Isaiah: My favorite OT Book (and Why)

I am a business person by profession, one who strives to excel at profit enhancement in an ethical manner. That said, my postings so far have been mostly on historical, ethical, or Biblical issues. That is primarily because I have peer-reviewed material in these arenas. I am working on a couple of economic policy articles now, as well as one on how to change accounting systems in small and mid-sized companies, which should be posted in the near future.

This is the most academic paper I have written. If you are not interested in Old Testament studies, read no further. If you are interested, you will appreciate that Isaiah is the most quoted OT book in the New Testament, is loved by Jews and Christians alike, and is one of the most studied texts from the Ancient World. Part of the mystery and allure of Isaiah is that it is the only Biblical book that was found in its entirety in the Qumran (Dead Sea) Scrolls, and is so consistent with today's translations as to silence all but the most unreasonable critics as to the accuracy of scribal transmission of the Scriptures from generation to generation.

The authorship of Isaiah is controversial. No one disputes that the first 39 chapters were written by the son of Amaz in the 8th Century BC. But, there is a lot of scholarly debate as to whether he alone wrote all 66 chapters, or if there were one or two other authors for Chapters 40-66. See footnote 2 below if you are interested in pursuing that further.

This paper looks at six themes in Isaiah ... there were over twenty I could have chosen from, so I freely admit that I do not discuss a lot of things that people who love Isaiah might have wanted covered. I wrote more on Isaiah than any other topic in Seminary, and one of the two sermons I have preached was on Isaiah 52.13 - 53.6. I hope my love for this ancient text can be seen in the material that follows.

Fuller Theological Seminary, Houston Campus

Six Major Themes of the Book of Isaiah

The Hebrew Prophets (OT 502X)

Dr. Cynthia L. Engle

By: E. Marcus Jonesi

June 6, 2008

Few books of the Bible have received as much critical attention as the Book of Isaiah. Majestic in its imagery and broad in its thematic scope, Isaiah has captivated scholars throughout the ages as a one-book “summary of biblical theology.”[1] Historically viewed as the work of the prophet Isaiah of Jerusalem of the late eighth century b.c., this view has been challenged by many text- and form-critical scholars of the 19th and 20th centuries who believe the Book to be a compilation of the works of several different authors spanning a time period of as much as 500 years.[2] Recently, there has been a renewed interest in analyzing the book through a paradigm of thematic unity, and although scholars vary widely regarding authorship, there is a growing consensus that the Book has been arranged with intentionality to tell a story that runs throughout its 66 chapters. The purpose of this paper is to explore the overall unity of the Book of Isaiah by analyzing several major themes that appear to run throughout the Book.

Although this paper does not deal directly with the authorship issue, my personal belief cannot help but shape the analysis which follows, so a brief discussion of my conclusions regarding when Isaiah was written, and by whom, is warranted. Although there is clearly evidence of some editorial insertions, I believe that the Holy Spirit actively assisted Isaiah in “seeing” into the future and penning a series of prophecies that would help future generations to deal with issues they would face. I have been persuaded by historical tradition, by inference, and by the thematic unity that runs throughout the Book. By “historical tradition,” I mean two things: (1) “The unanimous testimony of tradition credits Isaiah with the authorship of the whole book” and (2) the New Testament writers introduced many OT quotations by saying something akin to “as was spoken by the prophet Isaiah.”[3] By inference, I mean that I agree with Ridderbos’ statement: “Deutero-Isaiah is taken to be one of the greatest prophets, if not the greatest prophet, of Israel; it would be surprising indeed if every trace of the greatest prophet had been so thoroughly effaced from tradition that his very name is unknown to us.”[4] To me, it is no more stunning for someone to predict something 300 years in the future as to predict something only three years in the future, and if God felt predisposed enough toward Isaiah to have a “face-to-face” with him at his commissioning, as is described at Chapter 6 of Isaiah, then the illumination of the Holy Spirit while Isaiah was speaking or writing his oracles is not “fantastic.”

