Isaiah 1-39: The Christian Standard Commentary

By Gary V. Smith

Isaiah 1-39: The Christian Standard Commentary is part of The Christian Standard Commentary (CSC) series. This commentary series focuses on the theological and exegetical concerns of each biblical book, paying careful attention to balancing rigorous scholarship with practical application. 

This series helps the reader understand each biblical book's theology, its place in the broader narrative of Scripture, and its importance for the church today. Drawing on the wisdom and skills of dozens of evangelical authors, the CSC is a tool for enhancing and supporting the life of the church.

The author of Isaiah 1-39: The Christian Standard Commentary is Gary Smith.

• Language: English
• Publisher: BH Publishing Group
• Release date: Jan 15, 2022
• ISBN: 9781087750880

Gary V. Smith

Gary V. Smith has taught at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and Union University. Among his other published works are the two volumes on the book of Isaiah in The New American Commentary series.

Book preview

Table of Contents

Series Introduction

Preface to the First Edition

Preface to the Second Edition

Abbreviations

Introduction

1 God’s Threatened Court Case against His People (1:1–31)

2 Depending on Human Resources or Trusting God (2:1–12:6)

3 God’s Sovereign Plan for the Nations (13:1–23:18)

4 Trusting in God, Who Will Reign over All (24:1–27:13)

5 Do Not Trust in Enemies, Who Will Be Defeated (28:1–35:10)

6 Hezekiah’s Challenge to Trust God (36:1–39:8)

Bibliography

Name Index

Subject Index

Scripture Index

Gary Smith’s revised commentary on Isaiah 1–39 is to be welcomed by scholars and expositors. Smith provides careful and balanced analysis of texts and exhibits a thorough knowledge of past and recent scholarship. He affirms that Isaiah of Jerusalem is the book’s author, and he suggests contexts in Isaiah’s era for passages that some conservatives treat as purely predictive. Thus, he provides evidence that sustains traditional views of the book and its theology. I use Smith’s volumes for teaching and preaching Isaiah. I recommend it without hesitation.

Paul R. House, Professor of Divinity, Beeson Divinity School

Interpreters of the book of Isaiah will welcome this updated edition of Gary Smith’s important commentary on Isaiah 1–39, originally published in the NAC series in 2007. Smith is an insightful evangelical interpreter who engages the Hebrew text in its historical, cultural, and literary contexts. His work is exegetically solid and theologically perceptive. Pastors and teachers will find it helpful as they seek to explain the relevance of Isaiah’s message for modern Christians. I highly recommend this commentary as a go-to resource for students of Isaiah.

Robert B. Chisholm Jr., Chair and Senior Professor of Old Testament Studies, Dallas Theological Seminary

Isaiah 1-39

General Editors

E. Ray Clendenen

Brandon D. Smith

Series Associate Editors

Old Testament

R. Dennis Cole J. Gary Millar Andrew E. Steinmann

Heath A. Thomas

New Testament

Darrell L. Bock David S. Dockery Darian R. Lockett Richard R. Melick Jr.

Christian Standard Commentary: Isaiah 1–39

Copyright © 2021 by Gary V. Smith

All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978–1–5359–9658–7

Dewey Decimal Classification: 224.1

Subject Heading: BIBLE. O.T. ISAIAH — COMMENTARIES

Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the Christian Standard Bible®, copyright © 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2009, 2017 by Holman Bible Publishers. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked ESV are taken from The ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®). ESV® Permanent Text Edition® (2016). Copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. The ESV® text has been reproduced in cooperation with and by permission of Good News Publishers. Unauthorized reproduction of this publication is prohibited. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked GNT are taken from the Good News Translation® (Today’s English Version, Second Edition) copyright © 1992 American Bible Society. All rights reserved.

Scriptures quotations marked JPS are from TANAKH: A New Translation of THE HOLY SCRIPTURES according to the Traditional Hebrew Text. © The Jewish Publication Society, 1985. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked KJV are taken from the King James Version of the Bible, which is in the public domain.

Scripture quotations marked Moffatt are from The Bible, A New Translation. Copyright © 1954 by James A. R. Moffatt. Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.

Scripture quotations marked NASB are taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®, copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked NEB are from The New English Bible. © The Delegates of the Oxford University Press and the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press, 1961, 1970. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked NET are from from The NET Bible: The Translation That Explains Itself. © 1996, 1007, 1198, 2000, 2001, by Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV®, © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Scripture quotations marked NKJV is taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked NLT are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright © 1996, 2004, 2007 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked NRSV are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright

© 1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture quotations marked REB are from The Revised English Bible. Copyright © Oxford University Press and Cambridge University Press, 1989. Reprinted by permission.

Scripture quotations marked RSV are from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyright © 1946, 1952, and 1971 the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Printed in China

1 2 3 4 5 6 • 25 24 23 22 21

RRD

DEDICATION

To

My daughter and son-in-law, Christine and Randy Brunko

Our grandchildren, Ashley, Brett, and Mitchell

The children the Lord has given me are for signs and wonders (Isa 8:18)

series introduction

The Christian Standard Commentary (CSC) aims to embody an ancient-modern approach to each volume in the series. The following explanation will help us unpack this seemingly paradoxical practice that brings together old and new.

The modern commentary tradition arose and proliferated during and after the Protestant Reformation. The growth of the biblical commentary tradition largely is a result of three factors: (1) The recovery of classical learning in the fifteenth-sixteenth centuries. This retrieval led to a revival of interest in biblical languages (Greek and Hebrew). Biblical interpreters, preachers, and teachers interpreted Scripture based on the original languages rather than the Latin Vulgate. The commentaries of Martin Luther and John Calvin are exemplary in this regard because they return to the sources themselves (ad fonts). (2) The rise of reformation movements and the splintering of the Catholic Church. The German Reformation (Martin Luther), Swiss Reformation (John Calvin), and English Reformation (Anglican), among others (e.g., Anabaptist), generated commentaries that helped these new churches and their leaders interpret and preach Scripture with clarity and relevance, often with the theological tenets of the movements present in the commentaries. (3) The historical turn in biblical interpretation in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This turning point emphasized the historical situation from which biblical books arise and in which they are contextualized.

