In the Hebrew text vv. 16-17 and one long sentence, “Because the daughters of Zion are proud and walk…, the sovereign master will afflict….” In v. 17 the Lord refers to himself in the third person.


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here and in v. 18 is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Heb “the daughters of Zion.”


Or “a scab” (KJV, ASV); NIV, NCV, CEV “sores.”


The precise meaning of this line is unclear because of the presence of the rare word פֹּת ( pot ). Since the verb in the line means “lay bare, make naked,” some take פֹּת as a reference to the genitals (cf. KJV, ASV, NRSV, CEV). (In 1 Kgs 7:50 a noun פֹּת appears, with the apparent meaning “socket.”) J. N. Oswalt ( Isaiah [NICOT], 1:139, n. 2), basing his argument on alleged Akkadian evidence and the parallelism of the verse, takes פֹּת as “forehead.”


Or “in that day” (KJV).


Or “the beauty of [their] ankle jewelry.”


Heb “houses of breath.” HALOT 124 s.v. בַּיִת defines them as “scent-bottles”; cf. NAB, NRSV “perfume boxes.”


The precise meaning of many of the words in this list is uncertain. sn The rhetorical purpose for such a lengthy list is to impress on the audience the guilt of these women with their proud, materialistic attitude, whose husbands and fathers have profited at the expense of the poor.


Heb “and it will be in place of spices there will be a stench.” The nouns for “spices” and “stench” are right next to each other in the MT for emphatic contrast. The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


The pronoun is feminine singular, suggesting personified Zion, as representative of its women, is the addressee. The reference to “her gates’ in v. 26 makes this identification almost certain.


Heb “your strength in battle.” The verb in the first clause provides the verbal idea for the second clause.


Heb “she will be empty, on the ground she will sit.” Jerusalem is personified as a destitute woman who sits mourning the empty city.


Or “in that day” (ASV). sn The seven to one ratio emphasizes the great disparity that will exist in the population due to the death of so many men in battle.


Heb “eat” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV); CEV “buy.”


Heb “wear” (so NASB, NRSV); NCV “make.”


Heb “only let your name be called over us.” The Hebrew idiom “call the name over” indicates ownership. See 2 Sam 12:28 , and BDB 896 s.v. I ָקרָא Niph. 2.d.(4). The language reflects the cultural reality of ancient Israel, where women were legally the property of their husbands.


Heb “and the vegetation of the Lord will become beauty and honor.” Many English versions understand the phrase צֶמַח יְהוָה ( tsemakh yÿhvah ) as a messianic reference and render it, “the Branch of the Lord” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT, and others). Though צֶמַח ( tsemakh ) is used by later prophets of a royal descendant ( Jer 23;5; 33:15 ; Zech 3:8; 6:12 ), those passages contain clear contextual indicators that a human ruler is in view and that the word is being used in a metaphorical way of offspring. However, in Isa 4:2 there are no such contextual indicators. To the contrary, in the parallel structure of the verse צֶמַח יְהוָה corresponds to “produce of the land,” a phrase that refers elsewhere exclusively to literal agricultural produce (see Num 13:20, 26 ; Deut 1:25 ). In the majority of its uses צֶמַח refers to literal crops or vegetation (in Ps 65:10 the Lord is the source of this vegetation). A reference to the Lord restoring crops would make excellent sense in and the prophets frequently included this theme in their visions of the future age (see Isa 30:23-24; 32:20 ; Jer 31:12 ; Ezek 34:26-29 ; and Amos 9:13-14 ).


Heb “and the fruit of the land will become pride and beauty for the remnant of Israel.”


The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Or “set apart,” cf. CEV “special.”


Heb “all who are written down for life in Jerusalem.” A city register is envisioned; everyone whose name appears on the roll will be spared. This group comprises the remnant of the city referred to earlier in the verse.


Heb “when” (so KJV, NAB, NASB); CEV “after”; NRSV “once.”


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonai ).


The word refers elsewhere to vomit ( Isa 28:8 ) and fecal material ( Isa 36:12 ). Many English versions render this somewhat euphemistically as “filth” (e.g., NAB, NIV, NRSV). Ironically in God’s sight the beautiful jewelry described earlier is nothing but vomit and feces, for it symbolizes the moral decay of the city’s residents (cf. NLT “moral filth”).


Heb “over all the place, Mount Zion.” Cf. NLT “Jerusalem”; CEV “the whole city.”


Heb “a cloud by day, and smoke, and brightness of fire, a flame by night.” Though the accents in the Hebrew text suggest otherwise, it might be preferable to take “smoke” with what follows, since one would expect smoke to accompany fire. sn The imagery of the cloud by day and fire by night recalls the days of Moses, when a cloud and fire were tangible reminders that the Lord was guiding and protecting his people ( Exod 13:21-22; 14:19, 24 ). In the future age envisioned in , the Lord’s protective presence will be a reality.


Heb “indeed (or “for”) over all the glory, a canopy.” This may allude to Exod 40:34-35 , where a cloud overshadows the meeting tent as it is filled with God’s glory.


Heb “a shelter it will be for shade by day from heat, and for a place of refuge and for a hiding place from cloudburst and rain.” Since both of the last nouns of this verse can mean rain, they can either refer to the rain storm and the rain as distinct items or together refer to a heavy downpour. Regardless, they do not represent unrelated phenomena.


It is uncertain who is speaking here. Possibly the prophet, taking the role of best man, composes a love song for his friend on the occasion of his wedding. If so, יָדִיד ( yadid ) should be translated “my friend.” The present translation assumes that Israel is singing to the Lord. The word דוֹד ( dod , “lover”) used in the second line is frequently used by the woman in the Song of Solomon to describe her lover.


Heb “on a horn, a son of oil.” Apparently קֶרֶן ( qeren , “horn”) here refers to the horn-shaped peak of a hill (BDB 902 s.v.) or to a mountain spur, i.e., a ridge that extends laterally from a mountain ( HALOT 1145 s.v. קֶרֶן ; H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:180). The expression “son of oil” pictures this hill as one capable of producing olive trees. Isaiah’s choice of קֶרֶן , a rare word for hill, may have been driven by paronomastic concerns, i.e., because קֶרֶן sounds like כֶּרֶם ( kerem , “vineyard”).


Or, “dug it up” (so NIV); KJV “fenced it.’ See HALOT 810 s.v. עזק .


Heb “wild grapes,” i.e., sour ones (also in v. 4 ). sn At this point the love song turns sour as the Lord himself breaks in and completes the story (see vv. 3-6 ). In the final line of v. 2 the love song presented to the Lord becomes a judgment speech by the Lord.


Heb “men,” but in a generic sense.


Heb “and it will become [a place for] grazing.” בָּעַר ( ba ’ ar , “grazing”) is a homonym of the more often used verb “to burn.”


Heb “and it will become a trampled place” (NASB “trampled ground”).


Heb “it will not be pruned or hoed” (so NASB); ASV and NRSV both similar.


Or “For” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “the house of Israel” (so NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “but, look, disobedience.” The precise meaning of מִשְׂפָּח ( mishpakh ), which occurs only here in the OT, is uncertain. Some have suggested a meaning “bloodshed.” The term is obviously chosen for its wordplay value; it sounds very much like מִשְׁפָּט ( mishpat , “justice”). The sound play draws attention to the point being made; the people have not met the Lord’s expectations.


Heb “but, look, a cry for help.” The verb (“he waited”) does double duty in the parallelism. צְעָקָה ( tsa ’ qah ) refers to the cries for help made by the oppressed. It sounds very much like צְדָקָה ( tsÿdaqah , “fairness”). The sound play draws attention to the point being made; the people have not met the Lord’s expectations.


Heb “Woe [to] those who make a house touch a house.” The exclamation הוֹי ( hoy , “woe, ah”) was used in funeral laments (see 1 Kgs 13:30 ; Jer 22:18; 34:5 ) and carries the connotation of death.


Heb “[who] bring a field near a field.” sn This verse does not condemn real estate endeavors per se, but refers to the way in which the rich bureaucrats of Judah accumulated property by exploiting the poor, in violation of the covenantal principle that the land belonged to God and that every family was to have its own portion of land. See the note at 1:23 .


Heb “until the end of the place”; NASB “until there is no more room.”


Heb “and you are made to dwell alone in the midst of the land.”


Heb “in my ears, the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts].”


Heb “great and good [houses], without a resident.”


Heb “a ten-yoke vineyard.” The Hebrew term צֶמֶד ( tsemed , “yoke”) is here a unit of square measure. Apparently a ten-yoke vineyard covered the same amount of land it would take ten teams of oxen to plow in a certain period of time. The exact size is unknown.


Heb “one bath.” A bath was a liquid measure. Estimates of its modern equivalent range from approximately six to twelve gallons.


Heb “a homer.” A homer was a dry measure, the exact size of which is debated. Cf. NCV “ten bushels”; CEV “five bushels.”


Heb “an ephah.” An ephah was a dry measure; there were ten ephahs in a homer. So this verse envisions major crop failure, where only one-tenth of the anticipated harvest is realized.


Heb “Woe [to] those who arise early in the morning, [who] chase beer.”


Heb “[who] delay until dark, [until] wine enflames them.” sn This verse does not condemn drinking per se, but refers to the carousing lifestyle of the rich bureaucrats, made possible by wealth taken from the poor. Their carousing is not the fundamental problem, but a disgusting symptom of the real disease – their social injustice.


Two types of stringed instruments are specifically mentioned in the Hebrew text, the כִּנּוֹר ( kinnor , “zither”) and נֶבֶל ( nevel , “harp”).


Heb “the work of the Lord they do not look at, and the work of his hands they do not see.” God’s “work” can sometimes be his creative deeds, but in this context it is the judgment that he is planning to bring upon his people (cf. vv. 19, 26; 10:12; 28:21 ).


The suffixed (perfect) form of the verb is used; in this way the coming event is described for rhetorical effect as occurring or as already completed.


The third masculine singular suffix refers back to “my people.”


Heb “Their glory will be men of hunger.” כָּבוֹד ( kavod , “glory”) is in opposition to הָמוֹן ( hamon , “masses”) and refers here to the rich and prominent members of the nation. Some prefer to repoint מְתֵי ( mÿtey , “men of”) as מִתֵי ( mitey , “dead ones of”).


Heb “and their masses will be parched [by] thirst.”


Heb “Sheol” (so ASV, NASB, NRSV); the underworld, the land of the dead, according to the OT world view. Cf. NAB “the nether world”; TEV, CEV “the world of the dead”; NLT “the grave.”


Heb “so Sheol will make wide its throat, and open its mouth without limit.” sn Death is portrayed in both the OT ( Prov 1:12 ; Hab 2:5 ) and Canaanite myth as voraciously swallowing up its prey. In the myths Death is portrayed as having “a lip to the earth, a lip to the heavens … and a tongue to the stars.” (G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends , 69, text 5 ii 2-3.) Death describes his own appetite as follows: “But my appetite is the appetite of lions in the waste…If it is in very truth my desire to consume ‘clay’ [a reference to his human victims], then in truth by the handfuls I must eat it, whether my seven portions [indicating fullness and completeness] are already in the bowl or whether Nahar [the god of the river responsible for ferrying victims from the land of the living to the land of the dead] has to mix the cup.” (Driver, 68-69, text 5 i 14-22).


Heb “and her splendor and her masses will go down, and her tumult and the one who exults in her.” The antecedent of the four feminine singular pronominal suffixes used in v. 14 b is unclear. The likely referent is personified Zion/Jerusalem (see 3:25-26; 4:4-5 ).