1. A Commentary on Societal Dysfunction and Dynamics

Before looking at themes related to word studies or theological concepts, I will explore the position put forth by Walter Brueggemann that there is an overarching societal theme in each of the three major sections of Isaiah, and that each theme integrates symbiotically with the next.[5] Brueggemann views Isaiah as three separate books (First, Second, and Third Isaiah, as explained in the third option explained in my footnote 2 above), and argues that we see the progressive, or “dynamic,” unveiling of God’s plan through the successive movements of the three Isaiahs – that “each of the Isaiahs articulates a specific practice of social transformation.”[6]

Brueggemann views First Isaiah (Chs 1-39) as a carefully crafted lawsuit brought by God that enumerates His reasons for Judah’s eminent judgment. This section of Isaiah is not just general scolding or righteous indignation; rather, it is “a precise exposé of cultural practice and cultural value which engage in systemic perversion,” and a “judgment for a society and regime that is ordered against Yahweh’s purposes.”[7] Regarding systemic perversion, Isaiah makes his point succinctly at 5.20: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” When a society orders itself in direct contradiction to truth, when it promotes sin and punishes virtue, it cannot help but to fall: “Therefore my people will go into exile for lack of understanding (5.13).” Judgment is not so much something God has to proactively cause as it is something that is a natural consequence of the Israelite’s perversion; it is the reaping of what they have sowed.

Second Isaiah (Chs 40-55) deals with the emotional reaction of the people to what has happened to them in a societal reaction Brueggemann styles “the surfacing of, entry into and embrace of pain, regret and alienation.”[8] Here, he critiques Brevard S. Childs and Ronald E. Clements, both of whom he believes have Isaiah simply jump from judgment to promise, without allowing for an intermediary step or process of public mourning.[9] To Brueggemann, the purpose of the critique of ideology that was hammered home in First Isaiah was to allow the remnant to really understand their guilt and to get to a point of grief and abject despair from the fact that their former way of life as a sovereign nation was irretrievably gone. Now, in Second Isaiah, the “pastoral poet” acknowledges the pain and the grief of his community, speaking words of comfort (40.1; 49.13) in response to the people’s laments (40.27; 49.14), before moving on to hope and promise in the form of the Servant Songs and the assurance of a return from exile. Brueggemann’s main point here is that no real societal change is possible unless and until people come face to face with their flawed thinking, their misguided actions, and the resultant consequences that arise from these.

Third Isaiah, for Brueggemann, is the “release of social imagination,” the visioning or imagining of what the Jewish community and the world at-large could be. Here again, he asserts that the Israelites could not transition from an assault on their ideology (First Isaiah) to the formulation of an alternative imagination (Third Isaiah) without going through “the embrace of pain which unlooses the old givens and lets the maps be redrawn” (Second Isaiah).[10] The people had to see that their old way of thinking did not work before they could be open to new ways of thinking. Some of the new ways of thinking that Third Isaiah introduces are the ingathering of foreigners and eunuchs into the temple (56.3-8, both of which were prohibited under the Mosaic Law) and the idea that compassion and charity to others was more important than (or, the fulfillment of the requirements of) fasting (58.6-7).[11] This social imagination is both “this-worldly, earthly, and political” and “no substitute for policy implementation” – it describes what can be done here on earth, now, but leaves the implementation to others. Yet, as Brueggemann says: “Social policy depends upon social imagination, and will never go beyond it.”[12] Isaiah’s role was to expand the conceptualization of what was possible.

Brueggemann ends his article by stating that all three Isaiahs are subversive: “The first subverts ideology that does not want to be exposed. The second subverts a denial of pain that keeps people hopeless. The third subverts a world view that denies any alternative is possible.” To Brueggemann, Isaiah’s overall purpose was to expose the falsity of the societal mindset so that a new mindset could become possible.

Oswalt approaches this societal transformation issue in a similar, yet distinct, manner.[13] He views Chs 1-5 as a lengthy introduction that highlights Yahweh’s plan for His people Israel to be the source of salvation for the world while lamenting His inability to use them in that capacity in their corrupt and rebellious state. He then sees Chapter 6 as summarizing how God is going to resolve the national situation, utilizing the analogy of the individual call of Isaiah:

"Just as Isaiah needed to see both God and himself correctly (6.1-5), so did the nation (chs. 7-39). Just as Isaiah needed to receive the fiery, but ultimately gracious cleansing of God (6.6-7), so did the nation (chs 40-55). And just as Isaiah needed to receive God’s commission (6.8-13), so did the nation (chs.56-66)."