In light of these factors, the CSC affirms traditional features of a modern commentary, evident even in recent commentaries:

Authors analyze Old and New Testament books in their original languages.

Authors present and explain significant text-critical problems as appropriate.

Authors address and define the historical situations that gave rise to the biblical text (including date of composition, authorship, audience, social location, geographical and historical context, etc.) as appropriate to each biblical book.

Authors identify possible growth and development of a biblical text so as to understand the book as it stands (e.g., how the book of Psalms came into its final form or how the Minor Prophets might be understood as a book).

The CSC also exhibits recent shifts in biblical interpretation in the past fifty years. The first is the literary turn in biblical interpretation. Literary analysis arose in biblical interpretation during the 1970s and 1980s, and this movement significantly influenced modern biblical commentaries. Literary analysis attends to the structure and style of each section in a biblical book as well as the shape of the book as a whole. Because of this influence, modern commentaries assess a biblical book’s style and structure, major themes and motifs, and how style impacts meaning. Literary interpretation recognizes that biblical books are works of art, arranged and crafted with rhetorical structure and purpose. Literary interpretation discovers the unique stylistic and rhetorical strategies of each book. Similarly, the CSC explores the literary dimensions of Scripture:

Authors explore each book as a work of art that is a combination of style and structure, form and meaning.

Authors assess the structure of the whole book and its communicative intent.

Authors identify and explain the literary styles, poetics, and rhetorical devices of the biblical books as appropriate.

Authors expound the literary themes and motifs that advance the communicative strategies in the book.

As an ancient commentary, the CSC is marked by a theological bent with respect to biblical interpretation. This bent is a tacit recognition that the Bible is not only a historical or literary document, but is fundamentally the Word of God. That is, it recognizes Scripture as fundamentally both historical and theological. God is the primary speaker in Scripture, and readers must deal with him. Theological interpretation affirms that although God enabled many authors to write the books of the Bible (Heb 1:1), he is the divine author, the subject matter of Scripture, and the One who gives the Old and New Testaments to the people of God to facilitate her growth for her good (2 Tim 3:16–17). Theological interpretation reads Scripture as God’s address to his church because he gives it to his people to be heard and lived. Any other approach (whether historical, literary, or otherwise) that diminishes emphasis on the theological stands deficient before the demands of the text.

Common to Christian (patristic, medieval, reformation, or modern) biblical interpretation in the past two millennia is a sanctified vision of Scripture in which it is read with attention to divine agency, truth, and relevance to the people of God. The ancient commentary tradition interprets Scripture as a product of complex and rich divine action. God has given his Word to his people so that they may know and love him, glorify him, and proclaim his praises to all creation. Scripture provides the information and power of God that leads to spiritual and practical transformation.

The transformative potential of Scripture emerges in the ancient commentary tradition as it attends to the centrality of Jesus Christ. Jesus is the One whom God sent to the world in the fullness of time, and about whom the OT anticipates, testifies to, and witnesses to. Further, he is the One whom the NT presents as the fulfillment of the OT promise, in whom the church lives and moves and has her being, and who the OT and NT testify will return to judge the living and the dead and who will make all things new.

With Christ as the center of Scripture, the ancient commentary tradition reveals an implicit biblical theology. Old and New Testaments work together as they reveal Christ; thus, the tradition works within a whole-Bible theology in which each testament is read in dialectic relationship, one with the other.

Finally, the ancient commentary tradition is committed to spiritual transformation. The Spirit of God illumines the hearts of readers so they might hear God’s voice, see Christ in his glory, and live in and through the power of the Spirit. The transformational dimensions of Scripture emerge in ancient commentary so that God’s voice might be heard anew in every generation and God’s Word might be embodied among his people for the sake of the world.

The CSC embodies the ancient commentary tradition in the following ways:

Authors expound the proper subject of Scripture in each biblical book, who is God; further they explore how he relates to his world in the biblical books.

Authors explain the centrality of Jesus appropriate to each biblical book and in the light of a whole-Bible theology.

Authors interpret the biblical text spiritually so that the transformative potential of God’s Word might be released for the church.

In this endeavor, the CSC is ruled by a Trinitarian reading of Scripture. God the Father has given his Word to his people at various times and in various ways (Heb 1:1), which necessitates a sustained attention to historical, philological, social, geographical, linguistic, and grammatical aspects of the biblical books which derive from different authors in the history of Israel and of the early church. Despite its diversity, the totality of Scripture reveals Christ, who has been revealed in the Old and New Testaments as the Word of God (Heb 1:1; John 1:1) and the One in whom all things hold together (Col 1:15–20) and through whom all things will be made new (1 Cor 15; Rev 21:5). God has deposited his Spirit to his church so that they might read spiritually, being addressed by the voice of God and receiving the life-giving Word that comes by Scripture (2 Tim 3:15–17; Heb 4:12). In this way, the CSC contributes to the building up of Christ’s church and the Great Commission to which all are called.

preface to the first edition

The prophet Isaiah speaks with clarity and emotion against the proud people of his day that arrogantly thought they were in full control of their world. Although King Uzziah trusted in large armies, a land full of silver and gold, and impressive walled cities with magnificent towers, the prophet Isaiah reminded him that God would humble the proud, for his ultimate plan was to glorify and exalt himself alone. Later King Ahaz proudly refused to trust God for deliverance when he was hopelessly outmatched in a war with Syria and Israel, so God reduced him to being a vassal of Assyria. These kings of Judah were no different from the proud king of Assyria, who claimed that it was his hand, his wisdom, and his power that would crush the surrounding nations. Isaiah also prophesied the end of Israel’s arrogance, the devastation of Moab for its pride, boasting, and haughtiness, and the humbling of the glorious pride of Tyre. Isaiah is particularly hard on political and religious leaders who arrogantly misuse their power.

