Provisions in the promise: Patriarchal era 84-99
People of the promise: Mosaic era 100-121
Place of the promise: Premonarchical era 122-142
Ring of the promise: Davidic era 143-164
Life in the promise: Sapiential era 165-181
Day of the promise: Ninth century 182-191
Servant of the promise: Eighth century 192-219 Renewal of the promise: Seventh century 220-235 Kingdom of the promise: Exilic prophets 236-249 Triumph of the promise: Postexilic times 250-261 Part 3: The connection with New Testament theology 263-269
Walter C. Kaiser Jr.
on the Promise Theologian: Isaiah
Reprinted with permission from Walter C. Raiser Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978), pp. 204-5,207-10,212-19.
[2040 Beyond all question, Isaiah was the greatest of all the OT prophets, for his thought and doctrine covered as wide a range of subjects as did the length of his ministry. While his writing can be divided into two parts, chapters l-39 -keyed mainly to judgment and chapters 40-66 primarily emphasizing comfort, the book stands as a unit with its own continuity features such as the unique and distinctive phrase “the Holy One of Is- rael,” which occurs twelve times in the first part and fourteen times in the second part.1
[205B The second part of Isaiah’s work is a veritable OT biblical the- ology in itself. It might well be called the “Old Testament book of Ro- mans” or the “New Testament within the Old Testament.” Its twenty-seven chapters cover the same scope as the twenty-seven books of the NT. Chap- ter 40 begins with the predicted voice of John the Baptist crying in the wilderness as do the Gospels: chapters 65-66 climax with the same picture as the Apocalypse of John in Revelation 21-22 of the new heavens and the new earth. Sandwiched between these two end points is the midpoint, Isa 52: 13-53: 12, which is the greatest theological statement on the mean- ing of the atonement in all Scripture.
No less significant, however, is the first part of Isaiah’s writing. Its suc- cessive “books,” to use Franz Delitzsch’s term,2 are the books of Harden- ing (chaps. l-6)) Immanuel (7-12)) Nations (13-23)) the Little Apocalypse (24-27; 34-35)) the Chief Cornerstone and Woes (28-33)) and Hezekiah (36-39).
In our view, Isaiah must be called the theologian’s theologian. And when the continuing promise of God was being considered, Isaiah ex- celled both in his use of the antecedent theology of the Abrahamic-
1. Conservatives have pointed to some forty additional phrases or sentences that appear in both parts of Isaiah as evidence for its unity, cf. Gleason L,. Archer, Jr., A Suruq of 012 Tes- tamPnt Introduction, rev. ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1974), pp. 345ff.
2. Fr;m/. Iklitxsch, T/w Prqbhuriu.s oj’lcaioh. 2 ~01s. in Cl. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Bib&al (Jommentrcry on thr Old ‘fb.ctnment, 2.5 VOIS., tI‘i1I1s. James Martin (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1%9), 1 :v-vii; 2:~.
242
Promise 243
Mosaic-Davidic promise and in his new contributions and development of that doctrine.
I . . . .
I
The Branch of Yahweh0[2070 Who is the “sprout” or “branch” (~emah) of Isa 4:2-6? Very few doubt that the one who is afterward called “the Branch” is the Messiah.
Nor do they doubt that later prophets directly depend on Isa 4:2 for that title. Those products who use this title for Messiah are:
“Branch of Yahweh” (Isa 4:2)
“Branch of David” (Jer 23:5-6)
“The Branch, My Servant” (Zech 38)
“Branch, a man” (Zech 6:12)
In Isa 42 the “Branch of Yahweh” is the Davidic dynasty in its human (“fruit of the land”) nature as well as its divine (“of Yahweh”). In this case
“Branch” would be an equivalent term for “Anointed” or “holy One.”
But many object that “Branch” was not yet a fixed designation for Messiah; besides, its parallelism with “the fruit of the land” (4:2) favored a reference to the sprouting forth of the land under the beneficent influ- ence of Yahweh. However, as the following chapters of Isaiah show, Mes- siah was the Mediator of these benefits and He Himself was the greatest of all the benefits.
