Abraham ben Me r Ibn Ezra and M. riedl nder, The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah, 4 vols. (London,: Pub.

by N. Tr bner, 1873).

13

39:1 (Bä`ët hahiw´) where it is translated as ‘at that time’. (cf. 2 Kings 20:12) The noun et is

also found with the plural, masculine suffix and modified by masculine adjectives. (cf. Dan.

2:14; Ezra 10:14; Neh. 10:35; II Chron 15:5)24

Therefore, disagreement between gender is not

sufficient ground to translate häri´šôn andwühä´aHárôn substantively.

Emerton argues that the use of the perfect tense for both hëqal and hikBîd does not allow for the

‘contempt’ to be placed in the past and the ‘honor’ in the future. However, in Biblical poetry,

the perfect and imperfect forms often bear no relation to the aspect of time. (ie. ‘The Song of the

Sea’) It may also be argued that häri´šôn andwühä´aHárôn serve as time markers rather than the

imperfect and perfect forms of the verb.

Following Childs, it is better to take häri´šôn and wühä´aHárôn as “qualities of time” that

contrast oppression and redemption. 25

Keil and Delitzsh have further suggested that the phrase

Kä`ët häri´šôn, indicates that the disgrace extends over a period of time whereas wühä´aHárôn,

lacking as it does the subject et, refers to honor that is bestowed once and continues.26

(1) The people walking in darkness have seen a great light, on the inhabitants of the land of

the shadow of death a light has dawned.

Both synchronic and syntactic parallelism are found here.

ים העם שךהה לכ ול בח ור גד ו א רא

רץ י שבי ות בא ם צלמ ה עליה ור נג ׃א

24

J. A. Emerton, "Some Linguistic and Historical Problems in Isaiah Viii. 23," Journal of Semitic Studies 14, no. 2

(1969). 159 25

Childs, Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. 26

Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids,: Eerdmans).

14

It seems best to translate the verbs in 8:23-9:1-3 as ‘prophetic perfects’ that speak of future

events as though they had already happened. Murakoa writes, “In prophecies a future event is

sometimes regarded as having already been accomplished, hence the use of qatal. This prophetic

perfect is not a special grammatical perfect, but a rhetorical device.”27

If we connect 9:1 with 8:23 then the light is dawning on Zebulun and Naphtali but if we connect

9:1 with 9:2 then the light is dawning on the nation as a whole. 9:1 can be interpreted either way

although 8:23 singles out Zebulun and Naphtali as the land oppressed that in the future will be

honored. It seems better then, to take Zebulun and Naphtali as the antecedent for the phrase ‘a

light has shined on them’ (ôr nägah `álêhem).

(2) You have multiplied joy. You have made great gladness. They rejoice before you as the

rejoicing at harvest time, as when they rejoice in dividing the spoil.

The text shifts to the 2nd

person and the locus moves from Zebulun and Naphtali to the nation as

a whole. The subject of the verse is the LORD. Once again, we see synonymous parallelism.

ית וי הרב ו) [ל א( הג ]ל

לת גד ה ה מח הש

יך ו לפנ שמח

ת מח יר כש בקצ

ילו ר יג ל׃ כאש ם של בחלק

The text actually reads, “you enlarge the nation, you do not make great their joy.” This cannot

be correct. The qere is hagoi lo – which reads, “to it [the nation] you increase joy.” Wildberger

27

Paul Jo on and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Subsidia Biblica (Roma: Pontificio istituto biblico,

2006). 335

15

suggest that that hagoi lo should be amended to hagila meaning ‘joy’ (cf Isa 65:18).28

This

strengthens the parallelism in the verse so that it reads, “You have multiplied joy, you have made

large gladness.” The contrast between the descriptions of joy and redemption in 9:2 with the

darkness and despair of 8:19-22 suggests that these verses are intended to contrast each other.

(3) For the yoke of his burden and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of the oppressor you

will shatter as in the day of Midian.

Three instruments of oppression are listed:

י את־ לוכ ל סב ה ש ואת ע ומט בט הנ גש כמ ן׃ ש די ום מ ת כי ת ו הח ב

(Isa 9:3 WTT)

This is the first of three statements that begin with ,Each statement builds on the previous . יכ

climaxing with the cause for joy and source of salvation – the birth of the king. A comparison of

the king with the dawning of the light is also found in the ‘last words of David’.

Then one rules justly over men, ruling in the fear of God, he dawns on them like the

morning light, like the sun shining forth on a cloudless morning… 2 Sam 23:4b

The metaphor of light and darkness becomes something tangible in the description of victory

over oppressors. This victory is compared to the victory gained by Gideon over Midian (cf

10:26). Blenkinsopp notes in this context, the seeming lack of awareness of the Exodus or

Patriarchal traditions. But in this context, the invasion of the Midianites serves as a much better

28

Wildberger, Isaiah : A Continental Commentary. in loc.

16

‘type’ for the invasion of Assyria than the exodus. The fact that Gideon’s victory was won in the

north also fits well with the historical context of the oracle.29

(4) For every boot tramping in tumult and mantle rolled in blood will be a burning - fuel

for the fire.

Gray suggest that the vowel markings of !aeäso ((qal, part. Masc., sing, abs.) should be changed to

the pual form giving a reading, “ever boot worn in the tumult”.30

(5) For a child is born to us, a son is given to us, and the government will be on his

shoulders and his name will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Almighty God, Eternal

Father, Prince of Peace.

This verse has created many difficulties for translators. As with the other birth oracles in Isaiah

7 and 8, the verse tells us that a child will be born and what his name will be. Most interpreters

agree on this much.31

The first question we encounter is, how many names are there and who is

the subject?

