> ‎Chapter 2‎ > ‎Chapter 3‎ > ‎Chapter 4‎ > ‎Chapter 5‎ > ‎Chapter 6‎ > ‎Chapter 7‎ > ‎Chapter 8‎ > ‎Chapter 9-10:1-4‎ > ‎Chapter 10:5-34‎ > ‎Chapter 11‎ > ‎Chapter 12‎ > ‎Chapters 13-14‎ > ‎Chapters 15-16‎ > ‎Chapter 17‎ > ‎Chapter 18‎ > ‎Chapter 19‎ > ‎Chapters 20-21‎ > ‎Chapter 22‎ > ‎Chapter 23‎ > ‎Chapter 24‎ > ‎Chapter 25‎ > ‎Chapter 26‎ > ‎Chapter 27‎ > ‎Chapter 28‎ > ‎Chapter 29‎ > ‎Chapter 30‎ > ‎Chapter 31‎ > ‎Chapter 32‎ > ‎Chapter 33‎ > ‎Chapters 34-35‎ > ‎Chapters 36-37‎ > ‎Chapters 38-39‎ > ‎Introduction to the 2nd part of Isaiah‎ > ‎Chapter 40‎ > ‎Chapter 41‎ > ‎Chapter 42‎ > ‎Chapter 43‎ > ‎Chapter 44‎ > ‎Chapter 45‎ > ‎Chapter 46‎ > ‎Chapter 47‎ > ‎Chapter 48‎ > ‎Chapter 49-50:1-3‎ > ‎Chapter 50:4-11‎ > ‎Chapter 51‎ > ‎Chapters 52-53‎ > ‎Chapter 54‎ > ‎Chapter 55‎ > ‎Chapters 56-57‎ > ‎Chapter 58‎ > ‎Chapter 59‎ > ‎Chapter 60‎ > ‎Chapter 61‎ > ‎Chapter 62‎ > ‎Chapters 63-65‎ > ‎Chapter 66‎ >  

 

 

 

Summary of Chapter 1

In the times of Kings Uzziah, Jothan, Ahaz and Hezekiah,
Isaiah saw a vision from God about Jerusalem.

He calls on the people to listen, for God has spoken. God
complains that He has brought up children who have rebelled
against Him. Even dumb animals, the ox and the ass, know their
master:yet Israel does not recognize its master and its father.
It is a sinful people, full of wickedness who have provoked the
Holy One to anger. Why should they act so as to call for further
chastisements? Already their whole head is sick, their heart is
faint. There is no sound part of that body from head to foot.
Everywhere there are bruises, sores, bleeding wounds that have
not been cared for or bandaged. So the country is desolate, the
villages are burned:foreigners devour their land. It is desolate.
Daughter Zion is left like a tent in a vineyard, like a shelter
in a field of cucumbers, like a city under siege. If the God of
armies had not let a remnant survive, Israel would have been
totally wiped out like Sodom, like Gomorrah.

Now the prophet calls on the rulers of Sodom and Gomorrah -
that is, Jerusalem. Yes, they offer so many sacrifices, but God
has more than enough of those animals and their blood, for the
offerings are meaningless, mere externalism, with no interior
dispositions. He says He cannot put up with their New Moons and
Sabbaths. The people spread out their hands in prayer, but God
will not look, for their hands are really full of blood. So they
should stop doing evil and seek what is morally right, and help
the oppressed, defend those who are fatherless and the widows. If
they do that, then he appeals to their good sense:cannot they see
that if they do as He asks He will listen to them? Even if their
past sins have been as red as scarlet, He will cleanse them to be
as clean as fresh wool. If they do this they will eat the best,
and the sword will not come upon them. God has spoken!

But no, in actuality, the city that was once faithful has
become a harlot. Once there was righteousness and justice in
Jerusalem, but now instead He sees murderers. Their silver,
probably meaning their rulers, has turned to dross, and their
wine which once was choice, is now heavily watered. It is because
their rulers rebel against God, going after bribes and gifts.
They do this instead of taking up rightly the case of the
fatherless and the widows. Therefore His hand, which once was
turned against their enemies, will now turn on them to put things
right. But His action will result in cleansing their dross, and
taking away their impurities. Then He will give them judges as in
days of old and wise counselors. After this is all over it will
be called a faithful city, a city of righteousness. Those who are
penitent will be redeemed with righteousness, but rebels and
sinners will be broken. They who have forsaken the Lord are going
to perish.

