# comment

text:
<p>So shall he sprinkle many nations- Perhaps alluding to the ritual of sprinkling blood upon the leper to pronounce him clean (s:w. <a href='B:30 14:7'>Lev 14:7</a>). Men from all nations were in prospect sprinkled by His blood; and therefore we must extend the knowledge of this to all men, both in our collective and personal witness. <a href='B:490 24:48'>Luk 24:48</a> simply comments that the disciples were witnesses to the resurrection and the fact that forgiveness and salvation was therefore potentially available to all men. The parallel records in Mt. and Mk. say that they were told to go out and witness to the resurrection world-wide. Putting them together it is apparent that if we are truly witnesses of the resurrection in our own faith, then part and parcel of this is to take this witness out into our ownlittle worlds. If we believe in the resurrection of Jesus, we will preach it world-wide. He died and rose as the representative of all men; and therefore this good news should be preached to all kinds and all races of people.
But "sprinkle" may well be a poor translation, meaning rather that they would be inspired to admiration, as LXX. The Hebrew for 'sprinkle' means to cause to spurt or rise up.
</p><p>Kings shall shut their mouths at him- As explained on :13, the servant was to witness before kings, and stun them into silence if they had any objection to the idea of the salvation of God’s people. But"shut their mouths"may also imply repentance by these "kings". I suggest this because the whole reason for the Law of Moses was “so that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God” (<a href='B:520 3:19'>Rom 3:19</a>). Paul is quoting here from <a href='B:230 63:11'>Psa 63:11</a>: “the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped”. He’s reasoning that because we’re all sinners, we’re all liars- for untruth is the essence of sin. We are not being true to ourselves, to God, to His word, to our brethren… we profess covenant relationship with God, to be His people, and yet we fail to keep the terms of that covenant. And the Law of Moses convicted all God’s people of this, and in this way led them to the need for Christ. Yet <a href='B:290 52:15'>Isa 52:15</a> prophesied that the crucified Jesus would result in men shutting their mouths. The righteousness and perfection displayed there in one Man, the very human Lord Jesus, has the same effect upon us as the Law of Moses- we shut our mouths, convicted of sin. In fact, to forcibly be made to go silent is a figure for condemnation: "The righteous shall rejoice, but all the wicked shall shut their mouths" (Ps. 107:42); "The king shall rejoice in God... but the mouth of those who speak lies shall be shut" (Ps. 63:12). It is also a symbolic of deep respect: “The princes refrained talking, and laid their hand on their mouth. The nobles held their peace, and their tongue cleaved to the roof of their mouth” (Job 29:9). The Lord's cross, the suffering of the servant, convicts men of sin and leads them to the silence of condemnation- and yet takes them further, in faith that because of His achievment, we can be forgiven and eternally saved. In His suffering, the Lord also was dumb, like a lamb before shearers (Is. 53:7). But this dumbness is that of those condemned for their sins. He identified with and felt our condemnation, and so is able to save us. But it doesn't end there. As our representative, we also are to replicate His work for others. And these sufferings of the suffering servant are to be our pattern. For Christ suffered not simply to fulfil an ancient prophecy and save us; but suffered in order to leave us an example that we should follow in His steps (1 Pet. 2:21).  
</p><p>For that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they understand- Paul read “…for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider” (<a href='B:290 52:15'>Isa 52:15</a>) as a prophecy which required him to fulfill it, by taking Christ to those who had not heard (<a href='B:520 15:21'>Rom 15:21</a>). It was because they of themselves would not"consider"/ ’understand’ (s:w. <a href='B:290 1:3'>Isa 1:3</a>) that they were psychologically confirmed in their attitudes and blinded so that they would not understand / consider (<a href='B:290 6:9-10'>Isa 6:9-10</a>). And so God operates to this day. It was the suffering of the servant, the Lord Jesus upon the cross, which was designed to as it were jolt them into considering / understanding (s:w. <a href='B:290 52:15'>Isa 52:15</a>). So GNB"They will see and understand something they had never known".
