Exegesis and Theology

The Blog of Brian Collins

Douglas Brown, “The Glory of God and Dispensationalism: Revisiting the Sine Qua Nons of Dispensationalism”

by

Central Baptist Theological Seminary just published Dispensationalism Revisited: A Twenty-First Century Restatement. This book is a Festschrift for Charles Hauser, Jr. that is comprised of chapters by his former colleagues and students. The first three chapters focus on the classic sine qua nons of dispensationalism.

This chapter by Douglas Brown, dean of Faith Baptist Theological Seminary, investigates whether the glory of God is one of the sine qua nons of dispensationalism.

Brown begins by noting that not all dispensationalists, especially progressive dispensationalists, agree that Ryrie’s sine qua nons (the Israel/church distinction, literal interpretation, and God’s glory as God’s fundamental purpose) mark out the essentials of dispensationalism. Brown, by contrast, defends the inclusion of the glory of God in the sine qua nons of dispensationalism.

Brown notes that the emphasis on the glory of God emerged as a response to the critique that early dispensationalists undermined the “unity of the Bible” by having two redemptive purposes for the two peoples of God: “John Walvoord responded to these charges by affirming that there is one overarching purpose of Scripture—the glory of God” (17). This was seen by dispensationalists as superior to seeing the covenant of grace as the unifying principle in Scripture.

There are two lines of critiques for including the glory of God in the sine qua nons. First, before Walvoord no dispensationalist made it an “overarching principle” and contemporaries of Walvoord, as well as dispensationalists of the following generation, have argued that the kingdom of God is the “unifying theme” of Scripture (Brown mentions Pentecost, McClain, and Blaising). Second, non-dispensationalists also emphasize the importance of God’s glory as is seen in WSC 1 and Jonathan Edwards’s The End for Which God Created the World.

In response, Brown argues that there remains something distinctive about the glory of God as a unifying principle of history that sets traditional dispensationalism apart from both progressive dispensationalism and non-dispensational theologies.

In the remainder of the chapter Brown offers seven premises regarding a dispensational understanding of God’s glory

  • “Premise One: God is a glorious God” (20).
  • “Premise Two: The ultimate goal of all creation is the glory of God” (22).
  • “Premise Three: God wants every creature to glorify him” (23).
  • “Premise Four: Glorifying God is bound to God’s self-disclosure” (25). Here Brown highlights that God has revealed himself in both general and special revelation. In special revelation God has revealed himself in the Word of God and in the Son of God.
  • “Premise Five: God has chosen to reveal his glory progressively and systematically through redemptive history (i.e., through every dispensation)” (26).
  • “Premise Six: The climax of God’s glorification in human history will occur at the second coming and during the millennium” (27).
  • “Premise Seven: The ultimate completion of God’s glorification before all creation will occur only as he fulfils the national promises to Israel in the millennium” (28).

In light of these premises Brown concludes that “the glory of God is the overarching purpose of God” (31). He grants that this conclusion is not unique to dispensationalism, and he observes that this is the reason why many dispensationalists do no think it is a valid sine qua non of dispensationalism. Brown responds, however, that it should be retained as the “unifying principle” of dispensationalism. In addition, he argues that “the dispensational view of God’s glory is unique” in that it sees the millennial kingdom as the culmination of God’s display of his glory. He thinks that this observation has the potential to unite dispensationalists who make the kingdom the “unifying principle of the Scripture” (31).

Brown is careful in his presentation of this theme to acknowledge that adherents to other systems also recognize the importance of the glory of God, and he does a good job of demonstrating its importance as a “unifying principle” in the dispensational system. That said, I’m not sure that a single center to Scripture is necessary. If I were asked for Scripture’s central theme(s), I would provide three: glory, kingdom, and redemption. If given the opportunity to elaborate I’d observe that the kingdom theme is developed through a series of covenants which forward God’s plan of redemption—all for the purpose of bringing glory to God.

I appreciate Brown’s purpose in uniting the glory and kingdom themes by emphasizing that the glory theme culminates in the millennial kingdom. However, it does seem strange to make the millennium to the exclusion of the new creation the climax of the theme. In addition, while I agree with Brown about the fulfillment of God’s promises to the nation of Israel, it seems strange to omit the extension of God’s purposes to all the nations. From the beginning, God chose Israel to bless the nations. It seems that their omission detracts from the worldwide international scope of God’s glory.

