The Disciplined Order of Christ

            In our last essay we studied Isaiah 48.  And in this essay we are studying chapter 49.  This chapter begins a new, major section of the book, the first part of which anticipates salvation.  In the first 13 verses we see the calling and ministry of the divine Servant. 

            The passage begins with a renewed call to listen.  Only this time the call is issued to ”the coastlands, which as we have seen before, refers to the nations.  The language of verse one strongly suggests that the servant in view is an individual, rather than the nation.  Verse two tells us that this person’s mouth, that is his spoken word, is his weapon.  Of course you will remember that in John, chapter one, Jesus is identified as God’s Word become flesh.  Notice that the weapons are hidden, as a sheathed sword or an arrow in the quiver.  But they are at the ready, if and when they are needed. 

            Verse three is a problem, because it says, “You are my servant, Israel.”  Obviously that seems to say that the nation was the one spoken to rather than an individual; but Oswalt says this use of the term “Israel” is not a name.  Rather it is an expression of function of the Servant.  The divine Servant will function as Israel.  That is to say, Israel, the divine Servant, will do what Israel the nation was called to do, but could not (because of her sinfulness), namely, bring the nations to God.  Oswalt also claims that this rules out the possibility that Isaiah referred to himself as the servant.  He says that no prophet in Israel would have thought of himself as Ideal Israel. 

            Oswalt interprets verse four messianically as an expression of Christ’s humanity.  Jesus had very little success during his earthly ministry. 

            In verses 5-6 we see a shift from the Servant’s calling to his mission.  First, he is to bring Jacob back to the Lord.  It is true that Israel needed deliverance from Babylon.  And by God’s power, Cyrus would handle that.  But Israel had a deeper need.  She needed to be reconciled to God; and the Messiah was the only one who could accomplish that.  However, notice that the Servant’s mission is even greater than that.  Second, he is to bring the whole world to God.  Of course this cinches the fact that Isaiah was not thinking of himself.  No human prophet could bring the world to God. 

            In verse seven the Lord speaks to the Servant as one who is despised, abhorred, and a slave.  But in the end, kings and princes will honor him.  The messianic interpretation comes easily here. 

            In the next paragraph, the Lord turns to the Servant’s work.  In verse eight notice the verb tenses.  Both the NIV and Oswalt translate them as futures.  I don’t know why the NRSV translates them as in the past.  But the point is that on the day of salvation, the Lord will appoint the messianic Servant to a series of tasks.  The “salvation” mentioned here has two levels of meaning.  One is a political deliverance from Babylon, and the other is an ultimate deliverance from sin.  The Servant is to become God’s covenant to the people.  That is, he somehow will embody God’s covenant with the people.  Isaiah does not explain that, but we must remember that the people had broken the covenant time and time again.  Perhaps this embodiment of the covenant by the Messiah is the only way it can be restored. 

            At any rate, as God’s covenant to the people, the divine Servant will do three things.  One, he will restore the land.  Two, he will apportion the desolate heritages.  And three, he will call the prisoners out of the darkness.  Restoration of the land is easy to interpret at the deliverance from Babylon level.  A return to Judah would accomplish that.  It is much more symbolic at the end time level.  The symbolism is heavy at both levels when we think about apportioning desolate heritages.  The idea is to reinstate the division of land to the tribes and families, as originally done by Joshua, and as envisioned in the Jubilee Year (Lev. 25:8-55).  The calling of the people out of darkness is vivid at both levels. 

            In the middle of verse nine Isaiah begins to speak of the return to Judah following deliverance from Babylon.  He uses three fairly familiar images.  The first is the image of flocks grazing.  The flocks will have plenty to eat, even along the “bare heights” (v. 9).  The second image is provisions like those given during the Exodus.  The people will have plenty of food and water; they will be protected from the sun and wind, and the Lord will have compassion on them (v. 10).  And the third image is that of an easy, well-graded highway (v. 11). 

            These verses are important, because they demonstrate that the divine Servant’s ministry is not limited to setting the people free.  He also will guide and protect them along the way.  Verse 12 confirms the second level of salvation.  We saw a very similar message back in 43:5-6.  People will come from all over the civilized world.  Remember, this chapter began with a call to the “coastlands,” the nations.  The city of Syene has been identified with the modern city of Aswan at the southern edge of Egypt.  Therefore, at the time it represented the southernmost edge of the civilized world.  Thus we have the south, north and west named.  Those “far away” represent those in the east, providing all four points of the compass.  Therefore the return of the Jews to Judah would merely be a foretaste of a massive return to God from the whole world. 