The word for "understand" occurs again at the conclusion of the song- "My righteous servant will justify many by the knowledge of himself" (Is. 53:11), the idea being 'by understanding him'. The understanding in view is the understanding of His sufferings and what they achieved- in short, to know and believe the meaning of the cross of Christ. "Shall they understand" is transitive, thus implying that they shall be taught by and come to understand by learning. And the teacher is the suffering of the servant. The Lord Jesus to this day patiently leads men to an ever greater and deeper understanding of His sufferings and death on the cross. And those profound truths are in fact "the truth", the only truths worth reaching in human life, and they are as the GNB puts it "something they had never known".</p>


text:
<p>Who has believed our message? To whom has the arm of Yahweh been revealed?- This may follow on from the end of Is. 52, where we have the converted nations astounded at what the suffering servant had achieved. The idea may be: "Who would have believed our report! Were we to hear from others what we see, it would be unbelievable". We could argue that 53:1-6 are the thoughts of the repentant nations- they are the "we" and "our". The kings and nations who are "the many" of Is. 52:14,15 are the same "many" of Is. 53:10-12. They are converted by the sufferings of the servant and His work- the work of the Lord Jesus. And thus they come to Zion, as often spoken of in later Isaiah. Yet we must give full weight to the usage of these words in Jn. 12:37,38 and Rom. 10:16, which apply them to specifically Jewish disbelief in their crucified and suffering servant / Messiah. Or as has been observed, "Those [the Gentile kings] understand what they formerly did not hear; Israel, on the contrary, does not believe that which they have heard".
To make bare the arm meant to reveal power and to show intention to use it, just as men may roll up their sleeves and begin a fight. Just as the arm of Yahweh is said to awaken in Is. 51:9. In the suffering of the servant, the Lord Jesus, God showed He meant business to His maximum extent in dealing with the problem of human sin and the apparently impossible task of human salvation. Just as earlier in Isaiah He has been likened to a woman in labour, giving her maximum mental and physical focus to the task in hand- of bringing forth a child. "The arm of the Lord" is now revealed as a person, the suffering servant. 
The context of this arm of Yahweh is found in <a href='B:290 52:10'>Isa 52:10</a>"Yahweh has made bare His holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God". The past tense was used because this outcome was so certain- but it still depended upon the repentance and faith of the exiles. Had they returned, supported with the same kind of miraculous manifestations as seen at the exodus, then"the nations"amongst whom they were scattered, the 127 provinces of Persia, would have seen God’s arm revealed; the revelation (s:w:) of His salvation (<a href='B:290 56:1'>Isa 56:1</a>). The ends of the eretz were specifically those areas on the borders of the eretz promised to Abraham, which is where they had been taken into captivity. But this didn’t happen. The message of these things was not generally believed by the exiles, despite all the appeals to them to believe it (e.g. <a href='B:290 43:10'>Isa 43:10</a> s:w:). And so the arm of Yahweh which brings salvation is revealed now to the nations through the work of the Lord Jesus.</p><p>Note the pronouns in Isaiah 53. The “we” who preach the Gospel of the cross are the “we” who rejected and condemned the Saviour, and the “we” whose sins are forgiven and who are reconciled to God. These are the reasons why we preach the crucified Christ in zeal and humility (<a href='B:290 53:1-3'>Isa 53:1-3</a>; <a href='B:290 53:5-6'>Isa 53:5-6</a>). Grace is the motive power for witness; we preach the word of His grace as it has been to us. We aren’t&nbsp; little sinners. It was our race who crucified the Lord of glory, and we have some part in their behaviour.</p><p>h laments that despite the wonder of the atonement God would work out on the cross, scarcely any would believe it, and men would turn away their faces from the crucified Christ (<a href='B:290 53:1'>Isa 53:1</a>; Isa 533). And so it happened. Men and women went out that Friday afternoon to behold it, they saw it for a few moments, beat their breasts and returned to their homes (<a href='B:490 23:48'>Luk 23:48</a>). My sense is that most of that crowd still died in unbelief, untouched by what they saw that day. And so it is with us. We break bread, and we rise up and go on our way, we return to the pettiness of our lives, to a spirituality which often amounts (at its best) to little more than a scratching about on the surface of our natures. But let’s not look away, and change the subject; let’s see the love of Christ, behold it, and by this very act be changed into that same image, from glory unto glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord (<a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a>).</p><p>And we didn’t respect him- We are programmed to shy away from the ultimate realities, in the same way as men hid their faces from the terror and dastardly horror of the crucifixion of God’s Son (<a href='B:290 53:3'>Isa 53:3</a>), and as"none considereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding"to realize the idiocy of worshipping a piece of wood as an idol (<a href='B:290 44:19'>Isa 44:19</a>).</p>