Jeremiah 30-31: The New Covenant and the Land

by

In this section of Jeremiah the phrase “The word that came to Jeremiah from Yhwh” (30:1) marks off the beginning of a major section. The same phrase occurs in 32:1, marking off the next major section.  Within Jeremiah 30:1-31:40 the phrase “Thus says Yhwh, the God of Israel” marks the beginning of the prologue (30:1) and epilogue (31:23). Between these are seven songs each marked out by the phrase “Thus says Yhwh.” After the Epilogue there are three promises each marked out by the phrase “Behold, the days are coming, declaration of Yhwh” (31:27, 31, 38). After the second promise, there are two guarantees marked out by the phrase, “Thus says Yhwh.” All this is to say that the new covenant promises that get quoted in the NT are part of a highly structured section of Jeremiah. 

30:1-4Preamble: Promise of restoration to the land
30:5-11First Song: Israel’s distress; anticipation of the deliverance and service to Yhwh and the Messiah
30:12-17Second Song: Yhwh will heal Israel’s incurable wound
30:18-31:1Third Song: The restoration of Jerusalem under the Messiah; Israel will be God’s people, and He will be their God
31:2-6Fourth Song: Restoration of the remanent, restoration of the land, Yhwh’s reign from Zion
31:7-14Fifth Song: Call for rejoicing; announcing Israel’s restoration to the nations
31:15Sixth Song: Israel’s mourning
31:16-22Seventh Song: Yhwh will have compassion on Israel and restore her not only to the land but to Himself
31:23-26Epilogue: The blessing of restoration to the land
31:27-30First Promise: Yhwh will watch over Israel “to build and to plant”
31:31-34Second Promise: Yhwh will cut a new covenant with Israel and Judah in place of the Mosaic covenant; it will internalize the law and provide for regeneration and forgiveness
31:35-36First Guarantee: These promises are as sure as the fixed order of creation
31:37Second Guarantee: These promises as sure as the immensity of creation
31:38-40Third promise: Jerusalem will be rebuilt never to be destroyed again

Note: This structure and the wording “preamble,” “song,” “epilogue,” “promise,” and “guarantee” are taken from Andrew Shead, A Mouth Full of Fire: The Word of God in the Words of Jeremiah, New Studies in Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2012), 189. I depart from Shead in taking 31:15 as its own song rather than as the beginning of the final song and in dividing his single “guarantee” into two.

It is notable that the preamble (30:1-4) to this section focuses on restoration of Israel and Judah back to the land that Yhwh gave to their fathers. 

The theme of restoration from the land shows up in the first song, third song, fourth, fifth song, and seventh song. And it is the emphasis of the epilogue. The sixth song is a brief song of weeping to which the seventh is a response. The second song seems to be about spiritual renewal rather than physical renewal. The seventh song combines the two. 

The first promise uses the metaphor of seed to portray Israel and Judah growing up in the land. The third promise is about the rebuilding of Jerusalem. This has to be eschatological given that the valley of Hinnom is said to be sanctified and the city is said to never again be overthrown.

In the following section, Jeremaih 32:1-33:13 Jeremiah was told to buy a field while Jerusalem was under siege. Jeremiah recognized that it is because of Israel’s violation of the Mosaic covenant that Babylon will conquer Judah (32:23-24; cf. 32:29-35). But God reiterates the new covenant promise of the restoration of exiled Israel to the land—at which point they will fear God (32:36-44; 33:6-13). The transformation of heart indicates that this restoration is eschatological rather than merely post-exilic. In addition, the idea that Jeremiah would received the land purchased presupposes resurrection and also pushes to an eschatological fulfillment. 

 The emphasis on restoration to the land (along with the phrasing “house of Israel and house of Judah”) require that the new covenant promise in these chapters be focused on the nation of Israel specifically rather than the people of God most broadly. This is confirmed by the fact that the nations are mentioned in these chapters in distinction from Israel and Judah (30:11; 31:7, 10; 33:9). In addition we have the specific statement in 31:36 “If this fixed order departs from before me, declaration of Yhwh, then shall the seed of Israel cease from being a nation before me forever.”

