E. The Reign of Hezekiah
18. An Oracle on Moab (15:1-16:14)
15-16,” CB 18(1961)336-46; S. Mittmann, “Das sudliche Ostjordanland im Lichte eines neuassyrischen Keilschrift- briefes aus Nimrud,” ZDPV 89(1973)15-25; W. Rudolph,
“Jesaja XV-XVI,“ Hebrew and Semitic Studies Presented to G. R.
Driver (London: Oxford University Press, 1963)130-43; H. W.
F. Saggs, “The Nimrud Letters, 1952-Part II: Relations with the West,” Iraq 17(1955) 126-60; W. Schottroff, “Horonaim, Nimrim, Luhith und der Westrand des ‘Landes Ataroth’: Ein Beitrag zur historischen Topographie des Landes,” ZDPV 82(1966)163-208; A. H. van Zyl, The Moubites (Leiden: E. J.
Brill, 1960).
When Tiglath-pileser was in the eastern Mediterranean seaboard in 734-732, one of the kings who offered him tribute was Salamanu of Moab (ANET 282). Whether Moab was a participating member of the anti-Assyrian coalition at the time or was merely to pay tribute is not known. No biblical text explicitly accuses the Moabites of harassment against Judah during this period, and no Assyrian text implicates Moab in the conspiracy. A few years earlier, when Amos condemned Moab, he did so by denouncing the Moabite king I for burning to lime the bones of the king of Edom (Amos 2:1-3) but does not accuse Moab of actions against Israel or Judah. In Isaiah 11:14, Isaiah describes a future time when Ephraim and Judah would take action against Philistia, Edom, Moab, and Ammon, which clearly reflects animosity against Moab.
First Chronicles 5 supplies information that, when com- pared with Isaiah 15-16, could indicate that tensions existed between Judah and Moab in the days of Ahaz and Hezekiah.
238
I have inspected forty-five horses from. . . .officials of the Egyptians, the people of Gaza, of Judah, of Moab, of the sons of Ammon, when they entered Calah on the twelfth, delivered them at their hands (ND 2765; Saggs, 135)
Isaiah 15-16 indicates that Moab was part of the renewed anti-Assyrian coalition in the west in 728/7. Probably Shalmaneser V, rather than Tiglath-pileser, took action against Moab. That Shalmaneser was active in the Transjor- dan area is noted by the prophet Hosea, who warned Ephraim that “as Shalman destroyed Beth-arbel [a city in Transjordan] on the day of battle; mothers were slashed in pieces with their children. Thus it shall be done to you, 0 Bethel” (Hos. 10:14b-15u). We have no Assyrian texts concerning Shalmaneser’s wars in the west. From Josephus (Ant IX 283-87), we learn that the Assyrians were engaged in Phoenicia and Syria throughout much of Shalmaneseis reign. Probably the Assyrian king was forced to fight on several fronts in Syria-Palestine. One contingent of his troops
239
Isaiah
may have taken action against Moabite territory, while other units fought elsewhere. In his oracle on Damascus, Isaiah indicates that not only was Ephraim involved in rebellion (17:3), but also Moab seems to have suffered before the other two. Isaiah 17:2 declares “the cities [or citadels] of Aroer [in Moab] are deserted’ but implies that Damascus and Ephraim are yet to be attacked. If Moab was attacked first, this would explain the appearance of the oracle on Moab in Isaiah 15-16 before the speech on Damascus/Israel in chapter 17.
A few general comments on Isaiah 15-16 are in order before proceeding to more specific discussion. The two chapters form a unit. This is already indicated by the (probably editorial) single heading-the “oracle (or “burden, pronouncement”) on Moab.” The chapters, especially 15, are full of place names, some identifiable, others not. At times, it is difficult to know if a word indicates a place name or not. For example, the last word in chapter 15 may be read as a place name, Adamah (or Admah), or as the word for “land,”
“ground.” The language in the speech is very terse, at times almost cryptic. Difficulties in understanding many of the particulars of the text are already indicated in the ancient versions. There is at least one quotation within the speech, although its beginning and end are not clearly indicated.
We assume that the speech reflects an Assyrian assault on Moab, presumably from the north, devastation in the Moabite tableland, the flight of the people, an embassy to Jerusalem requesting that Moabite fugitives be allowed to take asylum in Judah, and a prophetic response, recom- mending denying the Moabites their request. Whether the speech is based on an actual appeal and response involving negotiations between the two states or is reflective of only a hypothetical situation which could have occurred during the crisis is unknown. At the time, Hezekiah had just inherited the throne in Jerusalem and Isaiah’s speech could be seen as the prophet’s recommendation of policy in the situation.
The following appears to be the contents of the speech:
Isaiah’s Preaching and the Zsaianic Narratives Isaiah 15:1-9
In 15:1-9, the prophet describes the calamity that has struck the Moabite countryside, the people’s reactions and the efforts of the general population to flee, and his own
“empathetic” identity with their plight.