Heb “men are brought down, men are brought low, the eyes of pride are brought low.”


Or “elevated”; TEV “the Lord Almighty shows his greatness.”


Heb “by judgment/justice.” When God justly punishes the evildoers denounced in the preceding verses, he will be recognized as a mighty warrior.


Heb “The holy God will be set apart by fairness.” In this context God’s holiness is his sovereign royal authority, which implies a commitment to justice (see the note on the phrase “the sovereign king of Israel” in 1:4 ). When God judges evildoers as they deserve, his sovereignty will be acknowledged. sn The appearance of מִשְׁפָט ( mishpat , “justice”) and צְדָקָה ( tsÿdaqah , “fairness”) here is rhetorically significant, when one recalls v. 7 . There God denounces his people for failing to produce a society where “justice” and “fairness” are valued and maintained. God will judge his people for their failure, taking “justice” and “fairness” into his own hands.


Or “young rams”; NIV, NCV “sheep”; NLT “flocks.”


The Hebrew text reads literally, “and ruins, fatlings, resident aliens, will eat.” This part of the verse has occasioned various suggestions of emendation. The parallelism is tighter if the second line refers to animals grazing. The translation, “amid the ruins the fatlings and young sheep graze,” assumes an emendation of “resident aliens” ( גָּרִים , garim ) to “young goats/sheep” ( גְּדַיִם , gÿdayim ) – confusion of dalet and resh is quite common – and understands “fatlings” and “young sheep” taken as a compound subject or as in apposition as the subject of the verb. However, no emendations are necessary if the above translation is correct. The meaning of מֵחִים ( mekhim ) has a significant impact on one’s textual decision and translation. The noun can refer to a sacrificial (“fat”) animal as it does in its only other occurrence ( Ps 66:15 ). However, it could signify the rich of the earth (“the fat ones of the earth”; Ps 22:29 []) using a different word for “fatness” ( דָּשֶׁן , dashen ). If so, it serves a figurative reference to the rich. Consequently, the above translation coheres with the first half of the verse. Just as the sheep are out of place grazing in these places (“as in their pasture”), the sojourners would not have expected to have the chance to eat in these locations. Both animals and itinerant foreigners would eat in places not normal for them. sn The image completes the picture begun in v. 14 and adds to the irony. When judgment comes, Sheol will eat up the sinners who frequent the feasts; then the banqueting halls will lie in ruins and only sheep will eat there.


The Hebrew text reads literally, “Woe to those who pull evil with the ropes of emptiness, and, as [with] ropes of a cart, sin.” Though several textual details are unclear, the basic idea is apparent. The sinners are so attached to their sinful ways (compared here to a heavy load) that they strain to drag them along behind them. If שָׁוְא ( shavÿ ’, “emptiness”) is retained, it makes a further comment on their lifestyle, denouncing it as one that is devoid of what is right and destined to lead to nothing but destruction. Because “emptiness” does not form a very tight parallel with “cart” in the next line, some emend שָׁוְא to שֶׂה ( she , “sheep”) and עֲגָלָה (’ agalah , “cart”) to עֵגֶל (’ egel , “calf”): “Those who pull evil along with a sheep halter are as good as dead who pull sin with a calf rope ” (following the lead of the LXX and improving the internal parallelism of the verse). In this case, the verse pictures the sinners pulling sin along behind them as one pulls an animal with a halter. For a discussion of this view, see J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:163, n. 1. Nevertheless, this emendation is unnecessary. The above translation emphasizes the folly of the Israelites who hold on to their sin (and its punishment) even while they hope for divine intervention.


Heb “let his work hurry, let it hasten.” The pronoun “his” refers to God, as the parallel line makes clear. The reference to his “work” alludes back to v. 12 , which refers to his ‘work” of judgment. With these words the people challenged the prophet’s warning of approaching judgment. They were in essence saying that they saw no evidence that God was about to work in such a way.


Heb “draw near” (so NASB); NRSV “hasten to fulfillment.”


Heb “Woe [to] those who call.” See the note at v. 8 .


Heb “Woe [to] the wise in their own eyes.” See the note at v. 8 .


Heb “[who] before their faces are understanding.” sn Verses 18-21 contain three “woe-sayings” that are purely accusatory and have no formal announcement of judgment attached (as in the “woe-sayings” recorded in vv. 8-17 ). While this lack of symmetry is odd, it has a clear rhetorical purpose. Having established a pattern in vv. 8-17 , the prophet deviates from it in vv. 18-21 to grab his audience’s attention. By placing the “woes” in rapid succession and heaping up the accusatory elements, he highlights the people’s guilt and introduces an element of tension and anticipation. One is reasonably certain that judgment will come, and when it does, it will be devastating. This anticipated devastation is described in frightening detail after the sixth and final woe (see vv. 22-30 ).


The language used here is quite sarcastic and paves the way for the shocking description of the enemy army in vv. 25-30 . The rich leaders of Judah are nothing but “party animals” who are totally incapable of withstanding real warriors.


Heb “and the just cause of the innocent ones they turn aside from him.” sn In vv. 22-23 the prophet returns to themes with which he opened his speech. The accusatory elements of vv. 8, 11-12, 18-23 are arranged in a chiastic manner: (A) social injustice (8), (B) carousing (11-12a), (C) spiritual insensitivity (12b) // (C') spiritual insensitivity (18-21), (B') carousing (22), (A') social injustice (23).


Heb “a tongue of fire” (so NASB), referring to a tongue-shaped flame.


Heb “the word.”


Heb “the anger of the Lord rages.”


Or “extends”; KJV, ASV “he hath stretched forth.”


Or “garbage” (NCV, CEV, NLT); NAB, NASB, NIV “refuse.”


Heb “in all this his anger is not turned, and still his hand is outstretched.”


The Hebrew text has literally, “for nations from a distance.” The following verses use singular forms to describe this nation, so the final mem ( ם ) on לְגּוֹיִם ( lÿgoyim ) may be enclitic or dittographic. In the latter case one could read לְגוֹי מֵרָחוֹק ( lÿgoy merakhoq , “for a nation from a distance”; see Deut 28:49 ; Joel 3:8 ). Another possibility is to emend the text from לַגּוֹיִם מֵרָחוֹק ( laggoyim merakhoq ) to לְגוֹי מִמֶּרְחָק ( lÿgoy mimmerkhaq , “for a nation from a distant place”) a phrase which occurs in Jer 5:15 . In this case an error of misdivision has occurred in MT, the mem of the prefixed preposition being accidentally taken as a plural ending on the preceding word.


Heb “he.” Singular forms are used throughout vv. 26-30 to describe this nation, but for stylistic reasons the translation uses the plural for these collective singulars.


Heb “and the belt on his waist is not opened, and the thong of his sandals is not torn in two.”


Heb “bent” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); NIV “are strung.”


Heb “regarded like flint.”


Or “in that day” (KJV).


Heb “over it”; the referent (the prey) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


Heb “like the growling of the sea.”


Heb “and one will gaze toward the land, and look, darkness of distress, and light will grow dark by its [the land’s?] clouds.” sn The motif of light turning to darkness is ironic when compared to v. 20 . There the sinners turn light (= moral/ethical good) to darkness (= moral/ethical evil). Now ironically the Lord will turn light (= the sinners’ sphere of existence and life) into darkness (= the judgment and death).


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here and in vv. 8, 11 is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Hebrew שָׂרָף ( saraf , “seraph”) literally means “burning one,” perhaps suggesting that these creatures had a fiery appearance (cf. TEV, CEV “flaming creatures”; NCV “heavenly creatures of fire”). Elsewhere in the OT the word “seraph” refers to poisonous snakes ( Num 21:6 ; Deut 8:15 ; Isa 14:29; 30:6 ). Perhaps they were called “burning ones” because of their appearance or the effect of their venomous bites, which would cause a victim to burn up with fever. It is possible that the seraphs seen by Isaiah were at least partially serpentine in appearance. Though it might seem strange for a snake-like creature to have wings, two of the texts where “seraphs” are snakes describe them as “flying” ( Isa 14:29; 30:6 ), perhaps referring to their darting movements. See the note at 14:29 .


Some have seen a reference to the Trinity in the seraphs’ threefold declaration, “holy, holy, holy.” This proposal has no linguistic or contextual basis and should be dismissed as allegorical. Hebrew sometimes uses repetition for emphasis. (See IBHS 233-34 §12.5a; and GKC 431-32 §133. k .) By repeating the word “holy,” the seraphs emphasize the degree of the Lord’s holiness. For another example of threefold repetition for emphasis, see Ezek 21:27 (Heb. v. 32). (Perhaps Jer 22:29 provides another example.) sn Or “The Lord who commands armies has absolute sovereign authority!” The basic sense of the word “holy” is “set apart from that which is commonplace, special, unique.” In this context the Lord’s holiness is first and foremost his transcendent sovereignty as the ruler of the world. He is “set apart” from the world over which he rules. Note the emphasis on the elevated position of his throne in v. 1 and his designation as “the king” in v. 5 . At the same time his holiness encompasses his moral authority, which derives from his royal position. As king he has the right to dictate to his subjects how they are to live; indeed his very own character sets the standard for proper behavior. He is “set apart” from his subjects in a moral sense as well. He sets the standard; they fall short of it. Note that in v. 5 Isaiah laments that he is morally unworthy to be in the king’s presence.


Perhaps in this context, the title has a less militaristic connotation and pictures the Lord as the ruler of the heavenly assembly. See the note at 1:9 .


On the phrase אַמּוֹת הַסִּפִּים (’ ammot hassippim , “pivots of the frames”) see HALOT 763 s.v. סַף .


Isaiah uses the suffixed (perfect) form of the verb for rhetorical purposes. In this way his destruction is described as occurring or as already completed. Rather than understanding the verb as derived from דָּמַה ( damah , “be destroyed”), some take it from a proposed homonymic root דמה , which would mean “be silent.” In this case, one might translate, “I must be silent.”


Heb “a man unclean of lips am I.” Isaiah is not qualified to praise the king. His lips (the instruments of praise) are “unclean” because he has been contaminated by sin.


Heb “and among a nation unclean of lips I live.”


Or “ritually cleansed,” or “atoned for” (NIV).


Heb “for us.” The plural pronoun refers to the Lord, the seraphs, and the rest of the heavenly assembly.


Heb “and great is the abandonment in the midst of the land.”


Or “be burned” (NRSV); NIV “laid waste.”


Heb “like a massive tree or like a big tree” (perhaps, “like a terebinth or like an oak”).


has במה ). אֳשֶׁר (’ asher , “which”) becomes a problem in this case, but one might emend the form to וּכְּאֲשֵׁרָה ( ukÿ ’ asherah , “or like an Asherah pole”) and translate, “like one of the large sacred trees or an Asherah pole.” Though the text is difficult, the references to sacred trees and a sacred pillar suggest that the destruction of a high place is in view, an apt metaphor for the judgment of idolatrous Judah.


Heb “a holy offspring [is] its sacred pillar.” If מַצֶּבֶת ( matsevet ) is taken as “stump,” one can see in this statement a brief glimpse of hope. The tree (the nation) is chopped down, but the stump (a righteous remnant) remains from which God can restore the nation. However, if מַצֶּבֶת is taken as “sacred pillar” ( מַצֶּבָה , matsevah; see the previous note), it is much more difficult to take the final statement in a positive sense. In this case “holy offspring” alludes to God’s ideal for his covenant people, the offspring of the patriarchs. Ironically that “holy” nation is more like a “sacred pillar” and it will be thrown down like a sacred pillar from a high place and its land destroyed like the sacred trees located at such shrines. Understood in this way, the ironic statement is entirely negative in tone, just like the rest of the preceding announcement of judgment. It also reminds the people of their failure; they did not oppose pagan religion, instead they embraced it. Now they will be destroyed in the same way they should have destroyed paganism.