None of this is to deny that the redeemed from the nations have also been made party to the new covenant. From the very beginning, God’s covenant’s with Israel have been for the sake of nations (Gen 12:3; 18:18; 22:18). Jeremiah himself anticipated Gentile inclusion in these blessings (Jer 3:17-18; 4:2; 12:14-17; 16:19; 46:26). In fact, some of these texts are land promises to the nations. See also Isa 19:25; 54-55 (esp. 54:2-3; 55:5 with attention to the covenantal context of these verses) and Zeph 3:9 with Isa 2:2-4; 11:10;  42:1, 4; 56:7; Eze 36:23, 36; 37:28; 39:7; Mic 4:1-3. All of these texts point to Gentile inclusion in the new covenant.

The New Testament is clear that the new covenant is now in force for both Jews and Gentiles. Jesus’s death, as memorialized in the Lord’s Supper, cut the new covenant (Matt. 26:28; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25). Paul was a minister of the new covenant (2 Cor. 3:6). Hebrews 8 teaches that the new covenant has already replaced the Mosaic covenant. Romans 11:7 and Ephesians 2:11ff. reveal that Gentile branches were grafted in and that believing Jews and Gentiles have become one new man. 

These passages do not teach that ethnic distinctions have been done away. Nor do they cancel the specific land promises made to Israel as part of the promised new covenant. Passages like Hebrews 8 indicate that the new covenant promises regarding relationship with Yhwh are now being equally enjoyed by believing Jews and Gentiles as members of the new covenant together. But the new covenant promises regarding the restoration of Israel and Judah to the land are so pervasive and emphatic that they cannot be dismissed. In the structure of Jeremiah 30-33, the promises regarding relationship with Yhwh serve the land promises since it is only when the people know God and love his law that they can be sure to remain in the land. This is not to say that the land promises are more important than promises regarding relationship to Yhwh. Far from it. But, in the context of Jeremiah, they are intertwined. 

Does this mean, then, that there are new covenant land promises to which Gentiles are not party? In that the specific land of Israel is promised to a reunified Israel and Judah, yes. But as noted above, there are land promises to Gentiles in the new covenant as well. The new earth is the fulfillment of the land promises—not as an abstraction but with Israel and the nations all receiving lands.

Some might see the land element of the new covenant as the husk which falls away with the spiritual promises being the kernel. To be sure, the relationship between God and his people is central. But God has always intended for his people to be embodied and emplaced. Embodiment and emplacement are not a husk that can be discarded. That is a gnostic tendency, and Jeremiah 30-31 forecloses that way of thinking for the Christian. 

The Interpretation of Isaiah 11:6-9

by

Isaiah 11:6-9 is the famous passage in which the wolf dwells with the lamb and the baby can play by hole of the cobra because these animals will no longer kill or devour.

This has long been understood figuratively. The Puritan commentator Matthew Poole (Annotations, 2:354), for instance, wrote:

But this is not to be understood literally, which is a gross and vain conceit of some Jews; but spiritually and metaphorically, as is evident. And the sense of the metaphor is this, Men of fierce, and cruel, and ungovernable dispositions, shall be so transformed by the preaching of the gospel, and by the grace of Christ, that they shall become most humble, and gentle, and tractable, and shall no more vex and persecute those meek and poor ones mentioned ver. 4, but shall become such as they; of which we have instances in Saul being made a Paul, and in the rugged jailer, Acts 16, and in innumerable others.

John Oswalt rejects this interpretation (NICOT, 1:283):

A second means of interpretation is spiritualistic. The animals represent various spiritual conditions and states within human beings (cf. Calvin). While this avoids the problems of literal fulfillment, it introduces a host of other problems, chief of which is the absence in the text of any controls upon the process. Thus, it depends solely upon the exegete’s ingenuity to find the correspondences (contra 5:1-7, where the correspondence is clearly indicated).

But he also rejects what he calls a “literalistic” interpretation (NICOT, 1:283):

While this interpretation is possible, the fact that the lion’s carnivorousness is fundamental to what a lion is and that literal fulfillment of the prophecy would require a basic alteration of the lion’s nature suggest that another interpretation is intended.

Paul House reaches a similar conclusion (MC, 331):

One problem with taking the passage in a fully literal manner is the change in the physiological makeup of the animals. How can a carnivore exist on plants, for example?