Where Brueggemann sees God exposing the falsity of the Jewish mindset, Oswalt sees God showing the nation the correct picture of Him and themselves. Where Brueggemann sees the nation entering into and embracing its pain, Oswalt sees God’s fiery but cleansing judgment. And, where Brueggemann sees the release of social imagination, Oswalt sees the nation receiving (and understanding) God’s commission for them. Both scholars see the three sections of Isaiah as describing a stair-step process by which Yahweh can be seen taking His people from where they start (rebellious, sinful, and perverted) to where He wants them to be (a purified people and the light of the world).

2. Jerusalem and the Zion Tradition

It is impossible to read the Book of Isaiah without quickly noting that Jerusalem and Zion are mentioned frequently and throughout all sections of the Book. The research stemming from this observation led William Drumbrell to conclude:

“If the book [of Isaiah] is read as a unit there is an overmastering theme which may be said effectively to unite the whole. This is the theme of Yahweh’s interest in and devotion to the city of Jerusalem….The interest in the fate of the historical Jerusalem and the eschatological hopes bound up with the notion of Jerusalem which the book of Isaiah develops can be seen to be the factor which provides the theological cohesion of this work and gives it its unitary stamp.”[14]

Ronald Clements finds the “thematic connection between the two major parts of the Book of Isaiah [to be] especially concerned with the fate of Jerusalem and with the Davidic dynasty.”[15] And, Lee Snook notes: “The Zion tradition is an important key to the message of all three of the Isaiah portions…”[16]

Clearly, many scholars believe the amalgamated concept of Jerusalem/the Davidic Dynasty/the Zion Tradition to be an important theme within Isaiah. In the OT, Zion is used 154 times and Jerusalem is found 660 times.[17] Both Zion and Jerusalem denote topographical locations – Zion being the southeast hill of the city of Jerusalem, which later became the site of the Jerusalem Temple – and both have deeper, theological meanings that came to be attached to them. Jerusalem, taken by conquest by King David (2 Sam 5), was later declared by Yahweh to be the place where He would chose to dwell among His people “in Zion” (Ps 132.13). The Zion tradition, as it developed in Israel over the roughly 300 years from David’s capture of Jerusalem until the time of Isaiah’s ministry, “blended two views of God’s relation to the world: (1) The view of God as related to a people who are nomadic escapees from slavery in Egypt, and (2) the view of God as related to a place, a holy mountain.”[18] God had created a people and moved in with them at Jerusalem.

By the time of King Hezekiah at the end of the eighth century b.c., the Zion tradition had evolved to a belief that the city of Jerusalem was inviolable since Yahweh “lived in” the Temple on MountZion. Judah’s personal God had chosen them and dwelled among them in a city He Himself had picked and sworn to defend “for [His] sake and for the sake of David [His] servant (37.35).” How, then, could the dwelling place of the Most High God be captured by armies of men?

It was this intellectual and spiritual stupor that Isaiah attacks in the first half of his Book, citing numerous examples of how corrupt the HolyCity had become and promising that God would bring judgment on His own city because it had been turned into a cesspool of sin by His people. Chapter 1 is a stinging indictment of all-things-Jerusalem: a sinful nation and people loaded with guilt (1.4), a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah (1.10), a whore of a city filled with murderers (1.21). Isaiah 3 is an entire chapter devoted to a very clear statement that God was going to destroy Jerusalem, a theme continued at 6.11-13 (Isaiah commissioned to preach until “the Lord has sent everyone far away and the land is utterly forsaken”); 22.1-14 (an oracle concerning “the Valley of Vision” that is clearly referring to a cataclysmic battle in Jerusalem’s future); 29.1-16 (woe to Ariel, the City of David); and, the entirety of Chapter 30 (which starts with “woe to the obstinate children, to those who carry out plans that are not mine”). Even Chapter 39, the last chapter of the “bridge” between the Book of Judgments and the Book of Comforts, ends with an assurance of being utterly conquered and destroyed by the King of Babylon. Isaiah is saying, “Zion tradition or no Zion tradition, this chapter of history is over…Jerusalem is being conquered and the Davidic dynasty is being brought to an end.”

