E. The Reign of Hezekiah
30. Woe to Those Who Go Down to Egypt
Isaiah Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives
of the old state of Israel-namely, the central hill country south of the valley of Jezreel. Hoshea was recognized as king by the Assyrian monarch. Tribute was imposed on Israel, but no clear reference is made in Assyrian texts to the reduction of Israelite territory (ANET 284 [the first paragraph of the inscription on p. 283 has been incorrectly restored]; see THAT I 373-74).
By 728, Hoshea and Samaria had again become involved in an anti-Assyrian movement (see Isa. 17, and, above, chap. 4, sect. 19). When the Assyrians moved back into Syria-Pales- tine, Hoshea capitulated and resumed paying tribute to Assyria, probably in 727 (II Kings 17:3). The new Assyrian monarch, Shalmaneser V, was unable to suppress the widespread revolt immediately and spent 726 back in Assyria. During this interval, Hoshea, apparently under popular pressure, sent messengers and gifts to Egypt hoping to secure Egyptian aid for the rebels.
II Kings 17:4 reports that Hoshea “sent messengers to So, king of Egypt, and offered no tribute to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year.” Since no Egyptian pharaoh named So is attested to in ancient sources, two possible alternatives for interpreting this text have been suggested.
One approach is based on emending the text to read, “He sent messengers to Sais, to the king of Egypt.” In this case, the Egyptian ruler would have been Tefnakht, who reigned in Sais in the western Delta. Diodorus (1.45.2) has preserved a story about Tefnakht that, in explaining his devotion to the simple life, reports an incident that occurred while he was
“on a campaign in Arabia.” This would indicate that he was active in Syria-Palestine at some point during his career.
A second interpretation of this text retains the present reading and takes So as an abbreviation of the name Osorkon (Iv). This pharaoh ruled in Tanis in the eastern Delta near Palestine. His family, the XXIInd Dynasty, had long followed a policy of encouraging anti-Assyrianism in Syria-Palestine.
At any rate, both Tefnakht and Osorkon IV were, at least nominally, under the authority of the Ethiopian ruler, Piye, who had recently sent ambassadors into Syria-Palestine (see Isa. 18 and, above, chap. 4, sect. 20). On the surface, all evidence thus pointed to a favorable hearing in Egypt for any appeal from anti-Assyrian rebels in Syria-Palestine.
30. WOE TO THOSE WHO GO DOWN TO EGYPT
Isaiah
Hoshea’s appeal for Egyptian aid forms the immediate background of Isaiah 30. Verses 6-7 would indicate that Judeans were cooperating in a limited way with Israel (see Isa. 28:14-22). The Judeans at least allowed Israelite ambassadors to pass through their territory on the way to Egypt. That the Israelites traveled through Judean territory rather than down the coastal highway would indicate that the Assyrians held the Palestinian coastal region. The area north of Philistia (“the way of the sea” in Isa. 9:l) had most likely been provincialized by the Assyrians in 734 or 732.
The following outline of this speech’s contents assumes that the entire chapter is a single address. The break at verse 6 with its reference to “an oracle on the beasts of the Negeb”
might appear to indicate a new speech. The thought, however, is continuous, and the “title” referring to the beasts of the Negeb could either be a gloss to clarify who the “they”
in verse 6 refers to or an actual catch phrase used by the prophet for dramatic effect.
(1) (2) (3) (4)
A woe denunciation of the Israelite appeal to Egypt (l-5).
Oracle on the beasts of the Negeb (6-7) A prediction of defeat for Israel’s plans (8-18).
A prediction of Zion’s salvation and Assyria’s destruc- tion (19-33)
Isaiah 30:1-S
Isaiah denounces the Israelites as stubborn children who go against God’s will (see 1:2-3). According to the regulations laid out in Deuteronomy 21:18-21, such children could be put to death. The two terms used to describe recalcitrant children in the Deuteronomy text are srr and mrh, both of which are picked up by Isaiah, srr in verse 1 and mrh in verse 9. The rebellion of the sons is spelled out in a series of expressions:
1. to carry out a plan, but not mine;
to pour out a libation, but not of my spirit;
thereby adding
rebellion to rebellion;
338
Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives 2. setting out to go down to Egypt,
without asking me;
to seek refuge in the protection of pharaoh, to seek shelter in the shadow of Egypt.