Both Oswalt and House opt for a broadly figurative approach:

The third way of interpreting this passage, and others like it, is the figurative. In this approach one concludes that an extended figure of speech is being used to make a single, overarching point, namely, that in the Messiah’s reign the fears associated with insecurity, danger, and evil will be removed, not only for the individual but for the world as well (Rom. 8:19-21).

Oswalt, NICOT, 1:283.

The goal of the passage is not to give detailed information on what animals will eat in the eschaton, but rather it is to provide understandable images that offer comfort and challenge to the eighth-century B.C. audience. From this base, these images provide challenge and comfort for current readers.

House, MC, 331

I don’t understand the reticence of Oswalt and House to say that this passage is prophesying a change in actual animal behavior.

  1. To say that a lion’s carnivorousness is fundamental to the lion’s nature is to deny the goodness of creation before the Fall, for it implies the existence of death before the Fall.
  2. Thus the objection that this passage would require “change in the physiological makeup of the animals” is a strange objection given that such a change happened in the move from Creation to Fall. Why not such a change in the move from Fall to New Creation. House already said the best understanding of this passage was re-creation, not mere return to Eden nor reform. Cannot re-creation  involve changes in the “physiological makeup of the animals”?
  3. To deny that this passage envisages a transformation of the animal world is to deny that Redemption extends as far as the Fall.
  4. To deny that this passage envisages a transformation of the animal world is to neglect covenant promies of God. See Hosea 2:18; Eze 34:25.
  5. Finally, the interpretation of Oswalt and House is very general. But, granting its validity, it would need to be lived out in concrete situations. It would seem that one of these concrete situations would be no fear of being killed by wild animals or poisonous snakes in the new creation. House already indicated that he believes the new creation is the time of fulfillment for this passage and that death will be abolished at that time.

Thus the better interpretation of this passage is that of Motyer (Isaiah, 124):

So secure is this peace that a youngster can exercise the dominion originally given to human kind. Secondly, in verse 7 there is a change of nature within the beasts themselves: cow and bear eat the same food, as do lion and ox. There is also a change in the very order of things itself: the herbivoral nature of all the creatures points to Eden restored (Gn. 1:29-30). Thirdly, in verse 8 the curse removed. The enmity between the woman’s seed and the serpent is gone (Gn. 3:15ab).”

See also Keil and Delitzsch, 7:184; E. J. Young, Isaiah 1:390-91; Geoffrey Grogan, Expositor’s Bible Commentary (rev. ed.), 6:545; Gary Smith, NAC, 268-69; Williamson, Sealed with an Oath, NSBT, 66; Edward Adams, The Stars Will Fall from Heaven, LNTS, 34.

Isaiah 10 as the Context of Isaiah 11

by

Isaiah 11-12 is the conclusion of a major section of Isaiah that began in chapter 2. This section begins and ends with the eschatological reign of the King over Israel and the nations. In chapter 2 the king is identified as Yhwh; in chapter 11 he is identified as Davidic. In between Isaiah provides evidence that he is both God and man in one person. This major section can be divided into three sub-sections: 2-5, 6, 7-12.

Isaiah 9:8-10:4 describe the judgment that God would bring on Israel and Judah through Assyria. Isaiah 10:5-19 then reveals that once God is finished using Assyria to judge Israel and Judah, God will then judge Assyria for its wrongdoing.

However strong may be the connections of theme or wording with the previous passage, the opening phrase of 10:33 clearly marks the start of a new literary unit, as its comparable use in 3:1 shows (הנה + this particular elaborate form of the divine title + participle); indeed, here it even lacks the editorial conjunctive כי that we find there. Suggestions that the section should begin as early as 10:27 (e.g. Blum, ‘Jesajas prophetisches Testament’, 567, with previous literature documented; Roberts) cannot, therefore, be entertained. Equally clearly, והיה ביום ההוא in 11:10 (see on 7:18) indicates the start of the next unit, there being no indication of any break in between.

Williamson, ICC, 629.

Based on Williamson’s comment and reflections from Bauckham’s essay (“The Messianic Interpretation of Isaiah 10:34,” in The Jewish World around the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008]), this is how I would see these verses in context.

10:5-11 – Assyria is God’s rod against his people, though Assyria does not understand this.

10:12-14 – Assyria boasts of itself

10:15-19  – God will judge proud Assyria

10:20-23 – The eschatological promise of a returning remnant of Israel

10:24-27 – Application of the preceding teaching to Israel when the Assyrians come against them.