Is it any wonder then that the later prophets applied this title to the living personal source of all these gifts in the last days? Some of those gifts found already in this passage are (1) the promise of the fruitfulness of the land; (2) the certainty of a remnant of “survivors”; (3) the holiness of the remnant; (4) the cleansing and purification of the moral filth of the people; and (5) the radiant glory of the personal presence of Yahweh dwelling in Zion with His people forever. The “holy nation” of Exod 19:6 would finally be completely realized as would the permanent “dwelling”
of Yahweh in their midst. Even the “cloud by day” and “fire by night”
(4:5) were to be renewed. For just as they were the visible proofs of God’s presence in the wilderness (Exod 14:19ff.), so they would be a shade by day and illuminate the night to shield the city of God from all violence.
I
ImmanuelWhat the previous “Branch [or Sprout] of the Lord” passage left indefi- nite was now given personal shape and definition in the Immanuel 12081) prophecies of Isaiah 7- 11. This word came against the background of the Syro-Ephraimitic War in which Pekah, king of Israel, made an alliance
244 Walter C. Kaiser Jr.
with Rezin, king of Syria, to advance against Ahaz, king of Judah, with a view to installing the son of Tabeal as king on David’s throne. This threat to Jerusalem and Judah was countered by Isaiah’s invitation to Ahaz to
“believe” God in order that Ahaz himself might “be believed,” i.e., estab- lished (7:9). In fact, God would validate His good offer in so improbable a situation by performing any sign (i.e., miracle) Ahaz might choose from Sheol or heaven.
But Ahaz, true unbeliever that he was, piously rejected Yahweh’s help with an oblique reference to Deut 6:16 about not tempting the Lord his God. The truth of the matter was that he expected little from Yahweh;
moreover, he had probably already secretly sought the support of Tiglath- pileser, king of Assyria (2 Kgs 16:7ff.).
Nevertheless, the Lord proceeded to give a sign. It was: “Behold, [you] the virgin are pregnant and bearing a son; you shall call his name Immanuel” (7:14). Now it is important to note several things: (1) the word CuZmtih denotes a “virgin” in every case where its meaning can be deter- mined;3 (2) it has the definite article, “&virgin”; (3) the verb “to call” is second person feminine and not third person feminine; and (4) the wording of this verse made use of older biblical phraseology: at the birth of Ishmael (Gen 16: 11) ; at the birth of Isaac (Gen 17: 19) ; and at the birth of Samson (Judg 13:5, 7). Thus, the sign given to Ahaz consisted in re- peating to him the familiar phrases used in promising the birth of a son.
But this passage dealt with the birth of three children, all three being signs in Israel (8: 17-18). Each of the three was introduced and then was later the subject of an expanded prophecy as follows:
1. Shear-Jashub- “remnant shall return”
7:3 -+ 10:20, 21, 22; ll:ll, 16 2. Immanuel-“God with us”
7:14 --) 8:8, 10
3. Mahershalalhashbaz-“haste spoil, hurry prey”
8:1, 3, 4 + 10:2, 6
In each of these passages we have the mention of a child born in fulfill- ment of the promise that had been made to David, to the lI20911 effect that his seed should be eternal . . . In the second half of his discourse on the three children, Isaiah thus reiterates the promise that had been made to David, and insists upon it. He makes it the foundation of his rebuke to the people for their corruptions . . .
3. Besides this text, it appears in the account of Rebekah (Gen 24:43); the sister of Moses (Exod 28); in the phrase “the way of‘ a man with a maid” (Prov 30:19); and in the plu- ral in Ps 6825 [26]; Song 13; 6:8; and the titles to Psalm 46 and 1 Chr 1520.
Promise 245
Those who heard him understood that when Ahaz refused to ask the offered sign, the prophet repeated to him, in a new form, Jehovah’s promise concerning the seed of David, and made that to be a sign that Jehovah would both keep his present pledge and punish Ahaz for his faithlessness. It may be doubted whether any of them had in mind the idea of just such a person as Jesus, to be born of a virgin, in some future century; but they had in mind some birth in the unending line of David which would render the truth, “God with us,” especially significant.4
Furthermore, before this son, the most recent birth in the line of Da- vid, was able to understand right from wrong (7:16-l 7)) a political revolu- tion of major proportions would remove both Pekah and Rezin from power. But several other facts must be borne in mind at once if one is rightly to identify this “son. n According to 8:8, 10, he is addressed as the prince of the land (“thy land, 0 Immanuel”) and as the expected anointed one of David’s house in 9:6-7 [5-61 (“There will be no end of the increase of his government and peace [as he rules] on the throne of David over his kingdom . . .forevermore”). Also Isaiah, like his contempo- rary Micah, everywhere presupposes that a period of judgment must pre- cede the glorious messianic age. Therefore, whatever this sign and birth is, it cannot be the completion of the “last days.”