Isaiah believed the only hope for mankind is centered in trusting God, not in blindly refusing to listen to his offers of salvation. Those leaders that had a hardened heart and closed ears that refused to hear the voice of God would eventually suffer under the judgment of God’s almighty hand. Isaiah faithfully offered many words of hope for the present situation of his listeners as well as assurances of God’s eschatological plan to establish peace and to provide a Davidic ruler on the throne of David. But even his most positive appeals caused few to turn from the stubborn path of pride. Although Hezekiah initially failed to trust God, when the Assyrians surrounded Jerusalem, he eventually admitted his weakness and threw himself on the strong arms of our merciful God and trusted him.

These ancient words of admonition, rebuke, and hope still ring in the ears of every person who is willing to listen to God’s voice. Individually and as a community, the people of God today need to humble themselves, to fully submit to the Holy One who calls them, and to faithfully trust the God who controls this world. The poor miner, the hardworking farmer, the destitute unemployed factory worker, and the sick cancer patient know how to live a humble life because they have nothing, and they must trust God for survival each day. God is compassionate to help many of these who trust him, but he is deeply concerned with the affluent and powerful who all too often trust in their own power. Those in positions of significant leadership in business and the state, as well as those who lead the church and its institutions, must learn to trust him for everything they do. Power and leadership can mix with trust in God and trust in fellow believers if responsibility and control are shared. Isaiah and Jesus were spiritual leaders in their communities, but neither operated from an authoritative platform that autocratically controlled or micromanaged those around them. True spiritual power and leadership are not something one can gain by political maneuvers or votes; a position of service is graciously granted by God and gladly affirmed by those who see the hand of God and the gifts of the Spirit exhibited in a fellow traveler with leadership ability. One can only pray that the spiritual leaders of the future will have ears that hear what God communicated though the prophet Isaiah.

Writing a commentary on the prophecies of Isaiah can almost be compared to climbing Mount Everest. The challenge is more than formidable; daily patience and great endurance are required for each step of the way, and the dangers of failure are evident at every turn. So many great servants of God have commented on Isaiah’s messages in books and articles that it is almost impossible to read and assimilate them all. So many different opinions and interpretations of the meaning of Isaiah’s words are presented that it sometimes seems unnecessary to add one more opinion. Yet as one works step-by-step through the literature, it becomes evident that some have seriously failed to understand the nature of true prophecy, and others have offered grand theories about dating, authorship, and meaning that stray far from the evidence. My prayer is that each reader of this study will be better informed about the key issues surrounding the interpretation of Isaiah’s words, better equipped to make important decisions about the text, syntax, historical setting, literary context, composition, genre, meaning, and application of Isaiah’s message. Although we trust in God’s Spirit to teach us and lead us into all truth, it is incumbent that every reader to know as much as possible about the interpretive issues surrounding each text, and to humbly communicate an interpretation that is faithful to the author’s original meaning.

Although at times one may feel the heavy weight of personal responsibility for each word that is written and the loneliness of the daily grind, the results derive from a collaboration of a host of fellow travelers earnestly searching for the best interpretation. I gladly acknowledge the contributions of former teachers and colleagues. I thank God for those who have helped shape my approach to the Hebrew text and biblical interpretation. Although I learned much from past commentators, the works of H. Wildberger and W. A. M. Beuken were the most helpful in dealing with interpretive issues, even though some of their theological conclusions were unacceptable. I also owe a great debt to those who reviewed, challenged, and made suggestions that have greatly improved this study. A special word of thanks should be expressed for E. Ray Clendenen as well as the staff at Broadman and Holman who edited, refined, and prepared the manuscript for publication. Although I finished the commentary on chapters 1–39 in November 2005, I am thankful that the publisher has allowed me to add a few references to more recent works in the final editing of this volume. Unfortunately, major commentaries like H. G. M. Williamson’s ICC volume on Isaiah 1–5 came too late for inclusion in this work. I want to thank my wife Susan Smith and Jacob Shatzer, a student at Union University, who proofread almost everything in Isaiah 1–39. Their suggestions have made the final product more readable.

I am dedicating this volume to our daughter Christine and her family. Every believing parent entrusts each child to God even before they are born, not knowing what path that child will choose or what problems they will face as they grow and mature. One can only thank God for his grace in guiding them to marry a fellow believer, faithfully serve in a church, and raise grandchildren in a Christian home. My prayer is that God’s work of grace in the heart of my children and grandchildren (like Isaiah’s children in 8:18) will be signs and wonders to all those who know them. In all these things the glory goes to God.

Gary V. Smith

Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, 2007

preface to the second edition

A second edition grants an author the opportunity to correct and improve what was written earlier. This revision makes it possible to supplement an argument in order to make it more convincing, to clarify a rather obscure theological point, or to wrestle with the translation of a biblical text. One of the key changes involves the integration of the Christian Standard Bible (CSB) translation into the exegetical interpretation of the text, but it also provides an opportunity to introduce some new ideas from recent journal articles and books. Some of the most significant additions were triggered by considering the evidence presented in a detailed study of the Assyrian background of the book of Isaiah, S. Z. Aster, Reflections of Empire in Isaiah 1–39: Responses to Assyrian Ideology (2017). Although some of his analysis may be modified as others reflect on his suggestions, there is much to learn from his study of the imperial ideology of Assyria. This ideology was centered around the chief Assyrian god Assur, ruler of the heavens and the one who authorized the king of Assyria to rule the four corners of the human world. This ideology was legitimatized by the meteoric rise of the Assyrian nation, which in turn legitimatized the Assyrian claim of supremacy. Nevertheless, these Assyrian ideas were in direct conflict with Isaiah’s belief in Yahweh’s universal kingship, so his preaching about Yahweh’s power and the need to trust Yahweh became a strong counter to this Assyrian propaganda. Countering the Assyrian claims was the defeat of Sennacherib and his god recounted in Isa 37:36, an event that convincingly proved Yahweh’s supremacy.