            Here in verse 13, as we have seen at other places in the book, the good news expressed calls forth universal praise led by nature, which according to Romans eight, itself looks forward to its redemption (Rom. 8:19-22). 

            The discussion of the Servant’s calling and work is followed in verse 14 by a cry from Zion that none of it matters, because God has put her away and forgotten her.  Then in verse 15 the Lord replies with the powerful image of a mother’s love.  He has not forsaken nor forgotten them.  The truth is even some mothers forsake their children, but the Lord never forsakes or forgets.  Psalm 27:10 makes the same point, “If my father and mother forsake me, the Lord will take me up.” 

            Verse 16 uses a different image.  The Lord declares that he has their names inscribed on the palms of his hands.  It was a common practice for slaves to have their master’s names inscribed on their hands.  This image is the opposite.  The master, the Lord, has the names of his people inscribed on his hands. 

            Modern translations show a translation problem at the beginning of verse 17.  The NRSV reads, “Your builders outdo your destroyers.”  And the NIV reads, “Your sons hasten back.”  Oswalt says that the Hebrew words for “builders” and “sons” differ only by one vowel, ands he thinks the lord was making a play on words here.  In effect he was saying to Israel, that the “builders” of the ruined walls would be the “sons” that Israel thought were gone forever.  The important thing here is in the second part of the verse.  The destroyers will leave. 

            In verse 18 the Lord calls on Zion to lift her eyes and look around.  The builders, the sons, are coming.  And she will wear them like an ornament.  Indeed, as verses 19 and 20 say, not only will those who “swallowed you up” (the destroyers) be gone, but there will be so many sons taking their place that even the desolate parts of the lands will be overcrowded.  A new generation born during the “bereavement,” the Exile, will appear.  Verse 21 declares that Israel will be astonished at the numbers.  She who will be thinking of herself as a barren mother will suddenly wonder where so many children came from. 

            Verses 22-23 answer the question of where the children came from.  The Lord will do it.  He will bring them from all over the world.  He will raise a banner, an ensign (the NRSV translates it “signal”) to the nations.  The banner will call on the nations to bring Israel’s children, who are her builders, home.  You may recall that back in 5:26 the Lord raised a banner to call the nations to punish Israel.  Now he will raise a banner to call them to bring Israel’s children home.  Interestingly, back in 11:10-12 the Lord identified the coming Messiah as the banner that calls God’s people from the nations. 

            Clearly, as Oswalt observes, the Lord intends by this picture much more than the return from exile.  The end time is in view.  The nations, including their kings and queens, will come and bow down to Israel in homage.  Whereas Israelites once served as nursemaids for the nations, it will be the other way around on that glorious day.  And Israel will learn from this that the Lord is God and that those who wait for him will not be disgraced. 

            The grand promises of verse 22-23 raise an incredulous response.  The rhetorical question in verse 24 is asking, “Is this possible?”  And the Lord answers in verse 25.  “Yes, it can happen, because I will make it happen.”  From a human perspective Israel can overcome neither Babylon nor sin.  But God can do it.  He will enable Cyrus to defeat Babylon, and his divine Servant will overcome sin.  In verse 26, using graphic imagery that is not to be taken literally the Lord declares that the oppressors will receive severe judgment.  Then the whole world will know that the Lord is Israel’s Savior.

            In the last essay we studied chapter 47, which dealt with the coming downfall and humiliation of Babylon.  In this essay we are studying chapter 48.  As we begin this chapter, we see Israel called to hear, meaning to pay close attention to what follows.  Oswalt suggests that Isaiah was appealing to Israel in three ways here.  First, he was appealing to their past, that is, to their history.  The names Israel, Jacob and Judah undoubtedly brought the past glories of the nation to their minds.  God had done great things for Israel over the centuries, and the people were well of that.  What about us?  What is our history?

            Second, Isaiah was appealing to their religion.  That is the significance of swearing by the name of the Lord.  They were the people of the Lord.  Again, what about us?  Is our situation really any different?

            Third, Isaiah was appealing to what Oswalt calls their “present identification.”  Their present identification was their identification with the holy city, Jerusalem.  They may be living in Babylon, but they belong in Jerusalem.  Once again, I ask, what about us?  Where do we belong? 