Rashi understood the first two compound names to be the subject of ‘veyikre’ and only the last

two compound names to be names of the child. Rashi’s interpretation reads:

29

It should be noted that a passing reference is made to the Exodus in 11:6 but only in reference to the judgement of

Egypt. 30

George Gray, ed. Isaiah 1-39, The International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1969). 31

The only interpretation I came across that does not, belongs to Lars Rignell who argues that the child is Israel and

that the child is actually ‘naming’ God. Rignell notes that veyikra is in the qal form and argues that it should not be

repointed niphal. - Lars G. Rignell, "Study of Isaiah 9:2-7," Lutheran Quarterly 7, no. 1 (1955).

17

For a child has been born to us, a son given to us, and the authority is upon his shoulder,

and the wondrous adviser, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, called his name, "the

prince of peace." 32

Ibn Ezra disagrees with Rashi on this point. He writes, "According to some, these expressions

are names of God, and the following sar shalom, the name of the child. I think that all these

words are the name of the child.”33

The syntax of sentence is on the side of Ibn Ezra for the

subject cannot appear between the verb šümô (his name) and the names given to the child.34

If

wayyiqrä´ šümô stands “at the head of a list of names”, as Keil and Delitzsh argue, then the qal

verb veyikre (he will call) should be repointed to make it niphal (he will be called).35

The

emendation makes all three verbs in the sentence passive: veyikre (is called), yulad (is born) and

niten (is given).

Pele´ yô`ëc - (Wonderful Counsellor) The word pele (wonderful) is a substantive and not an

adjective. For this reason, Keil and Delitzsh suggest that it does not modify yoetz (counsellor)

but should be taken substantively and read, “…Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God…” This

reading is supported by the accent marks in the Massoretic text. However, the other names in the

list are dual in form and it seems best to understand this also as a compound name. The

question remains, how do the two words relate syntactically? In his summary of the various

renderings of this name, Goldingay notes that the clause can be translated ‘wonder of a planner’

32

(Rashi, http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15940, accessed 2/28/2013) 33

Ibn Ezra agrees with Rashi that Hezekiah is the referrent. Ezra writes, “Wonder, "because God did wonders in

his days"; Counselling, this is distinctly said of Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 30:2); Might chief, for Hezekiah was

powerful; Father of perpetuity - because the reign of the house of David was prolonged through his merits. (Ezra

1873) 34

For discussion on this, see: J. D. Davis, ed. The Child Whose Name Is Wonderful, Biblical and Theological

Studies (New York: Scribner, 1912). 35

Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament.

18

or ‘planner of a wonder’.36

Holladay and Wildberger favor the latter, giving the king the role of

‘miracle worker’. (cf. also HALOT - pele) However, the word ‘plan’ is a poor translation in this

context. A student might plan his week but a son goes to his father for counsel. yoetz is almost

always translated as counsellor elsewhere. Furthermore, as Hayes and Irvine note, ‘counsellor’

and ‘king’ are found in parallel in Micah 4:9.37

This translation is also favored by Isaiah 11:2

where it speaks of a ‘spirit of council’ that rests on the Davidic king. It is better to translate yoetz

as ‘counsellor’ and pele attributively as ‘wonderful’. Thus pele functions like GiBBôr in the next

compound name.

ël GiBBôr (Mighty God) - This name has received the most attention in this passage.

Blenkinsopp translates it ‘God warrior’, arguing that the superlative use of GiBBôr requires a

reversal of word order. ie. ‘kokebe-el’ – mighty stars.38

However, el-gbor is also found in Is.

10:21 where it is translated ‘mighty God’.

A remnant will return, (šü´är yäšûb) the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God (ël GiBBôr).

(Isa 10:21 NAS)

In response, Blenkinsopp argues that the use of ël GiBBôr in Isa 10:21 borrows from Isaiah 9:5

further noting that the passage uses two theophoric names already revealed in the birth oracles

(šü´är yäšûb and ël GiBBôr). It is not clear how this solves the problem for even if the name does

borrow from Isa 9:6, it still doesn’t make sense to say that the “remnant returns to the God

Warrior.” It would be better to adjust the translation of the name in Isaiah 9:6 so that it reads

naturally in 10:21. ie.- “the remnant returns to the Mighty God.” There is no reason why GiBBôr

36

John Goldingay, "The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6)," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2 (1999). 37

John H. Hayes and Stuart A. Irvine, Isaiah, the Eighth Century Prophet : His Times & His Preaching (Nashville:

Abingdon Press, 1987).180 38

Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1-39, Isaiah 1-39.

19

must be translated as ‘warrior’. Although GiBBôr can refer to a warrior, its more basic meaning

is ‘mighty’ or ‘preeminent’. Thus a man can be a GiBBôr in drinking wine (Is. 5:22), or the chief

gatekeeper can be called a GiBBôr (1 Chron. 9:26).

ábî`ad - Hayes and Irvine note that the characterization of the king as ‘father’ is unusual in

Judean or Israelite contexts but is common in Akkadian texts.39

In Judea, the king was adopted

as a son by God (2Sa 7:14; 1 Chron. 28:6; Ps 89:27,28) or God is called a father to his people (cf.

Ex 4:22; De 32:6; Jer 31:9; Isa 63:16; 64:8). The king is never called a ‘father’. 40

It may be

that, in contrast to Akkadian practices, Judeans did not call their king ‘father’ because this role

was reserved for God. If this is the case, then its usage here makes it as problematic as ël GiBBôr.

Sar-šälôm - It is curious that Isaiah uses the word ‘sar’ (captain, commander, chief) rather than

the Hebrew word ‘melech’ (king). The word is usually translated prince, but if the prophet

wished to communicate the idea of ‘prince’ then he could have employed ‘nagid’ (cf. 2Sa 7:8) or

‘nasi’.41

The Hebrew word ‘sar’ is generally used of individuals of lower rank and not of the

king. von Rad suggests that this is a title of the Messiah who is “a viceroy in Yahweh’s

kingdom” and not a King.42

This is unconvincing considering the attribution of kingship to the

Messiah elsewhere and the nature of the other titles given here.