The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Or perhaps, “but they were unable to attack it.” This statement sounds like a summary of the whole campaign. The following context explains why they were unable to defeat the southern kingdom. The parallel passage ( 2 Kgs 16:5 ; cf. Num 22:11 ; 1 Sam 17:9 for a similar construction) affirms that Syria and Israel besieged Ahaz. Consequently, the statement that “they were not able to battle against them” must refer to the inability to conquer Ahaz.


Heb “house.” In this context the “house of David” includes King Ahaz, his family, and the royal court. See also Jer 21:12 ; Zech 12:7-8, 10, 12 , for a similar use of the phrase.


Heb “rests upon.” Most understand the verb as נוּחַ ( nuakh , “rest”), but HALOT 685 s.v. II נחה proposes that this is a hapax legomenon which means “stand by.”


Heb “and his heart shook and the heart of his people shook, like the shaking of the trees of the forest before the wind.” The singular pronoun “his” is collective, referring to the Davidic house/family. לֵבָב ( levav , “heart”) here refers to the seat of the emotions.


The name means “a remnant will return.” Perhaps in this context, where the Lord is trying to encourage Ahaz, the name suggests that only a few of the enemy invaders will return home; the rest will be defeated.


Heb “the field of the washer”; traditionally “the fuller’s field” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV); NIV “the Washerman’s Field.”


Heb “guard yourself and be quiet,” but the two verbs should be coordinated.


Heb “and let not your heart be weak”; ASV “neither let thy heart be faint.”


This sentence opens with the conjunction יַעַן כִּי ( ya ’ an ki , “because”). Consequently some take vv. 5-6 with what precedes, as another reason why Ahaz might be tempted to fear (see v. 4 ). However, it is more likely that vv. 5-6 give the basis for the Lord’s announcement in vv. 7-9 . The conjunction יַעַן כִּי here introduces the basis for judgment (as in 3:16; 8:6; 29:13 ), which is then followed by the formal announcement of judgment.


Heb “and let us break it open for ourselves”; NASB “make for ourselves a breach in its walls”; NLT “fight our way into.”


Heb “and we will make the son of Tabeel king in its midst.” sn The precise identity of this would-be puppet king is unknown. He may have been a Syrian official or the ruler of one of the small neighboring states. See Y. Aharoni, Land of the Bible , 370.


Heb “Ephraim will be too shattered to be a nation”; NIV “to be a people.” sn This statement is problematic for several reasons. It seems to intrude stylistically, interrupting the symmetry of the immediately preceding and following lines. Furthermore, such a long range prophecy lacks punch in the midst of the immediate crisis. After all, even if Israel were destroyed sometime within the next 65 years, a lot could still happen during that time, including the conquest of Judah and the demise of the Davidic family. Finally the significance of the time frame is uncertain. Israel became an Assyrian province within the next 15 years and ceased to exist as a nation. For these reasons many regard the statement as a later insertion, but why a later editor would include the reference to “65 years” remains a mystery. Some try to relate the prophecy to the events alluded to in Ezra 4:2, 10 , which refers to how the Assyrian kings Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal settled foreigners in former Israelite territory, perhaps around 670 b.c. However, even if the statement is referring to these events, it lacks rhetorical punch in its immediate context and has the earmarks of a later commentary that has been merged with the text in the process of transmission.


Heb “if you do not believe, you will not endure.” The verb forms are second plural; the Lord here addresses the entire Davidic family and court. (Verse 4 was addressed to the king.) There is a wordplay in the Hebrew text, designed to draw attention to the alternatives set before the king (cf. 1:20 ). “Believe” ( תַאֳמִינוּ , ta ’ aminu ) is a Hiphil form of the verb אָמָן (’ aman ); “endure” ( תֵאָמֵנוּ , te ’ amenu ) is a Niphal form of this same verb.


Heb “Make it as deep as Sheol or make it high upwards.” These words suggest that Ahaz can feel free to go beyond the bounds of ordinary human experience.


Ahaz uses the verb נָסַה ( nasah , “test”) in its negative sense of “challenge, provoke.” However, this is false piety, a smokescreen designed to cover up his lack of faith in the Lord.


Heb “and he said.” The subject is unexpressed, but the reference to “my God” at the end of the verse indicates the prophet is speaking.


The verb is second plural in form, because the prophet addresses the whole family of David. He continues to use the plural in v. 14 (with one exception, see the notes on that verse), but then switches back to the second singular (addressing Ahaz specifically) in vv. 16-17 .


Heb “house.” See the note at v. 2 .


The Hebrew term אוֹת (’ ot , “sign”) can refer to a miraculous event (see v. 11 ), but it does not carry this sense inherently. Elsewhere in Isaiah the word usually refers to a natural occurrence or an object/person vested with special significance (see 8:18; 19:20; 20:3; 37:30; 55:13; 66:19 ). Only in 38:7-8, 22 does it refer to a miraculous deed that involves suspending or overriding natural laws. The sign outlined in vv. 14-17 involves God’s providential control over events and their timing, but not necessarily miraculous intervention.


Heb “the young woman.” The Hebrew article has been rendered as a demonstrative pronoun (“this”) in the translation to bring out its force. It is very likely that Isaiah pointed to a woman who was present at the scene of the prophet’s interview with Ahaz. Isaiah’s address to the “house of David” and his use of second plural forms suggests other people were present, and his use of the second feminine singular verb form (“you will name”) later in the verse is best explained if addressed to a woman who is present.


Traditionally, “virgin.” Because this verse from Isaiah is quoted in Matt 1:23 in connection with Jesus’ birth, the Isaiah passage has been regarded since the earliest Christian times as a prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth. Much debate has taken place over the best way to translate this Hebrew term, although ultimately one’s view of the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ is unaffected. Though the Hebrew word used here ( עַלְמָה , ’ almah ) can sometimes refer to a woman who is a virgin ( Gen 24:43 ), it does not carry this meaning inherently. The word is simply the feminine form of the corresponding masculine noun עֶלֶם (’ elem , “young man”; cf. 1 Sam 17:56; 20:22 ). The Aramaic and Ugaritic cognate terms are both used of women who are not virgins. The word seems to pertain to age, not sexual experience, and would normally be translated “young woman.” The LXX translator(s) who later translated the Book of Isaiah into Greek sometime between the second and first century b.c. , however, rendered the Hebrew term by the more specific Greek word παρθένος ( parqenos ), which does mean “virgin” in a technical sense. This is the Greek term that also appears in the citation of Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23 . Therefore, regardless of the meaning of the term in the OT context, in the NT Matthew’s usage of the Greek term παρθένος clearly indicates that from his perspective a virgin birth has taken place.


Elsewhere the adjective הָרָה ( harah ), when used predicatively, refers to a past pregnancy (from the narrator’s perspective, 1 Sam 4:19 ), to a present condition ( Gen 16:11; 38:24 ; 2 Sam 11:5 ), and to a conception that is about to occur in the near future ( Judg 13:5, 7 ). (There is some uncertainty about the interpretation of Judg 13:5, 7 , however. See the notes to those verses.) In Isa 7:14 one could translate, “the young woman is pregnant.” In this case the woman is probably a member of the royal family. Another option, the one followed in the present translation, takes the adjective in an imminent future sense, “the young woman is about to conceive.” In this case the woman could be a member of the royal family, or, more likely, the prophetess with whom Isaiah has sexual relations shortly after this (see 8:3 ).


Heb “and you will call his name.” The words “young lady” are supplied in the translation to clarify the identity of the addressee. The verb is normally taken as an archaic third feminine singular form here, and translated, “she will call.” However the form ( קָרָאת , qara ’ t ) is more naturally understood as second feminine singular, in which case the words would be addressed to the young woman mentioned just before this. In the three other occurrences of the third feminine singular perfect of I קָרָא ( qara ’, “to call”), the form used is קָרְאָה ( qar ’ ah ; see Gen 29:35; 30:6 ; 1 Chr 4:9 ). A third feminine singular perfect קָרָאת does appear in Deut 31:29 and Jer 44:23 , but the verb here is the homonym II קָרָא (“to meet, encounter”). The form קָרָאת (from I קָרָא , “to call”) appears in three other passages ( Gen 16:11 ; Isa 60:18 ; Jer 3:4 [ Qere ]) and in each case is second feminine singular.


Or, perhaps “cream,” frequently, “curds” (NAB, NASB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); KJV, ASV “butter”; CEV “yogurt.”


Heb “for his knowing.” Traditionally the preposition has been translated in a temporal sense, “when he knows.” However, though the preposition לְ ( lamed ) can sometimes have a temporal force, it never carries such a nuance in any of the 40 other passages where it is used with the infinitive construct of יָדַע ( yada ’, “to know”). Most often the construction indicates purpose/result. This sense is preferable here. The following context indicates that sour milk and honey will epitomize the devastation that God’s judgment will bring upon the land. Cultivated crops will be gone and the people will be forced to live off the milk produced by their goats and the honey they find in the thickets. As the child is forced to eat a steady diet of this sour milk and honey, he will be reminded of the consequences of sin and motivated to make correct moral decisions in order to avoid further outbreaks of divine discipline.


Heb “for, because.” The particle introduces the entire following context (vv. 16-25 ), which explains why Immanuel will be an appropriate name for the child, why he will eat sour milk and honey, and why experiencing such a diet will contribute to his moral development.


Heb “the land will be abandoned, which you fear because of its two kings.” After the verb קוּץ ( quts , “loathe, dread”) the phrase מִפְּנֵי ( mipney , “from before”) introduces the cause of loathing/dread (see Gen 27:46 ; Exod 1:12 ; Num 22:3 ).


Heb “days” (so KJV, NAB); NASB, NRSV “such days.”


Heb “in that day” (so KJV). The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “and shall rest” (so KJV, ASV); NASB, NIV, NRSV “and settle.”


The meaning of this word ( נַהֲלֹל , nahalol ) is uncertain; some understand this as referring to another type of thorn bush. For bibliography, see HALOT 676 s.v. I * נַהֲלֹל .


Heb “in that day” (so ASV, NASB); KJV “In the same day.”


Heb “the river” (so KJV); NASB “the Euphrates.” The name of the river has been supplied in the present translation for clarity.


Heb “the hair of the feet.” The translation assumes that the word “feet” is used here as a euphemism for the genitals. See BDB 920 s.v. רֶגֶל .


Heb “in that day.” The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated, see note on 2:2 .


Heb “will become” (so NASB); NAB “shall be turned to.”


Heb “with arrows and a bow.” The more common English idiom is “bow[s] and arrow[s].”


Heb “go” (so NAB, NIV, NRSV); TEV “go hunting.”


Heb “will be” (so NASB, NRSV).


Heb “and all the hills which were hoed with a hoe, you will not go there [for] fear of the thorns and briers.”