10:28-32 – A description of Assyria’s march through Israel to Jerusalem.

10:33-34 – The curtain is pulled back; God is the one lopping the boughs of Israel and bringing the lofty low and cutting the thickets of the forest with an axe. – Note that the axe imagery links back to 10:15—Yhwh wields the axe (Assyria) against Israel.

11:1 – Though God has hewn the lofty in Israel down, a shoot will come forth from the stump of Jesse.

Bauckham understands John the Baptist to allude to these passages, with the understanding that the Majestic One is the Messiah. Given the above understanding, if Bauckham is correct, John is not working from a direct messianic prediction in his allusion to 10:33-34. Instead, he is alluding to a historical judgment of the Lord Yhwh on Israel in the past and warning that the Messiah will bring such a judgment against Israel in the future if they do not repent.

Handouts for Survey of the Old Testament II

by

In 2023 my church’s adult Sunday school classes surveyed the entire Old Testament. I was able to teach the Fall semester. Here is a link to the handouts I created for the class.

These handouts cover all the prophetic books except Hosea, Amos, and Haggai. They also cover Lamentations and the post-exilic historical books. The shorter books tend to include sections on historical context, the place of the book within the canon, the internal structure of the book, Scripture’s use of Scripture in relation to that book, major themes, and a recommended resource.

Isaiah Survey: Isaiah 56:9-66:24

by

Isaiah 56:9-66:24 forms the last major unit. I am generally unconvinced of chiastic structures on the macro level,[1] but this unit seems to be structured as a chiasm. As Abernethy says, “”While I am typically sceptical of chiastic structures, this one has strong textual merit and explanatory power.”[2]

A. Confronting the faithless insiders with judgment and assuring the faithful with salvation (56:9-59:8)

B. Prayer for forgiveness and restoration (59:9-15a)

C. The warrior king judges the wicked and redeems the repentant (59:15b-21)

D. Zion’s international renown amid King YHWH’s glory and his messenger (60-62)

C’. The warrior king judges and saves the nations (63:1-6)

B’. Prayer for forgiveness and restoration (63:7-64:12)

A’. Confronting the faithless insiders with judgment and assuring the faithful with salvation (65:1-66:24)[3]

Segment A (56:9-59:8) begins by calling for judgment on sinful Israel, and the sin of the people is once again expounded. In the midst of these judgment texts, however, are passages in which God promises redemption for the repentant. However, adhering to religious forms will not please God if it is not accompanied by righteous living.

In segment B (59:9-15a) Israel speaks in first person to confess its sins.

In segment C (59:15-21) Yhwh straps on his armor and comes as a warrior to “repay” sinners “according to their deeds” (59:18). But to those who repent, a “Redeemer will come to Zion,” and Yhwh will make a covenant that conveys the Spirit and the Word to them. Paul quotes this passage in Romans 11:26-27; this passage will find its ultimate fulfillment in the eschatological judgment that is followed by the salvation of all Israel.

Having mentioned the Redeemer who comes to Zion, segment D (chs. 60-62) turn the focus squarely upon Zion. Chapter 60 is a vision of the New Jerusalem (John draws heavily from this passage in Revelation 21-22). Jerusalem shines with the glory of Yhwh, and the nations stream into it with their wealth and worship. Then in chapter 61 the Messiah speaks (“Yhwh has anointed me”) of the Spirit empowering him for ministry. Jesus quoted this passage of himself in Luke 4:18-19 (cf. Matthew 11:5//Luke 7:22). It describes his ministry in both his first and second comings. The passage then speaks of the restoration of Israel in their land. Chapter 62 returns to the theme of Zion and coming of the nations to the city, but this chapter is couched in terms of anticipation of and preparation for that day.

Segment C’ (63:1-6) returns to the theme of the divine warrior. Here is a warrior who is treading down the peoples as if they are grapes in a winepress. It is the “day of vengeance” (63:4), but note that the day of vengeance is part of the “year of redemption” (63:4). The eschatological judgment of the nations prepares the way for the new creation. Revelation alludes to this passage when it speaks of “one like a son of man” who “gathered the grape harvest of the earth and thew it into the great winepress of the wrath of God” (Rev. 14:14, 19) and when it describes the returning Christ coming “clothed in a robe dipped in blood” (Rev. 19:13).

