The Old Testament records an Aramean king of Damascus known as Ben-Hadad (1 Kings 15:18, 20; 2 Chron. 16:2, 4). By his name, he is the son of his god. The prosopography of the Amarna Letters and also of the Ugaritic Texts show a number of people from various levels of society whose names follow the format \u201cson of Divine Name.\u201d Thus we do not know if the name Ben-Hadad proves that he considered himself as the representative of Baal to his people. It might depend on whether the name was a birth name from his parents or a name taken upon accession to the throne.
\nThe Canaanite and ancient Near Eastern culture shows that the notion of the king as a son of god was well established. The meaning may have differed in Egypt, Canaan, and Mesopotamia, but the common denominator is the idea that the king represents the character of the god in some way to the people.
\nAlso in the ancient Near East, those bound by suzerain-vassal treaties may refer to each other as father and son. This has a significant bearing on 2 Samuel 7. Earlier theologians discussed covenants in terms of unconditional or conditional promises. More recently, covenants have been evaluated according to suzerain-vassal models on the one hand or royal-grant models on the other. The former emphasizes the obligations of the vassal king to the suzerain, the latter the obligations of the great king to his noble or vassal. The Davidic covenant has frequently been classified as a royal grant, yet it does not fit neatly either the unconditional-conditional categories or the more recent suzerain-vassal versus royal-grant models.<\/p>\n
EXCURSUS: SON OF DN IN AMARNA\/UGARITIC TEXTS
\nWhat follows is an analysis of all personal names in the Amarna and Ugaritic texts of the type \u201cson of DN [Divine Name].\u201d
\n1. Amarna Texts
\nName
\nMeaning
\nComments
\nReference(s)
\nBin-Ana
\nson of Ana
\ndetained with Aziru in Egypt
\nEA 170:37
\nBen-Elima
\nson of Elu
\n(honorific plural?) identity unknown
\nEA 256:15
\n\u0160um-Adda
\nchild of Adda
\nson of Balume
\nEA 8:8, 13, 35; 224:3 (GAGI, 222)
\n\u0160umu-Haddi
\nchild of Haddu
\nmayor(?), detained in Egypt
\nEA 97:1 (GAGI, 222)
\n2. Texts from Ugarit
\nName
\nText Reference
\nComments
\nbnil
\nPRU 3:253
\n(van Soldt, 32n259, 139, 163)
\nPRU 4:201 (RS 18:2): 18
\n= 4.623:6 (van Soldt, 11)
\nUg 5 2 rev. 12\u2032
\nUg 5 3 rev. 6\u2032
\n3.10:17
\n4.86:12
\n4.297:3
\n4.377:19
\n4.609:8, 19
\n4:616:10
\n4.623:6
\nlist of maryannus
\n4.723:1
\n4.791:13
\nbn\u2018myn
\n4.69 III 5
\n4.75 IV 8
\n4.77:11
\n4.280:12
\n(van Soldt, 17, 139)
\n4.290:11
\nof high rank? (van Soldt, 37)
\n4.356:5
\nof high rank? (van Soldt, 37)
\n4.357:25?
\nof high rank? (van Soldt, 37)
\n4.677:5
\n4.755:9?
\n4.785:19
\nbn\u2018n
\n4.33.32
\nroyal guard from Rqd
\n4.35 II 19
\npersons grouped by
\nprofession
\n4.232:47
\nbuyer from Rqd
\n4.753:14
\n9.423:8 (RSOu 14 46)
\nbn\u02bbnt
\nPRU 3:194 (RS 11.839:12)
\n? (\u2019Il\u00ee-\u2019abu also possible)
\nPRU 3:194 (RS 11.839:16)
\n4.307:6
\nserf on royal farm at village
\nof Yny
\n4.320:4
\nbin-ba\u02bbalana
\nPRU 3:193 (RS 12.34:15)
\nFrom village of Bekani
\nbnhd(d)
\nsee below
\nbnpdr
\n4.655:8
\nbn rpiyn
\n4.232 (I) 8
\nFrom village of Rqd
\nbnr\u0161p
\n4.33:12
\nguard from Ary
\n4.155:15
\n4.170:9
\nbnr\u0161py
\n4.69. I 22
\ntitular of war-chariot
\n4.93 II 17
\ncf. PRU 3:20 (RS 15.63:11, 12, 19)
\nbin-\u0161ap\u0161i
\nPRU 3:195 (RS 15.09 B
\nI 17)
\nPRU 6:79 (RS 19.42:5)
\nRSOu 7 3:7 =
\ndumu-dutu dumu
\n= Bin-\u0161ap\u0161i m\u0101r il\u012b-\u0161alim?
\nIdingir-silim
\nbn\u0161p\u0161
\n4.63 IV 6
\n4.194:18
\n4.227 I 11
\n4.628:5
\n4.666:4
\n4.422:43 broken context
\nbt\u0161p\u0161?
\nRSOu 14 44:6 or bn\u0161p\u0161?
\nbnymn
\n4.64 IV 9
\n4.69 II 3
\n4.123:4
\n4.617 (I) 19
\n4.785:9
\nDUMU ad-d\u00e1
\nAT WO5 p. 63 (136,4)
\n(cf. GAGI, 222)
\n\u0161\u00f9m-ad\u00ec
\nPRU 3:59 (RS 16.133:6)
\nson of Gi\u0161e (Akkadian Text)
\n\u0161u-um-daddu
\nPRU 3:151 (RS 16.197:14)
\n(Akkadian Text)<\/p>\n
Second Samuel 7:14\u201315 clearly emphasizes the need for obedience on the part of the son, yet the literary structure shows that this is undergirded primarily by the promises of the father.
\nSecond Samuel 7 must also be read according to the arrangement of the books in the Hebrew canon. A canonical reading indicates that the Davidic king is inheriting the role of both Adam as son of God and Israel as son of God according to the instructions of Deuteronomy 17. This can be briefly reviewed and summarized at this point.
\nFirst to be considered is the fact that humans are created as the divine image, according to Genesis 1:26\u201328, which we discussed at greater length earlier in the book. The divine image defines human ontology in terms of a covenant relationship with the creator God on the one hand and with the creation on the other hand. The former may be captured by the term sonship and is implied by Genesis 5:1\u20133. The latter relationship may be reflected in the terms kingship and servanthood. As we noted earlier, the ancient Near Eastern data confirm and correspond exactly to this exegesis of the biblical text.
\nSecond, Israel inherited this Adamic role. Yahweh refers to the nation as his son in Exodus 4:22\u201323. The divine purpose in the covenant established between God and Israel at Sinai is unfolded in Exodus 19:3\u20136. As a kingdom of priests, they will function to make the ways of God known to the nations and also to bring the nations into a right relationship to God. Since Israel is located geographically on the one and only communications link between the great superpowers of the ancient world, in this position she will show the nations how to have a right relationship to God, how to treat each other in a truly human way, and how to be faithful stewards of the earth\u2019s resources. This is the meaning of Israel\u2019s sonship.
\nThird, Deuteronomy 17 intimates that the king will be the leader in this role. Verses 16\u201320 describe the manner in which the future king is to exercise his responsibilities. After 17:16\u201317 issues three negative commands, 17:18\u201320 specifies three positive commands, all relating to Torah: (1) the king shall copy the Torah, (2) the king shall have the Torah with him, and (3) the king shall read the Torah. In other words, the only positive requirement is that the king embodies Torah as a model citizen. This is exactly the point of the father-son relationship set out in 2 Samuel 7.
\nFourth, the author avoids using the word \u201cking\u201d (melek) and instead employs the word n\u0101g\u00eed, \u201cleader\u201d (2 Sam. 5:2; 6:21; 7:8). As Murray has shown, this is to counteract the notion of kingship in the culture surrounding Israel and to portray a kingship in Israel based not on autonomous power but on representing the kingship of Yahweh. In addition, twice in 2 Samuel 7, Yahweh refers to David as \u201cmy servant.\u201d This is hugely significant. This is the highest title a human can receive in the Old Testament. In an exhaustive study of the term \u201cservant of the Lord\u201d in the Old Testament, Stephen Dempster shows that David is the \u201cservant of the Lord\u201d par excellence in the book of Kings. The term \u201cservant\u201d connects with n\u0101g\u00eed to emphasize a servant kingship and clearly marks David in an Adamic role.<\/p>\n
DAVID\u2019S RESPONSE TO GOD<\/p>\n
The response of David to this revelation through the prophet Nathan in 2 Samuel 7:18\u201329 reveals David\u2019s own understanding of the covenant. In this regard, the problematic verse 19 is critical. In verse 18, David expresses the fact that he and his house have been highly exalted. Now, however, in verse 19, he says that this honor is dwarfed by the promises concerning the distant future: z\u00f4\u2019t t\u00f4rat h\u0101\u2019\u0101d\u0101m. This clause has been enigmatic for scholars. The NLT rendering, \u201cDo you deal with everyone this way?\u201d represents a standard interpretation. However, this interpretation is problematic. First, reading the clause as an affirmative, declarative statement is far more normal when no contextual or grammatical signals exist to indicate a question. Second, although \u201cmanner\u201d is suggested as the possible meaning of t\u00f4r\u00e2 by the Oxford Lexicon, \u201cinstruction,\u201d or \u201claw,\u201d is by far the first meaning that comes to mind. In the bound phrase, the free member may be subjective or objective. When the free member is a person, it is frequently a subjective genitive, but construing it as an objective genitive makes good sense here. Thus we should translate it, \u201cThis is the instruction for humanity.\u201d Dumbrell and Kaiser note that the expression \u201claw of man\u201d has been shown to have parallels in the similar Akkadian phrase, ter\u012bt n\u012bshe, which has the sense of a \u201ccharter for humanity.\u201d
\nWhat could David mean when he says that the covenant revealed through Nathan is Yahweh\u2019s instruction for humanity? In 2 Samuel 7:14\u201315, the human obligations in the relationship between Yahweh and the Davidic king are indicated by establishing a father-son relationship. We saw that, in the ancient Near East, a country or region was thought to be ruled by the god of that territory, and the king was considered the representative of the local god. This explains how the king could be called the son of God. Therefore, as the divine son, the Davidic king was to effect the divine instruction, or Torah, in the nation as a whole and was, as a result, a mediator of the Mosaic Torah. However, since the god whom the Davidic king represented was not limited to a local region or territory but was the creator God and Sovereign of the whole world, the rule of the Davidic king would have repercussions for all the nations, not just for Israel. This is developed in Psalm 2 and many other psalms but is already suggested in 2 Samuel 7. Thus, faithfulness on the part of the Davidic son would effect the divine rule in the entire world, much as God intended for humanity to do in the covenant of creation, as indicated by the divine image in Genesis 1:26\u201327. This, I submit, is the logic behind David\u2019s response in 2 Samuel 7:19, and this is why he claims that a covenant that makes the Davidic king son of God is the instrument of bringing Yahweh\u2019s Torah to all the nations. David\u2019s own understanding of divine sonship is clearly indicated by his statement in 7:19 that the covenant is God\u2019s charter or instruction for humankind.
\nThe parallel text in 1 Chronicles 17:17 is textually problematic but is also instructive. The clause corresponding to z\u00f4\u2019t t\u00f4rat h\u0101\u2019\u0101d\u0101m is \u00fbre\u2019\u00eetan\u00ee ket\u00f4r h\u0101\u2019\u0101d\u0101m hamma\u2018\u0103l\u0101h. The most thorough treatment of the problem and the best proposal for the meaning of t\u00f4r (not an error for t\u00f4r\u00e2) is in Critique Textuelle de l\u2019Ancien Testament: \u201cYou see me according to the rank of the man placed high.\u201d This is equivalent to the last words of David in 2 Samuel 23:1, where he refers to Nathan\u2019s oracle as a \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05ea and calls himself \u201cthe man set on high\u201d (\u05d4\u05b7\u05d2\u05b6\u05bc\u05d1\u05b6\u05e8 \u05d4\u05bb\u05e7\u05b7\u05dd \u05e2\u05b8\u05dc). The statement in Psalm 89:28 (89:27 EV) is similar:<\/p>\n
I will also appoint him to be my firstborn,
\nthe most exalted of the kings of the earth. (NIV)<\/p>\n
The second line explicates the meaning of the Davidic sonship as being \u201cthe most exalted of the kings of the earth.\u201d All these texts represent interpretations of 2 Samuel 7:19 and show that since the god who is represented by the Davidic king is both supreme and universal, the Davidic king has the highest rank among human beings. Despite critical textual problems, 2 Samuel 7:19 is the key to the universalization of the messianic vision in the Psalms and Prophets.
\nIn the response section, 2 Samuel 7:18\u201329, the word \u201cgood\u201d can be used to refer to the covenant. The comment of I. H\u00f6ver-Johag is apt: \u201cIn 2 S. 7:28, \u1e6d\u00f4\u1e07\u00e2 refers to the covenant of Yahweh with the house of David (cf. v. 29; 1 S. 25:30; 2 Ch. 24:16; Akk. dab\u0101bu \u1e6d\u0101b\u016bta = Heb. dabb\u0113r \u1e6d\u00f4b).\u201d This observation demonstrates that the term b\u0115r\u00eet need not occur in a text for the author to be speaking about a covenant.
\nSome have wondered whether the divine promises to David indicate a particular son, such as Solomon. We duly note that the word \u201cson\u201d is in the singular in 2 Samuel 7:14\u201315. And it is David\u2019s son who will be the temple builder. Nonetheless, 7:14b\u201315 speak of the future son\u2019s possible disobedience and consequent discipline by Yahweh. This suggests a sequence of kings in which some are more faithful than others. More significantly, God promises David a \u201chouse,\u201d which clearly indicates a dynasty or family line going beyond one son. Later we shall discuss how this promise is fulfilled. The promise of an eternal house could be fulfilled by each member having a son guaranteed into the eternal future. It could also be fulfilled by some king having an eternal son. This latter solution was probably not imagined by writers of the Old Testament.<\/p>\n
LATER INTERPRETATIONS OF 2 SAMUEL 7<\/p>\n
Brief observations are now in order on the consideration given by later texts to both divine and human obligations in the covenant between Yahweh and David. These are also crucial in a correct interpretation of Isaiah 55:3, and frequently scholars have depended heavily on intertextual links, particularly with Psalm 89. In one of the most enlightened treatments of intertextual links between Psalm 89 and Isaiah 55:3, Knut Heim addresses concerns of scholars who hold that Nathan\u2019s oracle has been reinterpreted or altered in different directions based on current political realities in Israel and Judah. Heim responds to Michael Fishbane as follows:<\/p>\n
Fishbane\u2019s notion that the psalm\u2019s developments or changes were introduced mainly to protect the validity of the original oracle loses conviction when we note that more effective changes to this effect could have been introduced. Yet Psalm 89 still maintains that the Davidic promise-covenant is unconditional, although changing the unconditional nature of the psalm into a conditional one would have brought the covenant more in line with political reality and resolved the theological problem. Such a transformation would have been part of the psalmist\u2019s toolbox, for many other texts employed exactly this type of change (e.g., Ps. 132:12; 1 Kgs 2:3\u20134, 6:12, 8:25).<\/p>\n
Heim\u2019s main point is well taken. Yet what has not been noted sufficiently in recent scholarship is that while later writers do adapt and apply Nathan\u2019s oracle to their present contexts and theological tensions, their exegesis is more firmly rooted in the original oracle than is frequently allowed. This is because the oracle itself has elements that are both conditional and unconditional. Later writers may focus more on the unconditional aspects found in 2 Samuel 7:11b\u201313 and 16 (e.g., 2 Sam. 22:51 = Ps. 18:51 [18:50 EV]), or on the conditional aspects found in 2 Samuel 7:14\u201315 (Ps. 132:12; 1 Kings 2:3\u20134; 6:12; 8:25; 2 Chron. 6:16; 7:17\u201318; Jer. 22:1\u20135, 24). Indeed, in Psalm 89, which is so focused on the unconditional aspect, the conditional side does surface. Two verses in particular should be highlighted:<\/p>\n
Psalm 89:31\u201334 (89:30\u201333)<\/p>\n
\u05d0\u05b4\u05dd\u05be\u05d9\u05b7\u05e2\u05b7\u05d6\u05d1\u05d5\u05bc \u05d1\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d9\u05d5 \u05ea\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8\u05b8\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9
\n\u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d8\u05b7\u05d9 \u05dc\u05b9\u05d0 \u05d9\u05b5\u05dc\u05b5\u05db\u05d5\u05bc\u05df\u05c3
\n\u05d0\u05b4\u05dd\u05be\u05d7\u05bb\u05e7\u05b9\u05bc\u05ea\u05b7\u05d9 \u05d9\u05b0\u05d7\u05b7\u05dc\u05b5\u05bc\u05dc\u05d5\u05bc
\n\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea\u05b7\u05d9 \u05dc\u05b9\u05d0 \u05d9\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05de\u05b9\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05c3
\n\u05d5\u05bc\u05e4\u05b8\u05e7\u05b7\u05d3\u05b0\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 \u05d1\u05b0\u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05d1\u05b6\u05d8 \u05e4\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e2\u05b8\u05dd
\n\u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b4\u05e0\u05b0\u05d2\u05b8\u05e2\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd \u05e2\u05b2\u05d5\u05b9\u05e0\u05b8\u05dd\u05c3
\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05d7\u05b7\u05e1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9 \u05dc\u05b9\u05d0\u05be\u05d0\u05b8\u05e4\u05b4\u05d9\u05e8 \u05de\u05b5\u05e2\u05b4\u05de\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9
\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05dc\u05b9\u05d0\u05be\u05d0\u05b2\u05e9\u05b7\u05c1\u05e7\u05b5\u05bc\u05e8 \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05d0\u05b1\u05de\u05d5\u05bc\u05e0\u05b8\u05ea\u05b4\u05d9\u05c3<\/p>\n
If his sons abandon my Torah
\nand do not walk in my ordinances,
\nif they profane my statutes
\nand do not keep my commands,
\nI will punish their transgression with a rod
\nand their offense with strokes,
\nbut my covenant loyalty I will not cancel from him,
\nand I will not prove false in my faithfulness.<\/p>\n
Verse 31 relates directly to Deuteronomy 17 and emphasizes that the Davidic king must know and keep Torah in order for this to be the basis of his rule of the nation (as in Isa. 11:3a). While the emphasis is on the faithfulness of Yahweh, the need for Torah keeping on the part of the king is duly noted.<\/p>\n
Psalm 89:50 (89:49 EV)<\/p>\n
\u05d0\u05b7\u05d9\u05b5\u05bc\u05d4 \u05d7\u05b2\u05e1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b6\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 \u05d4\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u05d0\u05e9\u05b9\u05c1\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d0\u05b2\u05d3\u05b9\u05e0\u05b8\u05d9
\n\u05e0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc \u05dc\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05d5\u05b4\u05d3 \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05d0\u05b1\u05de\u05d5\u05bc\u05e0\u05b8\u05ea\u05b6\u05da\u05b8\u05c3<\/p>\n
Where are your former \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eem, O LORD,
\nwhich you swore to David in faithfulness?<\/p>\n
This text appeals to the acts of \u1e25esed promised by Yahweh in the Davidic covenant and performed by the Lord for at least some of the descendants of David, although apparently not in the life situation of the psalmist. Williamson proposes that when the referent is God, it is normal to think of him as demonstrating \u1e25esed, and so the subjective genitive is standard. He argues that in the first instance where the referent is certainly postulated of a human, the meaning is spelled out to avoid misunderstanding. I would argue that the pronominal referent is normally subjective, regardless of whether God or a human is the referent. Here, Hebrew \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eak\u00e2 must be read as a subjective genitive, as Williamson acknowledges. But in order for the psalmist to clarify that the acts of covenant kindness performed by Yahweh are previous in time and promised in the Davidic covenant, the modifier \u201cformer\u201d and a relative clause are added to the bound phrase. Thus, clarifying modifiers can be added regardless of whether the referent is divine or human.
\nFirst Kings 3:6 and the parallel 2 Chronicles 1:8 are illuminating in revealing Solomon\u2019s understanding of the role of David\u2019s faithfulness in the fulfillment of Yahweh\u2019s promise:<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05b7\u05d9\u05b9\u05bc\u05d0\u05de\u05b6\u05e8 \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05dc\u05b9\u05de\u05b9\u05d4 \u05d0\u05b7\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc\u05d4 \u05e2\u05b8\u05e9\u05b4\u05c2\u05d9\u05ea\u05b8 \u05e2\u05b4\u05dd\u05be\u05e2\u05b7\u05d1\u05b0\u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05da\u05b8 \u05d3\u05b8\u05d5\u05b4\u05d3 \u05d0\u05b8\u05d1\u05b4\u05d9 \u05d7\u05b6\u05e1\u05b6\u05d3 \u05d2\u05b8\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc
\n\u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05d0\u05b2\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05e8 \u05d4\u05b8\u05dc\u05b7\u05da\u05b0 \u05dc\u05b0\u05e4\u05b8\u05e0\u05b6\u05d9\u05da\u05b8 \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05d0\u05b1\u05de\u05b6\u05ea \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05e7\u05b8\u05d4 \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e8\u05b7\u05ea \u05dc\u05b5\u05d1\u05b8\u05d1 \u05e2\u05b4\u05de\u05b8\u05bc\u05da\u05b0
\n\u05d5\u05b7\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05de\u05b8\u05e8\u05be\u05dc\u05b9\u05d5 \u05d0\u05b6\u05ea\u05be\u05d4\u05b7\u05d7\u05b6\u05e1\u05b6\u05d3 \u05d4\u05b7\u05d2\u05b8\u05bc\u05d3\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc \u05d4\u05b7\u05d6\u05b6\u05bc\u05d4
\n\u05d5\u05b7\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05ea\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\u05be\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9 \u05d1\u05b5\u05df \u05d9\u05b9\u05e9\u05b5\u05c1\u05d1 \u05e2\u05b7\u05dc\u05be\u05db\u05b4\u05bc\u05e1\u05b0\u05d0\u05d5\u05b9 \u05db\u05b7\u05bc\u05d9\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05dd \u05d4\u05b7\u05d6\u05b6\u05bc\u05d4\u05c3<\/p>\n
Solomon answered, \u201cYou have shown great kindness to your servant, my father David, because he was faithful to you and righteous and upright in heart. You have continued this great kindness to him and have given him a son to sit on his throne this very day.\u201d (NIV)<\/p>\n
Here Yahweh performs his covenant obligation, but David performs his as well, and thus the promise is fulfilled.
\nLastly, before considering the exegetical issues in Isaiah 55; 2 Chronicles 6:42 must be treated as the only other place where the bound phrase \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd occurs. Without repeating the excellent observations of W. A. M. Beuken, we may note here that the emphasis is not only on Yahweh fulfilling his covenant obligations but also on the Davidic son fulfilling his.