Who then was this child? His messianic dignity totally excludes the notion that he may have been Isaiah’s son born to some maiden newly married to the prophet after Shear-Jashub’s mother supposedly died. Still less likely is it a reference to any marriageable maiden or some particular ideal maiden present at the time of the proclamation of this prophecy since the prophet has definitely said “the virgin.” It is preferable to under- stand him to be a son of Ahaz himself, whose mother Abi, daughter of Ze- chariah, is mentioned in 2 Kgs 18:2- namely, his son Hezekiah. It is well known that this was the older Jewish interpretation, but it is also supposed that Hezekiah could not be the predicted “sign” of 7:14 since on present chronologies he must have already been nine years old at that time (about 734 B.C.). That last point is to be thoroughly studied before it is adopted.
The chronology of Israel and Judah has been well secured with only one minor exception- a ten year difficulty in the I12100 rule of Hezekiah.
Without arguing the point at this time, I would like to boldly suggest that only Hezekiah meets all the demands of the text of Isaiah and yet demon- strates how he could be part and parcel of that climactic messianic person who would complete all that is predicted in this Immanuel prophecy.
Only in this, the most recent installment in the Abrahamic-Davidic
4. Willis J. Beecher, “The Prophecy of the Virgin Mother: Isa. vii: 14,” Homiltdicul R&w 17 (1889): 357-58.
246 Walter C. Kaiser Jr.
promise, could it be seen how God was still being “with” Israel in all His power and presence.
In Isa 9:6, a series of descriptive epithets are given to this newborn son who is to climax the line of David. He is ‘tvonderful Counsellor,” “mighty God,” “Father of eternity,“5 and “Prince of Peace.” These four names rep- resent, respectively, (1) the victory due to His wise plans and great skills in battle; (2) the irresistible Conqueror (cf. 10:21); (3) the fatherly rule of Messiah and His divine attribute of eternality; and (4) the everlasting peaceful reign of Messiah. His government and the peace during His re- gime would know no boundaries, for He would establish His kingdom in justice and righteousness forevermore (Isa 9:7). Unique among the de- scriptions of peace that will be observed during that era is the picture of all nature at rest and devoid of hostility (11:6-g). Again, there is a graphic prediction of the restoration of both the north and south to the land “in that day” (w. 10-16). And from the stump of David’s father, Jesse, would come that “shoot,” even a “branch” (n&), upon whom the sevenfold gift of the Spirit of the Lord would rest as He ruled and reigned righteously and awesomely (w. l-5). The whole picture of the future person and work of the Messiah was cast in terms of the Davidic promise as a glowing encouragement for Israel.
. . . . Short Theology of the Old Testament
[2121) One of the most remarkable sections of all the OT is Isaiah 40-66.
In its general plan, it is laid out in three enneads: chapters 40-48, 49-57, and 58-66. In each of these three sets of nine messages the focus is di- rected to the particular aspect of the person and work of God. It is as close to being a systematic statement of OT theology as is the book of Romans in the NT. Its majestic movement begins with the announcement of the person and work of John the Baptist and spins to the dizzy heights of the suffering and triumphant servant of the Lord by the time the middle of the second ennead is reached. But this climax is again superseded by the concluding message on the new heavens and the new earth.
In each of the three sections there is a central figure. In Isaiah 40-48 the key figure is a hero who would come from the East to redeem Israel from captivity, namely, “Cyrus.” The revelation of this hero, coming as it did right in the middle of the addresses (44:28-45:10), served as a bold challenge to the idols or deities embraced in that day to do likewise for the people. However, their inability to speak anything about the future 5. It is not “Father of booty,” which does not match the perrnanrnt attribute of “Prince o f I’cace”; rather, the Hd)rcw ‘“i2 ‘~4 is “Father of Ekernity” as ‘ad means in (kn 4’3:%, ISi 5 7 : 15. md I LitI 3:ti.