Throughout his preaching, Isaiah declared that Yahweh had not only a plan for Assyria to serve as his agent of punishment but also a plan to destroy Assyria. But rebellion at this time was not Yahweh’s plan (see 30:lBb). “To pour out a libation” probably refers to rituals involved in sealing an alliance (see 19:21 and the discussion of this text, above, p.
266). The term we have translated “rebellion” is the common Hebrew word &‘, normally translated “sin.” In international relations, the Assyrians used the term in both its nominal and verbal forms to denote rebellion against their authority.
Later, when Hezekiah rebelled against Sennacherib, for example, the Judean king described his actions with the words, “I have sinned” [“done wrong”, the verb is haf’ati] (II Kings 18:14). Isaiah’s use of the word is double pronged. In going against the will of Yahweh, the Israelites sin. In appealing to Egypt, they are rebelling (“sinning”) against Assyria. In 735, Israel had rebelled and had done so again in 728. And now, in 726, Isaiah declares, “You are adding rebellion to rebellion.”
In verses 3-5, Isaiah predicts that the attempt to secure help from Egypt will only result in Israel’s shame and disgrace.
Although Israel’s leaders have arrived at Zoan (Tanis in the eastern Delta) and its messengers may reach even as far as Hanes (Heracelopolis in Upper Egypt, north of the Fayyum), Egypt’s help will prove to be not merely worthless but even harmful. Everything about this people-a people that does not profit-raises a stink (v. 5a). All Israel will gain from them is embarrassment and reproach.
Isaiah 30:6-7
The Israelite negotiators probably made their way to Egypt preceded by caravans carrying gifts for the courts. In verse 6 Isaiah describes the transportation of the people’s wealth and treasures on the backs of asses and camels through the Negeb desert. The Negeb is spoken of as a land of trouble and
Isaiah
anguish, the same terms used to speak of Israel after the takeover by Pekah (see 8:22), and a place of the lion and the lioness, the viper and the flying serpent. It must have struck Isaiah as ironic to watch beasts of burden carrying Israelite wealth into the desert, a symbol of anarchy and disorder, in hopes of finally bringing order to Israelite life. Like the Negeb desert, Egypt offered little and, like the Negeb, the future held only trouble and anguish. At the end of verse 6, Isaiah repeats the epithet that he had applied to Egypt in verse 5:
“a people that does not profit.”
In verse 7, Isaiah gives Egypt another name: “Rahab, a noisy one, a sitting one. ” Although various translations of this name are made-“Rahab Quelled” (NEB), “Rahab who sits still” (RSV)-the meaning is rather clear: Egypt, in spite of its big talk and bluster, could not be counted on to act when needed. The translation above assumes that hem is from hmh meaning “to raise a noise” and that shabeth is from yshb meaning “to sit.’ ” Years later, Jeremiah would hang a similar epithet on the Egyptian pharaoh: “Noisy one who lets the hour go by” (Jer. 46:17). The designation of Egypt as Rahab appeals to the old mythological tale of the chaos dragon (see Isa. 27:l). (For other references to Rahab, see Ps. 89:lO; Job 9:13; 26:12; Isa. 51:9.)
Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsafanic Narratives
his other inscribed slogans and pronouncements that were offered as predictions before the events (see 8:1, 16).
In verses 9-11, Isaiah explains the reason for writing down the pronouncement. The people are rebellious and deceitful children and will not accede to the verdict (torah) of Yahweh, as proclaimed by Isaiah. They will even try to influence their own seers and visionaries either not to perform their function or else to proclaim slippery and devious words. In other words, they attempt to secure divine oracles that condone what they already want to do (see on 8:19-20). Thus Isaiah orders that Yahweh’s verdict pronounced through him be written down as a reminder and a witness for coming days.
Two oracles of Yahweh are quoted to clinch the argument that appealing to Egypt, like rebellion against Assyria, is a foolish, senseless policy doomed to destroy those who carry it out. The first, in verses 12-14, condemns the people for rejecting Yahweh’s word (the torah of v. 9; see 1:lO; 5:24b), for trusting in a devious undercover plan (the scheme of rebellion while under the domination of and in a treaty relationship with Assyria), and for relying on it (Egypt). The consequence of this iniquity (the term bwon can denote either the act or the consequence of the act) will be like the collapse of a bulging wall (v. 13) or the shattering of a pottery container, leaving no fragment large enough to scoop up firecoals or to dip up water (v. 14).