Segment B’ (63:7-64:12) is another prayer. It follows this scene of judgment with praise for God’s steadfast love and compassion for his people. It acknowledges Israel’s rebellion and calls on God to redeem his people. Segment A’ (65:1-66:24) begins with God’s answer to the preceding prayer. His answer is that he is now saving the Gentiles while judging unrepentant Israel (65:1-7). But there will be a time when Israel will be redeemed and restored (65:8-10). He therefore distinguishes, in a series of blessings and curses his servants from those who would reject his call (65:11-16). Then God declares the creation of new heavens and a new earth. Close attention to the details of this text shows that there is combined in this text what Revelation 20 will identify as the Millennium and Revelation 21 identifies as a succeeding new earth.[4] This should not be troublesome. The millennial period is the time in which Christ, as the second Adam leads his people to subdue and rule over the earth as Adam was originally commissioned to do. It is thus the period in which the new creation is being brought about. When God says, “For behold, I am creating a new heavens and a new earth,” a process may be implied. This glorious vision of the future, and the book as a whole, closes on a somber note. All redeemed humanity will worship Yhwh—and they will view the dead bodies of those in hell whose worm will not die. Clearly Isaiah’s is burdened that those who heard (and read) his message avail themselves of the redemption accomplished by the Servant rather than continue in their rebellion and suffer God’s wrath for eternity.

[1] Oswalt captures my sentiments regarding chiastic structures: “I am very skeptical of hypotheses that depend on identifying elaborate structure, such as chiastic parallelism, extending over several chapters or even over the whole book. Not only do all these proposals seem to me to depend on misusing some of the data sooner or later, they also do not seem to take enough account of the way the motifs of the book appear and reappear. Thus, it is possible to create any number of these ‘structures,’ each one plausible and each one differing from the rest.” Oswalt, “Kerygmatic Structure,” in “God to the Land that I Will Show You”: Studies in Honor of Dwright Young, 147, n. 18, as cited in Wagner, 10, n. 20. That said, Oswalt does see a chiastic structure in Isaiah 56-66. NICOT, 2:15-16, 463-65; cf. Tully, Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture, 155.

[2] Abernethy, NSBT, 22.

[3] This structure adapts the one found in Abernethy, NSBT, 84. The wording is Abernethy’s. However, Abernethy’s A and A’ lines have been dropped. His A line covered 56:10-8, which I have attached to the previous section. His A’ line covered 66:18-24, which I incorporated into his line B’ (65:1-66:17). I relettered the lines according to my adaption. Oswalt and Tully’s chiastic structure (see previous note) is similar to Abernethy’s original structure, the only difference being that they do not separate out the prayers in 59:1-15a and 63:7-64:12 but incorporate them into 56:9-59:15a and 63:7-66:17).

[4] For instance, 65:20 refers to the birth of infants and the death of the aged while Revelation 21:4 indicates that there will be no more death.

Isaiah Survey: Isaiah 54:1-56:8

by

“Shout for joy, O barren one … Break forth into joyful shouting” is the exhortation that flows from Isaiah 53 and the atonement provided by the Servant.[1] Though there is a close connection between Isaiah 54:1-56:8 and Isaiah 53, these chapters are a new section. The bookends of Isaiah 401:1-11 and 52:7-12 indicated that that major section was coming to a close. One might then suppose that the final Servant song should begin a new section rather than end this section, but there is a major shift in Isaiah’s servant language after Isaiah 53. In Isaiah 40-53 the servant is always in the singular (whether it refers to the nation or to the Messiah), but after Isaiah 53 the occurrence of servant is always in the plural. Thus, a major break in the book occurs with the climatic 53rd chapter.[2] Notably, just as the text preceding Isaiah 53 captured in one text several of the most important theological themes in Scripture, Isaiah 54-55 brings together all the biblical covenants in a single passage. It opens with an allusion to the Abrahamic covenant (54:1-3). Sarah, the barren one, would become the mother of an innumerable seed. The enlargement of the tent and “spread[ing] abroad to the right and to the left” alludes to Genesis 28:14: “Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.”[3] In fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant, Israel will possess the nations. There may also be an allusion to Genesis 9:27, “and let him [Japheth] dwell in the tents of Shem.” In verses 9-10 there is an explicit reference to the Noahic covenant. God says that just as he committed in the Noahic covenant not to flood the earth again, so his new covenant commitments (here identified as the covenant of peace) will be maintained. He then looks forward to the New Jerusalem, filled with the righteous and immune to attack. In chapter 55 Isaiah calls all people to come to Yhwh for satisfaction and to seek Yhwh rather than wickedness or any other thing, since those will not satisfy. In this context Yhwh says that the covenant promises he made with David will be taken up into the new covenant (here called the “everlasting covenant”) and fulfilled among all the nations. In 56:1-8 those who were excluded from temple worship under the Mosaic covenant, the eunuch and the foreigner will keep God’s covenant and worship Yhwh in his house, which is to be “a house of prayer for all peoples” (56:7). When the Lord Yhwh gathers “the outcasts of Israel,” he will also gather “others,” Gentiles (56:8).