They will be ashamed then of their sacred oaks which they
once cultivated. Their gardens will dry up. Mighty men will burn
together with their works, and no one will quench the fire.

Comments on Chapter 1

Of what period of history is Isaiah speaking here? As usual,
we cannot be sure. A large possibility is the constant threat of
Assyria. Another is the fact that after the Syro-Ephramitic war
Pekah had destroyed the army of Achaz, and the Edomites and
Philistines invaded Judah. Jerusalem too was threatened.

But the chief message is clear. God calls heaven and earth
to witness to the fact that His people have been wicked. Even
brute animals, such as the ox and ass, know their master:these
people do not know their Father. (The mention of the ox and ass
here may have suggested putting those animals in Christmas
cribs). The people are loaded with guilt, they have forsaken the
Lord, the Holy One of Israel. Isaiah is fond of the expression,
the Holy One. God's holiness means basically that He observes
what is morally right in all His actions. Cf. Psalm 11:7: "God is
morally right [<sadiq>] , and He loves the things that are
morally right [<sedaqoth>]." Quite a contrast to the gods of
Mesopotamia, who seem to have been amoral, acting as if there
were no such thing as morality, or the Greek Zeus, a big time
adulterer, or Roman Jupiter. Cf. Ez 28:2: "Behold I am against
you, O Sidon. . . and they shall know that I am the Lord when I
inflict punishments on her, and I shall show myself holy in her
[<niqdashti>]." Cf. also Is 5:15-16: "God, the Holy One, will
show Himself holy by moral rightness. "(We do find even in
paganism some who speak of the God as morally right and the
guardian of justice. Socrates did this. It was at times said in
Mesopotamia, from where the Jews came. Cf. Wolfram von Soden,
<The Ancient Orient>, tr. D. Schley, Eerdmans, 1994, pp. 131,
142, 248).

The prophet asks if they want to be beaten still more? It seems
they have hardened themselves, and do not understand even when
there is no sound part from head to toe in them. Their country is
desolate, cannot they see? Does he mean the desolation is already
at hand, or is he, with prophetic vision, looking ahead? The
Daughter of Zion means the Daughter that is Zion (the hill on
which were built the palace and temple). Yet God's mercy has left
them a remnant, they are not completely wiped out, so they are
not like Sodom and Gomorrah, which were totally destroyed.

Now Isaiah picks upon the notion of Sodom, and calls the
rulers of Jerusalem the rulers of Sodom. Did he refer to
homosexuality there? We know from all the major prophets what
kind of sins Jerusalem committed:social injustice, not defending
the widow and orphan, instead, going for bribes. But this does
not mean that Isaiah did not know what the real sin of
Sodom was. Cf. Jude 7: "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the
surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged
in unnatural lust serve as an example by undergoing a punishment
of eternal fire." This is confirmed abundantly by the
Intertestamental Jewish literature.

God says He cannot stand their sacrifices and festivals, He
is weary of them. Some time ago, commentators often made the
mistake of saying the major prophets were all against sacrifice.
But no, they objected to empty externalism. We can gather the
right concept of sacrifice from Isaiah 29:13: "This people honors
me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." We see there
are two elements, lips, the externals, and hearts, the interior
dispositions. The outward sign should be a means of expressing
the interior, which is basically obedience to God's will. The
external without the interior is worthless, arouses God's anger
instead of pleasing Him. The Jews of Isaiah's day enjoyed the
externals, answering prayers, singing, joining in processions -
but it was all just empty:they disobeyed the will of God in not
caring for widows and orphans, and instead oppressed them for
financial gain. Even the sacrifice of Jesus would have been
worthless without obedience:cf. Romans 5:19.

Isaiah then urges them to stop doing evil, to do what is
good, to seek what is right, to help the oppressed. To most
persons this does not sound strange, but to some Protestant
commentators this creates a problem, to a thorough Lutheran it is
unacceptable. For in his major work, <The Bondage of the Will>
(tr. J. L. Packer & O. R. Johnston, Revell, Old Tappan., 1957)
Luther explicitly denies free will (p. 273) and adds that a human
being is like a horse (pp. 103-04):either God or satan may ride
him, and accordingly he does good or evil and goes to heaven or
hell. The human has nothing to say about which one rides him (pp.
103-04). Yet all Scripture testifies we do have free will, or
else all the exhortations to turn to God, to repent, to do good,
all over Scripture, are all mockery. St. Paul gives us a
fascinating problem. In one set of texts (2 Cor 3:5, Phil 2:13)
he says we cannot get a good thought of ourselves, or make a good
decision, or carry it out. In the other set (e. g., 2 Cor 6:1) he
says what Isaiah says here, that when grace comes, it is our
decision whether it comes in vain or not. How to fit together
these two sets of texts is a problem that has been a subject of
hot controversy over the centuries. It is, of course, no answer
at all to simply deny free will, as Luther did. We know the texts
can be reconciled, for Scripture does not contradict itself, but
how to reconcile the texts is debated. For a new proposal which
fully accepts all texts, cf. Wm. Most, <New Answers to Old
Questions> (London, 1971),