There may be another reason for the choice of the word Sär instead of melech and this has to do

with the relationship of Sär to the Akkadian word for king - Säru. It is noteworthy that in the

39

Hayes and Irvine, Isaiah, the Eighth Century Prophet : His Times & His Preaching. 40

One exception may be 1 Sam. 12:15 where ûba´ábötêkem (your fathers) does not make sense in the context and is

translated ‘king’ in the Septuagint. 41

Ezekiel speaks of a coming prince ‘nasi’ (Ezek 34:34) This title was picked up by later Jewish writers. It is found

ten times in the Dead Seas Scrolls and all these occurrences are messianic. –cf. Lawrence H. Schiffman and James

C. VanderKam, Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2 vols. (New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press,

2000).541 42

Gerhard von Rad, The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays (New York,: McGraw-Hill, 1966). 230

20

same passage Isaiah uses the word hammiSrâ for ‘government’ - a hapax legomena. Driver

notes that Qumran Scroll A has mswrh which is the correct form of the word. It is related to the

Akkadian word mshorah (dominion, kingly rule). 43

Is it possible that the prophet purposefully

chose to play on the Assyrian words for king (Säru) and government (mshorah) in order to

contrast the peace loving rule of the Sar-šälôm (Prince of Peace) with the Assyrian sarru (king)

who boasted of his cruelty? Likewise, when the prophet said that the king would take

hammiSrâ (the government) on his shoulder, was he thinking of the yoke that the Assyrian king

boasted of placing on the shoulders of the people? Peter Machinist notes that the prophet Isaiah

displays a keen awareness of Assyrian propaganda and makes use of it by “deflecting and

reworking it”.44

For example, the Assyrian kings often boasted about their expeditions to

Lebanon to chop down Cedars and Junipers for their palaces but in Isaiah the Cedars and

Junipers are said to rejoice at the death of the Assyrian king (Isa 14:8). Similarly, Assyrian kings

often spoke of placing their ‘yoke’ on those they have conquered and a common justification for

marching to war is to crush those who sinfully ‘throw off the yoke’. Machinist notes that “the

prophet turns this sin inside out, when he has Yahweh predict, in a defiant pun: And his yoke

shall depart from them (Israel).” (14:25; cf. 10:27)45

A final example that is especially

noteworthy is the boast of the Assyrian ruler, "are not my commanders (Säray) all kings

(müläkîm)"? Machinist notes that “this is a conscious wordplay on the Hebrew word Sär

‘subordinate official’ and the cognate Akkadian Säru as ‘king’.46

Based on these instances, it is

43

Godfrey Rolles Driver, "Isaiah 9:5-6," Vetus testamentum 2, no. 4 (1952). Driver notes that Qumran scroll ‘Isaiah

A’ has it correctly as msherah 44

Peter Machinist, "Assyria and Its Image in the First Isaiah," Journal of the American Oriental Society 103, no. 4

(1983). 734 45

Ibid. 734 46

Ibid. 735

21

fair to speculate that the decision to use Sar-šälôm as a title of the child was made in order to

contrast the peaceful nature of the rule of the child with the current ‘ruler of the universe’,

perhaps Tiglath Pileser III.

(6) Of the increase of his dominion and of peace there will be no end. On throne of David and on

his kingdom establishing it and supporting in judgement and righteousness from this time until

eternity. The zeal of Yahweh of Hosts will do this.

The nouns BümišPä† ûbicdäqâ (in righteousness and in justice) often appear together. The

words appear in construct form (mišPa†-ceºdeq) in Deut 16:18 where they are translated ‘with

righteous judgement’. The attribute of cdäqâ (righteousness) becomes the main characteristic

of the King in Jer. 23:5,6 where he is called ‘the LORD our Righteousness’. (cf. Jer 33:14-16

where the city of Jerusalem is called by this name).47

Who is the Child?

By recalling Gideon’s victory over Midian in the north, the prophet looks forward to the day

when the instruments of oppression will be broken and the warriors garb will be burned. The

description of the breaking and burning of the implements of war is similar to another

description found in Psalm 46:8-10 (cf. Hoshea 2:18-23; Isa. 2:1-4; Micah 4:1-4).

9 He makes wars to cease to the end of the earth; He breaks the bow and cuts the spear in

two; He burns the chariots with fire.

10

"Cease striving and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be

exalted in the earth." Ps 46:9-10 NAS

47

Snaith suggests that ‘the LORD our Salvation’ is a better translation in Jer. 23:5,6 but this fails to explain the

connection between righteousness and justice in the same context. Norman H. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the

Old Testament, Schocken Paperbacks (New York,: Schocken Books, 1964).

22

The similarities between Ps. 46 and Isaiah 8:6,7 are striking. The ‘raging sea’ (Psa 46:2) and the

‘abundant waters’ (Isa 8:7) are contrasted with the river of God (Psa 46:4) and the gently flowing

‘waters of Shiloh’ (Isa 8:6) respectively. The central theme of both passages is that ‘God is with

us’ (Isa 8:11; Ps 46:5,7,11). Both Ps. 46:9-10 and Isaiah 9:4 look forward to the burning of the

instruments of war - but with a notable distinction. In the first, God is the protagonist, whereas

in second, the destruction of the implements of war is connected with the birth of the King. It

may be argued that the prophet in Isa 9:4 is using poetic license – that he did not actually believe

that the future ruler of the Judean kingdom would make a warriors garb obsolete. On the other

hand, the prophet may be looking beyond this present age to an age to come – as the psalmist

was in Ps 46.