Yet, just as with a phoenix, death precedes new birth. Corrupt Jerusalem is destroyed in the first part of Isaiah, but God is going to deliver his people back from exile to rebuild a “redeemed Jerusalem” (52.8-12) in the second part of the Book. Just two verses after Isaiah promised Hezekiah that Jerusalem will be destroyed and his families’ rule ended (39.7), God commands “comfort my people and proclaim to Jerusalem that her sin has been paid for (40.1-2).” Second Isaiah (to continue the nomenclature of Brueggemann) is a multi-chapter promise that the remnant will be delivered from Babylonian exile by Cyrus, the King of Persia, and that Zion will become not just the hope of the Jews but a Holy City that brings righteousness, salvation, and justice “to the nations (51.5).” Third Isaiah then further develops the idea of a bigger-and-better Jerusalem/Zion “for all nations (56.7),” climaxing with an eschatological description at Chapter 60 of a City on a Hill where nations are drawn to the light of Zion (60.3), the wealth and the riches on the nations are given to Jerusalem (60.5), and there is no further need of the sun or moon because the Lord would be their everlasting light (60.19-20). As John Watts says in the introduction to his commentary: “Through the Vision [the Book of Isaiah], God calls on Jews to discover their place in his new order rather than harking back nostalgically to the patterns of David and Joshua.”[19] Back from exile, the Davidic monarchy gone, and under the vassalage of foreign powers from this point forward, Jerusalem and Zion are nevertheless as important as ever in God’s dynamic, progressively-revealed plan. Oswalt captures the idea best as follows:

"A nation that has been made pure and clean, from which God is no longer alienated, but has taken up His residence, becomes such a manifestation of the validity of the Torah that the nations come streaming to learn it and to conform their lives to it."[20]

3. “The Holy One of Israel”

“If there is any one concept central to the whole Book of Isaiah, it is the vision of Yahweh as the Holy One of Israel.”[21] This phrase, or title for God, runs throughout the Book of Isaiah, being found 12 times in Chapters 1-37, 11 times in Chapters 38-55, and twice in Chapters 56-66.[22] By way of comparison, the phrase is only found five times outside the Book of Isaiah, and one of those five is in the parallel passage at 2 Kings 19.[23] That Isaiah was “impressed” by his visit to the throne room of heaven in Chapter 6 is written across the pages of his Book; he could not get God’s holiness out of his mind.

Holy (qād??, as an adjective) is a difficult word to define, because it is not a visible reality here on earth, and we frequently understand it only as a contrast to things in our fallen world. The Bible tells us that God is holy (6.3), we know that wherever He is, he makes things Holy (Ex. 3.5), and holiness is characterized by the Bible as being the opposite of the common/mundane (Lev 10.10). Judging from Isaiah’s reaction when placed in the heavenly court, it is terrifying to be in front of the holy God; he became extremely conscious of his sinfulness in comparison with God’s perfection and righteousness. Even the seraphim that serve and worship God at His throne cover their eyes and faces, so powerful is the holiness, or “otherness” of God.

Jackie Naudé defines the term “Holy One of Israel” as “reflecting the Lord’s supremacy over any competitors, his eternal being, as well as the fact that he is the sole object of Israel’s devotion, [serving] to place the sins of Isaiah’s society in contrast to God’s moral perfection (30.12) and express[ing] God’s absolute separation from evil (17.7).”[24] “He is not simply the Holy One, but the Holy One of Israel…though his glory transcends the confines of Jerusalem, its temple, and the Israelite people and fills the whole world, [Yahweh] is nonetheless enthroned there in the house, the city, and the people he chose.”[25]

Oswalt sees the basic idea of the holiness of God within the Bible as God’s transcendence, that which separates the divine from the merely human. Yet, when “of Israel” is added to “the Holy One,” God’s immanence with His people is declared as well. Thus, “He is the only Holy One in the universe, and yet he has chosen to become immanent in Israel.”[26] This polarity between transcendence and immanence is reflected in Isaiah’s usage of “The Holy One of Israel” within the Book. In the first half (through 37.23), the primary emphasis of the phrase is upon the absolute Lordship that extends from Yahweh’s transcendence. It is sin of the highest order to have spurned Him, His word, or His prophets (1.4; 5.24; 30.11), to exalt oneself at His expense (37.23), or to look to other countries and not Him for protection (31.1). From a positive aspect, in the future, the humble will rejoice in Him (29.19), proclaiming His holiness (29.23) and greatness (12.6).

