Isaiah Chapter 2

Commentaries suggest that vss 6-21 may be a mixture of 2 separate poems, because of repeated themes and alternating refrains. It seems to me to be a reasonable conclusion, given also the change in imagery and pronouns can be confusing. Most, though, have decided efforts to separate the passage have been inconclusive and that it is better to read the verses together.

It is just that the changes in pronouns confuse me that it is difficult to read as a unit. So I am taking a stab at separating the poems, based primarily on noun shifts. Doing this I have 3 poems, but it does not seem to me that the poems have been mixed. They seem to be sequential.

They pronoun and foreign influence theme – vs 6 through 8

Man noun and haughty theme - 9a,b, through 17
(Disregard Omit 9c and 10 as not in the DSS, although the verses are in the LXX)

Idol theme 18 through 21
(verse 19 might be a duplication of 21 or a refrain with some of the poem missing.)

With this division it seems to me that there are three distinct ideas and treatments. Yahweh has rejected His people because they have sought security in riches, foreign entanglements, and armed strength. Yahweh will be exalted and man humbled. There will be a day in which men will hide from the terror of the Lord.

The themes, the language, the perspective, all seem to me to point to three separate poems which have not been mingled. Given that 2-5 are also in Micah 4.1-5, might it be that these verses are taken from 4 different existing poems?

OP, "...they have sought security in riches, foreign entanglements, and armed strength."

Sound like anyone we know?

#2 Sound like anyone we know?

I find that to be a scary proposition.

I find much prophecy goes over the heads of many good, solid Christians, even as they are reading it.

I truly wish I could participate in this discussion at the level it is being undertaken, but alas, I have neither the resources nor the learning to make us of them. I really appreciate you doing this. Believe me, I'm paying attention.

Geneg,
My favorite books are Isaiah and Genesis, certainly for the OT. Tackling Isaiah for me is partially motivated by a need to work on my Hebrew, and Greek.

And I always seem to focus on the text itself. It is just my approach.

This group though does not have as a purpose to focus on the text. It is to discuss Isaiah.

I will personally benefit from comments with different approaches to Isaiah. I would hope that others would also.

Please feel free to comment with any perspective on the existing Isaiah topics, or to start a new topic.

It would make sense to me to discuss Isaiah and the New Testament, or to take a thematic approach for something like how Isaiah understands righteousness and judgement, or as you started in #2 what does Isaiah say to us today.

This summer I am working chapters 1-12 with my Sunday School class. That was planned before I found LT. The Isaiah group I hope will go beyond August and chapter 12.

I did not want this group to be limited to pseudo scholarship, which is what it will be, left to my own tendencies. :)

I appreciate you participation here and your presence on LT.

The more I look at chapter 2, the more difficult the language and structure gets for me. Basically it looks like there are 3 or 4 poems that have been copied, and scribal notes and comments were written to the side and incorporated into the text.

I will list some of my questions in separate comments. One question about this though, is whether any of the chapter can be confidently attributed to Isaiah. Only the first poem might be accepted as contemporary, given its presence in Micah.

So it is, for me, hard to place the times that the verses might have been written, and some of the verses have some pointed meanings.

Specifically, the call not to forgive them and the emphasis on the pride of man need consideration.

Is this latter an idea from Isaiah or a subsequent writer, is it pointed to Judah's enemies, human accomplishment in general, reliance on human accomplishment, or so other sense of human pride apart from accomplishment?

The more I look into this chapter the harder it gets.

verse 12

The Hebrew has something like:
against all the haughty and raised
against all the lifted and low

The word "low" is a tough fit. The parallelism of the verse would indicate the word should be another "high" word. Additionally the word "low" is probably a verb, rather than an adjective.

KJV has "upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:"

NIV has: "for all that is exalted
(and they will be humbled),"

The NIV places the final clause in parentheses, I guess, to show the break with the normal parallelism and uses a future passive that is not in the Hebrew, but matches closely the treatment in the LXX.