Heb “and it will become a pasture for cattle and a trampling place for sheep.” sn At this point one is able to summarize the content of the “sign” (vv. 14-15 ) as follows: A young woman known to be present when Isaiah delivered this message to Ahaz (perhaps a member of the royal family or the prophetess mentioned in 8:3 ) would soon give birth to a boy whom the mother would name Immanuel, “God is with us.” Eventually Immanuel would be forced to eat sour milk and honey, which would enable him to make correct moral decisions. How would this situation come about and how would it constitute a sign? Before this situation developed, the Israelites and Syrians would be defeated. But then the Lord would usher in a period of time unlike any since the division of the kingdom almost 200 years before. The Assyrians would overrun the land, destroy the crops, and force the people to subsist on goats’ milk and honey. At that time, as the people saw Immanuel eating his sour milk and honey, the Davidic family would be forced to acknowledge that God was indeed with them. He was present with them in the Syrian-Israelite crisis, fully capable of rescuing them; but he was also present with them in judgment, disciplining them for their lack of trust. The moral of the story is quite clear: Failure to appropriate God’s promises by faith can turn potential blessing into disciplinary judgment.


Heb “write” (so KJV, ASV, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “with the stylus of a man.” The significance of the qualifying genitive “a man” is uncertain. For various interpretations see J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:219, n. 1.


Heb “quickly, [the] plunder; it hurries, [the] loot.” The first word ( מַהֵר , maher ) is either a Piel imperative (“hurry [to]”) or infinitive (“hurrying,” or “quickly”). The third word ( חָשׁ , khash ) is either a third masculine singular perfect or a masculine singular participle, in either case from the root חוּשׁ ( khush , “hurry”). Perhaps it is best to translate, “One hastens to the plunder, one hurries to the loot.” In this case מַהֵר is understood as an infinitive functioning as a verb, the subject of חוּשׁ is taken as indefinite, and the two nouns are understood as adverbial accusatives. As we discover in v. 3 , this is the name of the son to be born to Isaiah through the prophetess.


. Another option is to point the prefixed conjunction as a vav consecutive and translate, “So I summoned as witnesses.” In this case Isaiah is recalling his response to the Lord’s commission. In any case, the reference to witnesses suggests that the name and the child who bears it will function as signs.


For location see Map2-B1 ; Map4-D3 ; Map5-E2 ; Map6-A4 ; Map7-C1 .


The Hebrew text begins with “because.” In the Hebrew text vv. 6-7 are one long sentence, with v. 6 giving the reason for judgment and v. 7 formally announcing it.


The precise meaning of v. 6 has been debated. The translation above assumes that “these people” are the residents of Judah and that מָשׂוֹשׂ ( masos ) is alternate form of מָסוֹס ( masos , “despair, melt”; see HALOT 606 s.v. מסס ). In this case vv. 7-8 in their entirety announce God’s disciplinary judgment on Judah. However, “these people” could refer to the Israelites and perhaps also the Syrians (cf v. 4 ). In this case מָשׂוֹשׂ probably means “joy.” One could translate, “and rejoice over Rezin and the son of Remaliah.” In this case v. 7 a announces the judgment of Israel, with vv. 7 b-8 then shifting the focus to the judgment of Judah.


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Heb “the mighty and abundant waters of the river.” The referent of “the river” here, the Euphrates River, has been specified in the translation for clarity. As the immediately following words indicate, these waters symbolize the Assyrian king and his armies which will, as it were, inundate the land.


Heb “it will go up over all its stream beds and go over all its banks.”


Heb “and the spreading out of his wings [will be over] the fullness of the breadth of your land.” The metaphor changes here from raging flood to predatory bird.


The verb רֹעוּ ( ro ’ u ) is a Qal imperative, masculine plural from רָעַע ( ra ’ a ’, “break”). Elsewhere both transitive ( Job 34:24 ; Ps 2:9 ; Jer 15:12 ) and intransitive ( Prov 25:19 ; Jer 11:16 ) senses are attested for the Qal of this verb. Because no object appears here, the form is likely intransitive: “be broken.” In this case the imperative is rhetorical (like “be shattered” later in the verse) and equivalent to a prediction, “you will be broken.” On the rhetorical use of the imperative in general, see IBHS 572 §34.4c; GKC 324 §110. c .


The imperatival form ( Heb “be shattered”) is rhetorical and expresses the speaker’s firm conviction of the outcome of the nations’ attack. See the note on “be broken.”


The initial imperative (“get ready for battle”) acknowledges the reality of the nations’ hostility; the concluding imperative ( Heb “be shattered”) is rhetorical and expresses the speakers’ firm conviction of the outcome of the nations’ attack. (See the note on “be broken.”) One could paraphrase, “Okay, go ahead and prepare for battle since that’s what you want to do, but your actions will backfire and you’ll be shattered.” This rhetorical use of the imperatives is comparable to saying to a child who is bent on climbing a high tree, “Okay, go ahead, climb the tree and break your arm!” What this really means is: “Okay, go ahead and climb the tree since that’s what you really want to do, but your actions will backfire and you’ll break your arm.” The repetition of the statement in the final two lines of the verse gives the challenge the flavor of a taunt (ancient Israelite “trash talking,” as it were).


Heb “speak a word, but it will not stand.”


and read יְסִירֵנִי ( yÿsireni , “he was turning me aside,” a Hiphil imperfect from סוּר , sur ).


Heb “Do not say, ‘Conspiracy,’ with respect to all which these people say, ‘Conspiracy.’” The verb translated “do not say” is second masculine plural, indicating that this exhortation is directed to Isaiah and other followers of the Lord (see v. 16 ). sn The background of this command is uncertain. Perhaps the “conspiracy” in view is the alliance between Israel and Syria. Some of the people may even have thought that individuals in Judah were plotting with Israel and Syria to overthrow the king.


Heb “the Lord who commands armies [traditionally, the Lord of hosts], him you must set apart.” The word order is emphatic, with the object being placed first.


Heb “he is your [object of] fear, he is your [object of] terror.” The roots יָרֵא ( yare ’) and עָרַץ (’ arats ) are repeated from v. 12 b.


Because the metaphor of protection (“sanctuary”) does not fit the negative mood that follows in vv. 14 b-15, some contend that מִקְדָּשׁ ( miqdash , “sanctuary”) is probably a corruption of an original מוֹקֵשׁ ( moqesh , “snare”), a word that appears in the next line (cf. NAB and H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:355-56). If the MT reading is retained (as in the above translation), the fact that Yahweh is a sanctuary wraps up the point of v. 13 and stands in contrast to God’s treatment of those who rebel against him (the rest of v. 14 ).


These words are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons. וְהָיָה ( vÿhayah , “and he will be”) does double duty in the parallel structure of the verse.


For location see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


Heb “over them” (so NASB); NCV “over this rock.”


Heb “tie up [the] testimony.” The “testimony” probably refers to the prophetic messages God has given him. When the prophecies are fulfilled, he will be able to produce this official, written record to confirm the authenticity of his ministry and to prove to the people that God is sovereign over events.


Heb “seal [the] instruction among my followers.” The “instruction” probably refers to the prophet’s exhortations and warnings. When the people are judged for the sins, the prophet can produce these earlier messages and essentially say, “I told you so.” In this way he can authenticate his ministry and impress upon the people the reality of God’s authority over them.


Heb “who hides his face from the house of Jacob.”


Or “signs and portents” (NAB, NRSV). The names of all three individuals has symbolic value. Isaiah’s name (which meant “the Lord delivers”) was a reminder that the Lord was the nation’s only source of protection; Shear-jashub’s name was meant, at least originally, to encourage Ahaz (see the note at 7:3 ), and Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz’s name was a guarantee that God would defeat Israel and Syria (see the note at 8:4 ). The word מוֹפֶת ( mofet , “portent”) can often refer to some miraculous event, but in 20:3 it is used, along with its synonym אוֹת (’ ot , “sign”) of Isaiah’s walking around half-naked as an object lesson of what would soon happen to the Egyptians.


It is uncertain if the prophet or the Lord is speaking in vv. 19-22 . If the latter, then vv. 19-22 resume the speech recorded in vv. 12-15 , after the prophet’s response in vv. 16-18 .


Heb “inquire of the ritual pits and of the magicians who chirp and mutter.” The Hebrew word אוֹב (’ ov , “ritual pit”) refers to a pit used by a magician to conjure up underworld spirits. In 1 Sam 28:7 the witch of Endor is called a אוֹב - בַּעֲלַת ( ba ’ alat- ’ ov , “owner of a ritual pit”). See H. Hoffner, “Second Millennium Antecedents to the Hebrew ’ OñBù ,” JBL 86 (1967): 385-401.


Heb “Should a nation not inquire of its gods on behalf of the living, (by inquiring) of the dead?” These words appear to be a continuation of the quotation begun in the first part of the verse. אֱלֹהָיו (’ elohayv ) may be translated “its gods” or “its God.” Some take the second half of the verse as the prophet’s (or the Lord’s) rebuke of the people who advise seeking oracles at the ritual pits, but in this case the words “the dead on behalf of the living” are difficult to explain.


Heb “to [the] instruction and to [the] testimony.” The words “then you must recall” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons. In the Hebrew text vv. 19-20 a are one long sentence, reading literally, “When they say to you…, to the instruction and to the testimony.” On the identity of the “instruction” and “testimony” see the notes at v. 16 .


Heb “If they do not speak according to this word, [it is] because it has no light of dawn.” The literal translation suggests that “this word” refers to the instruction/testimony. However, it is likely that אִם־לֹא (’ im-lo ’) is asseverative here, as in 5:9 . In this case “this word” refers to the quotation recorded in v. 19 . For a discussion of the problem see J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 230, n. 9. The singular pronoun in the second half of the verse is collective, referring back to the nation (see v. 19 b).


Heb “he will pass through it.” The subject of the collective singular verb is the nation. (See the preceding note.) The immediately preceding context supplies no antecedent for “it” (a third feminine singular suffix in the Hebrew text); the suffix may refer to the land, which would be a reasonable referent with a verb of motion. Note also that אֶרֶץ (’ erets , “land”) does appear at the beginning of the next verse.


The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Or “gods” (NAB, NRSV, CEV).


Heb “and behold” (so KJV, ASV, NASB).


The precise meaning of מְעוּף ( mÿ ’ uf ) is uncertain; the word occurs only here. See BDB 734 s.v. מָעוּף .


Heb “ and darkness, pushed.” The word מְנֻדָּח ( mÿnudakh ) appears to be a Pual participle from נדח (“push”), but the Piel is unattested for this verb and the Pual occurs only here.


The Hebrew text reads, “Indeed there is no gloom for the one to whom there was anxiety for her.” The feminine singular pronominal suffix “her” must refer to the land (cf. vv. 22a, 23b). So one could translate, “Indeed there will be no gloom for the land which was anxious.” In this case the statement introduces the positive message to follow. Some assume an emendation of לֹא ( lo ’, “no”) to לוֹ ( lo , “to him”) and of לָהּ ( lah , “to her”) to לוֹ ( lo , “to him”), yielding this literal reading: “indeed there is gloom for him, for the one to whom there was anxiety for him.” In this case the statement concludes the preceding description of judgment.


The Lord must be understood as the subject of the two verbs in this verse.


Heb Just as in earlier times he humiliated…, [in] the latter times he has brought honor.” The main verbs in vv. 1 b-4 are Hebrew perfects. The prophet takes his rhetorical stance in the future age of restoration and describes future events as if they have already occurred. To capture the dramatic effect of the original text, the translation uses the English present or present perfect.


Traditionally צַלְמָוֶת ( tsalmavet ) has been interpreted as a compound noun, meaning “shadow of death” (so KJV, ASV, NIV), but usage indicates that the word, though it sometimes refers to death, means “darkness.” The term should probably be repointed as an abstract noun צַלְמוּת ( tsalmut ). See the note at Ps 23:4 .