Starting at Chapter 41, the emphasis changes dramatically in what Oswalt believes is “only explicable as a conscious development from the earlier chapters.” Here, Yahweh’s role as the Kinsman Redeemer and Savior of His people is stressed (41.14; 43.3, 14; 47.4; 48.17; 49.7; 54.5), as is His ability to manipulate the nations and creation for the benefit of His people Israel (41.20; 43.3, 14; 45.11). The ultimate goal of His immanence in the history of His people can be found at 60.14, that all “will call you the City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.”

Dr. Naudé offers this summary of what Oswalt defines as the “bipolarity” of Yahweh’s transcendence and immanence: “[H]e is sufficiently removed from his people to punish them without bias [transcendence], but he is also sufficiently powerful to create something utterly new after the punishment. Therefore, nations will run to the Holy One of Israel because he will glorify Israel (55:5) [immanence].”[27]

4. The Doctrine of the Remnant

The doctrine of the remnant is most articulated by the prophets of eighth century b.c., particularly by Amos and Isaiah.[28] The concept is closely tied to Isaiah’s message of redemption and salvation, as it is through Jerusalem’s purging and destruction that a pure remnant would be produced by God who could then be used to share Him with the world. That God was going to destroy the vast majority of the Jews and the City of Jerusalem was a certainty (10.22); but, that He was going to eventually bring a remnant back to Jerusalem-Zion was every bit as much a certainty (11.11). To summarize the remnant theology, as expounded by Oswalt: “The accumulated disobedience of many individual Israelites will ultimately bring the nation to destruction. But God will not give up the nation, and will ultimately find persons who will repent of the nation’s sins and thus become the basis of restoration.”[29]

Remnant theology is found very early in the Book of Isaiah. At 1.25, God declares that He intends to “thoroughly purge away [Jerusalem’s] dross and remove [Zion’s] iniquities.” Even earlier, at 1.9 we read: “Unless the Lord Almighty had left us [Jerusalem, here called the “Daughter of Zion”] some survivors, we would have become like Sodom…and Gomorrah.” The concept of a remnant can even be seen in Isaiah’s call, where God tells him to preach to a dull and senseless people “until the Lord has sent everyone far away,” and until “[only] a tenth remains in the land, [and that too] will again be laid waste” (6.12-13). In a review of a study written by G. F. Hasel, Craig Evans notes that Hasel believes that a remnant also is implied by Isaiah’s personal purification, which set him apart from people of “unclean lips,” and that Isaiah is a forerunner, or prototype, of the remnant that God will select to bring back to Zion.[30]

Chapter 7 deals with the remnant in a different way. In this account, God tells Isaiah to take his son Shear-Jashub – meaning “a remnant will return” – to an appointment he has with King Ahaz at the time of the Syro-Ephraimite crisis (ca. 734 b.c.). Isaiah gives King Ahaz detailed instructions to rely on Yahweh and not enter into an agreement with Assyria, which Ahaz ignores. Isaiah’s use of his son’s name is twofold, both threat and promise: The threat is that Judah will be reduced to a remnant; but, the promise is that there will at least be a remnant that will be spared. The remnant will be comprised of people of strong faith, like Isaiah and his disciples, and not people of weak faith, like King Ahaz, who would rather rely on political alliances than on the promises of Yahweh.[31] Isaiah warns Ahaz (and those like him): “If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all (7.9b),” which is what eventually came to pass through the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions.

The remnant is only mentioned three times in Chs 40-66 (44.17; 46.3; 49.21). Park believes “we may deduce that the remnant is viewed as already being refined through judgment and as having returned physically to the land and spiritually to the Lord.”[32] This interplay between judgment, purity, and the remnant is a theme that Oswalt also develops at length in many of his writings.[33]

5. Righteousness and Justice

Hebrew has two words for righteousness, “yā?ar” and “sādaq.” Yā?ar connotes more a sense of justice, integrity, straightforwardness, or honesty, whereas sādaq implies the maintenance of a proper, Torah-based relationship between people and Yahweh. Within Isaiah, the use of yā?ar predominately is topographical—“straight” highway, (40.3), “level” ground (40.4) or “leveled” mountains (45.2)—although it sometimes is used to describe that which is ethically “right” (45.19). Sādaq is used far more often by Isaiah (81 times), which he applies to the arena of social justice and the needs of the oppressed. It is sādaq that will be analyzed within this theme analysis.