In addition, there was much to learn from new commentaries such as those by Williamson, Raabe, House, and Roberts. I have tried not to burden the reader with too much additional reading but have sharpened the argument in a few cases (e.g., Isa 7:16) and added numerous footnotes. My interpretation of most significant theological issues has not changed much, and I still find little evidence to support the redactional theories which seem to subjectively fragment the literary unity of so many messages. I continue to see great theological and practical importance embedded in Isaiah’s preaching.

I want to thank the publishing staff at B&H for their excellent efforts in editing and producing this commentary. My prayer is that God will use these words by Isaiah to convince those who read them to trust in the God who has a master plan for the whole world, a plan that no one can stop, for his outstretched hand is sure to accomplish it (Isa 14:25–27).

May his glory be proclaimed by all!

Gary V. Smith, 2021

Saint Paul, Minnesota

abbreviations

ISAIAH 1–39

introduction outline

1 Contemporary Meaning and Relevance of Isaiah

2 Historical and Religious Background of Isaiah 1–39

2.1 The Time of Uzziah and Jotham

2.2 The Time of Ahaz

2.3 The Time of Hezekiah

3 The Life and Role of the Prophet Isaiah

3.1 Overview of Isaiah’s Life

3.2 The Role of the Prophet

4 The Masoretic Text and Other Text Traditions

4.1 MT and Dead Sea Scrolls

4.2 MT and the Greek Texts

4.3 MT and the Aramaic Targum

5 Composition of Isaiah 1–39

5.1 Early Perspectives

5.2 Some Modern Scholarly Approaches

5.2.1 Source Criticism

5.2.2 Composition by a Prophetic School

5.2.3 Redactional Approaches

5.2.4 Rhetorical Argumentation

5.2.5 A Canonical Perspective

5.3 Signs of Compositional Design and Structure in 1–39

5.3.1 The Structure of the Literary Units

5.3.2 Purpose

6 Theology of Isaiah 1–39

6.1 Finding Unity within Diversity

6.2 Trust the Holy God, Ruler of the World

6.2.1 The Holy One

6.2.2 All the World

6.2.3 Trust the Ruler

introduction

Most Bible readers are aware of those passages in Isaiah that introduce important theological themes about the Messiah that were fulfilled in the NT (e.g., Isa 53). Others have heard about some of the prophet’s unusual experiences that stand out as pivotal events strongly impacting his life. The glorious appearance of Israel’s holy God on his throne in the temple (6:1–8) is one such event that captures the imagination of all who read it. The wonder of the moment is enchanting, as Isaiah observed the seraphim proclaiming God’s holiness and as he saw a glimpse of the glory of God sitting on a high throne. One can almost visualize the prophet bowing and humbly confessing his sins. Many have heard sermons that challenged listeners to follow the example of Isaiah and be willing to go and serve God wherever he might send them (6:8). Another well-known event might be Isaiah’s words of hope to Judah’s king Ahaz during the Syro-Ephraimite War (734–732 BC) and his subsequent prediction that a virgin would bear a son called Immanuel (7:1–14). Equally memorable is the story of the Assyrian attack on Jerusalem during the days of Hezekiah (36:1–37:38). In response to Hezekiah’s prayer, God sent an angel to kill 185,000 Assyrian troops in order to deliver the city of Jerusalem. Of course, in Christian theology few passages are as central as those about the coming servant of the Lord who will establish justice on the earth (42:1–4), be a covenant and light to the nations (42:6–7; 49:6), and then suffer and die for the sins of all the world (52:12–53:12). These memorable passages only scratch the surface of Isaiah’s most important messages, and in some ways they tend to draw attention away from all the other equally important ideas the prophet communicated to his audience.

1 Contemporary Meaning and Relevance of Isaiah

Sometimes relevance is attached to a verse because readers intuitively know that the prophet’s words have a significant application to their life. But what someone proposes as a relevant application may not always make sense to others. Although these supposedly natural or self-evident insights sometimes are meaningful ways of applying the prophet’s theology to some modern situation, it is important to think systematically about the process of discovering the relevance of God’s Word so that (a) more of those verses that are not intuitively meaningful can become applicable, (b) embarrassing misapplications that are not truly based on the meaning of a biblical text can be avoided, and (c) a well-thought-out system of discovering the relevance of ideas in ancient biblical literature can be developed.

The first step in the process of finding contemporary relevance in an ancient text is to discover the meaning each passage had in its original setting. What did Isaiah’s words mean or convey to his audience? This raises the issue of defining the meaning of the Hebrew words he employed, the grammatical forms used to express these ideas, the temporal setting of the audience, and the theological worldview of the audience. Why was he speaking these words to them? Since Isaiah’s message was directed to a sixth-century audience on the verge of national crisis, it only indirectly relates to people today. The key that enables the modern reader to discover an indirect relevance comes from (a) understanding the meaning of the prophet’s message to his audience, (b) developing broad theological principles from these specific incidents and teachings, and (c) finding analogies between the OT theological teaching and the modern world today.

Consequently, a clear understanding of the original meaning of Isaiah’s words must precede any attempt to make an application. In the commentary section below, the focus will be on determining the meaning of Isaiah’s messages to his original audience by following the exegetical process of interpreting the Hebrew words he spoke in light of their semantic, grammatical, and syntactic meaning in that historical setting. This should enable the modern reader to comprehend what the original audience understood when the prophet spoke. Once the first step is complete, one can formulate some theological principle from that passage. From time to time within the commentary, theological principles are suggested in the final Theological Implications section of the commentary, and a few questions of application are broached.