These two alternatives (is there another?) come into sharper focus in the names given to the

Child. Goldingay argues that the names found in Isaiah 9:5 do not tell us anything about the

child but are rather statement about God. But, as Goldingay acknowledges, there is no parallel

for naming God ‘sar’.48

Neither can the names be formed into a statement about God after the

usual pattern of theophoric Hebrew names. It seems best then, to take these names as titles given

to the king rather than as statements about God.

Those interpreters who assign the name given in Isaiah 9:5 to a historical Judean king argue that

the titles must be understood as royal hyperbole. For example, Blenkinsopp connects the birth

pronouncement in Isa 9:5,6 to the birth pronouncements of Isaiah in chapter 7 and considers

Hezekiah to be the most likely candidate. He writes, "The language imitates the oratorical and

declamatory style of the court and corresponds to aspiration rather than political and military

48

Goldingay, "The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6)."

23

reality.”49

50

Similarly, A. Alt argues that this passage does not refer to the literal birth of a king

“but was hyperbolic idiom of royal ascension comparable to Egyptian coronation liturgy that

refer to qualities desired of the new monarch.” 51

This form of royal hyperbole is evident in the

following description of Ramses II:

No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of

man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique"52

Wildberger describes an Egyptian custom of giving five names to the pharaoh on his ascension

to the throne. For example, the names given to Pharaoh Harmhab were as follows:

(1) Mighty Bull, Read in Plans; (2) Great in Marvels in Karnak; (3) Satisfied with Truth,

Creator of the Two Lands; (4) Zeserkheprure (=Beaming Is the Nature of Re), Setepnere

(=Chosen by Re); (5) Mernamon (= Loved by Amon), Harmhad (=Horus at the Festival)

(cf. Breasted, ARE III~29)5354

It is not surprising to find royal titles such as these in Egypt where the pharaohs were akin to

gods on earth. It is more difficult to accept that these titles were given to a Judean king and

preserved in a book attributed to a 8th

century prophet. Such comparisons fail to account for the

fundamental differences in conceptions of kingship between Judea and Egypt.55

49

Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 1-39, Isaiah 1-39.249 50

If Hezekiah is the referent in Is. 7:14 then the birth of Hezekiah must be dated to no earlier than 734 BC. His

ascension to the throne was in 715 BC, thus at his ascension Hezekiah would have been, at most in his late teens

instead of 25 years of age as indicated by 2 Kings 18:12. 51

Childs, Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. in loc. 52

Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:67 as qtd. in NET Bible notes for 9:6 53

Wildberger, Isaiah : A Continental Commentary. 402 54

Although there are only four names in Isaiah 9:5 but Wildberger manages to find another.

55 These differences are highlighted in the way the ruler related to law. Because of their divine status, Egyptian

pharaohs were not bound by external law codes in the same way that Judean (or Mesopotamian) kings were.

Speiser writes,

24

Judean kings were characterized by a lack of self-aggrandizement relative to other ANE kings.

For example, there is no indication that Judean kings ever adopted the title ‘Great King’ (LUGAL

ra-bu-u) that was commonly used by kings in the ANE. This becomes all the more significant

when we consider the long and widespread usage of this title. According to Malamat, the title

was in use in the 19th

century BC and was ‘prevalent in the political conscience and in the

linguistic usage’ of the kings of Mari. Hittite kings from 1650 to the end of the Neo-Hittite

period almost constantly used the title ‘Great King’, “even when it was overshadowed by the

emerging title of glorification ‘My Sunship’.” 56

The title ‘Great King’ became an important

diplomatic title in the Amarna period that was adopted by the kings of Egypt, Hatti, Babylon,

Mitanni, and later, by the Assyrians. During the Neo-Assyrian period, Assyrian kings adopted

the standard royal tite: “[Name of the King] Great King, Strong King, King of the World, King

of Assyria.57

The Babylonian king Nabunaid adopted a similar title. The title ‘Great King’ was

adopted by Cyrus, Darius I, Xerxes, Artaxerxes I-II-II and by later Greek kings, the most notable

being Alexander. Malamat states that, “there is no evidence so far that the title ‘Great King’ was

used at all by the Kings of Judah and Israel.”58

Biblical writers are aware of how the title was

used by ANE kings (cf. 2 Kings 18:28; Hosea 5:13; 10:6; Eccl. 9:14; Ps. 136:17) but the title is

never applied to Judean kings. The title ‘Great King’ is only used in reference to God (Mal

“The same article of faith that deified the pharaoh made it inevitable that he be also the source and master of all law.

It is no surprise, therefore, that Egypt has yielded no evidence of any kind of legal code impersonally conceived,

since the authority of such a code would have competed with the personal authority of the pharaoh.”

The religion of Israel, on the other hand, was founded upon an external law code given by God. In addition to the

office of king, was that of priest. While the lines between these offices blurred at times, there is no indication that

an Israelite king officiated as priest as did the Egyptian Pharaoh or the Assyrian King. The radically different

relationship that the king had to the laws and priesthood serve to illustrate two very different views of kingship that

make it highly unlikely that Israel would be inclined to adopt an Egyptian liturgy that attributed deity to their kings. 56

Abraham Malamat, Mari and the Bible, Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient near East, (Leiden ;

Boston: Brill, 1998). in loc. 57

Ibid. 210 58

Ibid. in loc.