The Hebrew consonantal text reads “You multiply the nation, you do not make great the joy.” The particle לֹא ( lo ’, “not”) is obviously incorrect; the marginal reading has לוֹ ( lo , “to him”). In this case, one should translate, “You multiply the nation, you increase his (i.e., their) joy.” However, the parallelism is tighter if one emends הַגּוֹי לוֹ ( hagoy lo , “the nation, to him”) to הַגִּילָה ( haggilah , “the joy,” a noun attested in Isa 65:18 ), which corresponds to הַשִּׂמְחָה ( hasimkhah , “the joy”) later in the verse (H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:386). As attractive as this reading is, it has not textual evidence supporting it. The MT reading (accepting the marginal reading “to him” for the negative particle “not”) affirms that Yahweh caused the nation to grow in population and increased their joy.


Heb “as they are happy.” The word “warriors” is supplied in the translation to clarify the word picture. This last simile comes close to reality, for vv. 4-5 indicate that the people have won a great military victory over their oppressors.


Heb “for the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the scepter of the oppressor against him.” The singular pronouns are collective, referring to the people. The oppressed nation is compared to an ox weighed down by a heavy yoke and an animal that is prodded and beaten.


Heb “Indeed every boot marching with shaking.” On the meaning of סְאוֹן ( sÿ ’ on , “boot”) and the related denominative verb, both of which occur only here, see HALOT 738 s.v. סְאוֹן .


The Hebrew perfect (translated “has been born” and “has been given”) is used here as the prophet takes a rhetorical stance in the future. See the note at 9:1 .


Or “and dominion was on his shoulders and he called his name.” The prefixed verbs with vav ( ו ) consecutive are used with the same rhetorical sense as the perfects in v. 6 a. See the preceding note. There is great debate over the syntactical structure of the verse. No subject is indicated for the verb “he called.” If all the titles that follow are ones given to the king, then the subject of the verb must be indefinite, “one calls.” However, some have suggested that one to three of the titles that follow refer to God, not the king. For example, the traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text suggests the translation, “and the Extraordinary Strategist, the Mighty God calls his name, ‘Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.’”


Some have seen two titles here (“Wonderful” and “Counselor,” cf. KJV, ASV). However, the pattern of the following three titles (each contains two elements) and the use of the roots פָּלַא ( pala ’) and יָעַץ ( ya ’ ats ) together in Isa 25:1 (cf. כִּי עָשִׂיתָ פֶּלֶא עֵצוֹת מֵרָחוֹק אֱמוּנָה אֹמֶן ) and 28:29 (cf. הִפְלִיא עֵצָה ) suggest otherwise. The term יוֹעֵץ ( yo ’ ets ) could be taken as appositional (genitive or otherwise) of species (“a wonder, i.e., a wonder as a counselor,” cf. NAB “Wonder-Counselor”) or as a substantival participle for which פָּלַא provides the direct object (“one who counsels wonders”). יוֹעֵץ is used as a royal title elsewhere (cf. Mic 4:9 ). Here it probably refers to the king’s ability to devise military strategy, as suggested by the context (cf. vv. 3-4 and the following title אֵל גִּבּוֹר , ’ el gibor ). In Isa 11:2 (also a description of this king) עֵצָה (’ etsah ) is linked with גְּבוּרָה ( gÿvurah , the latter being typically used of military might, cf. BDB 150 s.v.). Note also עֵצָה וּגְבוּרָה לַמִּלְחָמָה in Isa 36:5 . פֶּלֶא ( pele ’) is typically used of God (cf. however Lam 1:9 ). Does this suggest the deity of the messianic ruler? The NT certainly teaches he is God, but did Isaiah necessarily have this in mind over 700 years before his birth? Since Isa 11:2 points out that this king will receive the spirit of the Lord, which will enable him to counsel, it is possible to argue that the king’s counsel is “extraordinary” because it finds its source in the divine spirit. Thus this title does not necessarily suggest that the ruler is deity.


גִּבּוֹר ( gibbor ) is probably an attributive adjective (“mighty God”), though one might translate “God is a warrior” or “God is mighty.” Scholars have interpreted this title is two ways. A number of them have argued that the title portrays the king as God’s representative on the battlefield, whom God empowers in a supernatural way (see J. H. Hayes and S. A. Irvine, Isaiah , 181-82). They contend that this sense seems more likely in the original context of the prophecy. They would suggest that having read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king’s deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God’s representative on earth. Ancient Near Eastern art and literature picture gods training kings for battle, bestowing special weapons, and intervening in battle. According to Egyptian propaganda, the Hittites described Rameses II as follows: “No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique” (See Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature , 2:67). According to proponents of this view, Isa 9:6 probably envisions a similar kind of response when friends and foes alike look at the Davidic king in full battle regalia. When the king’s enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself. The other option is to regard this title as a reference to God, confronting Isaiah’s readers with the divinity of this promised “child.” The use of this same title that clearly refers to God in a later passage ( Isa 10:21 ) supports this interpretation. Other passages depict Yahweh as the great God and great warrior ( Deut 10:17 ; Jer. 32:18 ). Although this connection of a child who is born with deity is unparalleled in any earlier biblical texts, Isaiah’s use of this title to make this connection represents Isaiah’s attempt (at God’s behest) to advance Israel in their understanding of the ideal Davidic king for whom they long.


This title must not be taken in an anachronistic Trinitarian sense. (To do so would be theologically problematic, for the “Son” is the messianic king and is distinct in his person from God the “Father.”) Rather, in its original context the title pictures the king as the protector of his people. For a similar use of “father” see Isa 22:21 and Job 29:16 . This figurative, idiomatic use of “father” is not limited to the Bible. In a Phoenician inscription (ca. 850-800 b.c. ) the ruler Kilamuwa declares: “To some I was a father, to others I was a mother.” In another inscription (ca. 800 b.c. ) the ruler Azitawadda boasts that the god Baal made him “a father and a mother” to his people. (See ANET 499-500.) The use of “everlasting” might suggest the deity of the king (as the one who has total control over eternity), but Isaiah and his audience may have understood the term as royal hyperbole emphasizing the king’s long reign or enduring dynasty (for examples of such hyperbolic language used of the Davidic king, see 1 Kgs 1:31 ; Pss 21:4-6; 61:6-7; 72:5, 17 ). The New Testament indicates that the hyperbolic language (as in the case of the title “Mighty God”) is literally realized in the ultimate fulfillment of the prophecy, for Jesus will rule eternally.


This title pictures the king as one who establishes a safe socio-economic environment for his people. It hardly depicts him as a meek individual, for he establishes peace through military strength (as the preceding context and the first two royal titles indicate). His people experience safety and prosperity because their invincible king destroys their enemies. See Pss 72 and 144 for parallels to these themes.


The Hebrew text has לְםַרְבֵּה ( lÿmarbeh ), which is a corrupt reading. לם is dittographic; note the preceding word, שָׁלוֹם ( shalom ). The corrected text reads literally, “great is the dominion.”


Heb “and to peace there will be no end” (KJV and ASV both similar). On the political and socio-economic sense of שָׁלוֹם ( shalom ) in this context, see the note at v. 6 on “Prince of Peace.”


Heb “over the throne of David, and over his kingdom.” The referent of the pronoun “his” (i.e., David) has been specified in the translation for clarity.


The feminine singular pronominal suffix on this form and the following one (translated “it” both times) refers back to the grammatically feminine noun “kingdom.”


Heb “with/by justice and fairness”; ASV “with justice and with righteousness.”


Heb “the zeal of the Lord.” In this context the Lord’s “zeal” refers to his intense devotion to and love for his people which prompts him to vindicate them and to fulfill his promises to David and the nation.


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here and in v. 17 is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Heb “sent a word” (so KJV, ASV, NRSV); NASB “sends a message.”


The present translation assumes that this verse refers to judgment that had already fallen. Both verbs (perfects) are taken as indicating simple past; the vav ( ו ) on the second verb is understood as a simple vav conjunctive. Another option is to understand the verse as describing a future judgment (see 10:1-4 ). In this case the first verb is a perfect of certitude; the vav on the second verb is a vav consecutive.


The translation assumes that vv. 9-10 describe the people’s response to a past judgment (v. 8 ). The perfect is understood as indicating simple past and the vav ( ו ) is taken as conjunctive. Another option is to take the vav on the perfect as consecutive and translate, “all the people will know.”


Heb “and the people, all of them, knew; Ephraim and the residents of Samaria.”


Heb “with pride and arrogance of heart, saying.”


The translation assumes that the prefixed verb with vav ( ו ) consecutive continues the narrative of past judgment.


The Hebrew text reads literally, “adversaries of Rezin against him [i.e., them].” The next verse describes how the Syrians (over whom Rezin ruled, see 7:1, 8 ) and the Philistines encroached on Israel’s territory. Since the Syrians and Israelites were allies by 735 b.c. (see 7:1 ), the hostilities described probably occurred earlier, while Israel was still pro-Assyrian. In this case one might understand the phrase צָרֵי רְצִין ( tsare rÿtsin , “adversaries of Rezin”) as meaning “adversaries sent from Rezin.” However, another option, the one chosen in the translation above, is to emend the phrase to צָרָיו ( tsarayv , “his [i.e., their] adversaries”). This creates tighter parallelism with the next line (note “his [i.e., their] enemies”). The phrase in the Hebrew text may be explained as virtually dittographic.


The prefixed verbal form is understood as a preterite, used, as is often the case in poetry, without vav consecutive. Note that prefixed forms with vav consecutive both precede ( וַיְשַׂגֵּב , vaysaggev , “and he provoked”) and follow in v. 12 ( וַיֹּאכְלוּ , vayyo ’ khÿlu , “and they devoured”) this verb.


Heb “and they devoured Israel with all the mouth”; NIV “with open mouth”; NLT “With bared fangs.”


Heb “in all this his anger is not turned, and still his hand is outstretched.” One could translate in the past tense here (and in 9:17 b and 21b), but the appearance of the refrain in 10:4 b, where it follows a woe oracle prophesying a future judgment, suggests it is a dramatic portrait of the judge which did not change throughout this period of past judgment and will remain unchanged in the future. The English present tense is chosen to best reflect this dramatic mood. (See also 5:25 b, where the refrain appears following a dramatic description of coming judgment.)


This verse describes the people’s response to the judgment described in vv. 11-12 . The perfects are understood as indicating simple past.


Heb “the elder and the one lifted up with respect to the face.” For another example of the Hebrew idiom, see 2 Kgs 5:1 .


Heb “and the ones being led were swallowed up.” Instead of taking מְבֻלָּעִים ( mÿbulla ’ im ) from בָּלַע ( bala ’, “to swallow”), HALOT 134 s.v. בלע proposes a rare homonymic root בלע (“confuse”) here.


has לא יחמול (“he did not spare”) which is an obvious attempt to tighten the parallelism (note “he took no pity” in the next line). Instead of taking שָׂמַח ( samakh ) in one of its well attested senses (“rejoice over, be pleased with”), some propose, with support from Arabic, a rare homonymic root meaning “be merciful.”


The translation understands the prefixed verbs יִשְׂמַח ( yismakh ) and יְרַחֵם ( yÿrakhem ) as preterites without vav ( ו ) consecutive. (See v. 11 and the note on “he stirred up.”)


Or “defiled”; cf. ASV “profane”; NAB “profaned”; NIV “ungodly.”