text:
<p>For he grew up before Him as a tender plant- Isaiah 53 is prefaced in chapter 52 by the command to return from Babylon and to proclaim the good news of the Messianic Kingdom which Cyrus’ decree could have brought in; as if it could have come true then. He shall “grow up” as a root from a dry land (<a href='B:290 53:2'>Isa 53:2</a>) uses the word frequently used about the ‘going up’ from Babylon to Jerusalem.</p>&nbsp;<p>When Zedekiah was taken into captivity (<a href='B:330 17:20'>Eze 17:20</a>), it was prophesied that “a tender one” (Messiah- <a href='B:290 11:1'>Isa 11:1</a>; <a href='B:290 53:2'>Isa 53:2</a>) would be planted “upon an high mountain”, and grow into a tree in whose shadows all animals would live (<a href='B:330 17:21-22'>Eze 17:21-22</a>). This is clearly the Messianic Kingdom (<a href='B:490 13:19'>Luk 13:19</a>). This young twig at the time of the captivity was surely Zerubabbel, and the “high mountain” upon which his Kingdom could have been established is surely the “high mountain” of <a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a> where the temple could have been built. Yet the prophecy had to suffer a massive deferment until its fulfilment in Christ. See on <a href='B:290 51:18'>Isa 51:18</a>.</p><p>And as a root out of dry ground. He has no good looks or majesty; when we see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him- The double figure of both a root and a tender shoot suggest connection with the prophecies of Messiah as "the root of Jesse" (Is. 11:10) and also the branch (Jer. 23:5; 33:15; Zech. 3:8; 6:12). We could read this as meaning that He grew spiritually without any good environment- a challenge to all who think better environment would make them more spiritual. However we could also read this as meaning that the Lord was like a stunted shrub struggling for existence in an arid soil. Which is why He "has no good looks". This is possibly a window onto the question of whether the Lord was handsome, or otherwise. But the essential point is that He grew up tender and sensitive in a hard environment. We cannot therefore blame our dry, unspiritual environments for our lack of spirituality. The Lord arose from such dry ground, green and tender, ultimately sensitive in an insensitive world. The thirsty land surrounding Him represented spiritually barren Israel (<a href='B:230 42:1-3'>Psa 42:1-3</a>); but the Lord Jesus so took His people upon Him, into His very soul, that His soul became a thirsty land (<a href='B:230 143:6'>Psa 143:6</a>); He felt as spiritually barren as they were, so close was His representation of us, so close was He to sinful man, so fully did He enter into the feelings of the sinner. In the same way as the Lord really did feel forsaken as Israel were because of their sins, so He suffered thirst, both literally and spiritually, which was a punishment for Israel’s sins.</p><p><a href='B:290 53:2'>Isa 53:2</a> speaks of Messiah, in a restoration context beginning in Isaiah 52, as ‘growing up’, the same word used to describe the ‘coming up’ from the dry ground of Babylon. This potential Messiah could have been Zerubbabel, but when he failed to fulfill the prophecies, there was the possibility that another man could have fulfilled his role. Nehemiah ‘came up’ from Babylon, and was “the servant” who ‘prospered’Yahweh’s work (<a href='B:160 1:11'>Neh 1:11</a>; <a href='B:160 2:20'>Neh 2:20</a>), just as the servant prophecies required (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>; <a href='B:290 48:15'>Isa 48:15</a>); and he was thereby the redeemer of his brethren (<a href='B:160 5:8'>Neh 5:8</a>). He encouraged the singing of praise on the walls of Zion (<a href='B:160 9:5'>Neh 9:5</a>; <a href='B:160 12:46'>Neh 12:46</a>), surely in a conscious effort to fulfill the words of <a href='B:290 60:18'>Isa 60:18</a> - that Zion’s gates in Messiah’s Kingdom would be praise. He was “despised” as Messiah would be (<a href='B:160 2:19'>Neh 2:19</a>; <a href='B:290 53:3'>Isa 53:3</a> s:w:). He entered Jerusalem on a donkey, as Messiah would (<a href='B:160 2:12'>Neh 2:12</a> cp. <a href='B:450 9:9'>Zec 9:9</a>); and <a href='B:160 2:16'>Neh 2:16</a> sounds very much like “of the people there was none with me” (<a href='B:290 63:3'>Isa 63:3</a>). The Gentiles round about came to sit at Nehemiah’s table to eat and drink (<a href='B:160 5:17'>Neh 5:17</a>), just as Isaiah had prophesied could happen on a grander scale at the restoration of the Kingdom. One wonders if the potential fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies was transferred to&nbsp; him? And yet Nehemiah returned to Babylon at least once, and there is no record that on his second visit he stayed on, but rather, the implication seems to be, he returned again to the service of Babylon. The total lack of Biblical information about his later life may reflect this disappointing decision. This train of thought enables us to appreciate the joy and pleasure which the Father had when finally His beloved Son lived up to all that He sought and expected.