[1] Oswalt, NICOT, 2:413-14; Motyer, 444; Williamson, Sealed with an Oath, NSBT, 160-61.

[2] See Daniel L. Wagner, “The Dynamic ‘Structure’ of Isaiah 40-66: An Analysis of Organization Based on Transitions in the Servant and Other Orienting Motifs,” PhD diss. Bob Jones University, 2004.

[3] Motyer, 445.

Isaiah Survey: Isaiah 40-53

by

Isaiah 40 marks a major shift in the book of Isaiah. In the closing verses of ch. 39, Hezekiah was told that the people will be sent into exile. Chapter 40 opens with words of comfort. Isaiah also alludes to the covenant formula, “I will be your God, and you will be my people.” Exile will not be the last word. Isaiah 40:1-2 also mentions that Israel’s great problem will be addressed: her iniquity will be removed; she has received the double for all her sins. How this will be effected will be most clearly explained in Isaiah 53, the closing chapter of the major section that runs from Isaiah 40-53.

This major section is comprised of two sub-sections, the first of which is Isaiah 40-48. This section opens with a voice calling. First, it calls for the way to be cleared for the coming of Yhwh (40:3-5). Some interpret this as referring to a second exodus as the exiles return from Babylon, but the text is clearly referring to the return of Yhwh, not the return of the exiles.[1] God’s presence is the most important thing to be restored to the people when the people are restored from their sin. Second, the voice affirms the enduring reliability of God’s Word (40:6-8). What follows is the content of that word from God (40:9), and that content is extols the incomparably unique glory of the sovereign Yhwh. This is a motif that Isaiah will weave throughout this entire section. Alongside this motif is another: the vanity of idols. The chief thing Isaiah highlights in setting Yhwh apart from idols is that he can predict the future, telling the end from the beginning. Only in chapter 41 does Isaiah introduce the theme of Israel’s return from exile, and that obliquely. He introduces “one from the east” (41:2), who will later be identified as Cyrus (45:28, 45:1). The Cyrus prophecy was given to show that “I am Yhwh, and there is no other; besides me there is no God” (45:5) (the first two motifs noted), and it does so through an amazing predictive prophecy (naming Cyrus 150 years before he took these actions). It also promises the rebuilding of Jerusalem, the temple, and the cities of Judah (44:26-28). The theme of return from exile thus runs through this section and is the focus of the final verses of chapter 48. Also introduced in this section is the servant of Yhwh theme. The servant is introduced in 41:8, where the servant is identified as Israel. In chapter 42 the Servant is an individual: Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him” (42:1, emphasis added). Abernethy notes, “A discerning reader should detect similarities between 42:1 and the task of the Davidic ruler as described in Isaiah 1–39. Like the Davidic ruler, the servant is an agent who receives God’s ‘Spirit’ (42:1//11:2) and establishes ‘justice’ (42:1, 3, 4; 9:7[6]; 16:5; 32:1; cf. 11:4).”[2] Since the king represents the nation, it is fitting for the servant to be both the nation and its federal head, the King. Later in the chapter, the focus shifts back to Israel, “Who is blind but my servant” (42:19). The servant for the rest of this section is the nation, though the focus shifts to the servant’s redemption (43:8-13; 44:1-5, 21-45:8; 48:20).