\nThe first section of 2 Chronicles 6 (verses 1\u201311) entails the blessing of Solomon. Verse 4 contains references to Yahweh\u2019s promises to David. Two promises are mentioned in verse 5: (1) choosing a city for the temple, and (2) choosing a leader over Israel. Then verse 6 observes the fulfillment of these two promises: (1) Yahweh chose Jerusalem for the temple, and (2) he chose David to rule his people Israel. Verses 7\u201311 go on to explain why it would be David\u2019s son and not David who would build the temple that stores the documents of the Mosaic Torah, or Israelite covenant. The explanation appeals directly to Nathan\u2019s oracle. The two themes established in verses 1\u201311, choice of Jerusalem for temple and choice of David for leader, are important for understanding the Chronicler at the end of the prayer.
\nThe second section, 2 Chronicles 6:12\u201342, records the prayer of Solomon. In verse 14, Solomon begins by praising Yahweh as the God who keeps covenant and \u1e25esed to those who walk before him in complete devotion. This is central. Certainly, the covenant with David entails promises that Yahweh must keep to be faithful. But the oracle through Nathan makes clear that Yahweh will keep them only to and through a faithful son. Therefore, from the Chronicler\u2019s point of view, the promises of Yahweh will be fulfilled only when the throne is occupied by an obedient son. What the subsequent course of history shows is that Yahweh must not only keep the promises but also provide the obedient son if the covenant is to be maintained.
\nVerse 15 emphasizes that Yahweh spoke with his mouth and fulfilled with his hands the commitments he made in regard to David, Solomon\u2019s father. In verse 16, Solomon asks Yahweh to fulfill his promises to David concerning David\u2019s sons only if the sons faithfully follow Torah, as David did. Verse 17 repeats the request for Yahweh to fulfill his promise.
\nTo this point Solomon is calling on Yahweh to be faithful to his promises to David, but he has underlined (1) the obedience of David and (2) the necessity of the obedience of the sons for the promises to work.
\nVerses 18\u201340 constitute a request that God hear prayers made in and toward this temple. The various situations are all based on the Mosaic covenant (Exodus and Deuteronomy).
\nAt the end of the prayer something interesting happens in the Chronicler\u2019s account, which is different from the prayer in 1 Kings 8. First, 2 Chronicles 6:39b\u201340 quickly summarizes 1 Kings 8:50\u201353. Then in 2 Chronicles 6:41\u201342, the Chronicler quotes, almost verbatim, Psalm 132:8\u201310. Beuken\u2019s comments on this use of Psalm 132 need not be repeated here. Beuken\u2019s argument, which supports understanding David as subject of the acts of kindness, may be strengthened, however, by a few significant observations. When we recall that the book of Psalms was Israel\u2019s hymnal, the reader of Chronicles immediately picks up Psalm 132 as part of the context in 2 Chronicles 6. This is because Psalm 132 addresses the concerns raised at the beginning of 2 Chronicles 6: (1) the choice of Zion for the temple and (2) the choice of David and his sons as leaders of Israel. From the historical point of view of the Chronicler, both of these have been in grave jeopardy. Yet Psalm 132 is a prayer for Yahweh to keep his oath to David based on a faithful David. This is the clear meaning of verse 12 and especially of the phrase in verse 10, \u201con account of David your servant.\u201d The Hebrew for \u201con account of\u201d is the preposition ba\u2018\u0103b\u00fbr, employed in forty-nine instances in the Hebrew Bible: in eighteen instances ba\u2018\u0103b\u00fbr is bound to an infinitive or prefixed verb form and means \u201cin order that.\u201d In the thirty-one remaining instances the preposition is bound to a proper noun\/pronoun or suffixed verb form and means \u201con account of\u201d or \u201cfor the sake of.\u201d In every case where the preposition is bound to a proper noun, the prepositional phrase means \u201con account of what a person did\u201d and not \u201con account of doing something on behalf of a person.\u201d An interesting confirmation of the use of ba\u2018\u0103b\u00fbr is found in Genesis 26:24, where ba\u2018\u0103b\u00fbr \u2019abr\u0101h\u0101m is a shorthand equivalent of \u2018\u0113qeb \u2018\u0101\u0161er \u0161\u0101ma\u2018 \u2019abr\u0101h\u0101m beq\u00f4l\u00ee (\u201cbecause Abraham obeyed my voice\u201d) in Genesis 26:5. In 2 Chronicles 6:42, the phrase \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd substitutes for ba\u2018\u0103b\u00fbr d\u0101w\u012bd in the citation of Psalm 132:10 and therefore probably intended the same thing. In this way, the Chronicler has Solomon praying for Yahweh to keep his promises on account of the faithfulness of David. It would work well in the context that Solomon is appealing for Yahweh to be faithful because of the obedience of his father. However, in the context of Chronicles, with its messianic focus, this is more likely a hope in a future king who will at last be an obedient son, so that the promises may be fulfilled by Yahweh.
\nIn sum, some of the later texts emphasize the part of the son (1 Kings 2:2\u20134; 6:12; 8:25; 9:4\u20139; 2 Chron. 6:42; 7:17; Ps. 132:11\u201312), while others stress the faithfulness of the father (2 Sam. 22:51; 1 Kings 3:6; 8:15, 24\u201326; 1 Chron. 17:13; 2 Chron. 1:8; 6:4, 10, 14\u201315, 16; 7:10; Ps. 89:28\u201337; Jer. 33:19\u201326) in the covenant relationship.<\/p>\n
INTERPRETATION OF ISAIAH 55:3<\/p>\n
Incline your ear, and come to me;
\nhear, that your soul may live;
\nand I will make with you an everlasting covenant,
\nmy steadfast, sure love for David.
\nBehold, I made him a witness to the peoples,
\na leader and commander for the peoples.
\nBehold, you shall call a nation that you do not know,
\nand a nation that did not know you shall run to you,
\nbecause of the LORD your God, and of the Holy One of Israel,
\nfor he has glorified you. (Isa. 55:3\u20135 ESV)<\/p>\n
Isaiah 55:3\u20135 is an extremely important text in relation to understanding both the Davidic covenant and the new covenant in Scripture. Debate has raged for some time over the interpretation of the phrase \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd in verse 3, a phrase rendered in the KJV by \u201cthe sure mercies of David.\u201d We will engage the major players in the debate and challenge the standard view by rethinking the evidence from the grammar of the Hebrew language and from the versions. We will argue, contrary to the consensus of scholarship, that the \u201csure mercies\u201d are by David rather than for David. Moreover, by properly relating the text in a canonical and theological trajectory from Genesis 1 through Deuteronomy 17 and 2 Samuel 7 to Isaiah 55:3, the passage in Isaiah can be interpreted as applying 2 Samuel 7:19 to the future Davidic servant-king who brings about the everlasting covenant in Isaiah 53\u201354. The citation in Acts 13 is seen as providing strong support for this interpretation.<\/p>\n
THE CONSTRUCT PHRASE IN SCHOLARLY DEBATE<\/p>\n
In 1965, Andr\u00e9 Caquot challenged the standard view that d\u0101w\u012bd is to be construed as object in the bound noun phrase \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd in Isaiah 55:3 and argued instead that d\u0101w\u012bd is to be understood as the subject of the acts of covenant kindness and love. His analysis was adopted and developed further by Beuken in 1974 but was rejected by Hugh Williamson in 1978 and by Walter Kaiser in 1989. Recent commentators follow Williamson directly or simply maintain the standard view.
\nFirst, Williamson scrutinizes the ancient versions and concludes that the Septuagint, contrary to claims by Caquot, in fact supports construing David as an objective genitive (in the phrase \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd). He further maintains that not only the Vulgate, as Caquot admits, but also the Targum preserves the ambiguity of the Hebrew. Only the Peshitta supports the subjective genitive. Later we shall return to the ancient versions and in particular to the Septuagint of Isaiah 55:3 and the citation of it in Acts 13:34.
\nSecond, Williamson considers the claim from grammatical observations that when \u1e25esed is bound to a noun or pronominal suffix, virtually everywhere the free member or pronominal suffix indicates the subject or agent of the kindness. With Caquot he notes that the plural of \u1e25esed occurs eighteen times in the Hebrew Bible. Apart from Genesis 32:11, the noun is always in a bound phrase, and the free member is always subjective\u2014aside from the disputed passages, Isaiah 55:3 and 2 Chronicles 6:42. But do these facts, he argues, necessarily require that we read Isaiah 55:3 as subjective?
\nAs an alternative approach, Williamson claims that in every text that chronologically precedes Isaiah 55:3, the one who exercises \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eem is God. Thus, the readers of Isaiah would have construed the phrase in 55:3 as referring to the covenant loyalty of God rather than of David. He bolsters this claim by asserting that in the first instance where \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eem is certainly postulated of a human, the meaning is spelled out to avoid misunderstanding: \u1e25\u0103s\u0101day \u2019\u0103\u0161er \u2018\u0101\u015b\u00eet\u00ee (Neh. 13:14). Williamson then turns attention to the far more common singular use of \u1e25esed and argues that in Psalm 5:8; Ezra 7:28; 9:9; Nehemiah 13:22b; and especially Psalm 144:2 and Jonah 2:9, we have examples where the objective use is possible, probable, or even certain.
\nLastly, Williamson considers the context of Isaiah 55:3. He argues that the use of \u1e25esed and ne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n link the passage strongly to 2 Samuel 7, and he critiques the proposals of Beuken and Caquot to demonstrate that the context emphasizes the faithfulness of God to David and not the reverse. He presents evidence to show that \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd hanne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n\u00eem must be read in apposition to b\u0115r\u00eet \u2018\u00f4l\u0101m, and that construing the text this way is not only the most natural reading but also requires the interpretation that David is objective rather than subjective.
\nIn responding to Williamson, we must begin by affirming that both Beuken and Caquot are correct in observing that the normal way to construe the bound phrase is to interpret David as agent or subject. Out of eighteen instances in the plural in the Old Testament, only two are considered objective, and after Williamson thoroughly scoured the materials, out of 228 occurrences of the singular only six can be found that may possibly or probably be read as objective. There is no point in debating the interpretation of these six texts. The extreme paucity and debatable interpretation of these texts only supports the contention of Beuken and Caquot and strongly suggests that arguments to the contrary constitute special pleading. Linguistic usage demands, then, that the first notion to enter the mind of the native reader is to construe the free member as subject. That the free member in Isaiah 55:3 and 2 Chronicles 6:42 is human and not divine is an interesting point that does not necessarily support construing the free member as objective. Williamson argues that in the first case where \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eem is certainly postulated of a man, the meaning is spelled out to avoid misunderstanding, \u1e25\u0103s\u0101day \u2019\u0103\u0161er \u2018\u0101\u015b\u00eet\u00ee (Neh. 13:14), but he fails to observe that the construction in Nehemiah 13:14 is basically the same as in Genesis 32:11, where God is agent of the acts of loyal love. The addition of the relative clause in Nehemiah 13:14 is motivated only by the fact that it emphasizes the agent and does not function to avoid misunderstanding over whether the pronominal suffix is objective or subjective. In Genesis 32:11, however, Williamson fails to note that the speaker is the recipient of the acts of loyal love, and this may be the reason why here, and only here, \u1e25esed (in the plural) is not and perhaps, according to usage, cannot be used in a construct phrase.
\nThe use of \u1e25esed in bound phrases, however, is only one factor in the correct interpretation of this text. Other important contextual, grammatical, and lexical considerations are as follows. The most natural reading of the bound phrase in relation to the whole is to construe it in apposition to the b\u0115r\u00eet \u2018\u00f4l\u0101m of Isaiah 55:3a. This Williamson has defended well, as have many scholars before him. For \u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05d5\u05b4\u05d3, one normally thinks of the historical person who was king over Israel after Saul and who began the only lasting dynasty in Israelite monarchy. Here, then, is the crux of the matter. We know of a covenant relationship established between Yahweh, God of Israel, on the one hand and David and his descendants on the other (2 Samuel 7). Yet what \u1e25\u0103s\u0101d\u00eem, that is, what acts of covenant kindness on the part of David or his sons, what acts fulfilling the human obligations in this covenant, could possibly constitute an everlasting covenant and so satisfy the context of Isaiah 55? Here is where scholars are driven to consider other possibilities, and the conventional interpretation has for the most part opted for construing \u05d3\u05b8\u05bc\u05d5\u05b4\u05d3 in the bound phrase as objective. At this point, rebuttals of and rejoinders to Beuken and Caquot by Williamson and Kaiser are persuasive. Acts of grace and kindness by King David do not satisfy the context in Isaiah 55. Yet neither is the conventional interpretation free of problems. Williamson understands the phrase to mean God\u2019s covenant faithfulness to David, \u201cgiving rise to such translations as \u2018my steadfast, sure love for David\u2019 (RSV).\u201d The NIV renders it \u201cmy faithful love promised to David.\u201d Kaiser\u2019s translation is similar: \u201cthe unfailing kindnesses promised to David.\u201d The fact of the matter, however, is that reading David as an objective genitive does not yield a translation such as that of Kaiser or the NIV. The term \u1e25asd\u00ea in the bound phrase means the acts performed either by David (subjective) or for David (objective). \u1e24asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd cannot, therefore, mean \u201cblessings\u201d or \u201cfaithfulness promised\u201d to David. It can only mean actions that fulfill covenant obligations\/stipulations.<\/p>\n
EXEGESIS OF ISAIAH 55:3<\/p>\n
We may now turn directly to the exegesis of Isaiah 55:3. At once the major problem for Williamson, who readily admits that \u1e25esed nearly always governs a subjective genitive, is to understand how acts of \u1e25esed performed by David can possibly satisfy the context of Isaiah 55:3. Here one can sympathize with objections raised by Williamson and others to the proposals of Beuken and Caquot. Nonetheless, there is a third option, and that is to construe David as a rubric for the future king who will arise from the Davidic dynasty and not as the founder of the line. Clear evidence exists for this in the context in that Isaiah 55:3b is expressed in the future tense. In 55:4, however, although \u05e0\u05b0\u05ea\u05b7\u05ea\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05d5 is a perfect tense, it refers to the fact that Yahweh has planned a future role for the Davidic king to play. This interpretation fully preserves standard usage for the Hebrew perfect and shows how the future orientation is maintained.
\nThis option was considered\u2014and rejected\u2014previously by Franz Delitzsch and more recently by Walter Kaiser, following Delitzsch. Delitzsch says, \u201cThe directly Messianic application of the name \u2018David\u2019 is to be objected to, on the ground that the Messiah is never so called without further remark.\u201d This objection is not serious. It wrongly assumes that the manner of reference in Isaiah must match that in other prophets and fails to note the patterns of reference in Isaiah itself. The name David in Isaiah refers elsewhere to the historical personage in the expression \u201cthe city of David\u201d (22:9; 29:1). In addressing Hezekiah, Isaiah calls Yahweh the \u201cGod of David your father\u201d (38:5). The phrases \u201chouse\/tent of David\u201d (7:2, 13; 16:5; 22:22) and \u201cthrone of David\u201d (9:7) are expressions used to refer to descendants of David, whether in the author\u2019s present or future. Thus the use of the name David in Isaiah shows that a future descendant is uppermost in the author\u2019s thought. Daniel I. Block\u2019s study \u201cMy Servant David: Ancient Israel\u2019s Vision of the Messiah\u201d provides strong evidence that the figure of the servant of Yahweh in Isaiah is both Davidic and royal. The figurative language in which the Davidic king and kingdom are portrayed as a majestic tree cut down (Isa. 6:13) and the reference to the shoot and root in Isaiah 53:2 clearly connect this text to the vision of the future king who is the shoot and root of Jesse in Isaiah 11:1, 10. As Alec Motyer notes, \u201cThe reference to Jesse indicates that the shoot is not just another king in David\u2019s line but rather another David.\u201d The connection between the future king of Isaiah 9 and 11 and the servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 53 in the history of interpretation is as old as the Septuagint. The rendering of y\u00f4n\u0113q in 53:2 by \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03af\u03bf\u03bd shows a clear connection with 9:5 (9:6 EV) in the mind of the Greek translator. Key to the identity of the servant of Yahweh is Isaiah 49:3 and 6 in the Second Servant Song. One text says the servant is Israel; another affirms that the servant will restore the tribes of Jacob (= Israel). The servant is Israel, yet he restores Israel. How can we resolve this enigmatic and apparently contradictory situation? When the servant is seen as a royal figure, we can propose a solution. There is a sense in which the king is the nation in himself and yet can also be the deliverer of the nation. If d\u0101w\u012bd in 55:3 refers to the future king, a precedent would already be set by Hosea 3:5, a usage more similar than those in Jeremiah (30:8\u20139) and Ezekiel (34:23, 24; 37:24, 25).
\nWith the above exposition of \u201csonship\u201d in the Davidic covenant of 2 Samuel 7 and the understanding that Isaiah 55:3 refers to a future David, the pieces of the text can now be put together. This approach best suits the flow of thought in Isaiah and best explains what the phrases \u201cwitness of the peoples\u201d and \u201cleader and commander of the peoples\u201d mean in context; it best explains the apposition of \u201cfaithful acts of loyal love by David\u201d to \u201ceternal covenant\u201d and why \u201cfaithful\u201d is used as a modifier. These arguments can be unpacked as follows.
\nThe first vision of a future restored Zion is found in Isaiah 2, where Mount Zion becomes the highest mountain in the new world and all the nations stream to it to receive instruction (t\u00f4r\u00e2) and the word of the Lord. This vision, along with the one in chapter 4, shows that the future Mount Zion has inherited the role of both Eden and Sinai and that the city, once a whore (1:21) is now characterized by social justice (1:26), as the term \u201choly\u201d (4:3) indicates.
\nThe visions in 9:5\u20136 (9:6\u20137 EV) and 11:1\u201310 bring a new twist. A future king, a new David, will arise. He will delight in the fear of the Lord, here a synonym for Torah as in Psalm 19. Thus he will fulfill the command of Deuteronomy 17:18\u201320 and as a result will implement the social justice of the Torah (Isa. 11:3b\u20135). According to 11:10, the King himself will become a banner for the nations. Here we see that the nations who stream to Zion in 2:1\u20134 will receive the Torah of Yahweh through the Davidic king. The servant of Yahweh\u2014already connected to this future king\u2014will bring justice to the nations in 42:1, 3\u20134; 49:1, 6. Also in the context of a Servant Song, the fact that a banner is raised to the nations is repeated in 49:22. In short, as the son of God, a future David will bring God\u2019s instruction and rule to all the nations, as indicated in 2 Samuel 7.
\nScholars have emphasized that \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd hanne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n\u00eem in Isaiah 55:3b functions in apposition to b\u0115r\u00eet \u2018\u00f4l\u0101m in 55:3a. What acts of \u1e25esed on the part of the future David can constitute an eternal covenant? The arm of Yahweh is part of the new exodus theme that permeates all of Isaiah. The occurrence in 50:2 initiates a focus (51:5, 9; 52:10) on the arm that reaches a climax in the Fourth Servant Song in 53:1. Nevertheless, when Yahweh rolls up his sleeves and bares his arm, no one would have believed it. The future king does not crush his enemies and rid the land of evil (11:3\u20135) by military force, prowess, and strategies but simply by his word (11:4; 49:2; 50:4) and by offering himself as an \u2019\u0101\u0161\u0101m (53:10). Thus the means and manner in which Yahweh\u2019s Torah is brought to the nations and in which his kingship is effected among them (a commander and leader of the peoples) are detailed by the four Servant Songs, and in particular by the Fourth Song (52:13\u201353:12). It is the acts of \u1e25esed on the part of the servant that establish and initiate the discussion on the eternal covenant in Isaiah 54, of which 55:3 continues the thread. It is because the servant is the \u201ccovenant of the people\u201d in himself (42:6; 49:8) that the apposition of \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd and b\u0115r\u00eet \u2018\u00f4l\u0101m in 55:3 makes sense.
\nIsaiah 55:4\u20135 speaks of the future David being a witness to the nations and a leader and commander of the peoples. This speaks far more of fulfilling the human obligations in the Davidic covenant than of a specific focus on fulfilling the divine obligations. In explaining the phrase \u05e2\u05b5\u05d3 \u05dc\u05b0\u05d0\u05d5\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05bc\u05d9\u05dd, Beuken concludes that \u201cDavid\u2019s witness had consisted neither of his lot in itself nor of the trustworthiness of the connection between proclamation and fulfillment of rescue. More properly it consisted of the outspoken praise of God among the nations.\u201d Williamson counters by appealing to John Eaton:<\/p>\n
Eaton here finds three aspects to this royal role, each of which fits the context, namely, of the king as one who exhorts and admonishes, as one who is able out of his own experience to testify to God\u2019s revelation and salvation, and thirdly as one who, by his very existence, is an \u201cevidential sign\u201d to the nations.<\/p>\n
John Eaton argues that the second is the most significant. This fails to consider the central function of the king to effect the instruction of Yahweh in the lives of the people and even to the nations: \u201cThis is the instruction for humankind\u201d (2 Sam. 7:19). This is what is prominent in Isaiah. The servant of Yahweh brings Yahweh\u2019s Torah to the distant islands.
\nA false start was made in trying to connect David as witness in Isaiah 55:4 and Psalm 89:38 (89:37 EV). The idea that David or his seed is the witness in Psalm 89:38 (89:37 EV) is suggested by Eaton and found \u201cattractive\u201d by Williamson. As Timo Veijola has shown, ne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n in Psalm 89:38 (89:37 EV) is a predicate adjective, not attributive, and 89:37ab\u201338a (89:36ab\u201337a EV) form a tricolon so that 89:38b (89:37b EV) is not parallel to 89:38a (89:37a EV). Consequently, we cannot translate this phrase \u201cthe faithful witness in the sky,\u201d as does the NIV. Williamson\u2019s rendering, \u201cand he is established to be witness in the clouds,\u201d does recognize the grammatical problem in construing ne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n as attributive, but this is not a natural reading of what is a simple nominal sentence. In Psalm 89:38 (89:37 EV), therefore, Veijola suggests that Yahweh, not the Davidic seed, is the witness: \u201cThe Witness in the sky is faithful.\u201d
\nA careful examination of all instances of \u2018\u0113d in the Hebrew Bible points in a different direction than earlier proposals for Isaiah 55:4 and better suits the interpretation proposed. The role of the Davidic king in fulfilling his covenant obligations is defined by divine sonship, based on 2 Samuel 7:14\u201315 and Deuteronomy 17:18\u201320. The king\u2019s rule is to exhibit the justice and righteousness of Yahweh himself. Foundational to this is the Torah that the king must copy for himself and keep with him. Then the divine justice and righteousness in the Torah will shine through every aspect of the king\u2019s decisions and government. The logic of being a son of a universal deity and the statement of 2 Samuel 7:19 together show that this instruction is not only for Israel but for all the nations. This argument explains how and why the Davidic king is a witness and is more to the point than that given by Eaton and Williamson.