מֵרַע ( mera ’) is a Hiphil participle from רָעַע ( ra ’ a ’, “be evil”). The intransitive Hiphil has an exhibitive force here, indicating that they exhibited outwardly the evidence of an inward condition by committing evil deeds.


Or “foolishness” (NASB), here in a moral-ethical sense.


Heb “in all this his anger is not turned, and still his hand is outstretched.” sn See the note at 9:12 .


Or “Indeed” (cf. NIV “Surely”). The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “and they swirled [with] the rising of the smoke” (cf. NRSV).


The precise meaning of the verb עְתַּם (’ ÿtam ), which occurs only here, is uncertain, though the context strongly suggests that it means “burn, scorch.”


Heb “men were not showing compassion to their brothers.” The idiom “men to their brothers” is idiomatic for reciprocity. The prefixed verbal form is either a preterite without vav ( ו ) consecutive or an imperfect used in a customary sense, describing continual or repeated behavior in past time.


Or “cut.” The verb גָּזַר ( gazar ) means “to cut.” If it is understood here, then one might paraphrase, “They slice off meat on the right.” However, HALOT 187 s.v. I גזר , proposes here a rare homonym meaning “to devour.”


The prefixed verbal form is either a preterite without vav consecutive or an imperfect used in a customary sense, describing continual or repeated behavior in past time.


Some suggest that זְרֹעוֹ ( zÿro ’ o , “his arm”) be repointed זַרְעוֹ ( zar ’ o , “his offspring”). In either case, the metaphor is that of a desperately hungry man who resorts to an almost unthinkable act to satisfy his appetite. He eats everything he can find to his right, but still being unsatisfied, then turns to his left and eats everything he can find there. Still being desperate for food, he then resorts to eating his own flesh (or offspring, as this phrase is metaphorically understood by some English versions, e.g., NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT). The reality behind the metaphor is the political turmoil of the period, as the next verse explains. There was civil strife within the northern kingdom; even the descendants of Joseph were at each other’s throats. Then the northern kingdom turned on their southern brother, Judah.


The words “fought against” are supplied in the translation both here and later in this verse for stylistic reasons.


Heb “in all this his anger is not turned, and still his hand is outstretched” (KJV and ASV both similar); NIV “his hand is still upraised.” sn See the note at 9:12 .


Heb “Woe [to] those who decree evil decrees.” On הוֹי ( hoy , “woe, ah”) see the note on the first phrase of 1:4 .


Heb “[to] the writers who write out harm.” The participle and verb are in the Piel, suggesting repetitive action.


Or “rob” (ASV, NASB, NCV, NRSV); KJV “take away the right from the poor.”


Heb “so that widows are their plunder, and they can loot orphans.” sn On the socio-economic background of vv. 1-2 , see the note at 1:23 .


Heb “the day of visitation” (so KJV, ASV), that is, the day when God arrives to execute justice on the oppressors.


Heb “except one kneels in the place of the prisoner, and in the place of the slain [who] fall.” On the force of בִּלְתִּי ( bilti , “except”) and its logical connection to what precedes, see BDB 116 s.v. בֵלֶת . On the force of תַּחַת ( takhat , “in the place of”) here, see J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:258, n. 6.


Heb “in all this his anger was not turned, and still his hand was outstretched”; KJV, ASV, NRSV “his had is stretched out still.” sn See the note at 9:12 .


Heb “Woe [to] Assyria, the club of my anger.” On הוֹי ( hoy , “woe, ah”) see the note on the first phrase of 1:4 .


Heb “a cudgel is he, in their hand is my anger.” It seems likely that the final mem ( ם ) on בְיָדָם ( bÿyadam ) is not a pronominal suffix (“in their hand”), but an enclitic mem . If so, one can translate literally, “a cudgel is he in the hand of my anger.”


Or “defiled”; cf. ASV “profane”; NAB “impious”; NCV “separated from God.”


Heb “and against the people of my anger I ordered him.”


Heb “to make it [i.e., the people] a trampled place.”


Heb “but he, not so does he intend, and his heart, not so does it think.”


Heb “for to destroy [is] in his heart, and to cut off nations, not a few.”


Or “For” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “Just as my hand found the kingdoms of the idol[s].” The comparison is expanded in v. 11 a (note “as”) and completed in v. 11 b (note “so”).


For the location of Jerusalem see Map5-B1 ; Map6-F3 ; Map7-E2 ; Map8-F2 ; Map10-B3 ; JP1-F4 ; JP2-F4 ; JP3-F4 ; JP4-F4 .


The statement is constructed as a rhetorical question in the Hebrew text: “Is it not [true that] just as I have done to Samaria and its idols, so I will do to Jerusalem and its idols?” sn This statement indicates that the prophecy dates sometime between 722-701 b.c.


The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here and in vv. 16, 23, 24, 33 is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonay ).


Heb “his work on/against.” Cf. NAB, NASB, NRSV “on”; NIV “against.”


The Lord is speaking here, as in vv. 5-6 a.


Heb “I will visit [judgment] on the fruit of the greatness of the heart of the king of Assyria, and on the glory of the height of his eyes.” The proud Assyrian king is likened to a large, beautiful fruit tree.


Heb “removed the borders of nations”; cf. NAB, NIV, NRSV “boundaries.”


The consonantal text ( Kethib ) has כְּאַבִּיר ( kÿ ’ abir , “like a strong one”); the marginal reading ( Qere ) is כַּבִיר ( kavir , “mighty one”).


Heb “and I brought down, like a strong one, ones sitting [or “living”].” The participle יוֹשְׁבִים ( yoshÿvim , “ones sitting”) could refer to the inhabitants of the nations, but the translation assumes that it refers to those who sit on thrones, i.e., rulers. See BDB 442 s.v. יָשַׁב and HALOT 444 s.v. ישׁב .


Heb “the one who pushes it back and forth”; KJV “him that shaketh it”; ASV “him that wieldeth it.”


Heb “will send leanness against his healthy ones”; NASB, NIV “will send a wasting disease.”


Heb “and in the place of his glory burning will burn, like the burning of fire.” The highly repetitive text ( יֵקַד יְקֹד כִּיקוֹד אֵשׁ , yeqad yiqod kiqod ’ esh ) may be dittographic; if the second consonantal sequence יקד is omitted, the text would read “and in the place of his glory, it will burn like the burning of fire.”


In this context the “Light of Israel” is a divine title (note the parallel title “his holy one”). The title points to God’s royal splendor, which overshadows and, when transformed into fire, destroys the “majestic glory” of the king of Assyria (v. 16 b).


Heb “his.” In vv. 17-19 the Assyrian king and his empire is compared to a great forest and orchard that are destroyed by fire (symbolic of the Lord).


Heb “from breath to flesh it will destroy.” The expression “from breath to flesh” refers to the two basic components of a person, the immaterial (life’s breath) and the material (flesh). Here the phrase is used idiomatically to indicate totality.


The precise meaning of this line is uncertain. מָסַס ( masas ), which is used elsewhere of substances dissolving or melting, may here mean “waste away” or “despair.” נָסַס ( nasas ), which appears only here, may mean “be sick” or “stagger, despair.” See BDB 651 s.v. I נָסַס and HALOT 703 s.v. I נסס . One might translate the line literally, “like the wasting away of one who is sick” (cf. NRSV “as when an invalid wastes away”).


Heb “and the rest of the trees of his forest will be counted, and a child will record them.”


Or “in that day.” The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “house” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “on one who strikes him down.” This individual is the king (“foreign leader”) of the oppressing nation (which NLT specifies as “the Assyrians”).


Or “sincerely”; KJV, ASV, NAB, NRSV “in truth.”


The referent of אֵל גִּבּוֹר (’ el gibbor , “mighty God”) is uncertain. The title appears only here and in 9:6 , where it is one of the royal titles of the coming ideal Davidic king. (Similar titles appear in Deut 10:17 and Neh 9:32 [“the great, mighty, and awesome God”] and in Jer 32:18 [“the great and mighty God”]. Both titles refer to God.) Though Hos 3:5 pictures Israel someday seeking “David their king,” and provides some support for a messianic interpretation of Isa 10:21 , the Davidic king is not mentioned in the immediate context of Isa 10:21 (see , however). The preceding verse mentions Israel relying on the Lord, so it is likely that the title refers to God here.


Heb “are like.”


Or “predetermined”; cf. ASV, NASB “is determined”; TEV “is in store.”


צְדָקָה ( tsÿdaqah ) often means “righteousness,” but here it refers to God’s just judgment.


Or “is about to overflow.”


Heb “Indeed (or perhaps “for”) destruction and what is decreed the sovereign master, the Lord who commands armies, is about to accomplish in the middle of all the land.” The phrase כָלָא וְנֶחֱרָצָה ( khala ’ venekheratsah , “destruction and what is decreed”) is a hendiadys; the two terms express one idea, with the second qualifying the first.


Heb “therefore.” The message that follows is one of encouragement, for it focuses on the eventual destruction of the Assyrians. Consequently “therefore” relates back to vv. 5-21 , not to vv. 22-23 , which must be viewed as a brief parenthesis in an otherwise positive speech.


Heb “in the way [or “manner”] of Egypt.”


The Hebrew text has simply “fury,” but the pronominal element can be assumed on the basis of what immediately follows (see “my anger” in the clause). It is possible that the suffixed yod ( י ) has been accidentally dropped by virtual haplography. Note that a vav ( ו ) is prefixed to the form that immediately follows; yod and vav are very similar in later script phases.


Heb “him” (so KJV, ASV, NASB); the singular refers to the leader or king who stands for the entire nation. This is specified by NCV, CEV as “the Assyrians.”


The Hebrew text reads literally, “and his staff [will be] against the sea, and he will lift it in the way [or “manner”] of Egypt.” If the text is retained, “the sea” symbolizes Assyria’s hostility, the metaphor being introduced because of the reference to Egypt. The translation above assumes an emendation of עַל הַיָּם (’ al hayyam , “against the sea”) to עַלֵיהֶם (’ alehem , “against them”). The proposed shift from the third singular pronoun (note “beat him” earlier in the verse) to the plural is not problematic, for the singular is collective. Note that a third plural pronoun is used at the end of v. 25 (“their destruction”). The final phrase, “in the way/manner of Egypt,” probably refers to the way in which God used the staff of Moses to bring judgment down on Egypt.


Or “in that day” (KJV). The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “he [i.e., the Lord] will remove his [i.e, Assyria’s] burden from upon your shoulder.”


The meaning of this line is uncertain. The Hebrew text reads literally, “and the yoke will be destroyed (or perhaps, “pulled down”) because of fatness.” Perhaps this is a bizarre picture of an ox growing so fat that it breaks the yoke around its neck or can no longer fit into its yoke. Fatness would symbolize the Lord’s restored blessings; the removal of the yoke would symbolize the cessation of Assyrian oppression. Because of the difficulty of the metaphor, many prefer to emend the text at this point. Some emend וְחֻבַּל ( vÿkhubbal , “and it will be destroyed,” a perfect with prefixed vav ), to יִחְבֹּל ( yikhbol , “[it] will be destroyed,” an imperfect), and take the verb with what precedes, “and their yoke will be destroyed from your neck.” Proponents of this view (cf. NAB, NRSV) then emend עֹל (’ ol , “yoke”) to עָלָה (’ alah , “he came up”) and understand this verb as introducing the following description of the Assyrian invasion (vv. 28-32 ). מִפְּנֵי־שָׁמֶן ( mippÿney-shamen , “because of fatness”) is then emended to read “from before Rimmon” (NAB, NRSV), “from before Samaria,” or “from before Jeshimon.” Although this line may present difficulties, it appears best to regard the line as a graphic depiction of God’s abundant blessings on his servant nation.