            Isaiah set all of this before Israel for a reason.  He believed that these things would predispose the people to hear and to obey.  And the same should be true for us. 

            Verse three reminds Israel of the Lord’s past pattern of predictions.  He foretold “the former things” and then he brought them to pass.  We have seen this pattern in Isaiah before.  The Lord’s ability to do this sets him apart from the idol-gods.  The fact that he fulfilled the predictions “suddenly” suggests that fulfillment of prophecies did not always occur in the times or places expected. 

            In verses 4-5 we see for the first time a reason given for predictive prophecy.  God knew that the people of Israel were “obstinate,” or “stubborn.”  Indeed they were like animals that dig in their heels and refuse to go where they do not want to go.  They stiffens their necks so much that the necks seem like they are made of iron.  The image of the brass forehead is less clear.  It may refer to the practice of male animals butting heads.  In any case, the point is that God had to overcome the stubbornness, because he knew the people might give credit to idol-gods for what God had done.  So the Lord predicted events long ahead of time through prophets like Isaiah, and then he made them happen.  That counteracted the tendency towards idolatry. 

            In the next paragraph the Lord, still speaking through Isaiah, shifts from “former things” to “new things,” because he has the ability to do things he never has done before.  Notice that the passage begins with a summary of what had just been said.  They have heard the prophecies of old; and they have seen, or are seeing, their fulfillment.  Therefore they must declare what they know to be true, namely, that the Lord is the only God; and he is trustworthy.  Then the Lord announces that from this time forward he will reveal “new things,” things they never heard of. 

            Verses 6-8 illustrate what is called “progressive revelation.”  Certain things are “hidden,” that is unrevealed, until the time when God decides they should be revealed.  The new things to be revealed were not revealed “long ago,” because the purpose of predictive prophecy is not to enable God’s people to know the future.  Rather its purpose is to demonstrate to us that there is no other God and that we can trust him.  Oswalt points out that only some things are predicted, because if we knew everything that was going to happen in the future, we would turn that knowledge into another form of idolatry.  We would lose our need to live in dependence on God.  After all, we have been rebels from birth, just as Israel had been. 

            In the case at hand, the Jews might have wondered why God had not revealed earlier that Israel would go into exile in Babylon and then be restored by an emperor from the East named Cyrus.  And the answer is that God knows when to reveal such things to accomplish his purposes. 

            As we have just seen from the previous verses, God is quite aware of Israel’s tendency towards idolatry and their stubborn, rebellious spirit.  In verses 9-11 we see that God would have been within his rights to destroy the people of Israel; but he decided to refine them instead.  And it seems he even moderated that process, because the refining was not like the refining of silver, which removes all dross.  He is not saving them from exile because they deserve it.  He is saving them, because he entered into a covenant with them (Ex. 34); and he wants to protect his own name, which is a way of saying his reputation.  This theme of God’s concern for his name goes all the way back to the Exodus (Ex. 32:11-14).  God’s extension of mercy and grace shows his true nature.  He keeps his promises and is trustworthy. 

            In verses 12-22 the Lord again calls on Israel to listen, to hear (cf. v. 1).  And then he talks once again about Cyrus.  The “I am he” in verse 12 is Isaiah’s equivalent of “I am who I am” in Ex. 3:14.  We see again here language about the first and last.  In this case it points to the fact that God began everything, and he will end everything. 

            The first part of verse 13 expands on “I am the first,” by declaring that God created everything.  The problem in this verse is how to identify the “them” in “I summon them.”  Oswalt, based on 40:22-26, believes it refers to the stars.  The pagans believed that the stars represented the gods.  And the Lord is saying that the stars, and therefore the gods, are at his command. 

            At the beginning of verse 14 the Lord once again calls for hearing.  Most identify the “you” in “Assemble all of you” to be Israel.  However, the context suggests that it easily could have been intended as a more general call that included the nations, and even the stars.  Oswalt believes that the “them” again is the stars, the same as in verse 13.  The “him” in the sentence, “The Lord loves him,” clearly is Cyrus. 

            Verse 15 indicates that Cyrus’ conquest of Babylon is due to God’s call and empowerment.  Then in verse 16 the Lord issues his fourth call to his people to hear (vv. 1, 12, 14, 16).  Notice that the Lord has been very “up front” about all of this.  None of it has been done in secret. 