Since Assyria does not exist anymore, Isaiah’s message of woe on Assyria and its proud king in 10:5–19 does not apply directly to the situation in any modern nation. Based on the authority of God’s prophetic word, one cannot say God was predicting the demise of Brazil or any other country today, because that was not what the prophet said. He specifically addressed only the fall of Assyria at that time. Nevertheless, timeless theological principles are illustrated in the way God dealt with this particular proud king of Assyria. When one finds similar divine attitudes toward other proud people in Isaiah (cf. 2:9–12, 17, 22; 3:16; 13:19; 16:5–6) and other books of Scripture, one can hypothesize that God has a timeless, consistent theological approach to dealing with leaders who proudly ignore God and pretend they are sovereignly in control of the future. Discovering broad theological principles consistent with God’s instructions in other passages helps the reader distinguish between ideas that are bound by time and those principles that broadly define God’s ways throughout Scripture.

Sometimes seeing how a principle might apply in contemporary situations can be difficult. Could one suggest that the principles drawn from God’s dealings with the proud king of Assyria might apply to arrogant presidents or prime ministers of nations today? Might that principle function today as a word of warning to governors or mayors who ignore God’s role in controlling modern history, or could it even be a sober reminder for bosses in industry and principals in schools not to take too much credit for accomplishing things God actually does? Although the biblical text does not speak directly to these situations, the principle is that pride often causes leaders to ignore God’s sovereignty and arrogantly claim authority and power over things they do not fully control.

Another central theological theme in the book of Isaiah is the challenge to trust God.¹ Issues related to trusting God will repeatedly come up as theological principles that could be relevant to life today. Many people in the self-sufficient modern world, proudly independent of God’s guidance, want to control their own future rather than trust God.

For example, during King Uzziah’s reign people were wealthy, safe (2:7), and proud (3:16–17). They trusted in their own human ability to provide happiness and success (2:22) and thought they did not need God. They were not exalting God alone; instead, they were exalting themselves (2:11, 17). Their pride caused God to send the prophet Isaiah to warn the people of Judah not to trust in mankind (2:22) but to trust God and glorify him. If they did not repent and start exalting God, he would destroy their land and take away their pride. He would demonstrate that he alone is God and is in control of their lives. The principles that guided God’s way of dealing with the wealthy who proudly trusted themselves have not changed.

Similar theological principles are evident in a different situation a few years later when the weak king Ahaz was threatened with total defeat following the foreign invasion of Judah and her subsequent destruction (except the city of Jerusalem; 7:1; 1 Kgs 16; 2 Chr 28). Isaiah approached Ahaz and told him not to fear these armies but to trust God for victory over his enemies (7:4–9). Unfortunately, Ahaz refused to trust God but instead called on the Assyrian king Tiglath-pileser III to deliver him from those who were attacking Jerusalem (2 Kgs 16:7–9). Because Ahaz was unfaithful to God and failed to trust him, God brought great judgment on the land (7:18–25). Here again those who proudly fail to trust God are humbled, but in a unique setting different from the situation Uzziah faced.

As one traces the themes of pride and trust through the messages of this book, one discovers the consistent theological message that (a) in all kinds of situations God hates pride and will destroy the proud; and (b) it pleases God for people to trust in him for the forgiveness of sins, for security from their enemies, for guidance in the future, and for their eternal hope. The theological principles within Isaiah’s challenge can become relevant today as we identify our leaders’ failure to trust God for guidance and our own acts and words of pride that take credit for things only God can do. Of course, just finding a relevant application is not the holy grail of all Bible study. The real sign of relevance is the text functioning to actually bring about a transformation of a person’s thinking and behavior. The purpose of application is only fulfilled when there is a Spirit-engendered response of repentance, trust in God, and commitment to glorify God.

2 Historical and Religious Background of Isaiah 1–39

Reading Isaiah’s messages in isolation from its historical context is comparable to overhearing a person talk on the phone without knowing who is on the other end of the line and what the situation is. For example, an intelligent interpreter needs to know what events in Judah caused the prophet to condemn the leaders of Judah for trusting in Egyptian horses and chariots (31:1). Why would Isaiah condemn Hezekiah for showing all the treasures of Judah to the Babylonian king Merodach-baladan (39:1–4)? What was the point of Isaiah’s walking around naked for three years (20:1–4)? If one knows nothing about the setting, how is it possible to figure out what Isaiah meant in 8:12 when he said people should not fall into the trap of becoming fearful about talk of a conspiracy? This last admonition may be understood only in connection with events surrounding the Syrian and Israelite military attack on Judah in 734 BC. In this setting people in Jerusalem were hearing all kinds of rumors about a coup, the possibility of a new king being imposed on them (7:6), and how the war progressed. Isaiah makes the persuasive exhortation that people would be far better off if they would fear God (8:13) rather than surrender to hypothetical fears. Knowing some basic facts about the background of a passage helps make sense of Isaiah’s advice to his audience. If one cannot identify the political, social, and religious situation of the nation in these incidents, there is no context for interpreting what the prophet was saying. S. Z. Aster’s analysis of numerous chapters in Isa 1–39 uncovered many examples where the author of Isaiah uses the language, phrases, and motifs that were similar to the language used in Assyrian imperial texts. Some of these examples challenge the ideology of the Assyrian Empire and are a reaction against Assyrian thinking.²

Although some modern scholars like T. Thompson believe the Bible is a useless document for reconstructing the history of Israel,³ many think a careful use of the historical evidence in the Bible is legitimate.⁴ One must remember that ANE documents give a slanted version of the historical story from the author’s perspective. The same thing is true of Israelite authors. Israel’s historical authors and the prophets wrote from an Israelite point of view that understood God as the one who controlled and directed history.⁵ Thus, the biblical accounts primarily give a theological interpretation of the significance of events and provide only a fraction of the whole story. There is seldom a complete picture of an event because authors had limited information and a limited amount of space to tell the story. Selectivity was required to accomplish the purpose God designed for each message. The biblical author’s purpose was not to give a completely objective and unbiased representation of all the historical evidence; in fact, no writer modern or ancient can do that, for everyone sees events through the colored lenses of his or her own experience. Nevertheless, in many prophetic messages bits and pieces of historical information enable one to make general comments about the political and religious setting of Isaiah and his audience.