Verses 18-20 also raise a problem for Protestants. God asks
the people to think it over:even if their sins are scarlet, they
shall be as white as wool. The favorite classic Protestant tactic
here is to say this means only <acquittal>. The sinner is not
really made white as wool - God throws the merits of Christ, like
a cloak, over him, and refuses to look underneath where all is
total corruption. If we recall that in the same line of thinking,
that man has no free will - this may fit. But 2 Peter 1:4 says we
become sharers in the divine nature; 1 Cor 3:16 and 6:19 say we
become temples of the Holy Spirit - who would not like to dwell
in total corruption; and we become capable for the face to face
vision of God in the next life (1 Cor 13:12) -- hardly possible
for someone totally corrupt, for as Malachi 3:23 says, "He is
like a refiner's fire. Who can stand when He appears? "Even now
we become white as wool, and even, as St. Paul puts it, "a new
creation"( Gal 6:15; 2 Cor 5:17). Creation is making something
out of nothing, not putting a white cloak over total corruption.

But the faithful city has become a harlot. Isaiah is not
just using rose-colored glasses here. Jerusalem once was faithful
to God, in the time of David, and the first part of the reign of
Solomon, and under some good kings, such as Jehoshapat. The
imagery behind thee lines is that Jerusalem is the bride of God,
and so must be faithful ( a theme much developed in Hosea). But
she has become unfaithful, has gone into association with the
Assyrians, who require that Assyrian idols be placed in
Jerusalem.

He says their silver has become dross - which is the
impurities removed in the process of purifying silver. A sulphide
ore of lead was a source of silver. The ore was put into a
shallow cup. A blast of hot air in the furnace would oxidize the
lead, and leave the silver. Lye might be added to speed up the
process. In Jeremiah 6:27-30 God tells Jeremiah He will make him
a refiner of silver - but his attempts to refine the people were
in vain, so they were rejected. Hence God Himself (Jer 9:7) said
He would refine and test them Himself - referring to the fall of
Jerusalem and the temple.

The silver may refer to the rulers of Jerusalem. For certain
they are in mind when he speaks of them as thieves, loving
bribes. They do not help the widow and the orphan.

Hence, in 24-26 God says, in some versions, that He will
"get relief", and "avenge" Himself on them. The words "get
relief," Hebrew <nhm>, can indicate He has been burdened by their
empty sacrifices, and now will get relief by acting to set things
right. But His acting will be not what the English word <avenge>
implies, it is more strictly the sense of Hebrew naqam, used in
v. 24, which means action by the highest authority to correct
things, whether it be favorable or unfavorable
to the persons affected (thus in Judges 11:36 there is
vindication for Israel, but punishment for enemies. Cf. also
Isaiah 59. 15b-18 where both <yesha> and <naqam> are used in the
sense of punishment, even though <yesha> usually means saving.

Vengeance is really an exercise of hatred, willing evil to
another so it may be evil to him - the opposite of love, which is
wiling good to another for the other's sake. God does not hate or
act in hatred, <naqam> is rather His righting of the objective
order. Cf. Simeon ben Eleazar (<Tosefta, Kiddushin> 1. 14): "He
[anyone] has committed a transgression:woe to him, he has tipped
the scale to the side of debt for himself and for the whole
world". Cf. also Paul VI, doctrinal introduction to his
Constitution on Indulgences of Jan 1, 1967.

God here threatens punishment, but it is for the sake of
repentance and purification. Hence He adds that He will bring
back judges as they once were and Jerusalem will be called a city
of righteousness, faithful city. But that really was far in the
future, after the end of the Babylonian exile, 539 BC.

He says they will be ashamed of their sacred oaks and
groves, where the Jews, like the Canaanites, used to offer
sacrifices to pagan gods. They thought they were getting
fertility - but it will turn out to be the opposite, all will
become tinder for fire.