“Mi?pāt” is the most significant Hebrew term used with reference to divine and human justice. It is paired more than 50 times with sādaq in the OT, most frequently translated as “justice and righteousness,” which is “best understood as a hendiadys[34] for ‘social justice,’ in which the order of the components is unimportant. Used by itself, it can either refer to divine justice (61.8) or human justice/injustice (10.2). Mi?pāt occurs more than 30 times in the Book of Isaiah.[35]

These two terms – justice and righteousness – are used throughout all three sections of the Book of Isaiah. Oswalt notes that the masculine and feminine noun forms of sādaq are used 61 times throughout Isaiah, spread fairly evenly throughout the Book, meaning that “it has importance for all three theological emphases the Book contains.”[36] However, he discerns differences in how righteousness is viewed within the three sections of Isaiah.[37] In First Isaiah, “righteousness is almost exclusively viewed as a kind of human behavior that is demanded by a righteous God,” a level of behavior that the nation generally fails to obtain (1.21; 26.2). In Second Isaiah, “the term is almost as exclusively used to describe God’s character as a deliverer.” In this section of the Book, God’s grace is manifested in the sense that, although legalistic righteousness would necessitate Yahweh’s destruction of the nation, His graciousness is displayed in the sense that He will deliver them through the righteousness of His Servant.[38] This idea is best illustrated at 46.12-13, where God says He will bring His righteousness near to the stubborn-hearted who are far from righteousness. Third Isaiah blends the two uses of righteousness from the preceding sections. At 56.1, God calls for both justice (mi?pāt) and righteousness (sādaq) to be exhibited by his redeemed people; the “how you should live” demand of First Isaiah is made possible through the “how God’s grace has delivered you” revelation of Second Isaiah. “There is to be a real change in the behavior of God’s servants, but that behavioral change is the result of appropriation of divine grace and not as a result of human effort.”[39] Hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus, Isaiah is describing the gospel in the same manner as did Paul, including God’s enabling of us to live righteously through the power of His Spirit.

6. The Sovereignty (or Incomparability) of Yahweh

As has been touched upon within previous sections, Yahweh is not a god, He is the only God. He is referred to as The Lord Almighty 61 times within Isaiah, 13 times by the double-emphasized The Lord, the Lord Almighty. He is the “first and the last;” apart from Him there is no God (44.6) and no savior (43.11). He is Israel’s Creator, a reference to how He made them a nation out of but one man, and “he as good as dead (Heb 11.12).”

He is the Creator of everything in the universe, and therefore, is sovereign over all that is in creation. This theme is especially prominent in Chapters 40-48, where Isaiah insists that there is nothing the Babylonian gods can do to prevent Him from reestablishing Judah and Jerusalem.[40] Before Him, all the nations are regarded as worthless and less than nothing (40.17). As regards His creative sovereignty over the universe,

Do you not know? Have you not heard?

Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded?

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers

He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

He brings princes to naught and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing…

“To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?” says the Holy One.

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these?

He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name.

Because of His great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing. (40.21-23, 25-26)

As regards the gods of Babylon,

The carpenter…cut down cedars, or perhaps took a cypress or oak….

Half of the wood he burns in the fire….

From the rest he makes a god, his idol; he bows down to it and worships.

He prays to it and says, “Save me; you are my god….”

Though one cries out to it, it does not answer; it cannot save him from his troubles. (44.13, 16, 17; 46.7)

Though Yahweh uses Assyria to punish Judah and Babylon to punish Jerusalem, Yahweh will have His way with both of them; Assyria’s demise is assured at 10.5-19 and Babylon’s certain destruction is prophesied at 13.19 and Chapter 47. Though Yahweh is not acknowledged by Cyrus of Persia, God will raise him up anyway for the sake of Jacob and Israel (45.4). Though Yahweh is “The Holy One of Israel,” Isaiah proclaims that He is nevertheless sovereign over all the nations:

The Lord is angry with all the nations; His wrath is upon all their armies.