The second oracle (w. 15-17) quotes Yahweh’s recommen- dation of the proper action, the people’s counter response, and Yahweh’s sentence of judgment. What Yahweh had called for was the opposite of what Israel was doing. Yahweh had counseled “sitting still and taking rest,” “keeping quiet and showing trust”-that is, in the political context, submission to Assyria and acquiescence to the status quo.
Instead of waiting for Yahweh (see v. 18) and enduring Assyrian domination for a time, Israel inaugurated a policy of action, a policy of rebellion.
One of the things the Israelites sought in Egypt was horses (see 31:l). Throughout the period of the XXVth Ethiopian dynasty, frequent references to horses from Egypt appear in ancient Near Eastern texts (see Deut. 17:16). The conse- quence of the people’s action will match their wrongdoing:
Isaiah 30:8-U
In verse 8, either Isaiah orders the recording of his word or Yahweh orders the prophet to write it down. If the latter is the case, there is nothing in the text to indicate that this directive is divine address. The first difficulty in interpreting this verse is, therefore, to determine who is speaking and who is being addressed. A second problem concerns what was to be written down, A third problem concerns what
“with them” (not “before them” as in the RSV) denotes.
Although it is impossible to decide the issues conclusively, the following appears to be the meaning of the text: Isaiah orders that his name for Egypt-“Rahab, a noisy one, a sit- ting one,” indicating that in spite of its talk, Egypt would not act-be written down, probably in a public place along with
lsaiah Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives
affliction.” Such an understanding of the text means that throughout verses 19-33 Isaiah is proclaiming a bright future for Zion.
The central thrust of verses 19-22 is to assure Jerusalem that Yahweh will make known his “way,” or his course of action,
SO there will be no uncertainty about what Judah’s position ought to be vis d vis the Assyrians. Isaiah proclaims that the people need weep no more. His reference to the city’s weeping may indicate that Jerusalemite and Judean society, as in the Syro-Ephraimitic crisis, had again been torn and troubled over what stance to take when their “kin” in the north had planned, and were now again carrying out, rebellion against Assyria (see 28:14-22, where support for the revolt is hinted at more strongly). In verse 19, Isaiah promises the people that when they appeal to Yahweh he will answer as soon as he hears, that is, as soon as the words are spoken.
In explaining how Yahweh will make known the “way,”
Isaiah refers to “your teacher” (v. 20). It is uncertain whether the “teacher” or “the one who teaches you” refers to God, to the king, or to Isaiah, although most translations and interpretations assume that God is the referent. The title teacher occurs nowhere else in Isaiah. Two things are said explicitly about the teacher. He will no longer hide himself or be out of sight (the Hebrew verb occurs only here, and thus its meaning is somewhat uncertain), and the people’s eyes will behold the teacher. If this text is speaking about God, as the context suggests, then Isaiah is declaring that Yahweh would make himself (his views) clearly obvious. The people would not only see, but they would also hear as if directed from behind whether they should turn to the right or to the left (v. 21). In describing this mode of Yahweh’s making known his way, Isaiah may be countering not only those who favored revolt and claimed divine sanction for the rebellion (see 8:19; 30:22), but also his own earlier proclamation, which referred to God’s teaching the people (the Israelites) through men of strange lips and gibberish talk (see 28:9-13). Verse 22 declares that the clear directions of Yahweh will make the use and consultation of images superfluous, and the people will treat them as polluted materials. (Here the prophet employs language associated with menstruation; see 4:4.). Isaiah does not condemn the use of images and idols per se; he merely
“We will take horse and flee”;
therefore you shall be put to flight:
“We will ride apace”;
therefore swift will be the pace of your pursuers.
Isaiah 30:16 The people will be overcome on the battlefield. A thousand will flee from a single attacker; at the sight of five opponents, all will flee (see Lev. 26:8, 17; Deut. 28:25).