Isaiah 49-53, the second part of the section that runs from chapter 40 through chapter 53, emphasizes how Yhwh will redeem Israel—through his Servant. In this section the Servant is in every instance the individual Servant that chapter 42 introduced and linked with the Davidic Messiah. Chapter 49 begins with the Servant calling out to the nations to listen. This servant, as the king of Israel, can be called Israel and his purpose from the womb has been to redeem Israel. But here it is revealed that this Servant Israel will also redeem the nations along with the nation Israel. Israel is spoken to as exiled for its sin, but just as God redeemed Israel from Egypt, God will redeem Israel from exile and sin (50:1-3). He will do this through the Servant, who (unlike the nation) listened to and obeyed the words of Yhwh. This obedient Servant will be beaten and humiliated, but he will not be disgraced, for Yhwh will vindicate him (50:4-9). Those who fear Yhwh and pursue righteousness are directed back to the promises of the Abrahamic covenant for the promises of God and then forward to the new creation and the new covenant when God’s law will be written on their hearts (50:10-8). The people call on God to redeem them as he did in the exodus (51:9-11), and Yhwh promises redemption and the end of judgment (51:12-52:6). This section begins to draw to a close with 52:7-12, which is full of language drawn first from 40:1-11.[3] These verses also bring together many themes that run right through Scripture from beginning to end. Jonathan Pennington comments, “Here is one of the single most important passages for a whole-Bible theology because in it we see the interconnectedness of multiple lines of overlapping truth: good news/gospel, salvation, God’s reign or kingdom, and peace/shālôm.”[4] This key text is followed by the final Servant song, which makes explicit that the redemption of Israel and the nations will take place through the substitutionary death and resurrection of the Servant.

[1] So Alexander, 2:95-96; Young, 3:28; Oswalt, NICOT, 2:51-52; Motyer, 300; Smith, NAC, 2:95-96; Steveson, 337, n. 9; Abernethy, NSBT, 56-57.

[2] Abernethy, NSBT, 139. Abernethy, however, does not identify the Messiah and the Servant directly. I would identify them.

[3] See Table 2.1 in Abernethy, NSBT, 63.

[4] Jonathan T. Pennington, “A Biblical Theology of Human Flourishing,” (Delivered at the Institute for Faith, Work, and Economics, 2015), 7.

Isaiah Survey: Isaiah 36-39

by

The next major section (36-39) is a series of narratives that demonstrate the importance of trusting in Yhwh alone, who again demonstrates that he is king over all the nations.[1] The Rabshakeh taunted Hezekiah and mocked Yhwh. But Hezekiah sent for Isaiah who prophesied that Yhwh would cause the king of Assyria to return to his own land where he would fall by the sword. In this section also Isaiah prays for deliverance, and this prayer draws on the themes of the preceding sections (Yhwh’s sovereignty over the nations) and anticipates the themes of the next section (the gods of the nations are idols, which means they are nothing in comparison to the true God).[2] The next two narratives precede in time Assyria’s siege of Jerusalem. In the first Hezekiah becomes sick and is told by Isaiah that he will die. However, Yhwh hears Hezekiah’s prayer and then sends word to Isaiah that Hezekiah will live another fifteen years. This prompts a psalm of praise from Hezekiah. The final narrative, however, does not put Hezekiah in a good light. He foolishly shows all his wealth to Babylonian envoys, and Isaiah is sent to declare to Hezekiah that one day all that treasure (and even some of his own sons) would be taken to Babylon. In Isaiah 36:2, the Rabshakeh of the king of Assyria came to the “conduit of the upper pool on the highway to the Washer’s Field” to speak to Hezekiah (36:2). This is the same exact location where Isaiah, in chapter 7, met Ahaz declared to him: “If you do not stand firm in your faith, you will not stand at all” (7:9, NIV). Ahaz did not stand firm in his faith; Hezekiah provides a counter-example of one who did trust in God. In between chapters 7 and 36 the oracles and woes emphasize that Judah and Jerusalem cannot trust in the nations or in their own might. These chapters further reveal that the great concern should not be conquest by the nations but the coming day of Yhwh.

[1] For the emphasis on trusting Yhwh, see Tully, Reading the Prophets as Christian Scripture, 161-62. For an emphasis on Yhwh as king, see Abernethy, The Book of Isaiah and God’s Kingdom, NSBT, 47-48.

[2] Wolf, Interpreting Isaiah, 175-76.