Promise 247
could only lead to one conclusion: Yahweh was indeed the only God, and they were nothing at all.
In Isaiah 49-57 the central figure is the “servant of the Lord,” who combined in his person all the people Israel, the prophet and E213l.l pro- phetic institution, and the Messiah in His role as Servant. Again the cli- mactic description and his most important work was located at the middle point of this ennead: 52:13-53:12. The salvation effected by this servant had both objective and subjective aspects (54:1-56:9); indeed, its final and concluding work would involve the glorification of all nature.
The third ennead, 58-66, triumphantly announces the dawning of a new day of salvation for nature, nations, and individuals. At the center of this ennead was a new principle of life - t h e Spirit-filled Messiah (61: l- 63:6) who bore the powers and dignities of the prophetic, priestly, and kingly officers.
Thus in each successive ennead another aspect of the Godhead and God’s work was celebrated. In order, the emphases on the persons of the Godhead are Father, “Servant” [Son], and Holy Spirit. In work, they are Creator- Lord of history, Redeemer, and sovereign Ruler over all in the
“eschaton.” The five major forces in Isaiah’s message are God, the people of Israel, the event of salvation, the prophet, and the word of God. Finally, this message even has several distinctive stylistic features. It has a plethora of divine self-asserverations such as “I am the first and the last,” or “I am Yahweh”; a long series of participial phrases after the formula ‘“Thus says the Lord” or “I am the Lord” which continue on to detail His special char- acter; and a profuse number of appositional words appearing after the names of Yahweh or Israel as well as a great abundance of verbs to de- scribe Yahweh’s work of judgment or salvation. Such is the style of this most magnificent section of the OT. But let us treat each of these enneads in turn to examine that theology more closely.
The God of All (Isaiah 40-48)
The theme of Isaiah’s call returns in this section as the holiness and righ- teousness of God are praised repeatedly. God is “the Holy One” (40:25;
41:14, 16, 20; 43:3, 14; 47:4; 48:17; and it continues in the later sections in 49:7 bis; 54:5; 55:5). He also is righteous (sedeq), i.e., straight, right, and faithful to a norm, His own nature and character. His righteousness could best be seen in His work of salvation, for the prophet often joined His righteousness and His performance of the covenant promise together
(c.g., 412; 42:6-7; 46:12-13; note later 51:1, 5, 6, 8; 54:lO; 55:3; 62:1-2).
Only of God could it be said, “He is right” (41:26) or He is “a righteous (;od and Savior” (45:21), who d’eclares “what is right” (v. 19) and who brings men near to His righteousness (46:13).
248 Walter C. Kiziser Jr.
His nature is especially to be seen in His singleness and self-sufficiency.
In Isaiah’s famous set of six variations on the formula of self-predication, he set forth the incomparability6 of Yahweh: Beside ([2140 Him there was no other God (44:6, 8; 45:5-6, 21). Thus the question remained: “To whom then will you liken Me?” (40:18, 25; 46:5). The forms of self-* predication ’ are:
“I am Yahweh” or “I am Yahweh your God”
“I am the first and I am the last”
“I am He”
41:13; 42:6, 8; 43:3, 11;
45:5, 6, 18 41:4; 44:6; 48:12 41:4; 43:10, 25; 46:4;
48:12
“I am God”
“I am your God” 43: 13; 46:9
41:lO
But God’s works were likewise enumerated in this first ennead. He was Creator, Kinsman-Redeemer, Lord of history, Ring of all, and Dis- closer of the future.
Repeatedly Isaiah stressed the fact that God had “created” (b&$);
“made” (‘G&h or Pti’aZ) ; “spread out” (nti_tih) , “stretched out” (rtiqa') , “es- tablished” (K&z), and “founded” (ytisaa the heavens and the earth. In this vocabulary, so reminiscent of Genesis l-2, he established God’s ability to create as part of His credentials as rightful Lord of man’s present history and final destiny (40:15, 17, 23-34; 42:5; 43:1-7; and later 54:15-16).
Yahweh was also a Kinsman-Redeemer (go^‘eZ) as Boaz was to Ruth.
The verb to redeem (gd’aal) and its derivatives appear twenty-two times.