Even after pronouncing condemnation and judgment on the people, Isaiah declares that Yahweh is still waiting to show favor and mercy, since he is a God of justice, but the blessing is “for those who wait on him” (see 28:16). Here Isaiah reiterates a pervasive element in his preaching- Yahweh will destroy the Assyrians but in his time and in his way. Blessed are those who wait until the time is ripe, and Yahweh chooses the hour.
lsaiah 30:19-33
Following the condemnation of Israel’s appeal to Egypt for support of its rebellion from Assyria, Isaiah moved to assure Zion that matters would go well with the city (w. 19-33). If the present form of verse 20 is correct, then Isaiah seems to envision some future danger and period of adversity for the city-there will be bread of adversity to eat and water of affliction to drink. This allusion could indicate that Jerusale- mites and Judeans had been cooperating with the Israelite rebellion to a degree that led Isaiah to anticipate some form of Assyrian retaliation. This clearly seems to be the case in chapters 28-29, which condemn some Jerusalemite leaders (28:14-22) and anticipate an attack on Jerusalem (29:1-5).
These chapters, however, probably come from an earlier period than does Isaiah 30. Since the latter dates from about 726, chapters 28-29 reflect earlier conditions before the second phase of revolt was in full swing and appeal had been made to Egypt.
Another way of reading verse 20 is to assume that the final letter in both lehem (bread) and mayim (water) should have been duplicated with the following words. This would give a text that reads “bread without adversity and water without
declares that the people who apparently were using them to ascertain the divine will would treat them as useless contaminants and dispose of them.
Isaiah promises that in the good time of coming salvation supernormal events will occur. The time of salvation is described first negatively and then positively. Negatively, it will be a day of great slaughter when the towering ones (not
“towers” as in RSV)-namely, the Assyrians-will fall (v.
25b). Positively, it will be a day when Yahweh binds up the hurt and heals the wounds of his people (v. 26b). The
“supernormaY’ events will consist of plenteous rain, marvelous productivity in the fields, extravagance in the care of livestock, and abundance of water (w. 23-25a) as well as the intensification of the light of the sun and the moon (v. 26a).
The depiction of the coming of Yahweh’s name in verses 27-28 lends dramatic and poetic color to Isaiah’s promise that Yahweh will take action against the Assyrians. Multiple metaphors appear in this subunit-a consuming fire, a thunderstorm, a flooding stream, and a restraining bit. The object of Yahweh’s coming and the victims of his wrath will be the nations and the peoples, not Israel or Judah.
In verses 29-32, Isaiah describes the good times to come in terms of the jubilant celebrations associated with festivals.
Various features of festival celebrations are noted-nocturnal singing, gladness of heart, pilgrimage accompanied by flute music, the sound of timbrels and lyres, and probably war dances (w. 29, 32; for a description of such nocturnal festivities and dancing, see Mishnah Sukkah 5:1-5; see also, above, chap. 4, sect. 27). The occasion for such exuberant celebrations would be the destruction of Assyrian power.
Isaiah describes this destruction in terms of Yahweh’s making his voice heard so as to strike the Assyrians with terror and in terms of blows landed by his arm to the accompaniment, on the one hand, of cloudburst, tempest, and hailstones and, on the other hand, music making and celebration by the people. The conclusion of this depiction of Assyria’s destruction (v. 33) associates the event with a
“fireplace” in the Jerusalem area, probably the site referred to in later texts as Topheth, where apparently human sacrifice was occasionally made to Molech but within the bounds of
Isaiah’s Preaching and the lsaianic Narratives
Yahwistic worship (see Jer. 231-32; 19:6-15; II Kings 23:lO;
Ezek. 20:25-26). Similar imagery is used in 31:9b, which speaks of Yahweh as one whose fire is in Zion and whose furnace is in Jerusalem. Isaiah describes this burning place as a site prepared for “the king” (hammelek), namely, the king of Assyria, thus punning on the term Molech.
Surely, Tophteh (or a burning place) has long been prepared, surely for the king it is made ready, deep and wide;
its pyre is fire and wood in abundance;
the breath of Yahweh, like a stream of brimstone, kindles it.
In spite of some difficulties in translating and understand- ing this final verse, it seems clear that Isaiah proclaimed the destruction of Assyrian power and the Assyrian king in the environs of Jerusalem. The language Isaiah uses here is highly metaphorical and dramatic, drawing on the cultic imagery of the decimation by Yahweh of any enemies attacking Zion (see Pss. 46, 48; Isa. 29:6-B). The belief that Assyrian power would be broken in the land of Yahweh, itself, seems to have been a characteristic feature of Isaiah’s preaching (see Isa. 14:24-27).
31. EGYPT IS HUMAN NOT DIVINE (31:1-9)