            The last sentence of verse 16 is a problem, because it suddenly shifts from God as he speaker to Isaiah.  Oswalt says that it simply shows the close relationship between the Lord and the prophet.  Isaiah speaks for God, and that makes the sudden shift possible. 

            Verses 17-22 supply a conclusion to the chapter.  First we see why we should listen to the Lord.  He is our teacher and guide.  God’s guidance during the Exodus became a biblical metaphor for his guiding his people of all the ages to himself.  And he teaches and guides us just as surely as he did Israel. 

            Unfortunately, historically Israel did not hear and obey very well.  So the Lord expresses what might have been.  They might have had peace like a river and righteousness like the waves of the sea.  The NRSV translates “peace” as “prosperity” and “righteousness” as “success.”  But I don’t think that was a helpful translation.  The word “peace” in the Hebrew is shalom, which, as you may know means “well being.”  And “peace” is a much better English word to translate it.  The word “righteousness” is used in the sense of “right behavior,” so I don’t think “success” is even close to the Hebrew meaning. 

            The worst did not happen to Israel, namely, have their name cut off, because a remnant in Israel did hear and were obedient.  Those who were obedient, and those of us today who, as part of the New Israel hear and obey, reap the benefits of verse 18.  A further benefit, in addition to peace like a river and righteousness like the waves of the sea is the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham (Gen. 22:17) that his offspring would be as numerous as grains of sand.  I believe that promise has been fulfilled in the New Israel, the Church. 

            After the warning of verses 18-19, we see in verse 20 a ringing command to leave Babylon with a shout of joy.  Verse 21 promises that when the time comes, the Lord will provide for them just as he provided for the people during the Exodus.  Then the chapter ends with the warning that those who refuse to listen and obey, “the wicked,” will have no peace.

            In our last essay we studied chapter 46, which dealt with God’s superiority over the idol-gods of the nations.  In this essay we are studying chapter 47, in which Isaiah dramatically pictorializes the coming fall and humiliation of Babylon.  He pictures her as a beautiful, protected virgin who is forced into slavery. 

            Notice in verses 1-4 that the language of the poem is rather harsh.  Although Babylon thought of herself as a queen worthy of a throne, she is commanded to sir on the ground in the dust.  And she no longer would be called “tender and delicate.”  The name Chaldea is parallel to Babylon, because the city of Babylon was located in a geographical area called Chaldea.  Thus the Babylonians also were known as Chaldeans. 

            Grinding grain at the millstone was the lowest form of work that usually was done by slaves.  As a slave, the woman no longer needed her finery.  She would have to dispense with the veil and the long gown of her high-class life, because she would need her legs free for the work of a slave.  The “rivers” mentioned could be a reference to irrigation ditches. 

            The statement in verse three, “Your nakedness shall be uncovered,” is very strong language.  According to John Oswalt, in the Old Testament this language at the very least means severe humiliation, and in some cases may mean rape.  Notice that it is the Lord who will bring about the humiliation. 

            Verse four is interesting in that it is so unexpected.  It ends the segment with an ejaculatory praise of “Our Redeemer” who is “the Lord of hosts: and “the Holy One of Israel.”  Of course liberal scholars say that this statement doesn’t belong here, that someone stuck it in later.  But Oswalt and others say it “stands well in this context.” 

            Next, verses 5-11 detail the Lord’s charges against Babylon.  Verse five tells us that the great virgin queen, Babylon, will sit in silence and darkness in addition to sitting in the dust (as we were told in verse one).  She has been “mistress of kingdoms,” because of her many conquests of other nations.  But she will be mistress no longer, because she will be conquered. 

            Verse six tells us that like Assyria before her, Babylon took pride in her many conquests.  She believed that she had conquered all of those nations by her own might.  But at least in the case of Judah, that was not true.  Babylon had been able to conquer Judah and take most of her people into captivity, not because of her strength, but because the Lord had wanted her to do it.  The Lord was chastising Israel for her disobedience and sinfulness.  And that was why he allowed Babylon to take her captive. 

            Although Babylon in a sense was doing God’s will when she conquered Judah, that fact did not give her the right to treat the captives harshly.  According to the Lord, she had no mercy, or compassion on the captives.  And she put an especially heavy burden the old people.  Now we do not know exactly what the Lord was referring to.  We know that some of the Jewish exiles were treated quite well.  Daniel and his friends are a good example.  And when Cyrus allowed the Jews to return to Palestine, many of them did not want to return, because they had forged good lives in Babylon.  That suggests that the Babylonians could have been much more harsh than they were.  At any rate, the Lord was unhappy with their treatment of some of the Jews, especially the aged. 