25

1:14; Ps 47:3, 48:2, 95:3).59

This parallels the usage of the title ‘ ather’, a title that was also

adopted by kings in the ANE but never by Judean kings.60

Rather than elevating the king, we find a historical tradition in Judah that was inherently critical

of the monarchy. Thus, when the people of Shechem made Abimelech king, Jotham likened

Abimelech to a bramble in a forest full of stately and fruitful trees. Ultimately, the bramble

catches fire and consumes the forest! (Judges 9:7-21) So too, when the people sought to make

Gideon a king, Gideon replied, "I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the

LORD will rule over you." (Jdg 8:23 ESV) Later, when the elders of Israel demanded that

Samuel appoint a king who would fight for them ‘like all the nations’, it was understood to be a

rejection of the LORD as king over Israel. (1 Sam. 8:7)

This raises an important question that bears on our understanding of Isaiah 9:6. If a strong anti-

monarchical sentiment existed among Judeans at an early date then why did the royal house of

David became so important theologically? How did a tribal confederation so critical of the

institution of kingship sustain a ruling dynasty in the same capital for over 350 years? Perhaps it

was this vexing question that led Wellhausen to relegate everything critical of the monarchy to

the exilic or post-exilic period. This solved the problem for Wellhausen but as T. Ishida argues,

the anti-monarchical argument is not easily separated from the narrative. Neither is it an easy

task to place it in the late monarchical or exilic period. Ishida concludes that, “we cannot accept

the view that the anti-monarchical arguments in the biblical sources either stemmed from or were

revived by those who suffered from the monarchy in its late period, such as the prophet Hosea or

59

One exception is Ezra 5:11, where it is applied retrospectively to Solomon. 60

“Cooper and Goldstein ("At the Entrance," 204 n. 14) point out the important contrast between Moses' words [in

Exo. 32:32] and "the proud boast of Kilamuwa and Azitiwada that they are like father and mother to their people:

KAI 24.10; 26.A.i.3." Moses' comment here [Exod 32:32] is the antithesis of the attitude expected of a Northwest

Semitic leader.” Benjamin D. Sommer, "Reflecting on Moses: The Redaction of Numbers 11," Journal of Biblical

Literature 118, no. 4 (1999).

26

the Deuteronomist.” 61

Ishida argues that the anti-Monarchical argument was the product of a

political struggle between the ruling priestly dynasty at Shilo and the elders of Israel who wished

to appoint a king who would fight for them ‘like all the nations’. According to Ishida, the anti-

Monarchical argument ‘was silenced and never revived’ after the kingdom of David and

Solomon was established.62

However, by explaining the anti-monarchical argument purely in terms of a political power

struggle, Ishida diminishes the theological aspect to the anti-monarchical argument. This was

the belief that the LORD God alone is sovereign over the earth and should therefore be King and

Ruler of All. This belief exerted a powerful influence on Isaiah and later prophets. Thus Isaiah,

even as he writes expectantly of the future, looks back to the period of the judges, when the

LORD was King in Israel.

"Then I will restore your judges as at the first, And your counselors as at the beginning;

After that you will be called the city of righteousness, A faithful city." (Isa 1:26 NAS) 63

This anti-monarchical sentiment is further apparent in Isaiah’s response after Ahaz rejected the

offer of a sign from God in favour of an alliance with Assyria. Turning from the king, the

prophet addressed the people of Judah and delivered an oracle concerning the child Immanuel

(7:14). The child signified the continued presence of God with his people despite the impending

invasion of Assyria. The prophet makes clear that God’s presence, Immanuel, would be their

salvation and not the current ruling monarch – King Ahaz.

61

Tomoo Ishida, The Royal Dynasties in Ancient Israel : A Study on the Formation and Development of Royal-

Dynastic Ideology, Beiheft Zur Zeitschrift R Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 142 (Berlin ; New York: W. de

Gruyter, 1977). 183 62

Ibid. 183 63

What political system does Isaiah have in mind? If the period of the Judges was held to be an ideal, then why

does the history recorded in Joshua and Judges depict it as a political and spiritual disaster? It is easy to define the

period of Judges in negative terms. There was no ruling dynasty, no centralized power, no palace or military levy,

etc. But how do we define its political and social structure?

27

… [the River - Assyria] will sweep on into Judah, it will overflow and pass on, reaching

even to the neck, and its outspread wings will fill the breadth of your land, O Immanuel."

Be broken, you peoples, and be shattered; give ear, all you far countries; strap on your

armor and be shattered; strap on your armor and be shattered. 10

Take counsel

together, but it will come to nothing; speak a word, but it will not stand, for God is with

us [Immanuel]. (Isa 8:8-10 ESV)

Although Isaiah rejected Ahaz as king, there is no indication that Isaiah turned away from the

unconditional promises of the Davidic covenant.64

This is evident in the way that Isa 9:1-6

expands upon the promises given to David in 2 Sam 7:5-17. For example, David was promised

that his name would be made ‘like the great ones of the earth’ (2 Sam 7:10) but the names given

the child transcend all earthly titles. (Isa 9:5) David was promised that his land would dwell in

peace (2 Sam 7:10-11a) but Isaiah looks forward to a day when the implements of war will be

burned (Isa 9:3). David was promised a son whose throne would be established ‘forever’ (2 Sam

7:12) but Isaiah speaks of a Child who will rule from ‘this time forth and forever’ (më`aTTâ

wü`ad-`ôläm) (Isa 9:6).65

The ancient belief that Yahweh alone is King and the unconditional promises of the Davidic

covenant are the two pillars on which expectations of a future ‘Great King’ are founded. The

rule of this King will be more than the restoration or continuation of the Davidic dynasty. His

rule hearkens back to a time before the monarchy, when the LORD ruled among his people. The

64

Sommer notes the similar language found in Is 42:1-9 and Is. 11:1-10 and suggests that the prophet reinterprets Is.

11:1-10 by replacing the King (Messiah) with the Servant (people of Israel). This reinterpretation, according to

Sommer, reflects exilic conditions in which the Davidic dynasty had come to an end. The textual similarities

between Is 42:1-9 and Is. 11:1-10 suggest a literary connection although the equation of the people of Israel with the

Servant cannot be consistently maintained. See (Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture : Allusion in

Isaiah 40-66, Contraversions : Jews and Other Differences (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998).) 65

The promise of an eternal dynasty is not uncommon in Assyrian texts and there is at least one instance where the

king is promised “long days and everlasting years”. (cf. Ishida 1974, 88 cf. also Wildberger 1991 on similar

Egyptian promises) However, the general tenor of our passage finds no comparison in Assyrian or Egyptian texts.