Here Isaiah used the motif of the Exodus as his source (cf. Exod 6:6;
15:13; Isa 45: 15, 21). Involved in this redemption were (1) physical re- demption from bondage (43:5-7; 45:13; 48:20; and later 49:9, 11, 14;
52:2-3; 55:12-13); (2) -inward, personal and spiritual redemption with the removal of personal sin for Israel (43:25; 44:22; 54:8) and Gentiles (45:20-23; 49:6; 51:4-5); and (3) the eschatological redemption when Jerusalem and the land were rebuilt (40:9-10; 43:20; 44:26; 45: 13; 49: 16- 17; 51:3; 52:1, 9; 53:11-12). Yahweh was a Kinsman-Redeemer without equal.R
6. For an excellent study on this concept, see C. J. Labuschagne, 7&e Incomparability of Yahweh in thF Old TestumPnt (Leiden: E. J. Rrill, 1966)) esp. pp. 11 I-12, 123f., 142-53.
7. See the discussion by Morgan L,. Phillips, “Divine Self-Predication in Deutero-Isaiah,”
Hi/&al Rewurch 16 ( 197 1) : 32-5 1.
8. See F. Eiolmgren, 7‘he Cow+ of Yuhweh us G’el in kond Isaiah (Diss., Union Theo- logical Seminary, New York: University Microfilms, 1963). Also Carroll Stuhlmueller, Creutive R&m/&on in Deutero-fsuiuh (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970).
Promise 249
B2150 Currently, Yahweh was in charge of history itself, and the na- tions did not frighten Him at all (40:15, 17). In fact, foreign leaders were raised up to do His bidding in history (as is so aptly illustrated by Cyrus in 41:1-4); and they were ransomed or conquered on His authority (43:3- 14; 44:24-45:8; 47:5-g). No wonder He was called “Ring” on four occa- sions. He was “Ring of Jacob” (4121); “your Ring,” 0 Israel (43:15); “Ring of Israel” (44:6); and as 527 summarized, ‘Your God is Ring.” Isaiah also used the additional royal titles of “Shepherd” (40:9-ll), ‘Witness,” “Com- mandment-Giver,” and “Leader” in Isa 55:3.’
One more word must be added before leaving the theology of this en- nead: Yahweh was the discloser of the future. Before things happened, the prophet was told about them (41:22-23, 26; 42:9; 43:9-10; 44:7-8; 45:21;
46:10-l 1; 48:5). The challenge to the gods, who were poor rivals and ac- tually nonentities at best, was to declare what was to come to pass in the future, be it good or bad. The most graphic of all the predictions was the naming of Cyrus and two of his greatest works for Israel almost two centu- ries before they took place (44:28). 0 n such works as these Isaiah rested his case. Yahweh was God of gods, Lord of lords, Ring of kings and be- yond all comparison. He was the God of all.
The Savior of All (Isaiah 4!&57)
Two words would summarize the second plank in Isaiah’s minitheology book: servant and salvation. But it was the figure of the servant of the Lord that captured the limelight in this section.
The advances in the portrayal of this corporate figure of “servant” are already observable in the use of the singular form twenty times in Isaiah 40-53 and in the plural form ten times in Isaiah 54-66.” To demonstrate that the servant is a collective term as well as an individual one represent- ing the whole group can be done from two sets of data: (1) the servant is all Israel in twelve out of the twenty singular references (41:8-10; 43:8-13;
43:14-44:5; 44:6-8, 21-23; 44:24-45:13; 48:1, 7, 10-12, 17); (2) the four great servant songs of Isa 42:1-7; 49:1-6; 50:4-g; and 52:13-53: 12 all present the servant as an individual who ministers to Israel. Therein lies one of the greatest puzzles for those scholars who reject the corporate solidarity of the servant.
[216] Israel, the servant, is the “seed of Abraham,” the patriarchal
“friend” of God (41:8). “Abraham . . . was called and blessed” when “he was but one” and was subsequently “made . . . many” (51:2; cf. 63:16). Now
9. Carroll Stuhlmueller, “Yahweh-King and Deutero-Isaiah,” Biblical Rfxeurch 11 ( 1970) :
:C!--45.
10. Isa 54:17; 56:6; 63:17; 65:8-Y, 13 ter, 14-15; 66:14.