Young's Literal Translation is interesting, "For a day (is) to Jehovah of Hosts, For every proud and high one, And for every lifted up and low one"

This treatment keeps the parallelism in tact by treating "low" as an adjective, but then the continuity of the series of words meaning high is lost.

Changing the "low" to a verb means the poetic structure is changed abruptly and the day of the LORD is in a way brought into the poetic structure by the writer. A sense that is conveyed by the parentheses of the NIV.

I actually like what the RSV does by making a correction to the verse, "against all that is proud and lofty, against all that is lifted up and high"

The correction is noted, but not at all explained. And there seems to be actually no textual evidence for the correction, only the parallelism of the verses.

This is not a significant point, except it is for me further evidence of scribal additions and comments making their way into this chapter.

I hate to throw all this in successive comments, but want to get these thoughts down in the topic. (geneg promises he is reading and that makes us at least 2. :) )

verse 9c and 10 are not in the DSS Isaiah. This immediately brings them into question, for me.

vs 10 is generally translated something like "Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty."

The issue is that one cannot enter a rock, nor hide in dust.

The JPS tries to give the verse more applicability with "Go deep into the rock, bury yourselves in the ground." Rock in this translation seems to mean the English idea of rock as a rock formation of a cliff. But the Hebrew usually means a single large boulder.

And "Bury yourselves in the ground" seems to me to be taking a good deal of liberty with the text, perhaps with an eye towards vs 19.

Remembering these verses (9c and 10) have likely been added, maybe initially as a marginal note. I am taking it as a short hand reference to the more complete version of the refrain in vs 19.

Verse 19, from the KJV "And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth." Most more modern translations have something like “caves of the rocks” and “holes of the ground.”

As for the verses from 18 to 21, it looks to me like a complete poem, except the some lines that might have been before 18 are missing. Verse 18 so abruptly changes the sense from the preceding verses, and is itself too short to be followed by the refrain of 19, my thought is that we are missing some of the original.

The missing lines before vs 18 might explain the variation in the refrains of 19 and 21. Maybe the missing lines had something in them to connect with the "caves in rocks" and "holes in ground" of refrain version in 19 like "bats" and "shrews" might be thought to connect with "gaps" and "cracks" of refrain version in 21?

So here is the point, other than an obsessive and time draining interest in minutiae.

There are four separate poems, not necessarily written by Isaiah.

1. Verses 2-5 – all nations will put away war and come to learn the way of the LORD
2. Verses 6-8 – Yahweh has rejected his people
3. Verses 9ab and 11-17 – pride of man will be humbled
4. Verses 18-21 – idols are discarded before the day of the Lord

Then there is some editorializing in 9c-10 and in 22. Verse 22 is not included in the LXX, and on that basis I take it not to be original. The thought of the editorial verses seems to me to have a consistent more harsh view of man that is different from the 4 poems, and different from my understanding of Isaiah's general message.

“Do not forgive them. Go in the rock and hide in the dust.”
“Turn away from man in whose nostrils is breath, for what worth is he?” RSV

Do we read and consider these poems and scribal additions each separately, assuming they offer insights into the circumstances of different periods and the thoughts of different people?

Or do we try to make a consistent message from what seems to me to be varying insights and perspectives?

Does it make sense to include these each as the message of Isaiah the prophet and to try to locate them within the period of his ministry? separately or together?

What do we make of the tone and sense of the editorial verses? (if they are indeed to be thought of as later editorial verses.)

#8: richardbsmith "(geneg promises he is reading and that makes us at least 2. :) )"

3!

Jim,

I am in good company. :)

Still here, post away, son!

4 ---- I can't get to this right this minute, but please don't stop! I will be freer of church-related reading groups in August and will try to bring my puny attention to Isaiah, a thing I've wanted to do for quite a long time.

I am in even better company. :)