Some chapters are historically located in the reign of a certain king and can be given an exact date (e.g., the death of 185,000 Assyrians outside of Jerusalem in 701 BC in 37:36), but most are loosely connected to a general setting. Sometimes the only thing one knows about the setting are a few bits of information, but careful attention to the setting can produce significant insight. On rare occasions an ANE document, like an account in Sennacherib’s annals, describes a campaign against some rebellious vassals and includes events somewhat parallel to Isa 36–37.⁶ Since Isaiah was not writing a history book or trying to give a complete list of all the historical events in his life, one should not expect to find a great deal of this kind of specific corroborated information.

The prophet’s purpose was focused on delivering a theological message to various audiences in Judah, so the interpreter has to search through his words for hints about the political and religious situation imbedded in his rhetoric. Some of the prophet’s theological statements about God’s sovereignty reflect not only Israelite beliefs but also serve as polemical statements that undermined the Assyrian ideological belief in the sovereignty of the Assyrian Empire, its king, and its gods.⁷ Careful observation of these factors will assist in making sense of the prophet’s messages.

2.1 The Time of Uzziah and Jotham

The superscription of the book of Isaiah claims that the prophet’s ministry began during the time of Uzziah and Jotham (1:1). The reference to Judah’s wealth and strong military power (2:7) suggest that these messages were delivered in the later part of Uzziah’s reign, after he had attained considerable prosperity and military strength. This was the time when Uzziah would be tempted to become proud (2 Chr 26:6–16). Though there is little information to pinpoint the exact years Isaiah spoke during the reign of Uzziah, one could hypothesize that most of these messages came between 750 BC and 740 BC, after the king’s acts of pride, though an exact date is unknown. If the prophet spoke at this time, Jotham was coregent and running the country because Uzziah was secluded from the public on account of his leprosy.

From a political and military point of view, Uzziah’s success in the first part of his reign can be attributed to the weakness of the Assyrian kings Shalmaneser IV (783–773 BC), Asshur-dan III (773–754 BC), and Asshur-nirari V (754–746 BC). Famines, revolts, and succession problems prevented these kings from expanding Assyrian influence, though Asshur-nirari V is known to have imposed a treaty with Mati’ilu, ruler of Bit-Agusi, in the area around Arpad.⁸ During these days Assyria was torn by internal strife and impacted by external pressure from the kingdom of Urartu in the north.⁹ This freed Uzziah from Assyrian interference and enabled him to consolidate his control over the Philistines, Meunites, Arabs, and the Ammonites (2 Chr 26:6–8). He was able to refortify the gates and walls of Jerusalem (2 Chr 26:9) and ensure the security of the nation by training a massive army of 307,500 elite men of war. He equipped them with the best armor and fighting tools and invented various machines that would shoot arrows and throw stones from the walls of Jerusalem. In addition to all this, Uzziah opened a new seaport in Elath (2 Kgs 14:22) and promoted a strong agricultural use of the land (with new towns, wells, and defensive walls), even in the somewhat desert area in the south, called the Negev (2 Chr 26:10).¹⁰ The biblical record provides a theological reason for Uzziah’s success, for at the beginning of his rule he was willing to listen to the prophet Zechariah, who instructed him in the ways of God. Thus Uzziah was viewed as one who did what was right in the eyes of the Lord (2 Chr 26:4–5 NIV). However, Uzziah did not destroy the popular high places where people worshiped other gods (2 Kgs 15:15), and Isaiah condemns the presence of idols (2:8, 20), rampant social oppression (3:11–15; 5:23), and those who disrespect God by rejecting his covenant laws (5:24).

The building of Uzziah’s impressive legacy was interrupted when he proudly went into the temple in Jerusalem and burned incense to God, in spite of the objections of eighty priests. In anger Uzziah did what only the priests were supposed to do, so God struck him with leprosy (2 Chr 26:16–20). From that time on, Jotham his son ruled as coregent for about ten years until Uzziah died around 740 BC. Isaiah’s messages were probably spoken in this final period of Uzziah’s life, though there is no record that he ever spoke directly to this king. This kind of internal evidence suggests (though it cannot prove) that most of the material in chaps. 2–5 (some oracles lack datable evidence¹¹) fits well during the time of Uzziah and Jotham.¹²

Some commentators do not accept this background evidence from the time of Uzziah because they believe 6:1–13 was Isaiah’s inaugural call, which is chronologically out of order.¹³ If 6:1–13 was Isaiah’s inaugural calling, then all of Isaiah’s messages must have come after the death of Uzziah (6:1). This alternative approach suggests that the oracles in chaps. 2–5 were given in the time of Ahaz, but most of the military factors listed above do not fit the period of Ahaz. Since the background for chaps. 2–5 matches the time of Uzziah, the prophet’s experience in 6:1–13 must be interpreted as a redirection of his calling to prepare him for a new, more difficult period of ministry during the reign of Ahaz.¹⁴

2.2 The Time of Ahaz

The background for chaps. 7–11 and a few of the oracles against the nations in chaps. 13–23 fit the reign of Ahaz (14:28–32). The death of Uzziah in 6:1 signals this change in rulers, and Isaiah’s personal conversation with Ahaz about the Syro-Ephraimite War in chap. 7 verifies a date around 734–732 BC for that chapter.

Life in the ANE changed dramatically when the Assyrian Tiglath-pileser III became king (745–727 BC). He took back territory in the mountainous area of Urartu to the north and east of Assyria when he defeated Sardur II. Later he defeated Babylon in 729 BC and took the name Pulu, King of Babylon. He conducted campaigns to the western territories around 743 BC to take control of Arpad and other small states.¹⁵ By 738 BC Tiglath-pileser III had received tribute from the western states of Hamath, Tyre, Byblos, Damascus, and the northern nation of Israel (Menahem paid tribute to him in 2 Kgs 15:19).¹⁶ Although some earlier Assyrian kings followed a gradual process of vassalage,¹⁷ this powerful new king exerted his control over defeated areas by deporting people from a rebellious land, reducing the territory of that state, and turning the territory into an Assyrian province.