Heb “he,” that is, the Assyrians (as the preceding context suggests). Cf. NCV “The army of Assyria.” sn Verses 28-32 describe an invasion of Judah from the north. There is no scholarly consensus on when this particular invasion took place, if at all. J. H. Hayes and S. A. Irvine ( Isaiah , 209-10) suggest the text describes the Israelite-Syrian invasion of Judah (ca. 735 b.c. ), but this proposal disregards the preceding context, which prophesies the destruction of Assyria. Some suggest that this invasion occurred in conjunction with Sargon’s western campaign of 713-711 b.c. , but there is no historical evidence of such an invasion at that time. Many others identify the invasion as Sennacherib’s in 701 b.c. , but historical records indicate Sennacherib approached Jerusalem from the southwest. J. N. Oswalt ( Isaiah [NICOT], 1:274-75) prefers to see the description as rhetorical and as not corresponding to any particular historical event, but Hayes and Irvine argue that the precise geographical details militate against such a proposal. Perhaps it is best to label the account as rhetorical-prophetic. The prophecy of the invasion was not necessarily intended to be a literal itinerary of the Assyrians’ movements; rather its primary purpose was to create a foreboding mood. Geographical references contribute to this purpose, but they merely reflect how one would expect an Assyrian invasion to proceed, not necessarily how the actual invasion would progress. Despite its rhetorical nature, the prophecy does point to the invasion of 701 b.c. , as the announcement of the invaders’ downfall in vv. 33-34 makes clear; it was essentially fulfilled at that time. For further discussion of the problem, see R. E. Clements, Isaiah (NCBC), 117-19. On the geographical details of the account, see Y. Aharoni, Land of the Bible , 393.


Heb “came against,” or “came to.”


The Hebrew text reads “Poor [is] Anathoth.” The parallelism is tighter if עֲנִיָּה (’ aniyyah ,“poor”) is emended to עֲנִיהָ (’ aniha , “answer her”). Note how the preceding two lines have an imperative followed by a proper name.


The consonantal text ( Kethib ) has “a mountain of a house ( בֵּית , bet ), Zion,” but the marginal reading ( Qere ) correctly reads “the mountain of the daughter ( בַּת , bat ) of Zion.” On the phrase “Daughter Zion,” see the note on the same phrase in 1:8 .


The Hebrew text reads “with terrifying power,” or “with a crash.” מַעֲרָצָה ( ma ’ aratsah , “terrifying power” or “crash”) occurs only here. Several have suggested an emendation to מַעֲצָד ( ma ’ atsad , “ax”) parallel to “ax” in v. 34 ; see HALOT 615 s.v. מַעֲצָד and H. Wildberger, Isaiah , 1:448. sn As in vv. 12 (see the note there) and 18, the Assyrians are compared to a tree/forest in vv. 33-34 .


Heb “the exalted of the height.” This could refer to the highest branches (cf. TEV) or the tallest trees (cf. NIV, NRSV).


The Hebrew text has, “and Lebanon, by/as [?] a mighty one, will fall.” The translation above takes the preposition בְּ ( bet ) prefixed to “mighty one” as indicating identity, “Lebanon, as a mighty one, will fall.” In this case “mighty one” describes Lebanon. (In Ezek 17:23 and Zech 11:2 the adjective is used of Lebanon’s cedars.) Another option is to take the preposition as indicating agency and interpret “mighty one” as a divine title (see Isa 33:21 ). One could then translate, “and Lebanon will fall by [the agency of] the Mighty One.”


The Hebrew text has יִפְרֶה ( yifreh , “will bear fruit,” from פָּרָה , parah ), but the ancient versions, as well as the parallelism suggest that יִפְרַח ( yifrakh , “will sprout”, from פָּרַח , parakh ) is the better reading here. See J. N. Oswalt, Isaiah (NICOT), 1:276, n. 2.


Heb “a spirit of wisdom and understanding.” The synonyms are joined here to emphasize the degree of wisdom he will possess. His wisdom will enable him to make just legal decisions (v. 3 ). A very similar phrase occurs in Eph 1:17 .


Heb “a spirit of counsel [or “strategy”] and strength.” The construction is a hendiadys; the point is that he will have the strength/ability to execute the plans/strategies he devises. This ability will enable him to suppress oppressors and implement just policies (v. 4 ).


Heb “a spirit of knowledge and fear of the Lord.” “Knowledge” is used here in its covenantal sense and refers to a recognition of God’s authority and a willingness to submit to it. See Jer 22:16 . “Fear” here refers to a healthy respect for God’s authority which produces obedience. Taken together the two terms emphasize the single quality of loyalty to the Lord. This loyalty guarantees that he will make just legal decisions and implement just policies (vv. 4-5 ).


The Hebrew text reads literally, “and his smelling is in the fear of the Lord.” In Amos 5:21 the Hiphil of רוּחַ ( ruakh , “smell”) carries the nuance of “smell with delight, get pleasure from.” There the Lord declares that he does not “smell with delight” (i.e., get pleasure from) Israel’s religious assemblies, which probably stand by metonymy for the incense offered during these festivals. In Isa 11:3 there is no sacrificial context to suggest such a use, but it is possible that “the fear of the Lord” is likened to incense. This coming king will get the same kind of delight from obeying (fearing) the Lord, as a deity does in the incense offered by worshipers. Some regard such an explanation as strained in this context, and prefer to omit this line from the text as a virtual dittograph of the preceding statement.


Heb “by what appears to his eyes”; KJV “after the sight of his eyes”; NIV “by what he sees with his eyes.”


Heb “by what is heard by his ears”; NRSV “by what his ears hear.”


Heb “with justice” (so NAB) or “with righteousness” (so KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV).


Heb “make decisions with rectitude”; cf. ASV, NRSV “and decide with equity.”


Or “land” (NAB, NCV, CEV). It is uncertain if the passage is picturing universal dominion or focusing on the king’s rule over his covenant people. The reference to God’s “holy mountain” in v. 9 and the description of renewed Israelite conquests in v. 14 suggest the latter, though v. 10 seems to refer to a universal kingdom (see 2:2-4 ).


The Hebrew text reads literally, “and he will strike the earth with the scepter of his mouth.” Some have suggested that in this context אֶרֶץ (’ erets , “earth”) as an object of judgment seems too broad in scope. The parallelism is tighter if one emends the word to ץ ( י ) עָרִ (’ arits , “potentate, tyrant”). The phrase “scepter of his mouth” refers to the royal (note “scepter”) decrees that he proclaims with his mouth. Because these decrees will have authority and power (see v. 2 ) behind them, they can be described as “striking” the tyrants down. Nevertheless, the MT reading may not need emending. Isaiah refers to the entire “earth” as the object of God’s judgment in several places without specifying the wicked as the object of the judgment ( Isa 24:17-21; 26:9, 21; 28:22 ; cf. 13:11 ).


Heb “and by the breath of his lips he will kill the wicked.” The “breath of his lips” refers to his speech, specifically in this context his official decrees that the wicked oppressors be eliminated from his realm. See the preceding note.


Heb “Justice will be the belt [or “undergarment”] on his waist, integrity the belt [or “undergarment”] on his hips.” The point of the metaphor is uncertain. If a belt worn outside the robe is in view, then the point might be that justice/integrity will be readily visible or that these qualities will give support to his rule. If an undergarment is in view, then the idea might be that these characteristics support his rule or that they are basic to everything else.


The verb גּוּר ( gur ) normally refers to living as a dependent, resident alien in another society.


). The present translation assumes this change.


Heb “and a cow and a bear will graze – together – they will lie down, their young.” This is a case of pivot pattern; יַחְדָּו ( yakhddav , “together”) goes with both the preceding and following statements.


Heb “one sucking,” i.e., still being nursed by his mother.


Or perhaps, “cobra” (cf. NAB, NASB, NIV, NCV); KJV, ASV, NRSV “asp.”


The Hebrew text has the otherwise unattested מְאוּרַת ( mÿ ’ urat , “place of light”), i.e., opening of a hole. Some prefer to emend to מְעָרַת ( mÿ ’ arat , “cave, den”).


Heb “one who is weaned” (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “in all my holy mountain.” In the most basic sense the Lord’s “holy mountain” is the mountain from which he rules over his kingdom (see Ezek 28:14, 16 ). More specifically it probably refers to Mount Zion/Jerusalem or to the entire land of Israel (see Pss 2:6; 15:1; 43:3 ; Isa 56:7; 57:13 ; Ezek 20:40 ; Ob 16 ; Zeph 3:11 ). If the Lord’s universal kingdom is in view in this context (see the note on “earth” at v. 4 ), then the phrase would probably be metonymic here, standing for God’s worldwide dominion (see the next line).


Heb “for the earth will be full of knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.” The translation assumes that a universal kingdom is depicted here, but אֶרֶץ (’ erets ) could be translated “land” (see the note at v. 4 ). “Knowledge of the Lord” refers here to a recognition of the Lord’s sovereignty which results in a willingness to submit to his authority. See the note at v. 2 .


Or “in that day” (KJV). The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “ a root from Jesse, which stands for a signal flag of the nations, of him nations will inquire” [or “seek”].


The Hebrew term translated “sovereign master” here is אֲדֹנָי (’ adonai ).


The Hebrew text reads, “the sovereign master will again, a second time, his hand.” The auxiliary verb יוֹסִיף ( yosif ), which literally means “add,” needs a main verb to complete it. Consequently many emend שֵׁנִית ( shenit , “a second time”) to an infinitive. Some propose the form שַׁנֹּת ( shannot , a Piel infinitive construct from שָׁנָה , shanah ) and relate it semantically to an Arabic cognate meaning “to be high.” If the Hebrew text is retained a verb must be supplied. “Second time” would allude back to the events of the Exodus (see vv. 15-16 ).


Or “acquire”; KJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV “recover.”


Heb “the remnant of his people who remain.”


Or “Ethiopia” (NAB, NRSV, NLT).


Or “Babylonia” (NIV, NCV, TEV, NLT).


Or perhaps, “the islands of the sea.”


Or “the banished of Israel,” i.e., the exiles.


Heb “turn aside”; KJV, NASB, NRSV “depart.”


Heb “hostile ones of Judah.” Elsewhere when the substantival participle of צָרָר ( tsarar ) takes a pronominal suffix or appears in a construct relationship, the following genitive is objective. (For a list of texts see BDB 865 s.v. III צָרַר ) In this case the phrase “hostile ones of Judah” means “those who are hostile toward Judah,” i.e., Judah’s enemies. However, the parallel couplet that follows suggests that Judah’s hostility toward Ephraim is in view. In this case “hostile ones of Judah” means “hostile ones from Judah.” The translation above assumes the latter, giving the immediate context priority over general usage.


Heb “fly.” Ephraim/Judah are compared to a bird of prey.


Heb “on the shoulder of Philistia toward the sea.” This refers to the slopes of the hill country west of Judah. See HALOT 506 s.v. כָּתֵף .


Heb “Edom and Moab [will be the place of] the outstretching of their hand,” i.e., included in their area of jurisdiction (see HALOT 648 s.v. ח ( וֹ ) מִשְׁלֹ ).


The verb is usually understood as “put under the ban, destroy,” or emended to חָרָב ( kharav , “dry up”). However, HALOT 354 s.v. II חרם proposes a homonymic root meaning “divide.”