\nNonetheless, there is much more. A lexical study of \u2018\u0113d shows that a witness functions in covenant relationships, especially with a view to restoring broken relationships. When Laban and Jacob make a covenant, a heap of stones functions as a witness. As Timo Veijola explains, \u201cWhen a treaty is violated, it is the duty of the witness to stand forth and accuse the partner who transgressed the treaty (cf. Gen 31:50).\u201d This is what the Davidic king is for the nations. Note that in the Servant Songs, twice the servant of Yahweh is informed that he will become in his person a covenant with the people (Isa. 42:6; 49:8). Just as the term \u201cwitness\u201d can sometimes replace \u201ccovenant\u201d\u2014so that, for example, the \u201cark of the covenant\u201d becomes the \u201cark of witness\u201d\u2014so here to say that David is a witness to the peoples correlates with the statements in the Servant Songs that he is a covenant to the people. Moreover, the background of Isaiah 19 is significant. David is to the nations what the altar is to Egypt in Isaiah 19:20. He speaks to the nations of their covenant disloyalty, of their broken obligations to the creator God, and he brings about the restoration of the covenant relationship between Yahweh and the nations. As stated earlier, the means and manner in which Yahweh\u2019s Torah is brought to the nations and in which his kingship is effected among them are detailed by the four Servant Songs and in particular by the Fourth Song in 52:13\u201353:12. And this is why a nation that does not know Israel and also one that Israel does not know comes running to her through the work of her king as witness.
\nThe king is also a leader and commander of peoples (n\u0101g\u00eed \u00fbme\u015fawweh le\u2019umm\u00eem). The most recent and thorough treatment of n\u0101g\u00eed, particularly in the context of 2 Samuel 5:17\u20137:29, is that of Donald F. Murray. His conclusion is worth citing:<\/p>\n
In our texts the melek is one who sees his power from Yahweh as susceptible to his own arbitrary manipulation, who obtrudes himself inappropriately and disproportionately between Yahweh and Israel, and who treats Israel as little more than the subjects of his monarchic power. The n\u0101g\u00eed, on the other hand, is positively portrayed as one who sees his power as a sovereign and inviolable devolvement from Yahweh, who acts strictly under the orders of Yahweh for the benefit of Yahweh\u2019s people, and holds himself as no more than the willing subject of the divine monarch.<\/p>\n
No description better fits the role of the future king in Isaiah 1\u201339 and the role of the servant of the Lord in Isaiah 40\u201366 in implementing Yahweh\u2019s kingship. Thus Isaiah employs n\u0101g\u00eed because the future David fulfills the role of obedient son in the framework of the Davidic covenant.
\nFinally, one must adequately explain the description of \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd as hanne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n\u00eem. Williamson finds that Caquot \u201cmerely suggests an interpretation that suits his view\u201d while Beuken \u201csees the problem posed by hanne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n\u00eem more clearly.\u201d He then seeks to show that when associated with \u1e25esed, d\u0101w\u012bd, and b\u0115r\u00eet, ne\u2019\u0115m\u0101n must surely point to Nathan\u2019s oracle. If we grant this, it may support interpreting it as a subjective genitive as much or more than an objective genitive, since the oracle is just as concerned with the faithfulness of an obedient son as it is with the faithfulness of Yahweh to his promises. Even here, Williamson is somewhat unfair in his treatment of the evidence:<\/p>\n
In Ps. 78:37 we find that the Israelites \u201cwere not true to his covenant.\u201d However, since this unique explicit application of n\u2019mn to the human partner in a covenant with God is cast in the negative, it would be precarious indeed to seek to use it in any way to elucidate the quite different atmosphere of Isa. 55:3 (contra Beuken, p. 53). Finally, in Neh. 9:8 it is said that God found Abraham\u2019s heart faithful (n\u2019mn), so that he made his covenant with him. However, whilst this is certainly the closest parallel to Isa. 55:3 which could suggest a subjective genitive, it should be pointed out against this conclusion that whereas in Neh. 9:8 n\u2019mn qualifies Abraham\u2019s heart (and hence Abraham himself), in Isa. 55:3 the plural hanne\u2019em\u0101n\u00eem must be construed with \u1e25asd\u00ea, and not with the singular dwd.<\/p>\n
This can only be classified as specious linguistic reasoning. Whether the person or the person\u2019s deeds are counted faithful does not affect whether one is speaking of God or of human beings. And whether the actions are negative in one place and positive in another does not change the fact that the term can be applied to humans. What Williamson has missed is the atmosphere of Isaiah, where in both the section concerning bad King Ahaz (Isaiah 7\u20139) and the section concerning good King Hezekiah (Isaiah 36\u201339), the history of the monarchy shows that we are still desperately awaiting an obedient Davidic son. While the faithfulness of Yahweh may be questioned in Psalm 89, it is not an issue in Isaiah.
\nWilliamson summarizes his approach to the problem as follows:<\/p>\n
Thus far we have sought to show, first, that the versions cannot legitimately be invoked to settle the issue of how to construe \u1e25sdy dwd, and secondly, that although it is true that \u1e25sd nearly always governs a subjective genitive, there are indications that this need not necessarily be so in every case, but that the context should be the deciding factor.<\/p>\n
This is largely sound. The ancient versions do hold weight in the history of interpretation, but they cannot settle the issue. The pattern of constructions used with \u1e25esed, however, carries great weight. While I am not persuaded that Williamson has succeeded in showing that genuine cases of the objective genitive exist, the first datum in the context is the predilection of the native speaker to construe \u1e25asd\u00ea d\u0101w\u012bd as subjective. So the burden of proof lies in showing that the context requires a meaning other than the subjective genitive. The main reasons interpreters have sought to interpret the text from the point of view of an objective genitive are a failure to see that a future, not historical, David is in view and a failure to observe properly the trajectory of the covenants in the Old Testament and the flow of thought both in the book of Isaiah as a whole and in the near context of chapter 55. While some interpreters use such renderings in English as \u201cthe promises of grace to David\u201d or \u201cthe unfailing kindnesses promised to David,\u201d paraphrases that actually go beyond linguistic parameters for a literal translation as an objective genitive, these renderings really show how awkward it is to construe it this way. The blessings do come to the nations, not because Yahweh\u2019s promises to David are democratized in the way some think but because a new David who is an obedient son succeeds in bringing Yahweh\u2019s Torah to all humans. If we follow through on the subjective genitive, the kindnesses of David could involve sharing the victory of the one with the many (see Isa. 53:10\u201312) so that all are now sons and daughters of God, just as all are now servants. This might be a way in which the future David democratizes the covenant.<\/p>\n
THE CITATION OF ISAIAH 55:3 IN ACTS 13:34<\/p>\n
The question remains, do the Septuagint of Isaiah 55:3 and the citation in Acts 13:34 support an objective genitive, as Williamson claims? He notes that the neuter plural \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 occurs only in Deuteronomy 29:19, where \u0161\u0101l\u00f4m yihyeh-l\u00ee is rendered idiomatically by \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf. Then he appeals to independent studies by J. Dupont and Evald L\u00f6vestam, who argue that \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 signifies \u201ca general expression for blessings and good gifts which may be expected from the deity.\u201d Finally, he argues that according to the majority of commentators, this meaning best suits the citation in Acts 13:34.
\nFirst, one should begin by considering the normal meaning of \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 and the translation technique used for \u1e25esed in Isaiah. As our standard Greek lexica show, \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 has two basic meanings: (1) it refers to what is divinely permitted or sanctioned, and (2) it describes persons or their deeds as devout, holy, or pious. There are actually two parallel passages where the neuter plural is found: Deuteronomy 29:19 and Wisdom of Solomon 6:10. In both passages, the first meaning, \u201csanctioned by divine law,\u201d fits well. Thus \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03ac \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf in Deuteronomy 29:19 may be rendered \u201cmay I be allowed to,\u201d and \u03bf\u1f31 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03ac\u03be\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f41\u03c3\u03af\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 may be translated \u201cthose who have kept the holy ordinances in holiness.\u201d Whether these parallels assist in interpreting Isaiah 55:3 remains to be seen.
\nThe term \u1e25esed was encountered in eight instances by the Greek translator of Isaiah, and normally he employed \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2, a standard equivalent among Septuagint translators (Isa. 16:5; 54:8, 10; 63:7 [2\u00d7]). The rendering of \u2019an\u0161\u00ea \u1e25esed ne\u2018\u0115m\u0101n\u00een in 57:1 by \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b5\u03c2 \u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9 and the use of \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1 in 40:6 for the charm or grace of a blossom illustrate well that the translator is sensitive to context and capable of fully idiomatic renderings. Since the rendering \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 \u0394\u03b1\u03c5\u03b9\u03b4 in 55:3 deviates from the norm, it is likely a contextually motivated idiomatic rendering. If divine sanctions are in view, it could mean \u201cthe divine decrees of David.\u201d This seems an odd way to refer to the divine promises made to David in 2 Samuel 7. An objective genitive is possible, but such English renderings as \u201cdivine blessings\/promises to David\u201d stretch the field of meaning permitted for \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 beyond the norm. The phrase may also mean the divine duties or holy deeds\/things of David. Again, an objective genitive is also possible, but a subjective genitive seems less awkward. Honesty, however, compels one to admit that either a subjective or objective genitive is possible and that the meaning of the Septuagint translator is not readily transparent. Nonetheless, one might argue that he avoided the usual \u1f14\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03c2 to show that God\u2019s kindnesses were not in view. Williamson does not explain why the Isaiah translator deviated from a more straightforward way of expressing that God\u2019s mercies were in view and used instead a unique expression.
\nLastly, we note the citation of Isaiah 55:3 in Acts 13:34. Although this text has been discussed extensively and the majority view favors an objective genitive, an alternative interpretation is briefly argued here.
\nAccording to the context, in Acts 13 Paul is attending a meeting of the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch, where he speaks to an audience consisting of Jews and God-fearing Gentiles (13:16, 26). His address is a retelling of the story of Israel, so one must pay attention to what is included and what is omitted. Doubtless, what we have recorded in Acts constitutes only the main points. Nonetheless, the election of the fathers, the exodus, and the period of the judges get only the barest mention as he hurries to the time when Israel requests a king. After discussing how Saul is given and also removed, Paul comes to David. He makes only one comment about David, but it is important: he will do everything that God wants. This is the faithful king of 2 Samuel 7. Next, he attempts to show that Jesus is the Savior God promised to bring to Israel from the line of David (Acts 13:23). Finally, Jesus\u2019s death and resurrection fulfill the words of the prophets (13:27). In 13:32, Paul offers good news to \u201cyou\u201d (second-person plural), that is, his audience. What God promised to the fathers was now fulfilled for Paul and his hearers, their descendants, when he raised Jesus from the dead. Paul cites Psalm 2:7 and then affirms that God raised Jesus, no longer to return to corruption. That the resurrection of the Davidic son of Psalm 2 is to an incorruptible life is demonstrated by two further texts: Isaiah 55:3 and Psalm 16:10. In Isaiah 55:3, he (i.e., God) said, \u201cI will give to you the faithful \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 of David.\u201d (Note that the \u201cyou\u201d is second-person plural. The recipients, according to Paul, are his audience in Pisidian Antioch, the descendants of the people first promised \u201cthe faithful \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 of David.\u201d This makes perfect sense in view of Isaiah\u2019s doctrine of a remnant.) Now if Paul meant \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 \u0394\u03b1\u03c5\u03b9\u03b4 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac to be a subjective genitive and if he understood \u201cDavid\u201d not as the historical David but as a rubric for the Messiah, his argument in context becomes plain. The explanation that David served his own generation is a clear statement that the historical David is not in view in verse 34. Instead, Isaiah refers to the Messiah. Since the pious deeds of David in the context of Isaiah 55:3 are the sufferings and death of the servant in Isaiah 53, the reference to resurrection becomes clear. Isaiah 53:11 affirms that \u201cafter the suffering of his soul he will see the light of life and be satisfied.\u201d Isaiah 53:12 shows the servant sharing his victory with the many. And it is natural for Paul to cite 55:3 and not a verse or two in chapter 53 because this is the text that applies the work of the servant to the nations. Once again, perhaps the reason why scholars have labored so hard to find an appropriate meaning for \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 in Acts 13:34 is that they are thinking of the wrong David. This interpretation, then, for Acts 13:34 is plausible and also matches the proposal for Isaiah 55:3.
\nFinally, not only seasoned scholars but even beginners should cast a doubtful eye at an entry in the lexicon that allocates a meaning for \u1f45\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 in one instance that is apparently so disconnected in meaning from standard usage. The new third edition by F. W. Danker removes Acts 13:34 from the section on \u201cthings divinely sanctioned\u201d and gives it a numbered paragraph of its own. The explanation, however, is almost identical to that in the previous edition:<\/p>\n
The ref. to \u1f45\u03c3. in \u03b4\u03ce\u03c3\u03c9 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c2. \u0394\u03b1\u03c5\u1f76\u03b4 \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac I will grant to you (pl.) the unfailing divine assurances or decrees relating to David Ac 13:34 is of special interest (for \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f45\u03c3. in the sense of divine decrees ordinances s. Wsd. 6:10; Jos., Ant 8,115\u2013). This quot. fr. Is 55:3 is evidently meant to show that the quot. fr. Ps 15:10 [16:10 EV], which follows immediately, could not refer to the Psalmist David, but to Christ alone (cp. a sim. line of argument relating to a referent Hb 2:6\u20139). The promises to David have solemnly been transferred to \u201cyou.\u201d But David himself served not you, but his own generation (vs. 36). So the promises of God refer not to him, but to his Messianic descendant.<\/p>\n
The movement from \u201cassurances\u201d or \u201cdecrees\u201d to \u201cpromises\u201d is an unwarranted jump linguistically. If we supply from regular usage a meaning like \u201cthe pious deeds of David,\u201d the comment in the lexicon would make good sense.<\/p>\n
CONCLUSION<\/p>\n
In conclusion, \u201cthe faithful kindnesses of David\u201d mentioned in Isaiah 55:3 are kindnesses performed by David\u2014a rubric for the future king in this text. The faithful or obedient acts of loyal love are those of the servant-king in Isaiah 53, whose offering of himself as an \u2019\u0101\u0161\u0101m and whose resurrection enable him to bring to fulfillment the promises of Yahweh in the Davidic covenant and who is at the same time the basis for the new or everlasting covenant. This future king, then, fulfills the roles required for the king in Deuteronomy 17 and 2 Samuel 7 by bringing the divine instruction, or Torah, to Israel (Deuteronomy 17) and, indeed, to all the nations (2 Sam. 7:19). He is therefore a leader and commander of the peoples, and he becomes a covenant witness in himself to the nations. This is exactly how Acts 13:34 interprets Isaiah 55.<\/p>\n
THE FULFILLMENT OF PROMISES TO DAVID<\/p>\n
The promises entailed in the covenant with David are divided by the text into two: (1) those to be fulfilled during his lifetime and (2) those to be fulfilled after his death. Second Samuel 7:8\u201311a gives the promises to be fulfilled during David\u2019s lifetime: (1) a great name, (2) a firm place for Israel as the people of God, and (3) rest for David from his enemies. Second Samuel 8 gives a list of David\u2019s victories and is placed by the author strategically after chapter 7 to show the fulfillment of these three promises. According to 8:13, \u201cDavid made a name for himself when he returned from striking down 18,000 Edomites in the Valley of Salt\u201d (ESV). The defeat of the enemies listed in chapter 8 shows that God made a firm place for his people Israel through these victories. In 1 Kings 5:4, Solomon attests to the fact that he has rest on every side\u2014a legacy received from his father David.
\nThe promises to be fulfilled after the death of David are also three: (1) an eternal house, (2) a kingdom, and (3) a throne. There are two ways in which God could give David an eternal house. It could be that every descendant would be successful in producing a male heir\u2014something that has always created problems for every human royal house. Or it could be that someday, a descendant would be born who would never die. According to the New Testament, this is what happened: the eternal house\/seed is fulfilled in Jesus Christ, a descendant of David, who according to his resurrection is an eternal person. And through the coming, person, and work of Jesus Christ, an eternal kingdom has already begun (2 Pet. 1:11). The authors of the New Testament make plain that ever since Jesus ascended to the right hand of the Father after his resurrection, he has been ruling from an eternal, heavenly throne (Acts 2:29\u201336; Heb. 12:22\u201324).<\/p>\n
RELATIONSHIP OF THE DAVIDIC COVENANT TO THE ISRAELITE COVENANT<\/p>\n
As we have seen in the exposition of 2 Samuel 7, the king of Israel was to be the administrator of the Israelite covenant. By depending on Yahweh for military victories, the king would point the people to the kingship of Yahweh. In his rule of the people he would represent God\u2019s social justice and also embody in his person the obedience of the people. Thus kingship in Israel was to be a means of accomplishing Exodus 19:3b\u20136: the king would be a devoted servant and son of God and would also function as a priest, instructing the nations in the righteousness of God and inviting them to come under the rule of Yahweh.
\nWe see the priestly role of David in that he wears an ephod. The description of David in 2 Samuel 6:14 is identical in the Hebrew text to that of Samuel in 1 Samuel 2:18. We further see the priestly role of the Davidic king in Psalm 110:4. All this indicates that the king will accomplish in his person the purpose that God had for the nation of Israel as a whole, to be a kingdom of priests. The king will embody the nation in himself.
\nAbove, in the discussion of the Fourth Servant Song (Isa. 52:13\u201353:12), we saw that there is a sense in which the king is the nation in himself, and yet can also be the deliverer of the nation. Genesis 20:4 is an excellent illustration of the corporate solidarity between king and people that was part and parcel of the culture of the ancient Near East:<\/p>\n
Now Abraham moved on from there into the region of the Negev and lived between Kadesh and Shur. For a while he stayed in Gerar, and there Abraham said of his wife Sarah, \u201cShe is my sister.\u201d Then Abimelech king of Gerar sent for Sarah and took her.
\nBut God came to Abimelech in a dream one night and said to him, \u201cYou are as good as dead because of the woman you have taken; she is a married woman.\u201d
\nNow Abimelech had not gone near her, so he said, \u201cLord, will you destroy an innocent nation? Did he not say to me, \u2018She is my sister,\u2019 and didn\u2019t she also say, \u2018He is my brother\u2019? I have done this with a clear conscience and clean hands.\u201d (Gen. 20:1\u20135 NIV)<\/p>\n
Notice in this text that God communicates to Abimelech that he is a dead man because he has taken a married woman. Abimelech responds, \u201cLord, will you destroy an innocent nation?\u201d Therefore the culture assumes that to kill the king is to destroy the nation (\u05d2\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05d9). This is a clear illustration of federal headship: the king is the nation in himself. Thus it is natural in the plan of God for the king of Israel, as Israel, to accomplish for the nation as a whole what the group of individuals have failed to do.<\/p>\n
RELATIONSHIP OF THE DAVIDIC COVENANT TO THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT<\/p>\n
First, God will use David to bring rest to his people and to give them a place. Compare for a moment Genesis 15:18\u201321; Deuteronomy 11:24; and 1 Kings 4:20\u201321 (EV):<\/p>\n
On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, \u201cTo your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.\u201d (Gen. 15:18\u201321 ESV)<\/p>\n
Every place on which the sole of your foot treads shall be yours. Your territory shall be from the wilderness to the Lebanon and from the River, the river Euphrates, to the western sea. (Deut. 11:24 ESV)<\/p>\n
Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. (1 Kings 4:20\u201321 ESV)<\/p>\n
The borders of the land as envisaged in Genesis 15:18\u201321 are defined in Deuteronomy 11:24 as Israel\u2019s \u201cplace.\u201d First Kings 4:20\u201321 indicates that this geographical \u201cplace\u201d belonged to Israel during the time of Solomon, David\u2019s son. So the covenant with David was a means to fulfill the promises in the Abrahamic covenant.
\nSecond, God will use David to bring blessing to the nations as promised in the covenant with Abraham. The covenant with David is the charter or instruction for mankind. Isaiah 55 shows how the future king will by his acts of loving-kindness be a witness and a commander and leader of the peoples as he brings the divine instruction, or Torah, to all the nations.
\nThe relation of the Davidic king to the Abrahamic covenant is described precisely by Psalm 72:17:<\/p>\n
\u05d9\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05d9 \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05de\u05d5\u05b9 \u05dc\u05b0\u05e2\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc\u05b8\u05dd
\n\u05dc\u05b4\u05e4\u05b0\u05e0\u05b5\u05d9\u05be\u05e9\u05b6\u05c1\u05de\u05b6\u05e9\u05c1 \u05d9\u05b8\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9\u05df *\u05d9\u05b4\u05e0\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05df \u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05de\u05d5\u05b9
\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc \u05d1\u05d5\u05b9
\n\u05db\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc\u05be\u05d2\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd \u05d9\u05b0\u05d0\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05bc\u05c1\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc\u05c3<\/p>\n
May his name endure forever,
\nhis fame continue as long as the sun!
\nMay people be blessed in him,
\nall nations call him blessed! (ESV)<\/p>\n
Verse 17b begins with another instance of the hithpael form of b\u0101rak. The rendering \u201cmay people be blessed in him\u201d in the ESV is passive, as is common in the English versions. Keith Gr\u00fcneberg argues that a speech action hithpael is more suitable:<\/p>\n
The verse begins with a request that the king\u2019s name endure. This would neatly introduce a statement that his fame will be such that other nations will use it in their blessings.\u2026 Gen 48:20 provides a clear example of how a person\u2019s name might be thus used. More importantly, \u05d9\u05ea\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05d5 is parallel to \u05d9\u05b0\u05d0\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05bc\u05c1\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc, \u201ccall him happy\u201d; this parallelism is close if the \u201cblessing\u201d is an utterance on the part of the nations.<\/p>\n
Benjamin Noonan, however, has shown that the analysis of Gr\u00fcneberg makes several questionable assumptions concerning the relationship of Genesis 48:20 and the general usage of the hithpael of b\u0101rak. The use of the beth preposition there may not necessarily be the same as in the uses with the hithpael.
\nAlthough the word that the ESV translates as \u201ccontinue\u201d in verse 17a\u03b2 is a bit obscure, it seems to belong to the plant\/tree imagery employed for kings and kingdoms. We could render the verse thus:<\/p>\n
May his name endure forever,
\nhis name make shoots as long as the sun!