He will totally destroy them, He will give them over to the slaughter. (34.2)

Isaiah also gives us a glimpse into what Yahweh intends to do in the distant and eschatological future. He will create new heavens and a new earth (65.17) and will be found by people (Gentiles) who did not seek Him (65.1). Foreigners will call Jerusalem “the City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel (60.14).” The sun and moon will no longer be necessary because “the Lord will be your everlasting light, and your God will be your glory…and your days of sorrow will end (60.19-20).”[41]

The Holy One of Israel is able to help Judah (41.20), is willing to help Judah (43.3), and is certain to help Judah (44.22, where Yahweh says he has “redeemed” Israel).[42] To a nation facing judgment (First Isaiah) or a remnant experiencing the pain and consequences of judgment, this knowledge had to be a powerful message of hope that allowed them to look forward to a brighter future.

-Concluding Remarks

The six themes reviewed in this paper—Societal Dysfunction and Dynamics, Jerusalem-Zion, “The Holy One of Israel,” the Doctrine of the Remnant, Righteousness and Justice, and the Sovereignty of Yahweh—all serve to knit a unity that runs throughout the Book of Isaiah. Each theme represents a significant theological concept that would have been of interest to God-fearers living in each of the three time periods embraced within the Book. All six of these themes can be found in each of the three Isaiahs, although they tend to have different emphases within the different sections. These six themes certainly are not the only ones in the Book; in fact, many significant themes have not been discussed due to space constraints. Nevertheless, these six themes, in the aggregate, do serve to prove to my satisfaction that the compiler(s) of the Book we call Isaiah did consciously and intelligently create a timeless document that told a story to its contemporaries and continues to tell a story to people of faith today.

No better concluding statement is available than that offered by Oswalt: “When the totality of Isaiah’s theology is surveyed, it can be seen that it is not without merit to suggest that Isaiah sums up biblical theology in a better way than does any other single book of the Bible.”[43] Amen.

Bibliography of Works Cited

Books

Grogan, Geoffrey W. Isaiah. Vol. 6, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.

Motyer, J. Alec. Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1999.

Oswalt, John N. Isaiah. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003.

Watts, John D.W. Isaiah. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word Books, 1985.

Periodicals and Journals

Brueggemann, Walter. “Unity and Dynamic in the Isaiah Tradition.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 29 (June 1984), 89-107.

Clements, Ronald Earnest. “The Unity of the Book of Isaiah.” Interpretation 36.2 (Apr 1982), 117-129.

Drumbrell, Willaim J. “The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah.” Tyndale Bulletin 36 (1985), pp. 111-128.

Evans, Craig A. “ISA 6.9-13 in the Context of Isaiah’s Theology.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29.2 (June 1986), 139-146.

Oswalt, John N. “The Book of Isaiah: A Short Course on Biblical Theology.” Calvin Theological Journal 39 (Apr 2004), 54-71.

. “God’s Determination to Redeem His People (Isaiah 9.1-7; 11.1-11; 26.1-9; 35.1-10.” Review and Expositor 88 (1991), 153-165.

. “Isaiah 52.13-53.12: Servant of All.” Calvin Theological Journal 40 (Apr 2005), 85-94.

. “Isaiah 60-62: The Glory of the Lord.” Calvin Theological Journal 40 (Apr 2005), 95-103.

Roberts, J.J.M. “Isaiah in Old Testament Theology.” Interpretation 36.2 (Apl 1982), 130-143.

Snook, Lee E. “Yahweh’s Changeless Purpose in the Changing History of Zion.” Word and World 3 (Fall 1983), pp. 448-461.

Dictionaries and Reference Works

New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis (electronic ed). VanGemeren, Willem A. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1975-c1999, CD-ROM.

. Naudé, Jackie A. “qāda? – Holy; holiness.”

. Olivier, Hannes. “yā?ar – Just; righteous.”

. Oswalt, John N. “Isaiah”

. Park, Sang Hoon. “?ā’ar – To remain; remnant.”

. Reimer, David J. “sādaq – Righteous; righteousness.”

. Schultz, Richard. “mi?pāt – Justice.”

The New Bible Dictionary (electronic ed). Wood, D.R.W. 3 Ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 1996, CD-ROM.

. N. H. Ridderbos, N.H. “Isaiah, Book of.”

The New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (electronic ed). Alexander, T. Desmond and Brian S. Rosner. Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 2003, CD-ROM.

. Oswalt, John N. “Isaiah”

The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (electronic ed). Kittel, Gerhard and Gerhard Friedrich, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 1964-c1976, CD-ROM.

. Fohrer, Georg. “Zion-Jerusalem in the Old Testament.”