In 734–732 BC Tiglath-pileser III came west to confront an anti-Assyrian alliance by King Rezin of Damascus and King Pekah of Israel (2 Kgs 16). These two vassals of Assyria were trying to force Ahaz to join them in a coalition against Assyria. Since Ahaz refused to join this coalition, Rezin and Pekah attacked him in order to replace Ahaz with a ruler more sympathetic to their plans (Isa 7:1–6). After Syria and Israel defeated most of Judah’s forces (2 Chr 28:6–8 reports the death of 120,000 soldiers), Ahaz called on Tiglath-pileser III to help him (2 Chr 28:16). But when the Assyrian king came, he not only defeated Syria, turning it into an Assyrian province (732 BC) and took land and taxes from Israel (2 Kgs 15:29); he also made Ahaz an Assyrian vassal and required a heavy tribute from him (2 Chr 28:20–21). A successful Edomite and Philistine attack on Judah provided further evidence of Ahaz’s military weakness (2 Chr 28:17–18).

When Tiglath-pileser III died in 727 BC, his son Shalmaneser V (727–722 BC) succeeded him and immediately dealt with rebellion in Babylon.¹⁸ In 725 BC he came west and besieged Samaria for three years until it fell in 722/721 BC, the year Sargon II came to the throne.¹⁹ These military events did not affect Judah directly, though the Assyrian presence nearby had an indirect impact. A large influx of people from Israel migrated to Judah to escape the Assyrian onslaught, thus greatly expanding the population.²⁰ In addition, an Assyrian campaign in neighboring Philistia in 720 BC demonstrated that Judah was not out of the reach of the Assyrian army.

The religious situation deteriorated dramatically during Ahaz’s reign in Judah. He did not do what was right in God’s eyes but supported the worship of Baal (2 Chr 28:1–4). He even introduced into the courtyard of Jerusalem’s temple a copy of a pagan altar he saw in Damascus (2 Kgs 16:10–16), and he probably offered sacrifices to the Assyrian gods of his conquerors.²¹ He removed some of the gold and bronze from the Jerusalem temple and palace furniture and gave it to Tiglath-pileser III as tribute. Ahaz’s lack of faith in God was illustrated when he failed to trust God even when military victory was promised (Isa 7:1–9). In 8:6, Isaiah concludes that the people of Judah had rejected God (the slowly flowing water of Shiloah), and in 8:19–20 he refers to the people’s pagan practices of depending on mediums and necromancy instead of following God’s laws.

The death of Ahaz is mentioned in Isa 14:28 (715 BC), but since these oracles against several foreign nations are grouped topically, it is difficult to determine which ones come from the time of Ahaz and which fit into the reign of the next king, Hezekiah. The oracles against Damascus and Ephraim in 17:1–14 discuss events during the time of Ahaz, but few others fit that time. Hayes and Irvine believe the condemnation of Babylon and the lament over its king in 13:1–14:27 describe Tiglath-pileser III defeating the Babylonian king Nabushuma-ukin around 729 BC, but this hypothesis has gained little support.²² Most of these oracles probably come from the reign of Hezekiah.

2.3 The Time of Hezekiah

Two key military events took place during Hezekiah’s reign. About 713–711 BC the Assyrian king Sargon II came west and defeated cities in the Philistine plain. Then the Assyrian king Sennacherib came against Judah from 703–701 BC. Sargon II spent the first few years of his reign trying to restore order in the rebellious provinces of Babylon (ruled by Marduk-apal-iddina, the Merodach-baladan of Isa 39:1),²³ Asia Minor, Media, and Urartu. Egypt’s rising power also concerned the Assyrians, so around 713 BC Sargon II came to retake the rebellious city of Ashdod, which had deposed the ruler he put on the throne (Ahimiti). The people of Ashdod had installed a friendlier ruler (Yamani) and then refused to pay tribute to Assyria, hoping Egypt would give them protection (20:1–6).²⁴ Egypt failed to help these people, so Ashdod fell to Assyria in 711 BC.²⁵ The prophet’s nakedness at this time was a sign to warn Hezekiah and the leaders of Judah not to depend on the Egyptians to protect them from the Assyrians, who would eventually defeat Egypt (20:3–6).

The second Assyrian incursion into Palestine was in response to King Hezekiah’s refusal to pay his tribute to Sargon II (2 Kgs 18:7)²⁶ and to Hezekiah’s seizure of Assyrian territory in Philistia (2 Kgs 18:8).²⁷ Sargon was unable to respond immediately to this act of rebellion because of trouble he was having with Babylon in 710 BC, with King Mita in Asia Minor in 709 BC, and with the Cimmerians in the north in 706 BC. Not long after this, Sargon II died. When Sennacherib came to power in 705 BC, he faced widespread rebellion in Judah, in Egypt (2 Kgs 18:21; 19:9), and by Merodach-baladan in Babylon (39:1–8). After Sennacherib put down the Babylonian rebellion, he attacked Sidon and then entered Palestine. Once the Assyrians had established their base of operations in the Philistine plains, Hezekiah was required to release the Philistine king of Ekron he had imprisoned,²⁸ and he was forced to pay his back taxes (2 Kgs 18:14–16). The Taylor Prism of Sennacherib describes these events from the Assyrian point of view, at some points agreeing with and at some points disagreeing with the biblical record.²⁹ Sennacherib refers to his defeat of the Egyptian forces in the plain of Eltekeh, parallel to events Isaiah records (36:6; 37:9). Although the biblical account calls the Egyptian Tirhakah a king and a Cushite (from southern Egypt/Ethiopia) in 2 Kgs 19:9 and Isa 37:9, he was probably only a coregent with his father Pharaoh Shebitku.³⁰ Having defeated Egypt, Sennacherib turned his attention to key cities in Judah, such as Lachish,³¹ Libnah (37:8; 2 Kgs 19:8), and eventually Jerusalem.