28

coming of this King is by nature eschatological for there is no place for his Kingdom in the

present age.

Conclusion

It is a mistake to derive our understanding of ancient Israelite kingship from passages that

describe the eschatological King, or conversely, to interpret passages that have to do with the

eschatological King as though they described a historical king. Attempts to apply the names in

Isa 9:5 to a historical Judean king ultimately end up watering down the language while finding

equivalencies between Judean and Ancient Near Eastern conceptions of kingship. In our

opinion, the promise of redemption in Isaiah 9:1-6 cannot be separated from the description of

judgement in Isaiah 8:19-23 and therefore could not have been used as liturgy in the palace

court. Apart from the dogmatic insistence that religious ideas must evolve according to a set

pattern established in the 19th

century, there is no reason to believe that an 8th

century prophet

could not have looked expectantly to a future in which the earliest ideals of Judah’s prophets are

expressed in the rule of a Great King.

ו יד ש אד ני כוננ קד לת יהוה מ בתך פע ון לש תך מכ ר נחל מו בה טע מו ות א יך׃תב

ד׃ ם וע ך לע ל מל ה׀ י יהו

You will bring them in and plant them on your own mountain, the place, O LORD, which

you have made for your abode, the sanctuary, O Lord, which your hands have

established. The LORD will reign forever and ever." (Exo 15:17-18 ESV)66

66

ד ם וע cf (Exo 15:17b) לע ל ם תה מע (Isa 9:6) ועד־עול

29

Excursus A –Isaiah 8:23-9:6 in the Light of later Messianic Expectations

The 8th century Greek poet, Hesiod, wrote of a golden age that disappeared with the arrival of

the age of iron. Hesiod gave no hope to his readers that the golden age would return. The earth

had fallen into a chaotic cycle from which it would never emerge and one must learn to get along

as best as he can in this present evil age. This pessimism was shared by other ancient cultures.

The Babylonians (1st millennium BC) began each year with the Akitu festival. They would carry

an image of Marduk out onto the wild steppe lands where the god was thought to do battle with

primordial monster goddess, Tiamat. His victory that year ensured the success of their crops.67

The Egyptians believed that the life giving sunlight of Ra was threatened every evening as the

sun dipped beneath the horizon and entered a frightening world in which Apophis, depicted as a

great serpent in Egyptian iconography, threatened to extinguish the sun.68

Did the Babylonians

or Egyptians see an end to the struggle with chaos?

Israel is perhaps unique in that their prophets looked forward to a day when Leviathan would be

slain. (Isa 27:1) The redemption of nature and the rule of a Great King are common themes that

often appear together in prophetic texts. The hope for a coming King contrasts sharply with

dismay of witnessing the Davidic dynasty crumble beneath the onslaught of the Assyrian and

Babylonian empires. The psalmist asks, “Where are Thy former loving kindnesses, O Lord,

Which Thou didst swear to David in Thy faithfulness?” (Psa. 89:49 NAS) Later, Ben Sira sums

up the ultimate plight of the Davidic dynasty with this pithy observation, “Except David and

Hezekiah and Josiah they all sinned greatly” – therefore the kings of Judah came to an end (Ben

Sira 49:4). Despite the apparent end to the Davidic dynasty, there remained a widespread belief

67

David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1st ed., 6 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1992).Vol. 1 – 138 –

See: ‘Akitu’ 68

Othmar Keel, Christoph Uehlinger, and Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Deutschsprachigen Katholischen Alttestamentler

und Alttestamentlerinnen., Gods, Goddesses, and Images of God in Ancient Israel (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress

Press, 1998).

30

in a coming King. Thus Neusner writes, “According to Palestinian Targums to the Pentateuch, a

messiah will come at the end of days who will spring from the lineage of David. His return will

mark the rebuilding of the temple and the destruction of all God’s enemies.”69

Although the

Qumran scrolls do not quote Isaiah 9:1-6 directly there is an interesting passage that should be

mentioned in this context:

“…through the breakers of death she gives birth to a male, and through the pangs of

Sheol there emerges from the crucible of the pregnant woman a wonderful counsellor

(pele yoetz). (1QHa 11:9-10)70

The text relies on themes and vocabulary found in Isa. 9:1-6 and perhaps also Micah 5:3.

Josephus mentions an ‘ambiguous oracle’ that inspired the Jewish zealots. He writes,

But now, what did the most elevate them in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous

oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how," about that time, one from their

country should become governor of the habitable earth." The Jews took this prediction to

belong to themselves in particular, and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in

their determination.71

Josephus lamented that the leaders of the Jewish people had wrongly interpreted the oracle.

According to Josephus, it actually spoke of Vespasian!

69

Jacob Neusner and William Scott Green, Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period : 450 B.C.E. To 600 C.E

(Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999). 427 70

John Collins, ed. The Immanuel Prophecy, Prophecy and Prophets in Ancient Israel : Proceedings of the Oxford

Old Testament Seminar (New York: T & T Clark, 2010). 240 71

Jewish Wars, 6:311-313

31

The Gospel of Matthew quotes Isaiah 8:23b in the context of the decision by Jesus to establish

his ministry in Capernaum, in the land of Zebulun and Naphtali (Matt. 4:15,16). According to

Gershon Scholem, later mystical Jewish communities likewise believed that the messiah would

appear first in Galilee.