            In verse seven, the Lord refers to Babylon’s arrogance.  She assumed that she would be the mistress of the kingdoms forever.  That seems to be a common idea in powerful nations, including our own.  It is easy to think that the power will last forever, but it never has; and it never will.  Oswalt suggests that Babylon’s arrogance is what led her to believe that she would never be held accountable for the way she treated her captives. 

            In verses 8-11 Isaiah contrasts Babylon’s arrogant self-confidence with her coming complete humiliation.  Notice the “therefore” in verse eight (NRSV).  Therefore, “now hear this you lover of pleasures [NIV, wanton creature”] who sit securely.”  In effect God was saying, because of your arrogance, because of your mistreatment of the captives, because you didn’t “lay these things to your heart,” this is what will happen. 

            But there was something else Babylon had done that was even more serious.  She had put herself in the place of God.  Do you see it?  She had said in her heart, “I am, and there is no one besides me.”  Wow!  That is exactly what God had said about himself.  Indeed it is a theme in chapters 45 and 46.  Look at 45:5; 45:6; 45:18; 45:22, and 46:9.  No wonder Babylon brought an announcement of judgment on herself! 

            We see more arrogance as Babylon continues to speak in the last two lines of verse eight: “I shall not sit as a widow or know the loss of children.”  Of course widows were completely without support, and that was the point being made.  Babylon never expected to be in that situation.  Nor did she ever expect to be alone in the world, which was the case when a woman lost her children.  She thought she was above all of that.  But it wasn’t true.  Indeed verse nine tells us that both of those things were going to happen to her quite suddenly.  E.J. Young suggests that widowhood represents the loss of the empire, and loss of children represents the loss of population in the war.  Oswalt thinks that stretches the metaphor too far, but I don’t. 

            At the end of verse nine, Isaiah says that all of this would l happen in spite of Babylon’s sorceries.  Babylon was famous for her magic arts and sorcery.  This was so much so that in the book of Daniel the court magicians were called Chaldeans.  But the magic and sorcery would not help her against God.  She had put herself in the place of God, and he would bring her down. 

            Verses 10-11 basically repeat the ideas of verses 5-9.  Babylon felt secure in her “wickedness.”  The wickedness referred to likely is the magic and sorcery, which were at the heart of her wisdom and knowledge.  The claim to be God is repeated, and so is the judgment that would come upon her.  The uselessness of her magic arts also is mentioned again.  She will not be able to “charm away” the disaster that is coming. 

            Verses 12-15 bring the denunciation of Babylon to a climax.  Some scholars believe Isaiah was making a serious demand of Babylon in verses 12-13.  Others, including Oswalt and myself, believe that Isaiah was being sarcastic.  In this latter case, Isaiah was saying in effect, “Why don’t you try the foolishness of the magic arts that you have practiced for so long.  Perhaps they will help you.  Babylon had sought wisdom to guide its future in many ways.  The astrologers were especially prominent in the process.  That is why Isaiah sarcastically declares that now is the time for those people to “step up” and save Babylon, if they can. 

            In verses 14-15 Isaiah announces the final outcome. The magicians and astrologers are like stubble that will burn up when the fires of adversity come.  And the coming fire would be no tame campfire around which they can warm themselves.  It would be a conflagration that burns everything up.  The magicians and astrologers won’t be able to save themselves let alone anyone else.  Babylon “trafficked” or “traded” with the sorcerers for centuries, but in the end it will do them no good.  The sorcerers will wander about trying to save themselves, and there will be no one to save Babylon.

            In our last essay we studied chapter 45, which dealt with God’s choice of a deliverer.  In this essay we are studying chapter 46, in which we see Isaiah continuing his attack on the idol-gods of the nations.  In verses 1-7 he points out that the idols do not carry, but are carried.  There are several things to be seen here.  First, in the Babylon pantheon of gods, Bel was the original name of the father of the gods.  The god of the city of Babylon was Marduk, the hero of the Babylonian creation myth, Enuma Elish.  And Nebo was Marduk’s son.  Thus Bel and Nebo were two of the major gods, or we could say they were the chief gods in the Babylonian pantheon. 