\nMay they consider themselves blessed by him,
\nall nations call him happy!<\/p>\n
The flow of thought in the psalm is simple. Whether \u201cby\u201d or \u201cfor\u201d Solomon, it begins in 72:1 as a prayer to God to give his judgments and righteousness to the king. In 72:2, the result is that the king will judge with social justice. In such a kingdom the needy and weak are given justice. His rule is extended to universal space and time. In 72:10, kings from the ends of the world pay tribute, and in 72:11, all nations serve him. So far we have an excellent exposition of 2 Samuel 7:19. In Psalm 72:12\u201317, the same theme is developed in another \u201cround of discourse\u201d on the same topic. The needy and weak receive help. The psalmist prays that many will offer prayer all day long for this king so that his name and the prosperity of his rule continue. Verse 17 fits appropriately into this flow of thought, where the psalmist prays that his fame might endure and that individuals of all nations might declare themselves blessed by him and call him happy. Noonan\u2019s analysis is similar:<\/p>\n
Recent analysis of Psalm 72 has focused on its structure and content vis-\u00e0-vis ancient Near Eastern ideologies of kinship, in which the king is portrayed as a mediator of prosperity and blessing. While the specific structure of this psalm is debated, many scholars acknowledge that verses 8\u201311 constitute a distinct unit portraying the king\u2019s international domination. These verses, which describe the world\u2019s nations as ingratiating themselves to the king in terms of submission, service, and tribute, are structurally and thematically linked to verse 17b. In light of this, the parallelism of \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc with \u05d9\u05b0\u05d0\u05b7\u05e9\u05b0\u05bc\u05c1\u05e8\u05d5\u05bc\u05d4\u05d5\u05bc should be understood in terms of ingratiation.\u2026 The preposition \u05d1 signifies the instrument of blessing since the king is the one whom the people rely upon for blessing and favor.\u2026 Thus, the point of this verse is not the uttering of blessings, but the nations\u2019 acts of ingratiation as a response to the king\u2019s role as mediator of blessing.<\/p>\n
Gr\u00fcneberg notes, as many have observed, that the wording of 72:17b\u03b1 is identical to the promises to Abraham: we have the same verb in the hithpael, the preposition beth, and the subject \u201call nations.\u201d Regardless, he is not inclined to see an allusion to Genesis:<\/p>\n
Some commentators propose that Psalm 72:17 alludes to the patriarchal promises, the Psalmist suggesting that those promises are fulfilled in or through the Davidic monarch. While this is hard to disprove, the Psalm seems perfectly comprehensible without seeing any allusion, and little else in the context suggests dependence on patriarchal traditions.<\/p>\n
Nonetheless, the idea that all nations are elated with the rule of the Davidic king could be expressed otherwise. In Psalm 2, the kings of the nations are invited to \u201ckiss the Son\u201d and develop an appropriate relation to him. Yet the wording in Psalm 72:17 is identical to the patriarchal promises. According to Genesis 28:14, the blessing of the nations comes through the nation of Israel. While the ideas in Psalm 72 are developed logically from the covenant promises to David in 2 Samuel 7, we see that the blessing of the nations comes through the king of Israel. It is hard to avoid the thought that here in Psalm 72 Solomon sees, as did David, that the Davidic covenant narrows the mediator of blessing to the nations from the nation of Israel as a whole to the king, who represents and stands for the nation.
\nThe Septuagint translation of Psalm 72:17 is significant, because there the connections between this verse and the promises to Abraham are absolutely clear:<\/p>\n
\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2, \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7 \u03bc\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd. (Ps. 71:17b [72:17b EV])<\/p>\n
The phrase \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c6\u03c5\u03bb\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2 clearly recalls \u05db\u05b9\u05bc\u05dc \u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b0\u05bc\u05d7\u05b9\u05ea \u05d4\u05b8\u05d0\u05b2\u05d3\u05b8\u05de\u05b8\u05d4 in Genesis 12:3 and the inclusio verse Genesis 28:14. While we need not pause to declare whether the parent text of the Septuagint is inferior or superior to the Masoretic Text, one may certainly say that it is possible that the rendering in the Masoretic Text arose from a scribe\u2019s eye skipping over phrases beginning with the same letters (\u05db\u05dc), causing him to accidentally omit text. The poetic line verse 17b\u03b1 also seems short and lacks an explicit subject. On the other hand, the text in the Septuagint may be due to the interpretation of the translator. Either way, the text in the Septuagint, probably from 200 BC, clearly connects Psalm 72:17 to the Abrahamic covenant, and its witness cannot be set aside lightly.
\nThese considerations of Psalm 72 are strengthened by the arrangement in the final redaction of the Hebrew Psalter. David Mitchell, in his classic work on the eschatological program in the book of Psalms, notes the placement of Psalms 2 and 72 at the beginning of the first book and ending of the second book in the Psalter, respectively. The former announces a victory for Yahweh\u2019s king, and the latter speaks of the kingdom established. These connections indicate that the blessing to the nations promised to Abraham is coming through the Davidic king\/kingdom.
\nThird, an extremely important passage in Jeremiah shows that the Davidic covenant continues and guarantees the Abrahamic covenant because the promise of seed as numerous as the stars of the sky and the sand on the seashore is now inherited by the seed of David.<\/p>\n
\u201cSee, days are coming,\u201d declares the Lord, \u201cwhen I will fulfill the good word I spoke to the house of Israel and the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will cause righteous growth to sprout for David, and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In those days Judah will be delivered, and Jerusalem will dwell securely. And this is the name by which it will be called: \u2018The Lord is our righteousness.\u2019 \u201d
\n\u201cFor thus says the Lord: a man belonging to David sitting on the throne of the house of Israel will never be cut off, and a man of the Levitical priests will never be cut off forever from offering burnt offerings, burning grain offerings, and making sacrifices before me.\u201d
\nThe word of the Lord came to Jeremiah: \u201cThus says the Lord: If you can break my covenant with the day and my covenant with the night, so that day and night will not come at their appointed time, then also my covenant with David my servant may be broken, so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne, and my covenant with the Levitical priests as my ministers. The fact that the host of heaven cannot be numbered and the sands of the sea cannot be measured\u2014in this way I will multiply the descendants [seed] of David my servant, and the Levitical priests who minister to me.\u201d
\nThe word of the Lord came to Jeremiah: \u201cHave you not seen what these people have spoken, saying, \u2018The Lord has rejected the two clans that he chose\u2019? Thus they have despised my people so that they are no longer a nation in their sight. Thus says the Lord: If I have not established my covenant with day and night and the fixed order of heaven and earth, then I will reject the offspring of Jacob and David my servant and will not choose one of his descendants to rule over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For I will restore their fortunes and will have mercy on them.\u201d (Jer. 33:14\u201326)<\/p>\n
Clearly, the promise to Abraham in Genesis 22:17 is narrowed down and will be fulfilled specifically through the seed of David.<\/p>\n
12<\/p>\n
THE NEW COVENANT<\/p>\n
Introduction and Isaiah<\/p>\n
The metanarrative of Scripture begins with a creator God who made our world, our universe. As the Creator, he is committed to caring for and sustaining all his creation. He governs and rules over all his creatures and works wisely. The apex and crown of his creative work is humankind. He has entrusted to the human race the administration and stewardship of his world. This covenantal arrangement was violated by disloyal and rebellious humans. The first man decided to act and manage things independently of the Creator. Everything is now riddled with chaos and evil.
\nGod responds to human rebellion in various ways as the story unfolds. As we have seen, at the center of a plan to restore his ruined world and bring it to serve his original intentions are a series of agreements called covenants. First, the covenant with Noah reestablishes the commitment of the Creator to his creation as a whole. Then God begins to work through one individual, Abraham, and through his family to model a new humanity in right relationship with the creator God and with one another. The Mosaic covenant at Sinai (supplemented and renewed by Deuteronomy) forges the nation into the people of God and governs life in the land. The covenant with David institutes a kingship where the rule of God is better established among his people since the king is to function as covenant administrator. What God planned for the nation as a whole will now be implemented through the king and his leadership.
\nLater on, largely between 750 and 550 BC, several men who functioned as spokesmen for God were raised up to call attention to the failure of the people to be covenant keepers. These were the prophets, servants of God who spoke for him. They confronted the people of God and exposed the clever and devious ways by which they had gradually slipped away from a proper relationship with God and with one another as defined by the Israelite\/Mosaic covenant. They were given visions from God, and they announced coming events. Some events would happen fairly soon; others would not happen for some time. They announced various ways in which God would act to deal with his faithless people and bring his overall plan of restoring his broken creation to fulfillment. Because the people had broken and violated the Israelite covenant, the prophets announced that God would put in place a new covenant in which not only he would be faithful but his people would be faithful too.<\/p>\n
REFERENCES TO THE NEW COVENANT<\/p>\n
The prophets spoke of the new covenant in different places at different times in a variety of ways. Five times they refer to the \u201ceverlasting covenant,\u201d three times to a \u201ccovenant of peace,\u201d and three times to a promise that God will give his people a new heart and a new spirit. Only once is the phrase \u201cnew covenant\u201d actually used. But all these phrases are referring to the same thing.<\/p>\n
Major Texts Dealing with a New Covenant<\/p>\n
1. Everlasting covenant: Isaiah 55:1\u20135; 61:8\u20139; Jeremiah 32:36\u201341; 50:2\u20135; Ezekiel 37:15\u201328 (esp. 37:26)
\n2. Covenant of peace: Isaiah 54:1\u201310 (esp. 54:9\u201310); Ezekiel 34:20\u201331 (esp. 34:25); 37:15\u201328 (esp. 37:26)
\n3. Promise of a new heart and a new spirit: Ezekiel 11:18\u201321; 18:30\u201332; 36:24\u201332 (esp. 36:26) [cf. Isa. 59:21]
\n4. New covenant: Jeremiah 31:31\u201334 (also 32:36\u201341)<\/p>\n
It is interesting to note that when we look at the New Testament, we find that the same covenant is referred to as the \u201cnew covenant\u201d five times (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor. 3:6; Heb. 8:8; 9:15) and only once as the \u201ceverlasting covenant\u201d (Heb. 13:20). Therefore the title for this covenant most used in the Old Testament is employed only once in the New Testament, and the title employed only once in the Old Testament is the one most commonly used in the New Testament.<\/p>\n
THE NEW COVENANT IN THE PROPHETS<\/p>\n
Previous works on the covenants in the Old Testament have tended to deal with the topic of the new covenant by discussing a number of passages selected from the Prophets presented together. Here, the contribution of each of the Major Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel) will be considered separately. The Prophets do not give a monolithic presentation on how God will restore things, although variation does not mean contradiction. The contribution of each prophet needs to be considered in the context of his ministry and, especially, within the flow and literary structure of his work. There is also chronological development as Jeremiah meditates on the prophecy of Isaiah and as Ezekiel reflects on the work of Jeremiah. When the contribution of each prophet has been heard separately and chronologically, then the multifaceted presentation can be put together into a whole. In addition to discussing passages that treat the topic of the new covenant, it is important to analyze passages in which a prophet deals with the relationships of the new covenant to any of the previous major covenants. In this way, the assembling of the biblical teaching on the covenants from the fundamental passages will be put together into a superstructure that is derived from Scripture and not from our own imagination or human philosophy.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 54:1\u201355:13<\/p>\n
Isaiah 54:1\u201355:13 is a major text dealing with the new covenant. We see the term \u201ccovenant of peace\u201d in 54:10 and \u201ceverlasting covenant\u201d in 55:3. First, we need to situate this text within the larger literary structure of the book as a whole. Although recent studies of Isaiah have focused more on the canonical shape of the text rather than on fragmentary sources adduced by critical scholarship, few have labored to discover the larger literary structure inherent to the work as a whole.
\nProphetic preaching and writing certainly do not follow the patterns of Aristotelian rectilinear logic so fundamental to our discourse in the Western world. Instead, the approach in ancient Hebrew literature was to take up a topic and develop it from a particular perspective and then to stop and take up the same theme again from another point of view. This pattern is recursive in order to present full-orbed ideas. As we noted earlier, when one discourse is heard against the background of another, together they function like the left and right speakers of a stereo, and we have an idea that is like Dolby surround sound or a holographic image. The book of Isaiah is no exception to this technique. The main theme is the development from corrupt Zion in the old creation to restored Zion in the new creation. After the topic is presented in approximately seven major sections, the reader ends up with a full-orbed, multidimensional mental picture. The major recursive sections of Isaiah may be roughly delineated as follows:<\/p>\n
The Book of Isaiah: From Zion in the Old Creation to Zion in the New
\n1. The judgment and transformation of Zion\u2014part 1
\n1:2\u20132:5
\n2. The judgment and transformation of Zion\u2014part 2
\n2:6\u20134:6
\n3. The judgment of the vineyard and Immanuel
\n5:1\u201312:6
\n4. The city of man versus the city of God
\n13:1\u201327:13
\n5. Trusting the nations versus trusting the word of Yahweh
\n28:1\u201337:38
\n6. Comfort and redemption for Zion and the world
\n38:1\u201355:13
\n7. Keeping Sabbath in the new creation
\n56:1\u201366:24<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 1\u201337<\/p>\n
Isaiah makes the first round of his theme in 1:2\u20132:5, beginning with the broken covenant between God and Israel\u2014excoriating the people for their sins\u2014and concluding with the vision of a future transformed Zion. From 2:6 to 4:6, Isaiah makes the second round of his theme, moving again in a short treatment from sin and judgment in the present corrupt Zion to the vision of a future transformed Zion.
\nChapters 5 to 37 comprise at least three subunits that treat in detail the issues of failure to keep the covenant\/Torah and the threat of judgment. Isaiah focuses on the failure of the people to practice social justice in spite of many, many acts of divine discipline. The covenant is broken and irreparably violated. Everything is in order in their services of worship, but the people have failed to demonstrate the lifestyle required of them as God\u2019s new humanity. The instruction in the covenant can properly be summarized by the term \u201csocial justice.\u201d As a community in covenant relationship to Yahweh, they are called to mirror to the world the character of Yahweh in terms of social justice and to be a vehicle of divine blessing and salvation to the nations. But the way that the people of God have treated each other is characterized by social injustice. The \u201ccity of truth\u201d has become a whore (Isa. 1:21). The Lord has no choice now but to fulfill the gravest curses and threats entailed in the covenant in Deuteronomy 28. The final threat is exile, and this theme is taken up in Isaiah 5\u201337.<\/p>\n
THE LITERARY STRUCTURE OF ISAIAH 38\u201355<\/p>\n
The sixth section of thematic treatment (covering chapters 38 to 55) is focused in particular on comfort and redemption for both Zion and the world. The following outline, adapted from the commentaries by Alec Motyer, is effective in clarifying the movement of thought in this cycle, dealing with the transformation of Zion in the old creation to Zion in the new creation:<\/p>\n
Isaiah 38\u201355: The Book of the Servant
\na Historical prologue\u2014Hezekiah\u2019s fatal choice
\n38:1\u201339:8
\nb Universal consolation
\n40:1\u201342:17
\n1. The consolation of Israel
\n40:1\u201341:20
\n2. The consolation of the Gentiles
\n41:21\u201342:17
\nc Promises of redemption
\n42:18\u201344:23
\n1. Release
\n42:18\u201343:21
\n2. Forgiveness
\n43:22\u201344:23
\nc\u2032 Agents of redemption
\n44:24\u201353:12
\n1. Cyrus: liberation
\n44:24\u201348:22
\n2. Servant: atonement
\n49:1\u201353:12
\nb\u2032 Universal proclamation
\n54:1\u201355:13
\n1. The call to Zion
\n54:1\u201317
\n2. The call to the world
\n55:1\u201313<\/p>\n
Two Distinct Issues and Stages<\/p>\n
First, the outline of the literary structure of Isaiah 38\u201355 shows that the return from exile involves two distinct issues and stages. As already noted, Isaiah 38\u201355 looks further into the future, beyond the judgment of exile, to the comfort and consolation of Israel, that is, to God\u2019s bringing them back from exile. Then the Lord will establish Zion as the people\/place where all nations will seek his instruction for social justice. This is described in the language of the exodus, so that the return from the Babylonian exile will be nothing less than a new exodus\u2014indeed a greater exodus! This new exodus is also described by the term \u201credeem\u201d (g\u0101\u2019al), which refers to the duties of the nearest relative. Since by virtue of the Israelite covenant Yahweh is Israel\u2019s nearest relative, he will \u201cbuy back\u201d his people from exile as he once delivered them from bondage and slavery in Egypt. The return from exile, however, is not a momentary or short task. The promises of redemption are divided into two distinct events: release (42:18\u201343:21) and forgiveness (43:22\u201344:23). Release refers to bringing the people physically out of exile in Babylon and back to their own land; forgiveness entails dealing fully and finally with their sin and the broken covenant. It has been neatly expressed that you can take the people out of Babylon, but how do you get Babylon out of the people? The books of Ezra and Nehemiah show that the people have returned from exile but have not changed at all in terms of their relationship to God: the failure to practice social justice remains a central problem. That is why for a postexilic prophet like Zechariah the return from exile is both a present reality and a future hope. The exile will be over only when God deals with the people\u2019s sin and renews the covenant, the temple is rebuilt, and the Lord returns to dwell in their midst as King.
\nZechariah 3:9 and 5:5\u201311 show that the forgiveness\/removal of sins is still future. Indeed, the major point of Daniel\u2019s vision of seventy weeks is that the exile will not be over in seventy years but rather in seventy weeks of years: \u201cSeventy sevens are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the Most Holy Place\u201d (Dan. 9:24). So there are two issues in the return from exile: physical return from Babylon and spiritual deliverance from bondage and slavery to sin. And corresponding to these two issues are two distinct agents of redemption: Cyrus and the servant. The former will bring about the first task: physical return to the land of Israel (44:24\u201348:22); the latter will bring about the second task: the forgiveness of sins (49:1\u201353:12).<\/p>\n
Gap in the Servant Songs<\/p>\n
Second, the larger literary structure clarifies why there is a gap in the text between the first of the Servant Songs (42:1\u20139) and the last three (49:1\u201313; 50:4\u20139; 52:13\u201353:12). The First Servant Song belongs to the introductory opening section, which is devoted to the theme of the consolation of Israel and of the nations (40:1\u201342:17). The Abrahamic covenant undergirds this introductory section. At the heart of the covenant with Abraham is the promise that blessing will come to the entire world through Abraham and his family, Israel.
\nThe arrangement in this section is important. The consolation of Israel comes first because at this time Israel is under a curse; she is part of the problem and not part of the solution. First, God must console and restore Israel, and only then can he use Israel to be an instrument of consolation and restoration for all the nations. After consolation is defined in 42:14\u201344:23 in terms of redemption (1) from exile and (2) from sin, Isaiah describes in 44:24\u201353:12 the work of Cyrus to accomplish the former before proceeding to develop the work of the servant of the Lord to accomplish the latter.
\nAt this point, three passages on the servant of the Lord are placed together to focus on redemption from sin. Each passage consists of a first presentation of the topic, a comment as a second presentation of the topic (except for the third section, per the outline below), and a response section:<\/p>\n
Outline of Isaiah 49:1\u201355:13
\na The servant\u2019s double mission: Israel and the world
\n49:1\u20136
\nb Comment: mission to the world and Israel confirmed
\n49:7\u201313
\nc Response: Zion despondent and unresponsive
\n49:14\u201350:3
\na\u2032 The servant obedient and responsive in suffering
\n50:4\u20139
\nb\u2032 Comment: the obedient and the self-willed
\n50:10\u201311
\nc\u2032 Zion summoned to respond
\n51:1\u201352:12
\na\u2033\u2013b\u2033 The servant successful, sin bearing, and triumphant
\n52:13\u201353:12
\nc\u2033 Response: invitation to Israel and the world
\n54:1\u201355:13<\/p>\n
The Identity of the Servant<\/p>\n
Third, the literary structure sheds light on the identity of the servant. Debate over the identity of the servant has raged for centuries and continues to the present time unabated. One good reason for this debate is in the text itself: it is characteristic of Isaianic style to begin discussing a topic in an ambiguous and mysterious manner and to add critical information bit by bit until the matter is plain. For example, in the oracle against Babylon in 21:1\u20139, Isaiah begins by talking about the wilderness by the sea. Only at the end, in 21:9, does one realize that the prophet is speaking about Babylon. Isaiah\u2019s presentation of the servant of Yahweh is similar. At the start, in 41:8, the servant is Israel, who in the biblical-theological scheme of the larger story has inherited the Adamic roles of son of God and servant-king, and who in the covenant at Sinai in Exodus 19:5\u20136 was called to be a holy nation and a kingdom of priests. The servant, however, seems to be deaf and disobedient in Isaiah 42:18\u201319. This contradicts the picture of the servant in 42:1\u20139 and especially in 50:4\u201311. Israel as a servant is in dire need herself, not just of rescue from exile and all that that entails but also of a full resolution of the problem of a broken covenant relationship (e.g., 43:22\u201328). Idolatry and social injustice are endemic in Israel. This is the dilemma: How can God keep his promises to Abraham when Israel has completely failed as the servant of the Lord? Israel was to model three things to the rest of the nations: (1) faithfulness and loyalty in their relationship to God, (2) social justice in their human relationships, and (3) responsible stewardship of the creation\/environment.
\nThe answer to this question, developed at length elsewhere, is addressed immediately in the Second Servant Song, which begins the detailed response to this question (49:1\u201313). At the beginning of this Second Song, in 49:3, we hear again the affirmation that Israel is the servant, as in 41:8. So the servant is the nation. Yet in 49:5\u20136, the servant\u2019s task is to bring the nation back. This is a return from exile, both physically and spiritually, as described earlier. How can the servant be both the nation and the deliverer of the nation? There is only one possible solution that resolves this conundrum fairly, and Isaiah has prepared us for this in the first part of his work: the servant must be the future king described earlier (e.g., 11:1\u201310). As an individual, the king can say, \u201cI am Israel.\u201d The king can represent the nation as a whole, yet he can be distinguished from Israel. This is difficult for Americans to grasp because we have no monarchy. In monarchies, both ancient and modern, there is a sense in which the king is the nation. At the same time, the king is the deliverer of the nation and fights her battles for her. Many Christians move too quickly to identify Jesus of Nazareth as the servant of Yahweh without following carefully the progression in the text. The main problem with the standard Jewish interpretation of identifying the servant as the nation is that the nation of Israel is neither in the text nor in history able to rescue itself, let alone atone for its own sins.