Hezekiah made extensive preparations in Jerusalem to withstand Sennacherib’s attack. He blocked off the spring of Gihon, which was outside the eastern city walls in the Kidron Valley, and dug a tunnel from the east side of the City of David to the west side where it emptied out at the Pool of Siloam (2 Chr 32:3–5, 30).³² He also repaired and strengthened the city walls (22:8–11), including the Broad Wall, whose twenty-two-foot-wide foundation was discovered by archeologists.³³ Hezekiah armed his soldiers with new equipment and did everything possible to prepare for the Assyrian onslaught. One night while the Assyrian soldiers were encamped around Jerusalem, 185,000 of them perished, so Sennacherib fled back home to Nineveh (37:36–38). For political reasons Sennacherib’s Prism does not mention how this battle ended, although one is left with the false impression that the Assyrians were successful against Judah. Later Sennacherib thoroughly defeated Babylon (689 BC), then in 681 BC Sennacherib was killed in a palace plot by his sons, and Esarhaddon succeeded him (2 Kgs 19:37).

There are some uncertainties about these events. First, questions are raised about calling the Egyptian Tirhakah a king in 701 BC, for it appears that he did not reign as sole king until 685 BC, and second, it is hard to figure out how Hezekiah’s payment of a heavy tribute in 2 Kgs 18:14–16 fits into the overall story. The studies by H. H. Rowley, B. S. Childs, and R. E. Clements survey several theories that have arisen to try to make sense of and coordinate the information in the three biblical accounts and the Assyrian accounts.³⁴ Some scholars hypothesize that the problem is due to the use of two contradictory literary sources in the biblical texts, while others try to resolve the enigmas embedded in these events by proposing that these chapters include improperly synthesized records of two different sieges of Jerusalem by Sennacherib. Many solutions have been proposed, but they break down into three major groups.

J. Bright’s solution was to find two different battles, an early one in 701 BC, when Hezekiah capitulated and was forced to pay a large sum of money, and then a second one around 688 BC, which is not mentioned in the Assyrian records but coincides with the marvelous story of divine deliverance in 2 Kgs 18:17–19:37.³⁵

A second group of theories prefers a literary solution that rejects the historical value of the theological accounts of divine deliverance in Kings and Isaiah and accepts the negative historical account of Hezekiah’s surrender and payment of heavy taxes to Sennacherib (2 Kgs 18:14–16).³⁶ R. E. Clements views these positive narratives as a later midrashic exegetical exaggeration of Zion theology composed during the reign of Josiah.³⁷

A third approach fits all the details into one event (not two separate Assyrian attacks) and tries to fit everything into one consistent narrative (not two inconsistent narratives) by proposing an initial capitulation by Hezekiah when Sennacherib defeated Ekron (2 Kgs 18:14–16) and then a later divine defeat of the Assyrians at Jerusalem.³⁸

No solution is without some assumptions and problems, but the first two approaches are not preferred in this commentary. If Tirhakah was a coregent in 701 BC, then some of the support for a later second invasion is removed. If Hezekiah paid the back tribute when he released the king of Ekron, this removes the need for suggesting two invasions: one won by Sennacherib when Hezekiah submitted and paid his tribute, and one lost by Sennacherib when God struck down many of his troops. Although there still are many unanswered historical and literary questions about the narrative description of what happened, any wholesale rejection of a portion of the narrative does not really solve the problems.³⁹ It merely removes part of the problem from consideration and ignores the theological implications of having a grand theological belief that it was impossible to conquer Zion based on an erroneous narrative.

The religious situation in Jerusalem changed dramatically after Hezekiah’s coronation (715 BC). The accounts of his religious reforms and trust in God vary. According to the narrative in 2 Chr 29:3–11, 15–36, Hezekiah repaired the temple, consecrated priests, renewed the nation’s covenant with God, removed pagan elements his father brought into the temple area, and restored worship starting in the first year of his reign (715 BC). Later he led the people of Judah, as well as Israelites from the northern territory of Ephraim (2 Chr 30:6–11, 18), in a grand celebration of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread (2 Chr 30:1, 21). Sometime during these events, he destroyed many pagan places of worship in Judah and Ephraim (2 Chr 31:1; 2 Kgs 18:4). Hezekiah is pictured as a great reformer, a man of faith who encouraged his armies to trust in God for deliverance (2 Chr 32:6–8) and who did so himself when he asked God to deliver them from the Assyrians (2 Chr 32:20–21). Although Hezekiah later exhibited pride for a time (2 Chr 32:25–26), he quickly repented and was blessed by God with great riches (2 Chr 32:27–29). Some of the material in Chronicles is not mentioned in Isaiah or 2 Kings. On the other hand, the narratives in 2 Kgs 18–19 highlight Hezekiah’s unique acts and prayers of faith (2 Kgs 18:5–6; 19:14–19), his courageous removal of Moses’s bronze snake from the temple (2 Kgs 18:4), his humiliation and payment of a large sum of gold and silver to the Assyrian king (2 Kgs 18:14–16), and his sin of dependence on Babylon (2 Kgs 20:12–18).

Isaiah’s own representation of the spiritual situation at this time is more complex. In support of Hezekiah, Isaiah celebrates Hezekiah’s final decision to trust God for the defeat of the Assyrians (37:14–20) and omits any reference to Hezekiah’s humiliating payment of tribute, but by and large he does not paint a very positive picture of the spiritual condition of the people or leaders of Jerusalem in 701 BC. Instead, he condemns the revelry in Jerusalem as the people make military preparations for battle against Sennacherib (22:1–13). He condemns their covenant with Death (28:15, 18), a reference to Judah’s alliance with Egypt (30:1–5; 31:1–5). He prophesies that God would bring Jerusalem low (29:1–4) but then would suddenly cause their enemies to become like dust (29:5). He portrays the people as rebellious, deceitful,