“…mystical Jewish groups who built their communities in Safed, did so in the belief that

the Messiah would come out of Galilee… according to certain eschatological texts the

messiah was due to make his first appearance in Galilee, and it is not impossible that this

and similar expectations contributed to the establishment of the community of saints in

Safed, which numbered more inspired enthusiasts and devout seekers of mystical

salvation than any other city.”72

Although Scholem does not specify which eschatological texts or whether they may have been

influenced by Christian interpretations. It would not be surprising to discover that Isa 8:23

formed the basis for these expectations.

One final text that appears, on the face of it, to have been directly influenced by Isaiah 9:1-6 is

the 4th Eclogue of Virgil (70-19 BC). In the poem, Virgil looks forward to the end of ‘the iron

race’ and rise of a ‘golden age all over the world’.73

This new age is accompanied by the birth of

a boy, born of a virgin (iam redit et virgo), who will ‘grow in the life of gods’ and ‘shall rule the

world that his father’s virtues have set at peace.’ In this age, ‘the earth will pour forth gifts’.

Virgil writes, “untended shall the she-goats bring home their milk-swollen udders, nor shall huge

72

Gershom Scholem, Sabbatai Evi; the Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676, Revised and augmented translation ed., The

Littman Library of Jewish Civilisation (London,: Routledge & K. Paul, 1973).19 73

Virgil, http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/virgil/ecl/ecl04.htm, Accessed 2/28/2013

32

lions alarm the herds.”74

This sounds very similar to Isaiah and raises the question of whether

the poet may have been influenced by an old Latin translation of Isaiah.75

74

http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/virgil/ecl/ecl04.htm, Accessed 2/28/2013 75

Virgil was later identified as a ‘heathen’ prophet. Michelangelo painted him on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel

together with Isaiah. Virgil also receives a prominent place in Dante’s Inferno.(Sawyer 1990)

33

Excursus B – The First Historical Section of Isaiah and the Woes of the Outstretched Hand

The book of Isaiah contains two major historical sections that each recount a major crisis that

threatened the continuation of the Davidic ruler and the kingdom of Judah. The first historical

section (7-12) recounts Isaiah’s mission to King Ahaz during the tumultuous days leading up to

the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis. The second historical section (36-39) describes Isaiah’s mission to

king Hezekiah after the armies of Sennacharib devastated the land of Judah and the Rabshekah

delivered the conditions of surrender to the people standing on the walls of Jerusalem. In both

crises, God calls the prophet to deliver a message to the king of Judah.76

The first historical section foretells the destruction of Israel and Damascus by Assyria and the

invasion of Judah by the Assyrians – an invasion that is described in the 2nd

historical section.

The first historical section is sandwiched between a series of woes (5:8-30, 9:8-10:4) pronounced

by the prophet against Israel, Judah and Assyria. This series of woes, sometimes referred to as

‘The Woes of the Outstretched Hand’, are a series of indictments knit together by the oft-

repeated phrase, “ or all this his anger has not turned away and his hand is stretched out still...”

It is rather puzzling that the ‘Woes of the Outstretched Hand’ are separated by the insertion of

the historical account. It has been suggested that the placement of the historical section was

somewhat arbitrarily determined by the way several different scrolls were stitched together.

However, if we look closely at the way the ‘Woes of the Oustretched Hand’ are divided, we will

see that their division was not arbitrary. Although the woes share a common form, they address

76

Evidence for the continuity between the two historical sections is found in the mention of the exact location from

which the prophet delivered his message to Ahaz (7-9) and later Hezekiah (36-39) - the upper pool on the highway

to the uller’s ield.

34

different audiences. The first series of woes (5:18-30) precede the historical section and are

directed towards Judah. No mention is made of Israel or Assyria. This is in striking contrast to

the series of woes that follow the historical section. They are directed exclusively towards Israel

(cf. Is 5:14; Is 9:9) and Assyria (Is. 10). The final woe, addressed to Assyria, forms the climax

of this series of woes by breaking the pattern. Rather than concluding with the familiar phrase

“for all this his anger has not turned away, and his hand is stretched out still”, the prophet

concludes with its antithesis, “Very soon my anger against you will end and my wrath will be

directed to their [Assyria’s] destruction." (Is. 10:25)

The question remains, why do the first series of woes directed against Judah, precede the

historical section and why does the final series of woes directed against Israel and Assyria follow

the historical section? One reason may be that the final redactor(s) of Isaiah 1-12 wished to

contrast the dark and dismal fate of Israel and Assyria with the brilliant promise of the righteous

king and eternal kingdom foretold in 9:5,6. This suggestion assumes that the redactor(s)

arranged Is. 1-12 with the intention of maximizing the contrast between those who choose to

trust in God and those who make alliances with other nations and their gods. Another reason the

first series of ‘Woes’ directed towards Judah is separated from the others is that the ‘Woes’

pronounced by Isaiah against Judah (5:8-30) are repeated by the prophet Isaiah in his warning to

king Ahaz.

The first series of woes against Judah (5:8-

30)

The prophecies of judgment made by Isaiah

to King Ahaz in the Historical Section

Isaiah 5:10 For ten acres of vineyard shall

yield but one bath, and a homer of seed shall

yield but an ephah."

Isaiah 7:23 In that day every place where

there used to be a thousand vines, worth a

thousand shekels of silver, will become briers

and thorns.

Isaiah 5:13 Therefore my people go into exile Isaiah 7:20 In that day the Lord will shave

35

for lack of knowledge; their honored men go

hungry, and their multitude is parched with

thirst.

with a razor that is hired beyond the River--

with the king of Assyria--the head and the hair

of the feet, and it will sweep away the beard

also.

Isaiah 5:17 Then shall the lambs graze as in

their pasture, and nomads shall eat among the

ruins of the rich.

Isaiah 7:21-22 In that day a man will keep

alive a young cow and two sheep, and because

of the abundance of milk that they give, he will

eat curds, for everyone who is left in the land

will eat curds and honey.