\nFor each of the latter three Servant Songs, a pattern is repeated in the text. First, Isaiah presents the topic; then, there is a comment that further develops the ideas; and finally, there is a response section. The Fourth Song, in chapter 53, contains four stanzas in two pairs: a stanza providing details and describing events, followed by a stanza explaining its meaning. We could consider the first pair of stanzas the basic text and the second pair the comment. Chapter 54 begins the section inviting Israel to respond. She is called to burst out in a ringing cry\/shout\/song of joy. She is to sing because her family, her marriage, and her city of righteousness are restored. This is essentially a discussion of the new covenant.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 54<\/p>\n
The theme of chapter 54 is bringing back the exiles, bringing about reconciliation between God and his people, restoring the covenant relationship, and rebuilding Zion, since the city of God, in terms of people, has been decimated. What ties together the diverse paragraphs and sections is a metaphor in which the people of God are represented as a woman. In 54:1\u20133, the people of God are pictured as a barren woman who now has more children than the married woman. In 54:4\u201310, the people of God are portrayed as a forsaken wife (i.e., divorced woman), someone who has long borne the reproach of widowhood but who is now reconciled and married to her creator God. Included in this section is a comparison of the promise of the new covenant to the promise of the Noahic covenant; just as God promised that never again would he judge by a flood, so now he promises never again to be angry with his people. Finally, in 54:11\u201317, the woman is the city of Zion, lashed by storms but now fortified by redoubtable foundations and battlements and rebuilt with stunning precious jewels and stones. Thus, in the brief span of seventeen verses, the new covenant is in some way either compared or correlated and linked to all the previous major covenants in the Bible.
\nIsaiah 54, then, discusses the new covenant, which is based on the death and resurrection of the servant-king in Isaiah 53. Certain key words join the Servant Song in chapter 53 to this chapter. The \u201cmany\u201d in 53:11\u201312 are the many in the miracle family in 54:1\u2014the exact same word in Hebrew. The seed or offspring of the servant, seemingly cut off in 53:8 but appearing after his resurrection, are now the descendants who possess the nations in 54:3. The just one justifies the many in 53:11; he makes them righteous. The city is established in righteousness in 54:14, which is almost equivalent to vindication from accusing opponents in 54:17. And the servant in the singular in chapter 53 becomes the servants of the Lord in the plural in 54:17.<\/p>\n
Outline of Isaiah 54:1\u201317<\/p>\n
A. Sarah: The Barren Woman
\n54:1\u20133<\/p>\n
B. Israel: The Deserted Wife
\n54:4\u201310<\/p>\n
C. Zion: The Afflicted Woman
\n54:11\u201317<\/p>\n
1. The city rebuilt
\n54:11\u201314a<\/p>\n
2. The city secure
\n54:14b\u201317<\/p>\n
The Miracle Family (Isa. 54:1\u20133)<\/p>\n
God\u2019s people are called to burst out in ringing shouts of joy. They need to prepare for a massive expansion in the family. Why? Isaiah 54:3 says that their descendants will inherit\/occupy\/possess the nations. This statement is somewhat vague in itself. It might be interpreted to mean that Israel will at last conquer the nations surrounding and troubling them. But 54:1 will not permit this interpretation. It talks about the children of the desolate woman far outstripping those of the married woman. What does this mean? The married woman is Israel during the days of the old covenant. The desolate woman is the decimated Israel who comes back from the destruction of exile. The family restored after the exile is far more numerous than before. From the point of view of the New Testament, it becomes clear: Israel inherits the nations because they become part of the family.
\nThe barren woman in the history of Israel is Sarah. The allusion to the times of Abraham and Sarah is also clear from the allusion to the tent and the mention of seed\/descendants. Thus the reference to the barren woman is a way of referring to the Abrahamic covenant and so recalls the promise to Abraham of descendants as numerous as the sand on the seashore and as the stars of the sky. But the covenant with Abraham also promised blessing to the nations through Israel. Thus Israel dispossesses the nations not as a destructive military conquest but as the blessing brings them into the family. Simply bringing the exiles back to the land to grow and prosper as a nation does not explain sufficiently the need for a massive enlargement of the family tent.<\/p>\n
The Reconstituted Marriage (Isa. 54:4\u201310)<\/p>\n
The next section, Isaiah 54:4\u201310, speaks of God as Husband, Maker, and Redeemer. This is a clear reference to the Israelite\/Mosaic covenant, the covenant made between God and Israel at Sinai. This marriage relationship was broken by Israel\u2019s unfaithfulness, and God brought the curse of exile on Israel, and so he forsook (i.e., divorced) his unfaithful wife. This display of wrath was only for a moment, so to speak. The marriage relationship was broken, the wife forsaken\/widowed, but now reconciliation brings about the renewing of the marriage.
\nVerse 4 begins with commands that call the woman out of disgrace, humiliation, and shame. She must forget the shame of her youth. This represents the four hundred years of bondage and slavery in Egypt, when Israel was at the beginning of her life as a nation. She must no longer remember the reproach of her widowhood. This represents the seventy years of exile in Babylon. She had been married to the Lord, but she was an unfaithful wife and ended up deserted and alone like a widow; all her lovers (i.e., idols, alliances with foreign nations) and even her husband turned their backs on her.
\nVerse 5 speaks of the Lord as her Husband and Maker. God is not only the creator God, the God of all the earth, but he is the Creator and Maker of Israel as a nation. Through the covenant at Sinai, he married Israel and so is her Husband and now the Redeemer\u2014that is, the nearest relative\u2014who has the duty to buy her back from exile and slavery.
\nAccording to 54:6, Israel may feel like a woman who was married as a high school sweetheart and then rejected. This, however, is only a momentary turning away. God will now show her compassion, mercy, and covenant loyal love forever. The marriage relationship will be restored. There will be a new covenant, called a \u201ccovenant of peace\u201d in 54:10 to emphasize the fact of reconciliation. God\u2019s anger has been appeased and finished. Israel may now benefit from the healing of a broken relationship in a new covenant. The new covenant renews and restores the broken old covenant. But it is more than that. It is a new covenant, different from the old one and superior to it, because it depends not on God\u2019s people but instead on the everlasting kindness of God. Momentary wrath is contrasted with everlasting love and mercy.
\nThis new exhibition of love and mercy is illustrated by a comparison between the new covenant and the covenant that God made with Noah. Just as he promised there that never again would he judge the entire world by a flood, so here he is promising never again to be angry with his people. The mountains will give way and the hills will totter, but his \u1e25esed, his covenant faithfulness and love, will never be taken away in the new covenant. That is why it is called a covenant of peace.<\/p>\n
The City of Righteousness (Isa. 54:11\u201317)<\/p>\n
1. THE CITY REESTABLISHED\/REBUILT (ISA. 54:11\u201314A). Verses 11\u201317 speak of the woman as a city, the city of Zion. She has been afflicted and lashed by storms but will be rebuilt and reestablished. Her new foundation will be with a solid construction of mortar and stone. She will be adorned by precious jewels and fiery, sparkling stones. This construction represents the fact that all will know the Lord\u2014that the city will be rebuilt in righteousness, as 54:13\u201314 makes plain.
\nThe city of Zion brings to mind the Davidic covenant and the place where Yahweh rules in the midst of his people as King and where his Son, always a descendant of David, represents his rule to the people and to the nations beyond.
\nIn 54:13, we read that \u201call your sons will be taught by the LORD.\u201d This verse correlates perfectly with Jeremiah 31:33\u201334. What is new about the new covenant is that in the covenant community, all are believers. In the Israelite\/Mosaic covenant\u2014indeed, in the Abrahamic covenant, which the Israelite covenant seeks to implement in Iron Age Israel for the nation as a whole\u2014one is born into the covenant community. This practice results in a situation where one may be a member of the covenant community but not a believer. In the new covenant community, the believing community and the covenant community will be perfectly coextensive. This is what Isaiah means when he says, \u201cAll your sons will be taught by the LORD,\u201d and this is the explanation of the statement that the restored city will be built with beautiful and lasting materials. It is comparable to Peter\u2019s picture of believers in the new covenant as living stones in the new temple (1 Pet. 2:5). Since every covenant member knows the Lord, every member or \u201cpiece\u201d of the city will constitute beautiful and lasting materials\u2014the jewels. The proof that this is the correct interpretation lies in the fact that the Hebrew word translated as \u201ctaught\u201d is \u05dc\u05b4\u05de\u05bc\u05d5\u05bc\u05d3, which means \u201cdisciple.\u201d The same word is used of the servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 50:4 and applies to the people of the Lord here because, according to 54:17, they too are servants of the Lord.<\/p>\n
2. THE CITY SECURE (ISA. 54:14B\u201317). The city is established in righteousness. This is part of her foundation and will characterize this community. This righteousness will also protect and save her in the end. The same word is used in 54:17 almost in the sense of vindication against those who accuse her in court.
\nThe Lord does not promise that the renewed city will have no enemies or experience no attacks, but she is not to be afraid. There is no need for terror. In terms of destroying weapons, Yahweh is in charge of the manufacturer, the product, and the intent of the user. Nothing will harm the city of God. Any weapon forged against her will not prosper or succeed. Any accusing tongue will in fact be pronounced guilty by the city of God, and God\u2019s people will triumph in court. Peace between God and his people results in peace and wholeness for them.
\nThis city is the final resting place of the servants of the Lord, the reward and vindication for all that they have suffered because of their faithfulness to God (54:17). Subtly and quietly, but also unmistakably, Isaiah links them to the greatest servant of all. As he was a disciple, taught by the Lord (50:4), so are they (54:13). They have suffered affliction (54:11), as did he (53:4). And as he will surely be vindicated (50:8), so will they be (54:17). They are called servants of the Lord because they follow in the footsteps of the perfect servant. They share his sufferings and will also share in his glory. They are \u201chis offspring,\u201d the fruit of his sacrifice (53:10), and the city of God will be their home.
\nThe new covenant therefore brings to fruition God\u2019s promises and purposes in all the others: (1) it brings the numerous seed promised in the Abrahamic covenant, (2) it brings the righteousness between God and humans and among humans aimed at in the Israelite covenant, and (3) it establishes the city of God ruled by the Davidic king. All this is as certain as the promises to Noah.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 55:1\u20135<\/p>\n
In Isaiah 55:3, God announces that he is initiating an everlasting covenant. This covenant is described as the acts of loyal love performed by David\u2014specifically, the atoning death of the servant-king in chapter 53. Here Isaiah is connecting the Davidic covenant and the new. The new covenant will accomplish what was promised in God\u2019s covenant with David. Second Samuel 7:19 reveals that the covenant with David is God\u2019s instruction for all mankind. Isaiah follows up this teaching by speaking of the Gentiles being called by Israel, who then look to Israel\u2019s king as their commander and leader, who, as witness, brings the instruction (Torah) of the Lord to them. This is exactly what happened when Peter and Paul began proclaiming the good news to the nations in the book of Acts.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 56:1\u20138<\/p>\n
Chapter 56 begins the last section of the book, where the prophet develops his themes from yet another perspective. His ideas follow the pattern at the beginning of the book. First the people are accused of idolatry and injustice and are condemned. Next comes a vision of the future restored and transformed city of Zion. This is followed by descriptions of the coming anointed conqueror and his work in bringing about this transformation as an act of deliverance and salvation. Finally, the book closes with prayers and promises for the future.
\nAlthough Isaiah 56 begins a new major section in the book, it nonetheless is also directly linked to the preceding and shows the next step in the divine program of salvation for Israel and the world. Those being gathered as the new Zion are to practice social justice and keep Sabbath.<\/p>\n
Outline of Isaiah 56:1\u20138
\nI. The Renewed Zion to Practice Righteousness and Keep Sabbath
\n56:1\u20132
\nII. Membership in the Community Worshiping Yahweh
\n56:3\u20138
\na The foreigner\u2019s complaint
\n56:3a
\nb The eunuch\u2019s complaint
\n56:3b
\nb\u2032 The eunuch\u2019s place in the temple
\n56:4\u20135
\na\u2032 The foreigner\u2019s place in the temple
\n56:6\u20138<\/p>\n
THE RENEWED ZION TO PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND KEEP SABBATH (56:1\u20132)<\/p>\n
Isaiah 56:1\u20138 forms an introduction to the last section of the book, and many of the main themes of this final section are expressed here in broad outline. The first half of 56:1 is a call and command to keep or observe justice and to do righteousness. Right away we can see the word pair \u201cjustice-righteousness\u201d distributed over a poetic couplet in parallelism, which forms the idiomatic phrase for social justice. The second half of 56:1 gives a motive or reason for the command: \u201cbecause my salvation is about to happen and my righteousness is about to be revealed.\u201d So the first half of 56:1 is a command to practice social justice, and the second half of 56:1 bases the command on the sovereign work of God, who provides his righteousness as an act of deliverance and salvation.
\nBefore proceeding any further, it is important to see that this final section of the book of Isaiah is interlocked and interwoven with the first two sections by Isaiah 56:1. The word pair \u201cjustice-righteousness,\u201d frequently split over poetic parallelism, has occurred so far only in the first major section of Isaiah, chapters 1\u201337; 1:21, 27; 5:7, 16; 9:6 (9:7 EV); 11:4; 16:5; 26:9; 28:17; 32:1, 16; 33:5. This word pair is also found six times in the third section: 56:1; 58:2 [2\u00d7]; 59:4, 9, 14. The word pair \u201crighteousness-salvation\u201d or \u201csalvation-righteousness\u201d in the second half of 56:1 speaks of righteousness as an attribute or characteristic of God; it is the way he works in all his relationships. And since humans do not possess this characteristic in their relationships, it must come from God as an act of deliverance and salvation, that is, as a gift. This word pair is found only in the second section of the book of Isaiah, constituted by chapters 38\u201355 (45:8, 21; 46:13; 51:5, 6, 8). This first verse of the third section of Isaiah, then, combines phrases that are found only in the first and second sections, respectively. This is a testimony to the unity of the book and also to the fact that this third section will now build programmatically on these two ideas.
\nThe second verse pronounces a blessing on the person who keeps the Sabbath and who keeps his hand from doing any evil. Two things about this statement cry out for our attention. First, the blessing, expressed just like the beatitudes of Jesus in Matthew 5, is not directed specifically to Jews or Israelites. Instead, it is general. The first line uses the word \u201cman\u201d (\u05d0\u05b1\u05e0\u05d5\u05b9\u05e9\u05c1) as a generic term, and the line matching it uses the expression \u201cson of man\u201d (\u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05df\u05be\u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd), the normal Hebrew way of saying \u201ca human being.\u201d Thus the invitation is not for Israelites specifically but for all who belong to the human race. This broad purpose will be made absolutely clear in 56:3\u20138, but for now we can note that chapter 55 summons all alike to the free banquet; 56:1\u20138 portrays the gathering people in which all are one, all are equal, and all are welcome in the house of prayer.
\nThe second thing that cries out for our attention from 56:2 is that, unlike the first section of Isaiah, no specifics are given about practicing social justice. There is only a general statement about keeping one\u2019s hand from doing any evil. He does not mention the orphan and the widow. He does not address specific issues of injustice. Instead, there is a call to keep the Sabbath. There is a focus on worshiping the Lord. What does all this mean? Verses 3\u20138 clarify and expand on these two ideas.<\/p>\n
MEMBERSHIP IN THE COMMUNITY WORSHIPING YAHWEH (56:3\u20138)<\/p>\n
First, instead of focusing on the orphan and the widow, this section focuses on the foreigner and the eunuch. The foreigner was excluded from the people of God. The eunuch was also excluded from the worship of God according to Deuteronomy 23:1. In addition, the eunuch had no descendants or posterity to carry on his name and leave a memorial for himself. And yet these verses explicitly show that the foreigner is joined to the Lord and the eunuch is keeping the Sabbath and that both are included in the one people of God. Many passages to this point have been somewhat vague. They could be interpreted to mean that Israel conquers the nations and takes over their lands. But not these verses. We shall look at them closely.
\nFirst, we see the foreigner and the eunuch cut off from the people of God. In Isaiah 56:3, the foreigner is complaining that the Lord will surely separate him from his people. The eunuch is complaining that he is a dry tree. Instead of being a tree that bears fruit and produces seeds that result in reproducing itself, he is a dry tree.
\nSecond, according to 56:3 and 56:6, we see foreigners joining themselves to the Lord. According to 56:6, they are ministering to the Lord and loving his name. The verb \u201cto minister or serve\u201d (\u05e9\u05c1\u05e8\u05ea) is most commonly used in the Old Testament of the work of the Levites and priests in the temple. So these foreigners are not just permitted in the temple, they are involved like the Levites and priests. At the end of 56:6, they become the servants (\u05e2\u05b2\u05d1\u05b8\u05d3\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd) of the Lord (cf. 54:17; 56:6; 63:17; 65:8, 9, 13, 15; 66:14). We were shocked to discover in 54:17 that those who are included in the new covenant community are called the servants of the Lord. The sins of the many have been borne by the servant, and the victory of the one servant is shared by the many, so that in the end they become servants too. Now we are further shocked because it is foreigners who are called the servants of the Lord. The end of 56:6 shows them as Sabbath keepers and as firmly grasping and laying hold of the covenant. At the beginning of the book of Isaiah, Israel, those who were born into the covenant community, the nation, physical Israel, were not Sabbath keepers. They were Sabbath breakers. And now it is the foreigners who are Sabbath keepers. The same sorts of things are said about the eunuch. In 56:4, he is choosing what pleases the Lord and laying hold of his covenant. As a result, God gives to him a memorial and a name in his house (i.e., temple) and within his walls, which is better than sons and daughters. His name is carried on for eternity and never cut off. We see, then, that those who were formerly outside the people of God and excluded from worshiping in the temple are now joined to the Lord and characterized as true worshipers.
\nThird, not only are individuals who are extreme examples of excluded people now characterized as true worshipers of the Lord, but also they are considered to be included in the covenant community. Notice the expressions in 56:7\u20138: God will bring them to his holy mountain; he will give them joy in his house of prayer, and they will offer acceptable burnt offerings and sacrifices. There is a progression in these statements of belonging and being included. First, they are brought to God\u2019s holy mountain as the place where the Lord is to be found. Second, they are welcomed into his presence and into his family, as indicated by bringing them to celebrate in his house of prayer. Third, they participate in those ordinances that guarantee acceptance and fellowship\u2014they bring offerings (\u05e2\u05d5\u05b9\u05dc\u05d5\u05b9\u05ea) and sacrifices (\u05d6\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05d7\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd) that are accepted at his altar. Nothing could be clearer on just how far into the ingroup are these foreigners! Verse 8 echoes this same theme. The first line speaks about gathering the exiles of Israel. Then the second line says that God will gather others in addition to his gathered ones. This passage plainly specifies what was also indicated in 49:6. First God will gather his own people; then the servant(s) will be a light to the nations.
\nLuke\u2019s account of the church\u2019s expansion beyond Jerusalem and Judea is clearly modeled on Isaiah 56. First the foreigners, the Samaritans, are brought into the new covenant community, and then the eunuch from Ethiopia is brought into the new people of God.<\/p>\n
PSALM 87<\/p>\n
While we are considering passages in the Prophets that speak of foreign nations being included in the one people of God, we should note the conversation between Isaiah and the Psalms discussed by Norbert Lohfink and Erich Zenger. An excellent example is Psalm 87, which deserves to be heard and briefly discussed (see table 12.1).<\/p>\n
LITERARY STRUCTURE OF PSALM 87<\/p>\n
The poem consists of four short sections or stanzas arranged in concentric circles. The first stanza (Ps. 87:1\u20132) constitutes a heading for the entire poem and is separate from the concentric structure. It declares that Yahweh loves Zion. The second stanza (87:3) announces that grand things are being said (by the nations) about Zion and is matched by the fourth stanza (87:7), expressing the same thing. In the third stanza (87:4\u20136), Yahweh is speaking, and he recounts the birth registry of the nations. It is arranged in three sections according to the scheme a-b-a:<\/p>\n
a This one
\nwas born there. (87:4)
\nb Every single one
\nwas born in it. (87:5)
\na This one
\nwas born there. (87:6)<\/p>\n
Table 12.1 Text of Psalm 87
\n1a. Of the Korahites. A Psalm. A Song.
\n1b. His foundation in the holy mountains Yahweh loves;
\n2. the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob.
\n3a. Glorious things are said about you,
\n3b. City of God. [Selah]
\n4a. \u201cI mention Rahab and Babylon among those who know me.
\n4b. See\u2014Philistia and Tyre along with Cush,
\n4c. \u201cThis one was born there.\u201d
\n5a. Yes, of Zion it will be said:
\n5b. \u201cEvery single one was born in it.\u201d
\n5c. Yes, he will establish it\u2014the Most High.
\n6a. Yahweh counts them
\n6b. When he registers the nations:
\n6c. \u201cThis one was born there.\u201d [Selah]
\n7a. They sing when they dance:
\n7b. \u201cAll my springs are in you.\u201d<\/p>\n
The repeated statement in 87:4 and 87:6 form a frame (inclusio) for which the background is the image of Yahweh registering the nations. The expression at the center is emphatic and thematic.
\nAround this middle section lie the second and fourth stanzas, which are connected by the two prepositional phrases \u201cin you\u201d (87:3a, 7b). Through these phrases, these two stanzas are interwoven with the center, which has the prepositional phrase \u201cin it.\u201d It may be that the first and second stanzas could be considered a unit, and thus the concentric pattern is perfect. The poetic structure is confirmed and supported by the fact that 87:3 and 87:6 end with the term selah.<\/p>\n
MESSAGE OF PSALM 87<\/p>\n
The two outer sections\/stanzas of the poem (87:1\u20133, 7) agree in presenting a coherent and unified picture of Zion typical in the Old Testament. Zion is the city of God situated on the \u201choly mountain,\u201d which is both the cosmic mountain of the world and the mountain of paradise, where Yahweh is enthroned and dwells as King of the world and God of all-encompassing shalom. In the center of the city of God, or better, in the midst of the palace\/temple of the God who dwells within it, the \u201csprings of life\u201d gush forth. The \u201csprings\u201d are integral to this picture, derived from the garden in Eden. It is noteworthy that Gihon is a name applied only to one of the four rivers just outside the garden in Eden (Gen. 2:13) and to the spring just outside the city wall of Jerusalem (1 Kings 1:33, 38, 45; 2 Chron. 32:30; 33:14). Zion is like Eden in possessing the same source of water.
\nThe \u201cgates of Zion\u201d mentioned in 87:2b may possibly connote a number of things. City gates are peculiar to a city, which in contrast to a village is characterized by a wall with its gate or gates. The gates of the city in ancient Israel correspond to the town hall of cities in the Western world. This was the place where important business transactions and court judgments took place. Therefore, it was key to the justice and righteousness of the city. By metonymy, the \u201cgates of Zion\u201d might also refer to the gates of the temple. The ordering of justice and life established by Yahweh is connected with \u201cthe gates\u201d of the temple (cf. Psalms 15; 24; Isa. 33:14\u201316). Just as in the vision of future Zion proclaimed by Isaiah 2, where the nations are streaming to Zion to receive instruction from Yahweh, so here also the two outer sections proclaim Zion as a source of universal social justice and righteousness for the nations.