The description of the destruction of Moabite cities does not follow a clear geographical pattern-that is, the places mentioned do not indicate a clear line of march and assault by the Assyrian army. One would have assumed that in an attack by Assyria, the troops would have marched south- ward down the main trunk road through Transjordan and would have attacked towns along this route in a north to south direction. There is, however, no such pattern reflected in Isaiah’s speech. This could be explained in one of two ways. First, the prophet could be simply picking and choosing place names at will without any effort to do so in any structured form. Second, the Assyrian forces that moved into southern Transjordan may not have been a large united front that operated by taking one town and then moving systematically to the next. The troops may have been a number of smaller units that spread out through the region and attacked various cities simultaneously. Earlier, we noted that Shalmaneser seems to have been fighting on several fronts in the west, and this dispersion of his troops may explain why he apparently never enjoyed the decisive victories of either his predecessor or his successor.
The cities mentioned in 15:1-9, whose locations can be identified, range throughout the Moabite plateau. Some, like Az, Kir (Kir-hareseth), and others, lay south of the River Amon (Wadi Mujib) in the more traditional land of Moab.
Others, like Dibon, Nebo, Medeba, Heshbon, and so forth, lay to the north of the Arnon.
Although the opening verse would seem to indicate that Moab was practically ready to collapse, the rest of the text, and especially 16:14, suggests otherwise-namely, that the people had time to flee, carrying along their moveable property, and to make contact with Judah and to negotiate asylum. Verse 9 also implies that more trouble lies ahead.
This verse is difficult to interpret. The Hebrew refers to Dimon, but ancient versions read Dibon as the city talked
241 (1) A description of the plight of the Moabites (15:1-9)
(2) Introduction to the Moabite petition for asylum (16:1-2) (3) The petition (16:3-5)
(4) The response (16:6-14).
240
Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives
of Sela (in the vicinity of Bozrah) and across the Judean wilderness to Jerusalem. They hoped by such a present to secure the aid of Judah.
Verse 16:2, describing Moabite women trying to flee across the Arnon rift, might fit better with the unit in 15:1-9 since it appears to form part of the description of the people’s plight.
Grammatically, it does not appear to be a part of the following appeal addressed to the Judean leaders. Nonethe- less, it may once have been stated so as to constitute the opening of the Moabite appeal: “Like fluttering birds and scattered nestlings are the daughters of Moab at the fords of the Amon, so. . . . ” After this emotion laden statement of the distressful situation, the actual appeal would have followed.
Isaiah
about. The verse also seems to contain a divine oracle that threatens more disaster, but such a divine threat is not found elsewhere in chapters 15-16, except for the prophet’s concluding statement. Possibly a textual error has occurred in the transmission of verse 9b (‘uryeh [“lion”] for ‘ereh [“I see”]). Such an assumption allows the NEB to translate
The waters of Dimon already run with blood;
yet I have more troubles in store for Dimon, for I have a vision of the survivors of Moab, of the remnant of Admah.
Isaiah 15:9
The prophet presents the Moabite people, giving expres- sion to their fears and anxieties. Wailing, wearing sackcloth, shaving the head and beard, leaving the fields unattended, weeping, fright, and other typical responses to distressful situations are noted. The royal house (see BSV margin on 15:2) and the capital city Dibon are depicted as going to places of worship (to the bumahs) to weep and lament.
The prophet, in verse 5, speaks of his “empathy” with the people. His expressions of sympathy, however, may have been only diplomatic language and expressions of “polite- ness” or, even more likely, pure sarcasm since, in the last analysis, Isaiah recommends that Judah close the border to any migration of Moabites into the country.
Isaiah 16:1-2
In 16:1, Isaiah speaks of an official embassy sent to Jerusalem requesting help and the right of asylum. The general sense of this verse is clear, although it contains several textual problems. Perhaps it should be translated as follows:
The rulers of the country have sent [a present of] lambs, from Sela by way of the desert,
to the mountain of the daughter of Zion.
Such a translation would imply that Moabite leaders had sent a gift to the Judean king (see II Kings 3:4) via the Edomite city
242
Isaiah 16:3-S
The petition of the Moabite emissaries is given in verses (2)3-5 and should be read as a direct quotation. The petition requests the king (Hezekiah) to give the people of Moab a hearing and to grant the homeless refugees the privilege of finding solace and safety in the shade of Judah’s protection.
(The entire speech is filled with diplomatic compliments and niceties!) The NEB expresses the sense of verses 3-b:
“Take up our cause with all your might;
let your shadow shield us at high noon, dark as night.
Shelter the homeless, do not betray the fugitive;
let the homeless people of Moab find refuge with you;
hide them from the despoiler.”
The quotation continues. Verse 4b should be interpreted as a clause stipulating the time limit of the refugees’ recourse to Judean protection:
“Until the oppressor is no more, and destruction has ceased;
and he who tramples under foot, has vanished from the land.”
Verse 5 continues the request, making the appeal in a flattering manner by complimenting the Judean king.
243
Isaiah Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives
(Num. 21:32; 32:35). Both Heshbon and Jazer had once been Levitical cities (Josh. 21:39).