Isaiah 5:26 He will raise a signal for nations

far away, and whistle for them from the ends of

the earth; and behold, quickly, speedily they

come!

Isaiah 7:18 In that day the LORD will whistle

for the fly that is at the end of the streams of

Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of

Assyria.

Isaiah 5:30 And if one looks to the land,

behold, darkness and distress; and the light is

darkened by its clouds.

Isaiah 8:22 And they will look to the earth,

but behold, distress and darkness, the gloom of

anguish. And they will be thrust into thick

darkness.

If the book of Isaiah had begun with the commission of Isaiah in chapter 6 then one would be left

wondering what Judah had done to deserve the sentence of judgment announced at Isaiah`s

commission and in his denouncement of king Ahaz. The first five chapters give us that needed

background.

36

Bibliography

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Isaiah 1-39. The Anchor Bible. Vol. Isaiah 1-39, Garden City, N.Y.,:

Doubleday, 1964.

Brekelmans, C., ed. Deuteronomic Influence in Isaiah 1-12. edited by J Vermeylen, Bibliotheca

Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Lxxxi: Leuven University Press.

Childs, Brevard S. Isaiah and the Assyrian Crisis. Studies in Biblical Theology 2nd Ser., 3.

London,: S.C.M. Press, 1967.

Cogan, Mordechai. The Raging Torrent. Jerusalem: Carta, 2008.

Cogan, Mordechai, and Hayim Tadmor. Ii Kings : A New Translation. The Anchor Bible. 1st ed.

Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1988.

Collins, John, ed. The Immanuel Prophecy. edited by John Day, Prophecy and Prophets in

Ancient Israel : Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, vol. 531. New York:

T & T Clark, 2010.

Davis, J. D., ed. The Child Whose Name Is Wonderful, Biblical and Theological Studies. New

York: Scribner, 1912.

Driver, Godfrey Rolles. "Isaiah 9:5-6." Vetus testamentum 2, no. 4 (1952): 357-57.

Emerton, J. A. "Some Linguistic and Historical Problems in Isaiah Viii. 23." Journal of Semitic

Studies 14, no. 2 (1969).

Freedman, David Noel. The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 1st ed. 6 vols New York: Doubleday,

1992.

Goldingay, John. "The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6)." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 61, no. 2

(1999): 239-44.

Gray, George, ed. Isaiah 1-39. edited by A. Plummer S.R. Driver, C.A. Briggs, The International

Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1969.

Hayes, John H., and Stuart A. Irvine. Isaiah, the Eighth Century Prophet : His Times & His

Preaching. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1987.

Ibn Ezra, Abraham ben Me r, and M. riedl nder. The Commentary of Ibn Ezra on Isaiah. 4 vols

London,: Pub. by N. Tr bner, 1873.

Irvine, Stuart A. Isaiah, Ahaz, and the Syro-Ephraimitic Crisis. Dissertation Series / Society of

Biblical Literature. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1990.

Ishida, Tomoo. The Royal Dynasties in Ancient Israel : A Study on the Formation and

Development of Royal-Dynastic Ideology. Beiheft Zur Zeitschrift R Die

Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 142. Berlin ; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1977.

Jo on, Paul, and T. Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Subsidia Biblica. Roma:

Pontificio istituto biblico, 2006.

Kaiser, Otto. Isaiah 1-12 : A Commentary. The Old Testament Library. 2nd ed. Philadelphia:

Westminster Press, 1983.

Keel, Othmar, Christoph Uehlinger, and Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Deutschsprachigen

Katholischen Alttestamentler und Alttestamentlerinnen. Gods, Goddesses, and Images of

God in Ancient Israel. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1998.

37

Keil, Carl Friedrich, and Franz Delitzsch. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand

Rapids,: Eerdmans.

Luckenbill, Daniel David. The Annals of Sennacherib. The University of Chicago Oriental

Institute Publications,. Chicago, Ill.,: The University of Chicago Press, 1924.

Machinist, Peter. "Assyria and Its Image in the First Isaiah." Journal of the American Oriental

Society 103, no. 4 (1983): 719-37.

Malamat, Abraham. Mari and the Bible. Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient near

East,. Leiden ; Boston: Brill, 1998.

Miller, J. Maxwell, and John H. Hayes. A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. 2nd ed.

Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006.

Neusner, Jacob, and William Scott Green. Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period : 450

B.C.E. To 600 C.E. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1999.

Oded, B. "The Historical Background of the Syro-Ephraimite War Reconsidered." Catholic

Biblical Quarterly 34 (1972): 153-65.

Rad, Gerhard von. The Problem of the Hexateuch and Other Essays. New York,: McGraw-Hill,

1966.

Rignell, Lars G. "Study of Isaiah 9:2-7." Lutheran Quarterly 7, no. 1 (1955): 31-35.

Schiffman, Lawrence H., and James C. VanderKam. Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. 2

vols New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Scholem, Gershom. Sabbatai Evi; the Mystical Messiah, 1626-1676. The Littman Library of

Jewish Civilisation. Revised and augmented translation ed. London,: Routledge & K.

Paul, 1973.

Snaith, Norman H. The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament. Schocken Paperbacks. New

York,: Schocken Books, 1964.

Sommer, Benjamin D. A Prophet Reads Scripture : Allusion in Isaiah 40-66. Contraversions :

Jews and Other Differences. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1998.

———. "Reflecting on Moses: The Redaction of Numbers 11." Journal of Biblical Literature

118, no. 4 (1999): 601-24.

Wildberger, Hans. Isaiah : A Continental Commentary. Continental Commentaries. 3 vols

Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.

Yadin, Yigael. Hazor: With a Chapter on Israelite Megiddo. The Schweich Lectures,. London,

New York,: Oxford University Press for the British Academy, 1972.