\nThe middle section (Ps. 87:4\u20136) is thoroughly stamped by the image that Yahweh confers citizenship in the city of God on the members of the many nations, in that Yahweh enters them in the \u201ccitizenship rolls.\u201d With artistic skill this idea is repeated three times. The background may be the heavenly book of destiny and life attested elsewhere in the ancient Near East. Within the Old Testament itself we find the institution of membership in the temple-congregation (Ex. 32:32; Ps. 69:28 [69:29 MT]; Isa. 4:3; Ezek. 13:9), and this is a better proposal as to the background of the text in Psalm 87. The first statement is the most shocking and significant: Yahweh has accorded a connection to Zion to the two great traditional enemy powers, Egypt (Rahab) and Babylon, as well as to the lands of Philistia, Phoenicia, and Cush in a legally binding way (with rights and obligations).
\nThe enumeration of the five names is not intended to be exclusive. Rather, the whole world is in view, with Zion proclaimed as the center or navel of the earth. The four names that are mentioned correspond to and mark the four compass points, West (Egypt), East (Babylon), North (Philistia and Tyre), and South (Cush). In this geographical and spatial perspective, Zion is a location, a place. But in Hebrew, \u201ccity\u201d is feminine, and the image of birth and registration in Zion gives the idea that Zion is the mother of the nations. In the Greek translation an error in the copying and transmission of the text resulted in the city actually being called \u201cMother Zion.\u201d This error in the textual transmission conveys the meaning of the passage quite well. Isaiah 66:7\u201314 also pictures Zion as a woman giving birth to her children, those who are citizens in Israel. In Psalm 87, Zion becomes the mother of the nations, not through natural birth but through Yahweh\u2019s own determination and election. If one connects the middle section in 87:4\u20136 to the statement of themes in 87:1\u20132, Yahweh gives the nations to Zion as \u201cchildren\u201d because Yahweh loves Zion.
\nThe pattern of thought in Psalm 87 is similar to the eschatological vision of Zechariah 2:10\u201312 (2:14\u201316 MT), although the order of thematic elements in the two texts is opposite to each other (see table 12.2):<\/p>\n
Table 12.2 Comparison of Zechariah 2:10\u201312 and Psalm 87
\nZechariah 2:10\u201312 (2:14\u201316 MT)
\nPsalm 87
\n2:10 (2:14 MT)
\nSing and rejoice, O daughter Zion! For see, I will come and dwell in your midst, declares the LORD.
\n87:7
\n2:11 (2:15 MT)
\nMany nations shall join themselves to the LORD in that day, and shall be my people; and I will dwell in your midst.
\n87:4\u20136
\n2:12 (2:16 MT)
\nThe LORD will inherit Judah as his portion in the holy land, and will again choose Jerusalem.
\n87:2<\/p>\n
Two exegetical difficulties remain: (1) How do we interpret Psalm 87:5c, and (2) how do we interpret the nations mentioned in Psalm 87? Some interpreters avoid the idea that the nations are incorporated as citizens of Zion by saying that the mention of these nations refers to the Jews in the Diaspora. The correct interpretation of Psalm 87:5c is provided by considering the relationship of Psalm 87 to the Korah psalms; the correct interpretation of the nations is resolved by noting the relationship between Psalm 87 and the Asaph psalms, in particular Psalm 83.
\nZenger discusses the editorial arrangement of the hymns in the Psalter in detail. Psalm 87 belongs to the psalms of Korah (Psalms 42\u201349; 84\u201385; 87\u201389) and is framed by the psalms of Asaph (Psalms 73\u201383).
\nIn Psalm 87, Yahweh establishes Zion in 87:1 and equips Zion as a beneficent force in the world in 87:5c. Verse 5c is in fact a citation of Psalm 48:8 (48:9 MT); the psalms of the sons of Korah share a common linguistic and theological profile and also develop an argument in the collection as a whole. Concerning the connections between Psalm 87 and the Korah psalms, Zenger says,<\/p>\n
It is possible that in 87:5c there is also a reminder of the manner in which YHWH \u201cequips\u201d Zion to be the source of life for the nations. In Ps 48:9\u201311 [10\u201312] the equipping of Zion spoken of in 48:8 [9] is explicitly seen in the saving gifts of \u201crighteousness and justice\u201d that are present there or go forth from there; with these YHWH as king of the world \u201cdeprives\u201d the enemy nations \u201cof their power.\u201d This legal aspect is also found in Psalm 87: from the seat of power YHWH, the king of the world, takes the nations into YHWH\u2019s realm in a legal and binding way and obligates them from that time on to follow the laws of his realm. That YHWH declares in 87:4a that Rahab and Babylon are among \u201cthose who (ac)know(ledge) me,\u201d from the perspective of Ps 46:10 [11] (\u201cBe still, and know that I am YHWH\u201d) means precisely this: the nations are prepared to take instructions from YHWH in his ordering of world peace. On the level of the book of Psalms, 87:4a has to be read from the perspective of Ps 25:14: Egypt and Babylon belong to those who acknowledge YHWH\u2014because YHWH has given them knowledge about himself and the covenant.<\/p>\n
Psalm 87 is connected to Psalm 83, the concluding psalm of the Asaph group, by appropriating key words in three instances:<\/p>\n
1. The geographical designations \u201cPhilistia and Tyre\u201d occur in 83:7 (83:8 MT) and 87:4.
\n2. Psalm 83 culminates with a statement that Yahweh should show himself and demonstrate in a dramatic way that he alone is the Most High (83:18 [83:19 MT]). According to Psalm 87:5, Yahweh is shown to be the Most High by \u201cequipping\u201d Zion as the \u201ccenter\u201d and \u201csource of life\u201d for the nations.
\n3. Yahweh intervenes against the assault of the nations intent on annihilating Israel, and his goal, according to 83:18 (83:19 MT), is that the nations (ac)know(ledge) Yahweh and Yahweh\u2019s name; likewise, in 87:4, Yahweh lists the great powers as those \u201cwho (ac)know(ledge) me.\u201d<\/p>\n
Psalm 86 is the prayer of a poor and persecuted person, whom the superscription identifies as David, making an urgent appeal that Yahweh let the vision laid out in Psalm 87\u2014of the universal liberation of the nations by the actualization of Yahweh\u2019s royal reign (86:8\u201310)\u2014at long last become reality. Psalm 86 also anticipates eagerly the decisive eschatological turning when the God of the Sinai covenant is revealed, as it affirms with a citation of Exodus 34, which is the basis for extending the covenant to the nations in Psalm 25.
\nThus the context of Psalm 87 decisively requires that we interpret the nations in Psalm 87 as the foreign nations and not as Diasporan Jews. Psalm 87 clearly teaches that the Lord will take the foreign nations, the enemies of Israel, and make them citizens of Zion. This teaching echoes the remarkable statement in Isaiah 19:24\u201325:<\/p>\n
In that day Israel will be the third with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth, whom the LORD of hosts has blessed, saying, \u201cBlessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel my inheritance.\u201d<\/p>\n
Here Isaiah predicts that the renewed and restored Zion will involve taking the worst enemies of Israel and incorporating them into the one people of God.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 59:21<\/p>\n
Another significant text is Isaiah 59:21:<\/p>\n
\u201cAs for me, this is my covenant with them,\u201d says the LORD. \u201cMy Spirit, who is on you, will not depart from you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will always be on your lips, on the lips of your children and on the lips of their descendants\u2014from this time on and forever,\u201d says the LORD. (NIV)<\/p>\n
The comment of John Davies is both apt and concise:<\/p>\n
After a description of the lamentable situation of Zion in Isa. 59:1\u201315, the result of separation from God through the people\u2019s sins and offences (59:2), a turning point is reached at v. 16, where the arm of Yhwh intervenes on his people\u2019s behalf. There follows a sustained depiction of a glorious restoration of Zion, once again to be graced with the divine presence and glory. This depiction continues without interruption through to the end of ch. 62.
\nThe key to the restoration is Yhwh\u2019s return to Zion in zealous pursuit of the interests of his people and his glorious presence there (59:17\u201320), together with his declared \u201ccovenant\u201d (v. 21) or commitment to remain forever with his people through his spirit and his words. Chapters 60\u201362 then draw on a rich store of imagery to portray the implications of this restoration of Zion (the remnant of Israel) to an exalted status.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 61:1\u201311<\/p>\n
Many Christians are familiar with the first three verses of Isaiah 61, since Jesus cited them in the synagogue service recorded in Luke 4:16\u201321. Nonetheless, Christians in general are not so well versed in what the rest of Isaiah 61 has to say about the new covenant.<\/p>\n
The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is on me,
\nbecause the LORD has anointed me
\nto proclaim good news to the poor.
\nHe has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
\nto proclaim freedom for the captives
\nand release for the prisoners,
\nto proclaim the year of the LORD\u2019s favor
\nand the day of vengeance of our God,
\nto comfort all who mourn,
\nand provide for those who grieve in Zion\u2014
\nto bestow on them a crown of beauty
\ninstead of ashes,
\nthe oil of joy
\ninstead of mourning,
\nand a garment of praise
\ninstead of a spirit of despair.
\nThey will be called oaks of righteousness,
\na planting of the LORD
\nfor the display of his splendor.
\nThey will rebuild the ancient ruins
\nand restore the places long devastated;
\nthey will renew the ruined cities
\nthat have been devastated for generations.
\nStrangers will shepherd your flocks;
\nforeigners will work your fields and vineyards.
\nAnd you will be called priests of the LORD;
\nyou will be named ministers of our God.
\nYou will feed on the wealth of nations,
\nand in their riches you will boast.
\nInstead of your shame
\nyou will receive a double portion,
\nand instead of disgrace
\nyou will rejoice in your inheritance.
\nAnd so you will inherit a double portion in your land,
\nand everlasting joy will be yours.
\n\u201cFor I, the LORD, love justice;
\nI hate robbery in a burnt offering.
\nIn my faithfulness I will reward my people
\nand make an everlasting covenant with them.
\nTheir descendants will be known among the nations
\nand their offspring among the peoples.
\nAll who see them will acknowledge
\nthat they are a people the LORD has blessed.\u201d (Isa. 61:1\u20139)<\/p>\n
A coming king, anointed by Yahweh and filled by his Spirit, will bring about a great jubilee\u2014no doubt the word \u05d3\u05b0\u05bc\u05e8\u05d5\u05b9\u05e8 in 61:1 is a direct allusion to Leviticus 25:10. The king anointed by the Spirit is also doubtless the same one described in Isaiah 11. As a result of his leadership, mourners in Zion are restored, and the long-standing ruins are rebuilt. Foreigners will care for the fields and the orchards, but Israel will be called priests of Yahweh (61:6). This simple statement is examined extensively by Davies, who is surely right to see here an allusion to Exodus 19:6. Israel\u2019s role as a royal priesthood, lost through violation of the Israelite covenant, is restored by the new covenant. Significantly, the text expressly states in Isaiah 61:8 that in the new covenant it is the faithfulness of Yahweh that brings about or causes the giving of this reward: \u201cIn my faithfulness I will reward my people and make an everlasting covenant with them.\u201d This is a clear reference to the new covenant, which is brought about by the faithfulness of Yahweh and entails a reward: the status (as priests) and the wealth mentioned in the context. It is also noteworthy that in 61:6, which specifies the restored status as priests, they are called \u201cministers of God,\u201d exactly the same term applied to foreigners in 56:6. The double portion was the inheritance of the firstborn son\u2014another connection to the role given to Israel in Exodus (4:22).<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 62:12<\/p>\n
They will be called the Holy People,
\nthe Redeemed of the LORD;
\nand you will be called Sought After,
\nthe City No Longer Deserted. (NIV)<\/p>\n
The designation \u201cHoly People\u201d here in 62:12 confirms the interpretation of 61:6: the renewed people of God are given in the new covenant what Israel lost in violating the Israelite covenant\u2014the status as holy nation and royal priesthood. This, as we saw earlier, is an Adamic role\u2014functioning as king-priest.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 66:18\u201324<\/p>\n
Many passages relating to the role of the nations in the new covenant could be examined with profit. Isaiah 66:18\u201324 is one of the more important texts:<\/p>\n
For I know their works and their thoughts, and the time is coming to gather all nations and tongues. And they shall come and shall see my glory, and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, who draw the bow, to Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands far away, that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations. And they shall bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD, on horses and in chariots and in litters and on mules and on dromedaries, to my holy mountain Jerusalem, says the LORD, just as the Israelites bring their grain offering in a clean vessel to the house of the LORD. And some of them also I will take for priests and for Levites, says the LORD.<\/p>\n
For as the new heavens and the new earth
\nthat I make
\nshall remain before me, says the LORD,
\nso shall your offspring and your name remain.
\nFrom new moon to new moon,
\nand from Sabbath to Sabbath,
\nall flesh shall come to worship before me,
\ndeclares the LORD.<\/p>\n
And they shall go out and look on the dead bodies of the men who have rebelled against me. For their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh. (ESV)<\/p>\n
Outline of Isaiah 66:1\u201324
\na Where is the temple of Yahweh and its worship?
\n66:1\u20134
\nb Assurance for those who tremble at God\u2019s word
\n66:5\u201314
\nb\u2032 Divine judgment on the false worshipers
\n66:15\u201317
\na\u2032 Worldwide pilgrimage to the temple of Yahweh
\n66:18\u201324<\/p>\n
Four paragraphs are arranged in chapter 66 in chiastic fashion. The last paragraph is 66:18\u201324. Here Isaiah speaks of a worldwide pilgrimage bringing a pure offering to the Lord\u2019s house (66:18\u201321), and then in 66:22\u201323, we see that all humanity is keeping Sabbath. This section returns to the themes raised in the important questions at the beginning of chapter 66: Where is the true temple of the Lord, and who are the people worshiping there? The answer is that God is not worshiped at a particular geographical location but by a certain type of people: the humble and lowly, who tremble at his word. At the same time, this section also returns to the theme at the beginning of chapter 65 of the nations playing a role in the future Zion and people of God. The issues of true Sabbath keepers and true worshipers raised in chapters 56 and 58 are brought to a conclusion as well.
\nThere is also a way in which the end of the book of Isaiah matches its beginning. In chapter 1, Isaiah lambastes the people for corrupt forms of worship, and here at the end of his work he returns to this theme, showing how the problem has at last been resolved.
\nVerse 18 is difficult because apparently some words are missing from the text in Hebrew. It begins with the words \u201cand I.\u201d Then follow the words \u201ctheir deeds and their intentions.\u201d After that the verb \u201cis coming\u201d is feminine, which rules out the translation of the NIV that it is the Lord who is coming. The best proposal is to translate, \u201cAnd as for me, in view of their deeds and intentions, the time is coming to gather all the nations and tongues, and they will come and see my glory.\u201d In Ezekiel 21:12 and 39:8, we have the verb \u201ccoming\u201d as a feminine form and the omitted subject is the word \u201ctime,\u201d so this is a possible way to interpret this text as well. The question is whether this gathering of nations is negative or positive\u2014that is, will God gather them for judgment or for salvation? According to the context, both are possible. But in 66:18\u201324, the emphasis is on gathering from the nations those who will become true worshipers of the Lord. So the emphasis here is a positive one. This passage reminds us of Isaiah 2:2\u20134, where the nations are streaming to Mount Zion to receive instruction, or Torah, from the Lord for daily living. It also reminds us of 11:10, where the root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples, who will then rally to him. A parallel passage is Zechariah 2:15 (2:11 EV), which speaks of many nations being joined to the Lord in a future day. Another parallel is Psalm 22:27: \u201cAll the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the LORD, and all the families of the nations will bow down before him\u201d (NIV). The end of this verse says that the nations will see the glory of Yahweh. The glory of the Lord in the Old Testament was a bright cloud, indicating that God was dwelling in the midst of the people. This seems to be the thought here. When the tabernacle was constructed, Israel saw the glory of the Lord as a bright cloud descending on it, showing that the creator God was coming to dwell with them and rule in their midst as King. Here, the nations will see the glory of the Lord.
\nHow will the nations recognize that God is gathering them to see his glory? Verse 19 speaks of God placing a sign among the nations. Since this passage refers to the gathering of the nations into the new Jerusalem, we can see and understand from our vantage point that the sign probably refers to the cross. Isaiah, however, knows and speaks only in a general way of some sign that will be a common cause to bring the nations to see the glory of the Lord.
\nNext, survivors are dispatched and sent to distant nations (66:19). Some interpret the survivors to be from Israel, but Isaiah 45:20 speaks specifically of survivors from the nations. These will be sent to distant countries. It is difficult to identify the countries listed here. Tarshish may be in Spain. The Hebrew text mentions Pul and Lud. According to Genesis 10:13, there is a Lud in Africa and, according to 10:22, a Lud associated with the Semites, possibly in Asia Minor. It could be that the NIV is right in speaking of Libya and Lydia as places in Africa and then Tubal and Greece as places in eastern and western Turkey. The Greeks known to Israel were the Ionians who lived in southwestern Turkey. At any rate, all these places represent those countries on the edge of the map as far as geography in Isaiah\u2019s time is concerned. And the amazing thing is that survivors are sent out to these distant nations because they have not heard about Yahweh or seen his glory. This is a hint in the Old Testament of the missionary enterprise in the New Testament. Normally in the Old Testament, all the nations come to Israel to learn about her God and the right way to treat each other. In the New Testament, Jesus sends his disciples out to the far ends of the earth. This text in Isaiah comes close to the Great Commission in Matthew 28.
\nIsaiah 66:20 states, \u201c \u2018And they will bring all your brothers from all the nations as an offering to the LORD on horses, in chariots and wagons, on mules and camels to my holy mountain, Jerusalem,\u2019 says the LORD.\u201d There are different interpretations of this verse. Some think that because the term \u201cbrothers\u201d is used, Isaiah is speaking about gathering Israelites from the nations. But it is more probable that he uses the term \u201cbrother\u201d to show that converts from the nations will become part of the one people of God.
\nSeveral considerations support the interpretation of \u201cbrothers\u201d as referring to Gentiles. Every word in the text of Isaiah is carefully chosen and motivated. Note, for example, Isaiah 58:7, where true fasting is defined: \u201cIs it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter\u2014when you see the naked, to clothe them, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?\u201d (NIV). Here Isaiah employs the term \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e9\u05b8\u05c2\u05e8 (\u201cflesh\u201d) to show that the \u201cpoor\u201d are family. They are not other people; they are our own, and we must feed them with the same responsibility with which we would feed our own family. Likewise, in 56:6, the text speaks of the foreigners as \u201cministers\u201d and \u201cservants\u201d to show that they have the same status as priests. The same technique is employed in 66:20, where \u05d0\u05b8\u05d7 is used to show that those drawn from the nations are family as well. Admittedly, \u201cbrother\u201d is rare in Isaiah (3:6; 9:19; 19:2; 41:6; 66:5, 20) and refers to Israelites in 66:5. Nonetheless, if \u201cbrothers\u201d were fellow Israelites, the point would be anticlimactic, and the comparison between offering the brothers as an offering just as the Israelites offer an offering would be tautological and meaningless. Romans 15:16 is directly dependent on this verse in Isaiah, and Paul is interpreting the text to refer to Gentiles, non-Jews, being joined to the people of God. This also agrees with the vision in Isaiah 2 of the nations streaming to Mount Zion. John 11:49\u201352 would confirm this:<\/p>\n
Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, \u201cYou know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.\u201d He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. (ESV)<\/p>\n
Isaiah 66:21 goes one step further. Not only will people from the nations come to worship the Lord just as Israel used to bring a pure offering, but also some of them will be chosen for priests, for Levites, that is, to be leaders in the worshiping community (61:6). Again, the term \u201cpriest\u201d is employed sparingly in the book of Isaiah: 8:2; 24:2; 28:7; 37:2; 61:6; 66:21. In 61:6, we saw that the renewed people of God are once more assigned the status proclaimed earlier in the Israelite covenant. Now Israel as a royal priesthood includes Gentiles; the context puts an emphasis on honor, privilege, absorbing the riches of the nations, and nearness to Yahweh.
\nTo sum up where we have come in Isaiah 66:18\u201321, God will gather the nations and put a sign among them. He will dispatch survivors (of judgment) to distant lands to bring the peoples there to know and see the glory of the Lord. These messengers will bring non-Jews as a kind of offering to the Lord, and the nations will worship in Jerusalem with some of them even being chosen as priests (cf. Rom. 15:16).
\nIsaiah 66:22 now offers a guarantee: \u201cJust as the new heavens and new earth are before the LORD [i.e., so certain that he can already see them], so are your offspring and your name.\u201d This is a clear reference to God\u2019s promises to Abraham. His name and his offspring are preserved because now God has joined Jews and non-Jews into one family. The new world involves two things: a new place and a new people. Verse 22 shows that both of these are certain because they are in God\u2019s mind; he can actually see them before him. Verse 23 then refers to all the nations coming every new moon and every Sabbath to worship the Lord.
\nThe last verse of Isaiah (66:24) indicates that those rescued will observe the final judgment of those who have responded negatively to Isaiah\u2019s message of salvation.<\/p>\n
ISAIAH 65:1\u201325<\/p>\n
The transformation of Zion reaches consummation and conclusion with the announcement of a new creation\/Jerusalem. Motyer demonstrates that Isaiah chapters 65 and 66 form one chiastically structured unit (see outline below on p. 519). This important text deserves to be heard in full:<\/p>\n
\u201cI revealed myself to those who did not ask for me;
\nI was found by those who did not seek me.
\nTo a nation that did not call on my name,
\nI said, \u2018Here am I, here am I.\u2019
\nAll day long I have held out my hands
\nto an obstinate people,
\nwho walk in ways not good,
\npursuing their own imaginations\u2014
\na people who continually provoke me
\nto my very face,
\noffering sacrifices in gardens
\nand burning incense on altars of brick;
\nwho sit among the graves
\nand spend their nights keeping secret vigil;
\nwho eat the flesh of pigs,
\nand whose pots hold broth of impure meat;
\nwho say, \u2018Keep away; don\u2019t come near me,
\nfor I am too sacred for you!\u2019
\nSuch people are smoke in my nostrils,
\na fire that keeps burning all day.<\/p>\n
\u201cSee, it stands written before me:
\nI will not keep silent but will pay back in full;
\nI will pay it back into their laps\u2014
\nboth your sins and the sins of your fathers,\u201d
\nsays the LORD.
\n\u201cBecause they burned sacrifices on the mountains
\nand defied me on the hills,
\nI will measure into their laps
\nthe full payment for their former deeds.\u201d<\/p>\n
This is what the LORD says:<\/p>\n
\u201cAs when juice is still found in a cluster of grapes
\nand people say, \u2018Don\u2019t destroy it,
\nthere is yet some good in it,\u2019
\nso will I do in behalf of my servants;
\nI will not destroy them all.