            Isaiah probably mentioned these two gods, because images (that is idols) of them were carried in the annual New Year’s Festival procession in Babylon.  We would call it a parade.  But there is an added dimension here.  Not only did beasts carry idols of these gods in the New Year’s Festival parade, Isaiah is saying that Bel and Nebo and their idols would be helpless when Cyrus of Persia came to conquer Babylon.  Furthermore, Cyrus and his armies would carry away those same images on beasts into captivity.  The point is that when Babylon would be conquered, those idols that had been carried in honor would be carried in dishonor. 

            Now an interesting thing about the history of the fulfillment of this prophecy is that Cyrus did not publicly disgrace the gods of Babylon.  For some foreign policy reason, perhaps to curry favor with the people of Babylon. Cyrus chose to worship the Babylonian gods publicly.  After all, he had to govern the Babylonians, and he may have wanted to maintain as good a relation with them as possible.  At any rate, the carrying away of the idols on beasts apparently was a means of protecting them rather than humiliating them. 

            In verses 3-4 the Lord addresses Israel directly and reminds them quite firmly that Israel’s relationship with him has been quite different from Babylon’s relationship to her gods.  In contrast to Babylon’s carrying her gods the Lord has been carrying Israel.  And this has been true throughout her entire history, from their birth to the present.  And it will never be any different: “even when you turn gray I will carry you,” says the lord. 

            This is an important message.  We humans constantly drift into thinking that we are at the center of things and that we don’t need God.  This is especially true when things are going well.  We begin to think that we are capable of carrying ourselves with the aid of our gods of wealth and power.  But that is a delusion.  The truth is God is carrying us every step of the way, whether or not we are Christians.  Without his sustaining power the universe itself would fall apart. 

            The last two lines of verse four are powerful.  I like the NIV translation: “I have made you and I will carry you; I will sustain you and I will rescue you.”  Do you see both the staccato repetition and the profound truths.  The Lord declares that he is their creator, their carrier, their sustainer, and their rescuer, or deliverer.  Wow! 

            Verses 5-7 express the logical conclusion of the Lord’s argument, a conclusion we have seen several times before in the book.  The Lord cannot be compared to anyone else.  And it is especially foolish to try to compare him with the idol-gods (cf. 40:19-20; 41:6-7; 44:9-20).  Notice once again in verse seven the idea that the idols are carried, and that they cannot, without aid, move from the place where they are set.  And to top it off, they cannot help anyone who cries out to them.  The reason is simple.  Something that cannot help itself cannot help anyone who calls upon it. 

            Verses 8-13 are a kind of summary.  Notice in verses 8-9 that the Lord calls on Israel to remember.  And notice also that he addresses them as “rebels” (NIV) or “transgressors” (NRSV).  God obviously is not completely happy with Israel.  The lack of faith and sinfulness that Isaiah has been railing against throughout the book is still present.  The question, of course, is what the “rebels” are to remember.  Well, the key thing, it seems is “the former things of old.”  That would be their history.  And a stellar history it is.  It would include the patriarchs, the Exodus, the Sinai covenant, the conquest of the Promised Land, the judges, King David, and on and on.  It would remind them of the great acts of God over those centuries; and thus it would remind them that the Lord is God and there is no other.  In other words there is every reason to believe that the Lord is faithful and that he will fulfill his word about deliverance. 

            In verses 10-11 we find a series of three participles that remind Israel that the Lord predicts and fulfills his predictions, that he has an intentional will that he brings to pass, and that he is doing it again with Cyrus.  In the NRSV the three participles are easy to spot, because they are translated that way.  The NRSV translates, “declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done.”  “Saying, ‘My purpose shall stand, and I will fulfill my intention.’”  And “calling a bird of prey from the East” (my emphasis).

            In the NIV the participles are not evident as such, because they are not translated that way.  In the NIV the first one is translated, “I make known the end from the beginning, etc.”  Then the second is translated,” “I say: ‘My purpose will stand, etc.’”  And the third is translated, “I summon a bird of prey.” 

            Regardless of the translations, the point is clear.  The Lord reminds Israel that he predicts the future and then brings it to pass, that he has an intentional will for his people that he brings to pass, and that he is doing it again with Cyrus.  He is calling “a bird of prey” out of the East for the purpose of the rescue.  That is, he is predicting that he will use Cyrus to deliver his people, and it is going to happen. 