Three times during its history, Israel/Judah controlled large portions of Transjordan. In the tenth century, David conquered much of the land north of the Amon River and Solomon presumably continued to rule over some or all of this area. For about half a century after the death of Solomon, the Israelites probably controlled little, if any, of Transjor- dan. During the reign of the Omride family in Israel (885-843), much of Transjordan again came under Israelite control. Following the death of Ahab (see II Kings l:l), Moab, under King Mesha, regained its independence (see the so-called Moabite stone of King Mesha; ANET 320-21). Again in the eighth century, Jeroboam II and Jotham resecured territory in Transjordan, probably including the plateau just east of the northern end of the Dead Sea (II Kings 14:25; I Chron. 5:1-22). This Israelite expansion into Transjordan had been especially sanctioned as an act of holy war (see the reference to the sanction of the prophet Jonah in II Kings 14:25 and note I Chron. 5:22). The towns of Elealeh, Heshbon, Jazer, and Sibmah were all in this area. Toward the end of Jeroboam’s reign, this region was retaken by the Moabites, and the Israelites/Judeans were driven out or massacred. Thus when Isaiah refers to weeping over the fall of these towns, his audience, whether Moabite or Judean, would have caught the glitter of his verbal sword.
The pride of Moab is ridiculed in verse 6 as having turned out to be nothing but empty talk. Those who once bragged are told in verse 7 to change their tune and wail. The viticultural excellence of the Heshbon and Jazer regions and the importance of the wine trade from their vineyards dominate verses 8-10. In these verses, the prophet plays on the weeping theme. He will weep over the fall of these (Israelite) cities in Moab and the loss of their good wine, but his weeping will not be for Moabite cities.
Isaiah concludes his sarcastic remarks with a double entendre that borders on the vulgar: “Therefore my bowels for Moab like a lyre will make music, and my innards for Kir-heresh”( = “city of silence,” a play on name of the Moabite city Kir-hareseth, mentioned in v. 7).
245
“Established in mercy is a throne, and one sits upon it in truthfulness,
in the tent of David;
one who judges and seeks justice, and is swift to do the right thing.”
Such a king, the emissaries imply, would surely do the right, proper, and merciful thing and aid the homeless of Moab.
If verses (2)3-5 are a quotation of the Moabites’ request for refuge, how is the presence of such a quotation in a prophetic speech to be explained? Is the Moabite request purely a creation of the prophet, who uses it to offer his response and thus his opinion about what should be done in such a situation? Is this an actual request of the Moabites, which Isaiah took up and incorporated into his speech? Are chapters 15-16 something like a royal court stenographer’s record of words spoken in an actual historical situation?
Which of these conditions stands behind chapters 15-16 cannot be determined, but none should be ruled out as a possibility.
Isaiah 16:6-14
In verses 6-11, Isaiah responds to the Moabite request. In verses 6-7, his attitude is very openly harsh and condemna- tory. In verses 8-11, especially verses 9-11,his tone seems to change drastically, and he appears to empathize intensely with the Moabites. In reality, his statements in verses 9-11 are rife with cutting sarcasm. In order to understand the prophet’s sarcastic attitude, it is necessary to understand the history of the Moabite-Israelite struggles over territory in Transjordan.
Four towns are mentioned in verses B-11: Elealeh, Heshbon, Jazer, and Sibmah. All of these were towns which at one time or another in earlier days had been Israelite cities. Elealeh, Heshbon, and Sibmah were towns in close proximity to one another, which the Israelites had once occupied and rebuilt (see Num. 21; 32:3,37-38; Josh. 13:17-19). Jazer, which lay at the border of Ammonite territory north of the Heshbon region (Num. 21:24), was settled by Levites from Hebron at the time of David (I Cl-u-on. 26:31) and was claimed as Israelite territory
244
lsaiah
Verse 12 is offered as an aside to the main part of the speech and probably was addressed fundamentally to the Judean audience or to Hezekiah. If we transpose the collective singulars in the verse into plurals, an expansive translation would look like this:
And should it happen [should Moabites be admitted temporarily into Judah], when the Moabites wanted to worship, when they wearied themselves over the bumah [a place of worship], and when they came to his [Yahweh’s] sanctuary to pray, they would not be allowed.
Verse 13 explains that this has been the verdict of Yahweh from of old. Here Isaiah is alluding to the type of opinion concerning the Moabites that became enshrined in Deu- teronomy 23:3--“No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of Yahweh; even to the tenth generation, none belonging to them shall enter the assembly of Yahweh.”
To this old word of Yahweh, Isaiah now adds a further divine word. In three years, in spite of Moab’s vast numbers, the country will be decimated and its survivors few and inconsequential. Isaiah’s use of the expression “three years, like the years of a hireling” could refer to the exactness of the count (three years, no more, no less) or to the burdensome length the time will appear to be (three years counted off one long day at a time). If the latter, Isaiah has Yahweh announce a long, slow death for Moab.
19. OLD COALITIONS NEVER DIE (17:1-14)