\nI will bring forth descendants from Jacob,
\nand from Judah those who will possess my mountains;
\nmy chosen people will inherit them,
\nand there will my servants live.
\nSharon will become a pasture for flocks,
\nand the Valley of Achor a resting place for herds,
\nfor my people who seek me.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut as for you who forsake the LORD
\nand forget my holy mountain,
\nwho spread a table for Fortune
\nand fill bowls of mixed wine for Destiny,
\nI will destine you for the sword,
\nand all of you will fall in the slaughter;
\nfor I called but you did not answer,
\nI spoke but you did not listen.
\nYou did evil in my sight
\nand chose what displeases me.\u201d<\/p>\n
Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says:<\/p>\n
\u201cMy servants will eat,
\nbut you will go hungry;
\nmy servants will drink,
\nbut you will go thirsty;
\nmy servants will rejoice,
\nbut you will be put to shame.
\nMy servants will sing
\nout of the joy of their hearts,
\nbut you will cry out
\nfrom anguish of heart
\nand wail in brokenness of spirit.
\nYou will leave your name
\nto my chosen ones to use in their curses;
\nthe Sovereign LORD will put you to death,
\nbut to his servants he will give another name.
\nWhoever invokes a blessing in the land
\nwill do so by the one true God;
\nwhoever takes an oath in the land
\nwill swear by the one true God.
\nFor the past troubles will be forgotten
\nand hidden from my eyes.<\/p>\n
\u201cSee, I will create
\nnew heavens and a new earth.
\nThe former things will not be remembered,
\nnor will they come to mind.
\nBut be glad and rejoice forever
\nin what I will create,
\nfor I will create Jerusalem to be a delight
\nand its people a joy.
\nI will rejoice over Jerusalem
\nand take delight in my people;
\nthe sound of weeping and of crying
\nwill be heard in it no more.<\/p>\n
\u201cNever again will there be in it
\nan infant who lives but a few days,
\nor an old man who does not live out his years;
\nthe one who dies at a hundred
\nwill be thought a mere child;
\nthe one who fails to reach a hundred
\nwill be considered accursed.
\nThey will build houses and dwell in them;
\nthey will plant vineyards and eat their fruit.
\nNo longer will they build houses and others live in them,
\nor plant and others eat.
\nFor as the days of a tree,
\nso will be the days of my people;
\nmy chosen ones will long enjoy
\nthe work of their hands.
\nThey will not labor in vain,
\nnor will they bear children doomed to misfortune;
\nfor they will be a people blessed by the LORD,
\nthey and their descendants with them.
\nBefore they call I will answer;
\nwhile they are still speaking I will hear.
\nThe wolf and the lamb will feed together,
\nand the lion will eat straw like the ox,
\nand dust will be the serpent\u2019s food.
\nThey will neither harm nor destroy
\non all my holy mountain,\u201d
\nsays the LORD. (Isa. 65:1\u201325 NIV)<\/p>\n
Outline of Isaiah 65:1\u201366:21 (Chiastic Structure of the Lord\u2019s Promises)
\na The Lord\u2019s call to those who had not sought him
\n65:1
\nb God\u2019s repayment to a rebellious people
\n65:2\u20137
\nc Promise of a preserved remnant
\n65:8\u201310
\nd Those who forsake the Lord destined for slaughter
\n65:11\u201312
\ne Joys of the Lord\u2019s servants in the new creation
\n65:13\u201325
\nd\u2019 Those who forsake the Lord destined for slaughter
\n66:1\u20134
\nc\u2032 Promise of a preserved remnant
\n66:5\u201314
\nb\u2032 God\u2019s repayment to a rebellious people
\n66:15\u201317
\na\u2032 The Lord\u2019s call to those who had not sought him
\n66:18\u201321<\/p>\n
The purpose of the chiastic literary structure is twofold. The first purpose is to rivet our attention on the center section: the promise of a new creation, with a new Zion at its center. The second purpose is to show the conditions and steps to the fulfillment of this vision and, on the other side of the central section, to develop these truths in greater detail. While we might expect more space to be devoted to a description of the final state, Isaiah devotes more space to the process by which we get there.<\/p>\n
THE NEW PEOPLE<\/p>\n
We may begin by focusing on Isaiah 65:13. It starts with the word \u201ctherefore\u201d and so summarizes the contrasting destinies outlined in the paragraphs of 65:2\u201312. The section comprising verses 13\u201318 brings together three streams of thought: the worldwide stream of 65:1; the judgment streams of 65:2\u20137, 11\u201312; and the remnant stream of 65:8\u201310.
\nThe remnant is referred to as the servants of God. They will eat, but the rebels will go hungry. They will drink, but the rebels will go thirsty. They will know celebration and joy, while the rebels will know shame. They will be so filled with cheerfulness within that they will burst out with a loud cry of joy that echoes and rings, while the rebels will be filled with pain inside and will howl with broken spirits. These terms speak of both physical and spiritual well-being. Every external need is met, and internally, they are fully satisfied.
\nBoth this paragraph and the paragraph in 65:8\u201310, which refers to the remnant, are amazing in speaking of these people as the Lord\u2019s servants. Already in 54:17, where the sacrificial death and suffering of the servant-king results in a new everlasting covenant, we see that those who are joined to the servant as the new covenant community are also referred to as servants. More astonishing is 56:6, which makes plain that individuals from the nations are included as the servants of the Lord. Then in 63:17, in the prayer of the watchman, the person praying asks for God to show mercy on his servants. And now this prayer is answered as we see the blessings to be poured out on the servants of the Lord.
\nIsaiah 65:15\u201316 shows that the promises to Abraham and the covenant with Abraham find fulfillment in the new covenant community, who are referred to as \u201cthe servants of the Lord.\u201d In an ironic reversal, the name of unbelieving Israel becomes a curse to God\u2019s chosen ones, and the Lord puts them to death. The new covenant community is given a new name, which is left unspecified. And the one being blessed or uttering a blessing in the land will be blessed or will utter a blessing by a \u201cGod of amen,\u201d and the one swearing in the land will swear by a \u201cGod of amen.\u201d The epithet \u201cGod of truth\u201d (as it appears in most English versions) is actually \u201cGod of amen\u201d in the Hebrew text. The English word \u201camen\u201d is a transliteration of the Hebrew adverb \u05d0\u05b8\u05de\u05b5\u05df, which means something like \u201csurely\u201d and is employed by someone who is acknowledging an oath or promise. In contrast to rebellious Israelites who have uttered a blessing by false gods who cannot back it up, members of the new community will utter blessings by a God who will acknowledge and back up blessings uttered in his name.
\nThere is a clear connection between this paragraph and the covenant made with Abraham. First, note that it was in the covenant with Abraham in Genesis 17 that Abram was given a new name\u2014Abraham (17:5). Second, note that the covenant promised blessing for those blessing Abram and his family. Third, note that there is a curse for the one\u2014and it is specified in the singular\u2014who rejects Abram\u2019s family. The blessing and cursing in Isaiah 65:15\u201316 clearly recall the promises of Genesis 12:2\u20133, but they redefine them according to the new covenant community and its \u201cGod of amen.\u201d The name \u201cGod of amen\u201d is found only here in the Old Testament, and it is explained in 2 Corinthians 1:20, where Paul says that it is in the new covenant community that all the promises of God receive a resounding \u201cyes.\u201d
\nGr\u00fcneberg argues that the hithpael of b\u0101rak means \u201cutter an oath\u201d since it is parallel to \u201cswear\u201d in verse 16b. Nonetheless, the A line of the poetry need not be identical to the B line in meaning, and it seems as if Paul construes the form as passive, for those who hear a \u201cyes\u201d to God\u2019s promises are being blessed. Thus we can translate it, \u201cWhoever is blessed in the land will be blessed by a God of amen.\u201d
\nVerse 17 begins with the conjunction \u201cfor,\u201d explaining the particular and worldwide blessings of the preceding section. That section ended by promising blessings for the one who is related to the God of \u201camen,\u201d or truth. This experience is so radical that the former distresses and troubles are forgotten\u2014not just by humans but by God himself. The new section picks up the thought of the former things and shows why the former things will not be remembered: God is making all things new.<\/p>\n
THE NEW PLACE<\/p>\n
The promise of a new creation\u2014a new heavens and a new earth\u2014shows that the divine plan of salvation is no half job. God has something bigger in mind. Yes, it involves return from exile and deliverance from the nations that have been oppressing God\u2019s people. Even more than that, it entails the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation so that the covenant is renewed, the temple is rebuilt, and Yahweh returns to Zion. God is dwelling once more in the midst of his people as King. Not only, then, do God\u2019s people have a right relationship to him, but they treat one another in genuinely human ways with faithfulness and truth, with justice and righteousness\u2014social justice. And astonishing as it may seem, these blessings flow to the nations who are included now in the one people of God. But the creation itself has been subject to futility and destruction on account of human sin, and God is not finished until this is rectified. He will make a completely brand new universe: a new heavens and a new earth. We see, then, that the plan of salvation is no halfway fix-it job. God\u2019s plan of restoration brings us back to the pristine state of Eden\u2014in a world now much better and much greater. Augustine once said that he feared to entrust his soul to the great physician lest he be more thoroughly cured than he cared to be. God\u2019s plan of salvation is absolutely thorough, and he is not going to be satisfied with some half job of reformation and renewal in our lives.
\nGod\u2019s forgetting of the old things results in our forgetting of the old creation. And we are commanded to delight and rejoice in the new, just as God finds his delight and joy in the new.
\nIt must be emphasized that the final state is not heaven but rather life in a new creation. The gospel I heard as a child was one in which I was warned of eternal judgment in hell and told of heaven offered through faith in Jesus Christ. It is true to the Scriptures that, when a believer dies, he or she goes to \u201cbe with the Lord.\u201d And in Hebrews 12, we are given a glimpse of the heavenly Zion, where the spirits of just men made perfect are kept safe in the Lord\u2019s presence. But this is not our final goal. The final goal is not to get away from this world, full of evil and completely ruined by our poor stewardship, but to live in a new creation where we have a brand new start.
\nIsaiah 65:18b describes creating Jerusalem a delight and God\u2019s people a joy. It seems that Jerusalem is the new creation. As T. Desmond Alexander notes,<\/p>\n
Significantly, in verses 17\u201318 the creation of the \u201cnew heavens and a new earth\u201d parallels the creation of Jerusalem (cf. Isa. 24:23). The repeated use of the Hebrew verb b\u0101r\u0101\u2019, \u201cto create,\u201d suggests that Jerusalem is deliberately equated here with the new heavens and the new earth. They are one and the same.<\/p>\n
Possibly this is not the only way to understand the text, but in Revelation 21, we see that it is the correct interpretation. Jerusalem is not only at the center of the new world but in fact is coextensive with it. The new creation is the new Jerusalem, and vice versa. This conclusion is clear from Isaiah 65:25, where the new creation is described as God\u2019s holy mountain\u2014Mount Zion has become the new Eden!
\nThe order in producing the new creation is reversed from that in producing the old creation. In the old creation, God first made the place where we live and then made the creatures to live there. In the new creation, however, God will first make his new people and then make the home where they will live. This order is first observed in Genesis 12, where God makes his last new start with Abram and his family. The promises in 12:1\u20133 begin by announcing that God will make Abram into a great nation. Nothing is said about land, but surely this is implied. A great nation cannot exist apart from a place to call home. This is actually made explicit later on in 12:7, where God promises to Abram the land of Canaan. Nonetheless, as the history of the divine dealings with Abram show, God\u2019s priority is to create a covenant people first rather than settle the issue of the land where they will dwell. As we saw in the Davidic covenant, the land as defined in the covenant with Abram in Genesis 15:18\u201321 and described in Deuteronomy 11:24\u201325 as Israel\u2019s place becomes Israel\u2019s possession in the time of Solomon (1 Kings 4:24\u201325). But the Israelite covenant curses brought the loss of the land: first the area of Galilee, then the northern kingdom, then Judah, and finally Jerusalem itself. Yet in his treatment of the new covenant, Isaiah announces that the people of the new Zion will be far more numerous than those of the old (e.g., the barren woman, Isa. 54:1\u20133) because the nations will be drawn into the new Zion. Implicit in this is the fact that more land will be required than just the real estate entailed in historical Israel. How can the new Zion find enough space in the new Jerusalem\/Israel? Isaiah 65 solves the puzzle: the new Jerusalem and new creation will be coextensive. As Paul says, \u201cAbram believed he would inherit the world\u201d (Rom. 4:13).
\nSome may find this discussion of the promises concerning the future of the city of Jerusalem and the land of Israel troublesome. It is extremely important to observe the development within the book of Isaiah in regard to the transformation of Zion. At the outset we noted that the main theme of Isaiah\u2019s prophecy is the change or movement from corrupt Zion in the old creation to restored Zion in the new creation, and that this topic is presented in seven major recursive sections. Five of these seven sections end with a vision of the future Zion (2:1\u20134; 4:2\u20136; 11:1\u201310; 25:6\u201312; 65:17\u201325). The first (2:1\u20134) pictures the temple mountain higher than all others, with the nations streaming to it to receive instruction (Torah). The second (4:2\u20136) combines images of a fruitful land, a city devoted to the Lord, and a place of worship overshadowed by a canopy of glory as in the exodus. The third (11:1\u201310) portrays the future as an Edenic paradise (recall that Eden was on a mountain). The fourth (25:6\u201312) paints the scene of a mountain banquet with aged wine where death is swallowed up forever. The last (65:17\u201325) combines the new creation and the new Jerusalem together in one tableau. We must put all these pictures together holographically to see Isaiah\u2019s vision of future Zion. This is much better than a two- or even four-speaker audio system!
\nLet us note in particular the first and second visions, in Isaiah 2 and 4. In the vision of 2:1\u20134, the mountain of the temple of Yahweh becomes higher than all other hills and mountains. In the ancient Near East, mountains were viewed as a meeting place between heaven and earth and hence a place where humans could meet God. Consequently, it is no surprise that sanctuaries and temples and places of worship were all constructed on mountaintops. In the Tigris-Euphrates River valley, where the country was as flat as a pancake, the temples were built as mountains, the ziggurats. Here in Isaiah 2, the mountain of the temple of the Lord is a high and lofty mountain; all other places are mere hills by comparison. This is to say that the oracles in all other religions have been found wanting and are silenced. Zion has been restored as a place from which Yahweh speaks, and his word is supreme in and for the entire world.
\nThis mountain temple city calls to mind other mountains in the past. First of all, the garden in Eden was on a high mountain. How else could one river divide into four and water the whole world? Although the word \u201cmountain\u201d does not occur in Genesis 2, it does occur in the description of Eden in Ezekiel 28:13\u201314. The garden in Eden was not only a mountain, it was also a sanctuary, a place of worship. It was characterized by the presence of the Lord God. There he gave his decrees to rule the lives of his creatures.
\nSecond, Mount Zion as the source of the Torah reminds us of Sinai, called the \u201cmountain of God\u201d (Ex. 3:1), the place from which he issued the Ten Words (or Commandments), his instructions to rule and regulate the daily lives of his people. In Isaiah 2, we see that it is no longer from Sinai that Yahweh gives his word but from Mount Zion. Moreover, the Torah is not simply the law, a code of laws and regulations for just and righteous living that pleases God. At the same time, it constitutes a covenant, the formalizing of a relationship of love, loyalty, and trust between God and his people. Torah is, in a way, the flip side of the word covenant.
\nWe have a picture of the nations traveling up Mount Zion to worship there, and there they are given the Torah of Yahweh, instruction on daily living that involves not only giving God his proper place in their lives but also treating other people in a truly human way. Isaiah\u2019s use of the word Torah as the flip side of covenant subtly suggests that all the nations will be in a covenant relationship with God. In Isaiah 2:3, Torah and the word of Yahweh are in parallel lines. This occurs elsewhere in Isaiah only in 1:10. There Zion has rejected Yahweh\u2019s instruction and word; here his instruction and word are restored to their rightful place. Thus, in the vision of future Zion in 2:1\u20134, the future Zion has assumed roles earlier played by Eden and Sinai.
\nIn the vision in Isaiah 4:2\u20136, the picture is of a fruitful land and a holy city (Israel and Jerusalem). Moreover, there is a canopy of glory over the whole site of Mount Zion and over all its assemblies. In the exodus desert wanderings, the canopy of glory was over the tabernacle. Thus it is as if the entire city of Zion is now the tabernacle or the temple (a precursor to Revelation 21\u201322). The future Zion, then, takes up the imagery of Eden and Sinai. It is not just the old city of Jerusalem or the land of Israel. It is that and more\u2014it is a changed and transformed Zion: the whole new creation as the place where God\u2019s people dwell (land) and where God is worshiped (temple). Thus earlier sections of Isaiah prepare us to recognize in the vision in Isaiah 65 that the new Jerusalem and the new creation are coextensive.<\/p>\n
13<\/p>\n
THE NEW COVENANT<\/p>\n
Jeremiah<\/p>\n
Jeremiah\u2019s basic message can be summarized in a very few words: \u201cThe Babylonians are coming.\u201d He ministered from 627 BC to just a few years after the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. During this time he witnessed the fall of the neo-Assyrian Empire and the rapid rise of the Babylonian Empire led by Nabopolassar and his famous son, Nebuchadnezzar. He knew that the attempts of kings like Josiah to reform the nation were inadequate, and in his famous \u201cTemple Sermon\u201d (Jeremiah 7\u201310), he warned the people about hypocritical worship, just as Isaiah before him and Ezekiel after him.
\nSerious differences between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint (that have not been resolved) plague our study of the text of Jeremiah. In spite of this, William Dumbrell rightly notes that the prophecy is intended to relate Judah to the world. His defense of the arrangement in the Masoretic Text is noteworthy:<\/p>\n
It is not insignificant that oracles against foreign nations conclude the prophecy in the Hebrew text. Admittedly, these oracles are placed between Jer 25:13a and 15 in the Greek OT, but this seems to have risen from a desire for a more consistent historical structure, as well as from the purpose of ending the book with the account of the fall of Jerusalem and what immediately preceded the fall. But the Hebrew placement of these oracles at the conclusion of the book, viewed together with the nature of the prophet\u2019s call, draws into obvious focus the internationalism of the prophecy. This broader political perspective recognized that all the organized world as Jeremiah knew it was involved in a new societal structure under the leadership of Babylon.
\nMoreover, from a formal structural perspective, Jer 51:64 forms an inclusion with 1:1. In chapters 46\u201351 the oracles against the foreign nations are arranged geographically (Egypt, Philistia, Moab, Ammon, Edom, Damascus, Arabs, Elam and finally Babylon) and have the common theme of failure to submit to Babylon. Finally, Babylon herself is punished for hubris. These oracles underscore the tenor of Jeremiah\u2019s constant prophecy of Judah\u2019s need to recognize Babylonian hegemony as the new factor in the world situation.<\/p>\n
THE STRUCTURE AND SHAPE OF JEREMIAH<\/p>\n
A brief outline of this longest of the Prophetic Books will assist us as we consider key texts within the work that deal with the new covenant and related matters.<\/p>\n
Outline of Jeremiah
\nA. Superscription
\n1:1\u20133
\nB. Call of Jeremiah and Visions
\n1:4\u201319
\nC. Judgment on Judah and Jerusalem
\n2\u201325
\n1. Israel\u2019s guilt and punishment
\n2\u20136
\n2. Jeremiah\u2019s \u201cTemple Sermon\u201d
\n7\u201310
\n3. Warnings and judgment
\n11:11\u201315:9
\n4. Confessions, symbolic acts, and preaching
\n15:10\u201325:38
\nD. Jeremiah\u2019s Controversy with False Prophets
\n26\u201329
\nE. The Book of Consolation
\n30\u201333
\nF. The Days of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah
\n34\u201339
\nG. Jeremiah\u2019s Experiences after the Fall of Jerusalem.
\n40\u201345
\nH. Oracles against the Foreign Nations
\n46\u201351
\nI. Appendix: Fall of Jerusalem
\n52<\/p>\n
JEREMIAH 4:1\u20132<\/p>\n
Our attention is drawn, first of all, to Jeremiah 4:1\u20132, a passage early in the book of Jeremiah that focuses on Israel\u2019s relationship to Yahweh and its impact and significance for all the nations:<\/p>\n
If you return, O Israel,
\ndeclares the LORD,
\nto me you should return.
\nIf you remove your detestable things from my presence,
\nand do not waver,
\nand if you swear, \u201cAs the LORD lives,\u201d
\nin truth, in justice, and in righteousness,
\nthen nations shall bless themselves in him,
\nand in him shall they glory. (ESV)<\/p>\n
To aid the discussion, the Hebrew text for 4:2 is as follows:<\/p>\n
\u05d5\u05b0\u05e0\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05d1\u05b7\u05bc\u05e2\u05b0\u05ea\u05b8\u05bc \u05d7\u05b7\u05d9\u05be\u05d9\u05b0\u05d4\u05d5\u05b8\u05d4 \u05d1\u05b6\u05bc\u05d0\u05b6\u05de\u05b6\u05ea \u05d1\u05b0\u05bc\u05de\u05b4\u05e9\u05b0\u05c1\u05e4\u05b8\u05bc\u05d8 \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05b4\u05e6\u05b0\u05d3\u05b8\u05e7\u05b8\u05d4
\n\u05d5\u05b0\u05d4\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05e8\u05b0\u05db\u05d5\u05bc \u05d1\u05d5\u05b9 \u05d2\u05bc\u05d5\u05b9\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd \u05d5\u05bc\u05d1\u05d5\u05b9 \u05d9\u05b4\u05ea\u05b0\u05d4\u05b7\u05dc\u05b8\u05bc\u05dc\u05d5\u05bc\u05c3<\/p>\n
Four issues require discussion in the interpretation of Jeremiah 4:1\u20132. First, the Hebrew verb rendered \u201cwaver\u201d in the ESV is \u05e0\u05d5\u05d3 and has as its fundamental meaning \u201cgo back and forth, swing to and fro, flutter, oscillate, shake, wave\u201d (e.g., 1 Kings 14:15). Some secondary meanings are \u201cbe aimless, wander\u201d (e.g., Gen. 4:12, 14) or \u201cflee\u201d (e.g., Jer. 49:30; 50:3, 8). John Bright renders it \u201cnor stray from my presence,\u201d similar to the NIV. Yet the ESV is good here because the meaning is metaphorical of Israel\u2019s fickle vacillation between loyalty and disloyalty in the covenant relationship with Yahweh. Israel\u2019s covenant disloyalty and fickleness is a major theme in Jeremiah; he speaks frequently of the \u201cstubbornness of their evil hearts\u201d and of their \u201cincurable wound.\u201d Indeed, the entire section from 3:1\u20134:4 is a call to return to devoted, faithful loyalty in covenant love to Yahweh.