            The image of the “bird of prey” is a powerful one.  He was suggesting that the conquest of Babylon would be swift.  A hawk, for example, swoops down on a rabbit, and the kill is over quite quickly. 

            The last two lines of verse eleven emphasize the certainty of connection between God’s speaking and his acting: “I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have planned, and I will do it.”  God speaks, and then he acts.  e is true to his word. 

            Notice in verse 12 that the Lord is addressing the “stubborn of heart.”  That expression is parallel to the “rebels” of verse eight.  So the Lord still is addressing Israel as stubbornly refusing to believe that the Lord will deliver them.  Even those who believe are convinced that it is far off. 

            The NRSV translates the word “righteousness” as “deliverance,” and that is a valid translation.  That is how the word “righteousness” is being used here.  So those of you have the NIV can interpret the word “righteousness” as “deliverance.” 

            But the Lord insists that his “righteousness” or “deliverance” is not far off.  On the contrary it is quite near.  And notice that the focal point of the salvation is Zion, the great symbolic mountain of Jerusalem.  That indicates the return to Palestine by the Jews whom Cyrus sets free.

            In the last essay we studied Isaiah 44, which dealt with the promised Spirit and the folly of idolatry.  In this essay we are studying chapter 45.  Verses 1-8 are an oracle to Cyrus whom God had chosen to deliver Israel from the Babylonian Exile.  If Isaiah’s readers were shocked to hear Cyrus called God’s “shepherd” in 44:28, they undoubtedly were more shocked to hear him called God’s “anointed” here in 45:1.  Only priests, prophets and kings of Israel were anointed.  And of course the coming Messiah would be the anointed One.  To say that a pagan emperor was anointed of God would have seemed preposterous, perhaps even blasphemous, to the people of Israel. 

            However Isaiah had a broader vision than the people in general.  He understood that the Lord had created and maintained Israel, not just for its own sake, but also for the benefit of the world.  Thus Isaiah’s point was that God is God of the whole world, and he can use anyone in the world to accomplish his purposes.  It is in that sense that Cyrus was God’s anointed.  He was chosen and empowered to carry out the purposes of God.  And in that way he became a type of the coming Messiah.  The taking of Cyrus’ right hand is symbolic of God’s choosing and of intimate fellowship.  Notice that God declares that he opened the way for Cyrus’ conquests, a theme that is continued in verses 2-3. 

            Notice in verse three that the Lord wanted Cyrus to know he had called him to service.  That does not mean Cyrus was a believer any more than Pharaoh was during the Exodus.  Rather as Pharaoh knew that he was dealing with the Lord without believing in him, so did Cyrus. 

            Verse four declares that God’s use of Cyrus was for Israel’s sake [same word as “so that” in verses three and six].  Verse five makes it clear that Cyrus’ success was due to the Lord.  And verse six tells us that the Lord wanted the entire world, “from the rising of the sun and from the west,” to know that the Lord is the only God. 

            Verse seven has sparked much debate.  In it the Lord is saying that he is responsible for everything in nature (from light to darkness) and everything in history (from good fortune to misfortune).  The word translated “weal” by the NRSV and “prosperity” by the NIV means “heath” or “well being.”  But it is the contrasting element in that sentence that creates most of the controversy. 

            As John Oswalt explains, the Hebrew word ra’ translated “woe” by the NRSV and “disaster” by the NIV has several meanings in the Hebrew, depending on the context.  Its usage is similar to the word “bad” in English.  It can mean “bad” in the sense of moral evil, which is why the KJV translates it “evil.”  However the KJV really missed this one, because the meaning “evil” was not intended here.  God does not cause people to make evil moral decisions.  The word also can mean “misfortune” in the sense of “I’m having a bad day.”  The NIV seems to be treating it more strongly than “misfortune” when they use “disaster.”  Still another usage of the Hebrew word is to mean that something is not conforming to some potential, as when we say, “This is a bad road.” 

            Calvinists love this verse, because it seems to support their extreme view of the sovereignty of God.  The message of the verse is quite true.  God, because of his sovereignty, is responsible for everything.  But the rest of Scripture must be allowed to qualify that overarching truth.  For example, we know from other Scriptures that God has given us freedom of choice, or free will.  We are responsible for our evil choices.  God is responsible only in the sense that in his sovereignty he permits us to make those choices.  And that brings up the important distinction between God’s intentional will and his permissive will.  In the area of salvation, it is the Lord’s intentional will that we all be saved.  But we have a choice, and what we decide is his permissive will. 