Heb “tongue” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NRSV).


Heb “the river”; capitalized in some English versions (e.g., ASV, NASB, NRSV) as a reference to the Euphrates River.


Heb “with the [?] of his wind” [or “breath”]. The Hebrew term עַיָם (’ ayam ) occurs only here. Some attempt to relate the word to an Arabic root and translate, “scorching [or “hot”] wind.” This interpretation fits especially well if one reads “dry up” in the previous line. Others prefer to emend the form to עֹצֶם (’ otsem , “strong”). See HALOT 817 s.v. עֲצַם .


Heb “seven streams.” The Hebrew term נַחַל ( nakhal , “stream”) refers to a wadi, or seasonal stream, which runs during the rainy season, but is otherwise dry. The context (see v. 15 b) here favors the translation, “dried up streams.” The number seven suggests totality and completeness. Here it indicates that God’s provision for escape will be thorough and more than capable of accommodating the returning exiles.


Heb “and there will be a highway for the remnant of his people who remain, from Assyria.”


Heb “in the day” (so KJV).


Or “in that day” (KJV).


Or “salvation” (KJV, NIV, NRSV).


The words “in him” are supplied in the translation for clarification.


The Hebrew text has, “for my strength and protection [is] the Lord, the Lord ( Heb “Yah, Yahweh).” The word יְהוָה ( yehvah ) is probably dittographic or explanatory here (note that the short form of the name [ יָהּ , yah ] precedes, and that the graphically similar וַיְהִי [ vayÿhi ] follows). Exod 15:2 , the passage from which the words of v. 2 b are taken, has only יָהּ . The word זִמְרָת ( zimrat ) is traditionally understood as meaning “song,” in which case one might translate, “for the Lord gives me strength and joy” (i.e., a reason to sing); note that in v. 5 the verb זָמַר ( zamar , “sing”) appears. Many recent commentators, however, have argued that the noun is here instead a homonym, meaning “protection” or “strength.” See HALOT 274 s.v. III * זמר .


Or “salvation” (so many English versions, e.g., KJV, NIV, NRSV, NLT); NAB “my savior.”


Or “salvation” (so many English versions, e.g., KJV, NAB, NIV, NRSV, NLT); CEV “victory.” sn Water is here a metaphor for renewed life; the springs symbolize the restoration of God’s favor.


Heb “call in his name,” i.e., “invoke his name.”


Heb “bring to remembrance that his name is exalted.” The Lord’s “name” stands here for his character and reputation.


The translation follows the marginal reading ( Qere ), which is a Hophal participle from יָדַע ( yada ’), understood here in a gerundive sense.


Or “is great” (TEV). However, the context emphasizes his mighty acts of deliverance (cf. NCV), not some general or vague character quality.


Heb “The message [traditionally, “burden”] [about] Babylon which Isaiah son of Amoz saw.”


Heb “my consecrated ones,” i.e., those who have been set apart by God for the special task of carrying out his judgment.


Heb “my warriors with respect to my anger.”


Heb “the boasting ones of my pride”; cf. ASV, NASB, NRSV “my proudly exulting ones.”


Heb “a sound, a roar [is] on the mountains, like many people.”


Heb “a sound, tumult of kingdoms.”


Heb “from the end of the sky.”


Or “anger”; cf. KJV, ASV “the weapons of his indignation.”


Or perhaps, “land” (so KJV, NAB, NASB, NLT). Even though the heading and subsequent context (see v. 17 ) indicate Babylon’s judgment is in view, the chapter has a cosmic flavor that suggests that the coming judgment is universal in scope. Perhaps Babylon’s downfall occurs in conjunction with a wider judgment, or the cosmic style is poetic hyperbole used to emphasize the magnitude and importance of the coming event.


Heb “the day of the Lord” (so KJV, NAB).


Heb “like destruction from the sovereign judge it comes.” The comparative preposition ( כְּ , kÿ ) has here the rhetorical nuance, “in every way like.” The point is that the destruction unleashed will have all the earmarks of divine judgment. One could paraphrase, “it comes as only destructive divine judgment can.” On this use of the preposition in general, see GKC 376 §118. x . sn The divine name used here is שַׁדַּי ( shaddai , “Shaddai”). Shaddai (or El Shaddai) is the sovereign king/judge of the world who grants life/blesses and kills/judges. In Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he both blesses/protects and takes away life/happiness. The patriarchs knew God primarily as El Shaddai ( Exod 6:3 ). While the origin and meaning of this name is uncertain (see discussion below) its significance is clear. The name is used in contexts where God appears as the source of fertility and life. In Gen 17:1-8 he appears to Abram, introduces himself as El Shaddai, and announces his intention to make the patriarch fruitful. In the role of El Shaddai God repeats these words (now elevated to the status of a decree) to Jacob ( 35:11 ). Earlier Isaac had pronounced a blessing upon Jacob in which he asked El Shaddai to make Jacob fruitful ( 28:3 ). Jacob later prays that his sons will be treated with mercy when they return to Egypt with Benjamin ( 43:14 ). The fertility theme is not as apparent here, though one must remember that Jacob viewed Benjamin as the sole remaining son of the favored and once-barren Rachel (cf. 29:31; 30:22-24; 35:16-18 ). It is quite natural that he would appeal to El Shaddai to preserve Benjamin’s life, for it was El Shaddai’s miraculous power which made it possible for Rachel to give him sons in the first place. In 48:3 Jacob, prior to blessing Joseph’s sons, tells him how El Shaddai appeared to him at Bethel (cf. chapter ) and promised to make him fruitful. When blessing Joseph on his deathbed Jacob refers to Shaddai (we should probably read “El Shaddai,” along with a few Hebrew mss , the Samaritan Pentateuch, LXX, and Syriac) as the one who provides abundant blessings, including “blessings of the breast and womb” ( 49:25 ). (The direct association of the name with שָׁדַיִם [ shadayim , “breasts”] suggests the name might mean “the one of the breast” [i.e., the one who gives fertility], but the juxtaposition is probably better explained as wordplay. Note the wordplay involving the name and the root שָׁדַד [ shadad , “destroy”] here in Isa 13:6 and in Joel 1:15 .) Outside Genesis the name Shaddai (minus El, “God”) is normally used when God is viewed as the sovereign king who blesses/protects or curses/brings judgment. The name appears in the introduction to two of Balaam’s oracles ( Num 24:4, 16 ) of blessing upon Israel. Naomi employs the name when accusing the Lord of treating her bitterly by taking the lives of her husband and sons ( Ruth 1:20-21 ). In Ps 68:14 ; Isa 13:6 ; and Joel 1:15 Shaddai judges his enemies through warfare, while Ps 91:1 depicts him as the protector of his people. (In Ezek 1:24 and 10:5 the sound of the cherubs’ wings is compared to Shaddai’s powerful voice. The reference may be to the mighty divine warrior’s battle cry which accompanies his angry judgment.) Last but not least, the name occurs 31 times in the Book of Job. Job and his “friends” assume that Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world ( 11:7; 37:23 a) who is the source of life ( 33:4 b) and is responsible for maintaining justice ( 8:3; 34:10-12; 37:23 b). He provides abundant blessings, including children ( 22:17-18; 29:4-6 ), but can also discipline, punish, and destroy ( 5:17; 6:4; 21:20; 23:16 ). It is not surprising to see the name so often in this book, where the theme of God’s justice is primary and even called into question ( 24:1; 27:2 ). The most likely proposal is that the name means “God, the one of the mountain” (an Akkadian cognate means “mountain,” to which Heb. שַׁד [ shad , “breast”] is probably related). For a discussion of proposed derivations see T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God , 70-71. The name may originally depict God as the sovereign judge who, in Canaanite style, rules from a sacred mountain. Isa 14:13 and Ezek 28:14, 16 associate such a mountain with God, while Ps 48:2 refers to Zion as “Zaphon,” the Canaanite Olympus from which the high god El ruled. (In the Canaanite god El may be in view. Note that Isaiah pictures pagan kings as taunting the king of Babylon, suggesting that pagan mythology may provide the background for the language and imagery.)


Heb “drop”; KJV “be faint”; ASV “be feeble”; NAB “fall helpless.”


Heb “melts” (so NAB).


Heb “their faces are faces of flames.” Their faces are flushed with fear and embarrassment.


Heb “the day of the Lord.”


Heb “[with] cruelty, and fury, and rage of anger.” Three synonyms for “anger” are piled up at the end of the line to emphasize the extraordinary degree of divine anger that will be exhibited in this judgment.


Heb “making desolate.”


Or “land” (KJV, NAB, NASB, NIV, NLT).


Heb “do not flash forth their light.”


Heb “does not shed forth its light.”


Or “I will bring disaster on the world.” Hebrew רָעָה ( ra ’ ah ) could refer to the judgment (i.e., disaster, calamity) or to the evil that prompts it. The structure of the parallel line favors the latter interpretation.


Or perhaps, “the violent”; cf. NASB, NIV “the ruthless.”


The verb is supplied in the translation from the first line. The verb in the first line (“I will make scarce”) does double duty in the parallel structure of the verse.


Or “the sky.” The Hebrew term שָׁמַיִם ( shamayim ) may be translated “heavens” or “sky” depending on the context.


Heb “from its place” (so NAB, NASB, NIV, NCV).


Heb “and in the day of the raging of his anger.”


Or “like a gazelle being chased.” The verb that introduces this verse serves as a discourse particle and is untranslated; see note on “in the future” in 2:2 .


Heb “his people” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV) or “his nation” (cf. TEV “their own countries”).


Heb “carried off,” i.e., grabbed from the fleeing crowd. See HALOT 764 s.v. ספה .


Heb “will fall” (so KJV, NIV, NRSV); NLT “will be run through with a sword.”


Heb “against them”; NLT “against Babylon.”


Heb “and bows cut to bits young men.” “Bows” stands by metonymy for arrows.


Heb “the fruit of the womb.”


Heb “their eye does not.” Here “eye” is a metonymy for the whole person.


Or “most beautiful” (NCV, TEV).


Heb “the beauty of the pride of the Chaldeans.” sn The Chaldeans were a group of tribes who lived in southern Mesopotamia. The established the so-called neo-Babylonian empire in the late seventh century b.c. Their most famous king, Nebuchadnezzar, conquered Judah in 605 b.c. and destroyed Jerusalem in 586 b.c.


Heb “and Babylon…will be like the overthrow by God of Sodom and Gomorrah.” On מַהְפֵּכַת ( mahpekhat , “overthrow”) see the note on the word “destruction” in 1:7 .


Heb “she will not be inhabited forever, and she will not be dwelt in to generation and generation (i.e., forever).” The Lord declares that Babylon, personified as a woman, will not be inhabited. In other words, her people will be destroyed and the Chaldean empire will come to a permanent end.


Or “Arab” (NAB, NASB, NIV); cf. CEV, NLT “nomads.”


יַהֵל ( yahel ) is probably a corrupted form of יֶאֱהַל ( ye ’ ehal ). See GKC 186 §68. k .


The words “their flocks” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The Hebrew text does not supply the object here, but see Jer 33:12 .


The word “ruined” is supplied in the translation for clarification.


The precise referent of this word in uncertain. See HALOT 29 s.v. * אֹחַ . Various English versions translate as “owls” (e.g., NAB, NASB), “wild dogs” (NCV); “jackals” (NIV); “howling creatures” (NRSV, NLT).


Heb “will skip there.”