\nSecond, once again we have the hithpael of the verb b\u0101rak, and a number of different interpretations are possible. The analysis of Keith Gr\u00fcneberg is one of the most thorough and deserves to be cited in full:<\/p>\n
The hithpael here is commonly judged a reflexive (NASB, NKJV, JB, RSV), though passive translation is not unknown (e.g., NIV, NRSV, Bright). Yet once again passive force appears unlikely. For \u05d4\u05ea\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05d5 stands parallel to \u05d9\u05ea\u05d4\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5, probably used passively in Proverbs 31:30 (above pp 200\u2013201) but elsewhere regularly meaning \u201cglory,\u201d \u201cboast in\u201d: the context makes clear that the subject is doing the praising in e.g., Jer 49:4 (where it is linked to \u201ctrusting in her treasures,\u201d \u05d4\u05d1\u05d8\u05d7\u05d4 \u05d1\u05d0\u05e6\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9\u05d4); Psalm 34:3[2] (where the Psalmist is praising God); Psalm 105:3 (bidding people to give thanks, make known, sing and rejoice); Isa 41:16 (parallel to \u221a\u05d2\u05d9\u05dc). Elsewhere it is more difficult conclusively to exclude passive sense, but non-passive sense seems more plausible (e.g., Jer 9:22\u201323; 1 Kings 20:11; Psalm 52:3[1]). Hence it seems overwhelmingly that in Jer 4:2 the meaning of \u05d1\u05d5 \u05d9\u05ea\u05d4\u05dc\u05dc\u05d5 is \u201cthey will boast in him [i.e., by speaking in praise of him],\u201d and hence of \u05d4\u05ea\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05d5 \u05d1\u05d5 that \u201cthey will bless by him [i.e., in his name].\u201d For once passive force has been excluded, the analysis will repeat that given to \u05d9\u05ea\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05d5 in Ps 72:17 (pp 213\u201314 above, which see for detailed arguments): the primary situation described is probably that of individuals uttering blessings on other individuals, which does not obviously fit either reflexive or reciprocal semantics; however the main point is not precisely who is blessed (or who blesses), but the use of God\u2019s name when blessings are uttered. Thus again we most plausibly have a speech action hithpael.<\/p>\n
Note that this analysis matches that of Lee cited earlier in the discussion of the form in Genesis 12:3 and its later reiterations. We concluded that the niphal forms are passive (\u201cThey shall be blessed\u201d) and the hithpael are declarative-estimative reflexive (\u201cThey shall declare themselves as blessed\u201d). Nonetheless, as Benjamin Noonan has shown in his discussion of the hithpael of b\u0101rak, the declarative-estimative reflexive is the meaning of the hithpael, not a \u201cspeech action hithpael\u201d:<\/p>\n
If the nations pride themselves in God, placing their trust in him and finding their happiness in him, the parallelism indicates that the nations likewise seek out blessing from him. Once again, the point is not that blessings or statements of praise are being uttered, even though this may occur. Rather, the point is that the nations are placing their trust in God and seeking his blessing. This understanding is coherent within the larger context of this literary unit, in which Jer 3:17 refers to the inclusion of the nations within God\u2019s blessing. Jeremiah thus expresses the view Israel will provoke the nations to jealousy (cf. Isa 19:24\u201325): when Israel repents, the nations will see how Israel benefits from its covenant relationship and seek to enter into that relationship in order to also obtain blessing from God.<\/p>\n
Third, in the line \u201cthe nations [g\u00f4y\u00eem] will consider themselves blessed in him,\u201d to whom does the third-person pronoun him refer? According to the principle of proximity in the context, it must refer to Yahweh. If there is an allusion to the promise in Genesis 12:3 and its reiterations, then this text does present the reader with a variant: rather than being blessed by Abraham or the family of Abraham, the nations declare themselves blessed by Yahweh. They see the blessing through the family of Abraham as ultimately coming from God.
\nFourth, Jeremiah 4:1\u20132 is an extended conditional sentence, and interpreters differ over where the protasis, or \u201cif\u201d clause, ends and the apodosis, or \u201cthen\u201d clause, begins. While many English versions render 4:2a as does the above citation from the ESV, John Bright, for instance, sees the \u201cthen\u201d clause beginning at 4:2a instead of 4:2b, as follows:<\/p>\n
If you return, O Israel\u2014Yahweh\u2019s word\u2014
\nTo me return,
\nIf you put your vile things aside,
\nNor stray from my presence,
\nThen might you swear, \u201cAs Yahweh lives,\u201d
\nTruthfully, justly, and rightly;
\nAnd the nations by him would bless themselves,
\nAnd in him exult.<\/p>\n
Bright\u2019s rendering makes better sense of the Hebrew text. Both 4:2a and 4:2b begin with waw-consecutive perfect verbs. Moreover, the \u201cif\u201d that is repeated in 4:1b from 4:1a is no longer repeated in 4:2a. This is a clear sign that we are shifting from the protasis to the apodosis, but no clear sign can distinguish 4:2b as the beginning of the apodosis. Bright also makes better sense of the flow of thought. If Israel returns to an unadulterated devotion and loyalty to Yahweh in the covenant relationship, then her use of the name Yahweh will demonstrate faithfulness and justice. This in turn would move the nations to turn to Israel\u2019s God\u2014this is the plot structure of the Old Testament from Genesis 12 onward.
\nGr\u00fcneberg doubts that Jeremiah 4:2 entails an allusion to Genesis, mainly because few identical lexemes are used. But allusion is not always a matter of reusing lexemes or phrases from earlier texts. Previously we saw that Genesis 12 is describing God establishing his rule in the hearts and lives of humans through covenant relationship, exactly as described by Genesis 1:26\u201327. The ideas are precisely the same. The lexemes and language, however, are not remotely similar. Jeremiah 4:2 expresses the idea that when Israel is faithful in her relationship to Yahweh, blessing will flow to the nations, and this idea is based squarely on the Israelite\/Mosaic covenant as an outworking of the promises to Abraham.<\/p>\n
JEREMIAH 12:14\u201317<\/p>\n
The interpretation of Jeremiah 4:1\u20132 just provided is confirmed and strengthened by the oracle of Jeremiah 12:14\u201317, which reads as follows:<\/p>\n
This is what the LORD says: \u201cAs for all my wicked neighbors who seize the inheritance I gave my people Israel, I will uproot them from their lands and I will uproot the house of Judah from among them. But after I uproot them, I will again have compassion and will bring each of them back to their own inheritance and their own country. And if they learn well the ways of my people and swear by my name, saying, \u2018As surely as the LORD lives\u2019\u2014even as they once taught my people to swear by Baal\u2014then they will be established among my people. But if any nation does not listen, I will completely uproot and destroy it,\u201d declares the LORD. (NIV)<\/p>\n
Yahweh speaks of \u201call my wicked neighbors who seize the inheritance I gave my people Israel.\u201d Historically speaking, this would refer to the lands and peoples surrounding Israel who have brought harm to its land and people down through the years: the Arameans, the Edomites, the Moabites, the Philistines, and, wider afield, the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Egyptians, just to name a few of them.
\nVerse 14 speaks of an exile, not just for Judah but also for each of these lands and peoples. The verb \u201cuproot\u201d may have a double meaning: uprooting a land would mean sending the people into exile; uprooting Judah from among them would mean bringing Judah back from exile. What is astonishing, however, is that according to 12:15, each land and people will have a return from exile. And when all the exiles are brought home, if the nations learn from Israel to swear by the God of Israel, then they will be \u201cbuilt up\u201d or established in the midst of the restored Israel. If they do not, each will be permanently eradicated as a nation.
\nWhat is precisely parallel in this text to Jeremiah 4:1\u20132 is the idea that through a renewed and restored Israel (which is faithful and loyal to the Lord by faithfulness and social justice), the nations may become worshipers of this same Lord and will be established in the midst of the renewed people of God. What is additional and new in this text is that the notion of a return from exile applies to the nations as well as to Judah and Israel. This idea is developed further in our next text, Jeremiah 16:14\u201318.<\/p>\n
JEREMIAH 16:14\u201318<\/p>\n
\u201cHowever, the days are coming,\u201d declares the LORD, \u201cwhen it will no longer be said, \u2018As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of Egypt,\u2019 but it will be said, \u2018As surely as the LORD lives, who brought the Israelites up out of the land of the north and out of all the countries where he had banished them.\u2019 For I will restore them to the land I gave their ancestors.
\n\u201cBut now I will send for many fishermen,\u201d declares the LORD, \u201cand they will catch them. After that I will send for many hunters, and they will hunt them down on every mountain and hill and from the crevices of the rocks. My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from me, nor is their sin concealed from my eyes. I will repay them double for their wickedness and their sin, because they have defiled my land with the lifeless forms of their vile images and have filled my inheritance with their detestable idols.\u201d (NIV)<\/p>\n
As already stated, Jeremiah has a consistent message: \u201cThe Babylonians are coming! Judah will be carried away into exile.\u201d This, however, is not the whole message. There is also a message of consolation: \u201cGod will bring his people back from exile.\u201d This message of return from banishment and exile is expressed first in plain speech in 16:14\u201315 and is then repeated in figures of speech in 16:16.
\nIn 16:14\u201315, the return from exile is described as a new exodus. The exodus from Egypt was the big event in the history of Israel. Nonetheless, in terms of magnitude and significance, the exodus will be overshadowed by the future return from exile. In the future, the renewed people of the Lord will be defined and determined not by the exodus from Egypt but rather by a \u201cnew exodus\u201d event in which all the exiles are brought home. In the new exodus, the Israelites are brought back from the land of the north, according to 16:15, because the normal routes of travel from Assyria and Babylon enter Israel from the north and not from the east.
\nVerse 16 employs some unusual figures of speech to depict and portray the effort and length to which the Lord goes to bring back all the exiles. A comparison is drawn between fishing and hunting and bringing back the exiles. Those who fish and hunt require patience, strategy, and time to catch their prey. In a similar way, God will expend considerable patience, strategy, and time to catch his \u201cprey\u201d\u2014the exiles.
\nIt is instructive to pause and follow the interpretation of Jesus and the apostles in the fulfillment of this prophecy. There is a clear and unmistakable allusion to Jeremiah 16:16 in Matthew 4 as Jesus is in the process of choosing twelve men whom he would train as his special agents:<\/p>\n
While walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon (who is called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. And he said to them, \u201cFollow me, and I will make you fishers of men.\u201d (Matt. 4:18\u201319 ESV)<\/p>\n
When Jesus says to Peter and Andrew that he will make them \u201cfishers of men,\u201d he is referring directly to Jeremiah 16:16, and he is saying that he will use his followers to bring the exiles home. We saw earlier that the return from exile entails two stages: (1) (physical) release from Babylon and (2) (spiritual) release from sin, condemnation, and death. The final stage of return from exile is inaugurated with the coming of Jesus and his ministry. This reading is substantiated from the many passages in the Gospels indicating that the new exodus has begun in the person and work of Jesus Christ.
\nThe work of bringing the exiles home is, in fact, begun at the first coming of the Lord Jesus and concluded with his second coming. This is made plain by Paul\u2019s clear allusion to Isaiah 27:12\u201313 in 1 Thessalonians 4:13\u201318:<\/p>\n
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a command by the voice of an archangel and the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. Therefore encourage one another with these words.<\/p>\n
The descent of the Lord is heralded by an archangel blowing the trumpet of God. The trumpet of which Paul speaks is not something he was told about by direct revelation, but rather it is something he learned from his own Bible, the Old Testament, in Isaiah 27:<\/p>\n
In that day from the river Euphrates to the Brook of Egypt the LORD will thresh out the grain, and you will be gleaned one by one, O people of Israel. And in that day a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were lost in the land of Assyria and those who were driven out to the land of Egypt will come and worship the LORD on the holy mountain at Jerusalem. (Isa. 27:12\u201313 ESV)<\/p>\n
Isaiah is referring here to the final gathering of the exiles, which is compared to gathering a grain harvest. A great trumpet is sounded, and the exiles in Assyria and Egypt will be brought home. One common function of blowing a trumpet in the Old Testament is to announce the coming of a king. The great trumpet, then, blown to announce the coming of the Lord for his own in 1 Thessalonians 4, is the signal for the final phase of bringing the exiles home.
\nAccording to Jesus and the apostles, then, the gathering of the exiles is what the first coming of Christ inaugurates and his second coming completes.
\nReturning to Jeremiah 16, note that verses 17 and 18 conclude the paragraph by reminding readers of the reason for the banishment that requires a new exodus: the idolatry of the Israelites is not hidden from the Lord, and he will repay them for their violation of the covenant in Exodus 19\u201324, made at Sinai and supplemented by Deuteronomy on Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal. The rendering of the ESV in Jeremiah 16:18 (as well as that of most versions), \u201cBut first I will doubly repay their iniquity and their sin,\u201d does not adequately bring out the meaning of the original text. A literal rendering of the Hebrew would be, \u201cI shall at first repay the double of their iniquity and sin.\u201d This does not mean that the divine punishment is two times the value of the wrongdoing but rather that the penalty matches precisely the wrongdoing. It is the lex talionis, the principle of retribution, that is the foundation of the justice in the covenant: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe (Ex. 21:24\u201325). For every crime, the repayment must be precisely as much as, but not more than, the damage or harm caused.<\/p>\n
JEREMIAH 31:26\u201340<\/p>\n
We come now to Jeremiah 31:29\u201337\u2014not only the main passage in Jeremiah on the new covenant but the only place in the Old Testament where the term \u201cnew covenant\u201d is actually employed. The passage on the new covenant appears in a well-defined section commonly called the \u201cBook of Consolation\u201d that follows the bulk of the messages given by Jeremiah and his controversy with false prophets and that precedes his description of the last days of Jerusalem and the oracles concerning foreign nations. Fortunately, Jeremiah\u2019s message is not all bad news: in the midst of prophesying destruction and judgment comes a marvelous message of future restoration for the people of God. It is important to consider the context before examining Jeremiah 31:29\u201337 in some detail.<\/p>\n
OVERVIEW OF JEREMIAH 30\u201331: THE BOOK OF CONSOLATION<\/p>\n
Outline of Jeremiah 30\u201331
\n1. Introduction: Promise of restoration and return of God\u2019s people
\n30:1\u20133
\n2. A coming time of distress, yet Jacob will be rescued
\n30:4\u20137
\n3. Discipline and rescue for Israel; destruction for the nations
\n30:8\u201311
\n4. The incurable wound: The discipline of Israel
\n30:12\u201317
\n5. The restoration of Israel
\n30:18\u201324
\n6. The Lord (Yahweh) will be God of one united people
\n31:1
\n7. Because of his love, the Lord will rebuild Israel
\n31:2\u20136
\n8. Regathering the north: Images of restoration
\n31:7\u201322
\n9. Restoring the south: Judah regathered
\n31:23\u201326
\n10. Once again God\u2019s people will be fruitful
\n31:27\u201330
\n11. The new covenant
\n31:31\u201334
\n12. The permanence of the new covenant: As permanent as creation
\n31:35\u201337
\n13. The new Jerusalem
\n31:38\u201340<\/p>\n
The outline helps to situate our text in its immediate context and to see the flow of thought in the larger context. Jeremiah 30:1\u20133 forms a kind of general introduction and headline for the section as a whole, and 30:4\u201311 summarizes the thought of the whole: destruction for the nations but restoration for Israel. Then the restoration is described in detail, beginning with the northern kingdom of Israel and concluding with the southern kingdom of Judah. As the flow of thought arrives at the place where we have a regathered and restored people, we are presented with an announcement of a new covenant. This is followed by comments on the permanence of the new covenant and a brief glimpse of the new Jerusalem.<\/p>\n
JEREMIAH 31:26\u201340<\/p>\n
The full text of Jeremiah 31:26\u201340 is cited here without apology; the author of Hebrews does the same thing and hence is responsible for the longest citation of the Old Testament in the New. Once again, this reveals the importance of this text.<\/p>\n
At this I awoke and looked, and my sleep was pleasant to me.
\n\u201cBehold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man and the seed of beast. And it shall come to pass that as I have watched over them to pluck up and break down, to overthrow, destroy, and bring harm, so I will watch over them to build and to plant, declares the LORD. In those days they shall no longer say:<\/p>\n
\u201c \u2018The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
\nand the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge.\u2019<\/p>\n
But everyone shall die for his own iniquity. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.<\/p>\n
[The New Covenant]<\/p>\n
\u201cBehold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, \u2018Know the LORD,\u2019 for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.\u201d<\/p>\n
Thus says the LORD,
\nwho gives the sun for light by day
\nand the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
\nwho stirs up the sea so that its waves roar\u2014
\nthe LORD of hosts is his name:
\n\u201cIf this fixed order departs
\nfrom before me, declares the LORD,
\nthen shall the offspring of Israel cease
\nfrom being a nation before me forever.\u201d<\/p>\n
Thus says the LORD:
\n\u201cIf the heavens above can be measured,
\nand the foundations of the earth below can be explored,
\nthen I will cast off all the offspring of Israel
\nfor all that they have done,
\ndeclares the LORD.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cBehold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when the city shall be rebuilt for the LORD from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate. And the measuring line shall go out farther, straight to the hill Gareb, and shall then turn to Goah. The whole valley of the dead bodies and the ashes, and all the fields as far as the brook Kidron, to the corner of the Horse Gate toward the east, shall be sacred to the LORD. It shall not be plucked up or overthrown anymore forever.\u201d (ESV)<\/p>\n
Many discussions of this passage delimit the text as 31:31\u201334. Note the editorial heading \u201cThe New Covenant\u201d in the ESV that sets off 31:31\u201340. Certainly the phrase \u201cBehold, the days are coming\u201d probably marks the beginning of an oracle or unit; 31:27 and 31:38 begin with the same phrase. Note, however, that 31:26 says that Jeremiah awoke and his sleep was pleasant to him. This indicates that the normal means of communicating to the prophet was in dreams and visions (see Num. 12:6) and that as the content of the Book of Consolation represented good news rather than the usual bad news, Jeremiah found his sleep sweet to him this time. At the same time, the statement that Jeremiah awoke is a clear indication of the end of the divine communication at 31:25, so that what we have attached at the end of the Book of Consolation are several prophetic oracles in definite sections appended to it. As we will see, 31:27\u201330 is integral to 31:31\u201334 and important for the interpretation of the new covenant. It is for this reason that I have delimited the unit as 31:27\u201340, subdivided by the recurring introductory phrase into three sections. The messenger formula at the onset of 31:35 (\u201cThus says the LORD\u201d) also marks a new paragraph. In all, then, the section contains four paragraphs. Discussions of the new covenant do not, in general, consider the flow of thought integral to these four paragraphs, but instead, they unnecessarily isolate 31:31\u201334 and focus attention on that one paragraph.
\nExplanation of this text will be focused on four questions: (1) When did Jeremiah predict the new covenant would be initiated? (2) With whom would God make this covenant? One of the parties is obviously God, but how should we define and delimit the other (human) party? (3) How is this covenant like the old (Israelite) covenant, and how is it unlike it? In other words, precisely what is new about the new covenant? And (4) what is the power or promise of the new covenant? That is, is this renewed covenant any better than the former one made at Sinai and supplemented by Deuteronomy on the plains of Moab?<\/p>\n
Time<\/p>\n
Jeremiah 31:27, 31, and 38 all begin with the phrase \u201cBehold, days are coming.\u201d This phrase also occurs at 30:3, the general introduction to the Book of Consolation:<\/p>\n
The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD: \u201cThus says the LORD, the God of Israel: Write in a book all the words that I have spoken to you. For behold, days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will restore the fortunes of my people, Israel and Judah, says the LORD, and I will bring them back to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall take possession of it.\u201d (Jer. 30:2\u20133 ESV)<\/p>\n
The general introduction to the Book of Consolation announces, \u201cBehold, days are coming\u201d (\u05d4\u05b4\u05e0\u05b5\u05bc\u05d4 \u05d9\u05b8\u05de\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd). The next occurrences of this phrase are the three instances in 31:27\u201340 (in 31:38, \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d0\u05b4\u05d9\u05dd is supplied as a Qere reading in the Masoretic Text). Indeed, this is a familiar phrase in Jeremiah (occurring some fourteen or fifteen times), but it is found only rarely elsewhere in the Old Testament (six occurrences). Note carefully that the word \u201cdays\u201d is unarticulated or anarthrous. The translation \u201cthe days are coming\u201d is not accurate. The text simply says, \u201cdays are coming.\u201d The days are indefinite. We must not take this as a technical term in the eschatology of the Old Testament or in the writings of the prophets. It simply refers to an indefinite future. Whether this indefinite time in the future is near or remote is left entirely unspecified in the prophecy.<\/p>\n
Parties<\/p>\n
According to the text, Yahweh makes the new covenant \u201cwith the house of Israel and the house of Judah\u201d (Jer. 31:31). The human partner is specified in this way because, in Jeremiah, this is the party that has broken the covenant made at Sinai:<\/p>\n
For the house of Israel and the house of Judah
\nhave been utterly treacherous to me, declares the LORD. (Jer. 5:11 ESV)<\/p>\n
The house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken my covenant that I made with their fathers. (Jer. 11:10 ESV)<\/p>\n
The new covenant will bring the return from exile and reunification of a divided kingdom promised earlier:<\/p>\n
In those days the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel, and together they shall come from the land of the north to the land that I gave your fathers for a heritage. (Jer. 3:18 ESV)<\/p>\n
So \u201cthe house of Israel and the house of Judah\u201d are expressly mentioned in 31:31 to show that the previously divided kingdom(s) according to the cotext of chapters 30\u201331 will be united. The regathered and restored North and the regathered and restored South of 30:1\u201331:26 will be reunited as one. Jeremiah 31:1 emphasizes, as do a number of passages, that there will be one united people of God.
\nWe have already seen, however, from earlier passages in Jeremiah that the Gentiles or non-Jewish nations will be established in the midst of Israel in this restored people of God. They too are the exiles who will be brought home by the fishers of men. Let us now follow this through and see how it is interpreted in the New Testament by Jesus and the apostles.
\nFirst, note the clear reference to Jeremiah\u2019s new covenant by Jesus during his last Passover meal\u2014which was at the same time his institution of the Lord\u2019s Supper. The text of Matthew 26:26\u201329 reads as follows:<\/p>\n
Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, \u201cTake, eat; this is my body.\u201d And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, \u201cDrink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father\u2019s kingdom.\u201d (ESV)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Old Testament records an Aramean king of Damascus known as Ben-Hadad (1 Kings 15:18, 20; 2 Chron. 16:2, 4). By his name, he is the son of his god. The prosopography of the Amarna Letters and also of the Ugaritic Texts show a number of people from various levels of society whose names follow … <\/p>\n