            Verse eight is interesting in that God metaphorically calls on nature to help save Israel from exile.  He calls for righteousness to rain down from the heavens and salvation to spring up from the earth.  Oswalt says that the “righteousness” mentioned, which is paralleled with “salvation,” refers to the rightness of God’s actions. 

            The oracle to Cyrus that we just studied had to seem strange to the people of Israel.  When they fantasized about being delivered from exile, they undoubtedly thought of it in terms of another Exodus led by another Moses, not in terms of a pagan emperor who didn’t even know the Lord.  Verses 9-13 address that problem. 

            Notice that the Lord asserts that as the creator he has the right to deal with his creation in any way he chooses.  In verse nine he offers a warning to those who challenge him and his ways.  They are like a pot telling the potter what to do.  According to Oswalt, the NIV has a much better translation than the NRSV.  “Woe to him who quarrels with his maker, to him who is but a potsherd among the potsherds on the ground.  Does the clay say to the potter, ‘What are you making?’  Does your work say, ‘He has no hands’”?  The implied answer of course is, “No.”  Then why would they challenge God, their maker? 

            Verses 10-13 continue the argument.  Verse 13 provides a concluding statement.  Cyrus did not rise by accident.  Whether he knew it or not, Cyrus was accomplishing God’s will.  The word “righteousness” once again refers to the rightness of God’s actions. 

            All right, moving on to verses 14-19, we run into some difficult issues.  The first disputed question is that of who is addressed in verses 14.  Some believe Cyrus is still being addressed, because back in 43:3 these very countries were named as being given to him in exchange for Israel.  But Oswalt says that isn’t possible, because other nations cannot worship Cyrus’ god as the only God.  Furthermore the pronouns relating to the addressee are all feminine.  But when Oswalt tries to explain how the nations who come to worship are doing it voluntarily rather than because they are conquered and how their coming in chains isn’t due to conquest, and how Jerusalem is the one being addressed, it seems to me that there are even more problems with the position he takes than with the position that it is Cyrus who is addressed.  You can decide which way you want to go on that issue. 

            Verse 15 also is a problem.  Oswalt believes that it is the nations who spoke the last sentence of verse 14 that are continuing to speak in verse 15.  That probably is the case, but if so, the question arises as to what the statement means.  Oswalt suggests that it means three things.  First it “is a mistaken statement by those who have rejected revelation” the mistake being that God did not hide himself.  Second, it also is “an observation about the surprising fact that the Savior should come from little, insignificant Israel.”  And third, it is “in some sense an expression of theological truth.” 

            In verses 16-17 Isaiah says that the nations all will be put to shame, because they worship idols instead of the true God.  But Israel, the only nation that worships the true God, will not be put to shame, but will be saved “to all eternity.” 

Verses 18-19 begin with a word meaning “for,” or “because.”  Thus these verses substantiate what has gone before.  They explain “the failure of the idols and the eternal trustworthiness of God.”  The idols fail and Israel is saved because God longs to reveal himself to his people.  He speaks through nature and with words.  He created the world for the purpose of human habitation, and then he communicated to his created people how he wants us to relate to him. 

            The last paragraph of the chapter, verses 20-25, is quite important.  Most commentators agree that this passage is about the salvation of the world.  Notice verse 22: “Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth.”  Oswalt captures the thrust of the paragraph well when he says: the Lord “is not the savior of Israel because he is Israel’s God.  He is the savior of Israel because he is the Savior of the world.”  That is an important insight. 

            You will notice in verses 20-21 that the Lord once again calls the nations into assembly, as we have seen him do a couple of times earlier in the book (41:1,21; 43:8-9).  Again he condemns the idols of the nations and declares his own superiority.  Also once again the reader is reminded that God foretold all of this many years before when Isaiah made the prediction. 

            In verses 22-23 the Lord calls on the nations to experience the same salvation that Israel experienced.  And the idea seen in the New Testament that one day “every knee shall bow and very tongue confess” is seen here in Isaiah. 

            Finally, in verses 24-25 Isaiah makes it clear that righteousness and strength as well as the triumph of salvation take place only “in the Lord.”  Indeed the only hope of either Israel or the world is “in the Lord.”