The fourth servant song has a way of using two words of similar reference, and then repeating them reversed. In Is. 52:14 we have the first of seven cases of this in the song. "Appearance... form" in Is. 52:14 are the same words translated "good looks [s.w. "form"... beauty [s.w. "appearance"]" in Is. 53:2, but the order is reversed. The amazement of people at the disfigured form and appearance of the servant in Is. 52:14 clearly refers to His appearance in His time of dying, i.e. the Lord Jesus on the cross. We would therefore tend to think that Is. 53:2 refers to the same. Or we could understand all this to mean that in fact, throughout His life He was essentially as He was on the cross. His supreme spirituality shown in His death was but a reflection of how He had always lived and 'grown up'.
Here are the other examples of this usage of two words and reversing them:
"Man... sons of men" (52:14) = sons of men... men (53:3 Heb.)
"Suffering... disease" (53:3) = "Diseases... suffering" (53:4)
"Bear... carry" (53:4) = "Bear... carry" (53:11)
"Stricken... afflicted" (53:4) = "Stricken... afflicted" (53:7,8)
"Crushed... wounded" (53:5) = "Wounded... crushed" (53:5 Heb.)
"Our transgressions... our iniquities" (53:5) = "Our iniquities... our transgressions" (53:11,12).
</p>


text:
<p>He was despised- The same word occurs in <a href='B:340 4:17'>Dan 4:17</a>, concerning how Yahweh will exalt the basest, the least esteemed, to be King over the kingdoms of this world. That made-basest man was a reference to the Lord Jesus. He humbled Himself on the cross, that He might be exalted. Peter had his eye on this fact when he asks us to humble ourselves, after the pattern of the Lord, that we might be exalted in due time (<a href='B:670 5:6'>1Pe 5:6</a>). He desired greatness in the Kingdom, and so can we;&nbsp; for the brighter stars only reflect more glory of the Sun (<a href='B:530 15:41'>1Co 15:41</a>):&nbsp;This very thought alone should lift us up on the eagle wings of Spirit above whatever monotony or grief we now endure.</p><p>And rejected by men; a man of suffering, and acquainted with disease. He was despised as one from whom men hide their face- The AV brings out the connections more clearly: "a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief... Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows" (:4). His experience of sorrow and grief was intimately tied up with our sorrow and grief. He was so intensely our representative; and we respond to this by baptism into Him and living life in Him.
The translations vary, "we hid as it were our faces from him" or “As one that hids his face from us”. The latter would be yet another allusion to leprosy.  LXX "for his face is turned from us"would connect with how Hezekiah turned his face to the wall during his illness (<a href='B:290 38:2'>Isa 38:2</a>). His whole life was a being acquainted with grief (<a href='B:290 53:3'>Isa 53:3</a> AV); and yet we read in this same context that He was put to grief in His death (:10). The grief of His death was an extension of the grief of His life. “Who hath believed our report?" (<a href='B:290 53:1'>Isa 53:1</a>) was fulfilled by the Jewish rejection of Him in His life, as well as in His death (<a href='B:500 12:38'>Joh 12:38</a>)."He bore the sin of many" (<a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>) is applied by <a href='B:500 1:29'>Joh 1:29</a> to how during His ministry, the Lord Jesus bore the sin of the world.
There are copious connections between Job and the suffering servant:
Is. 49:7 – The servant is abhorred = Job 19:19 s.w. 
Is. 50:4 – The servant has the tongue of a teacher and sustains the weary = Job 4:3, 29:21 – Job instructed many,
strengthened the weak, and counselled others.
Is. 50:6 – The servant gave the cheek to those who would pull out his beard = Job 16:10 – Job’s tormentors struck him on the cheek (s.w.) 
Is. 50:6 – The servant did not hide his face from insult and spitting- Job 30:10 – Job is abhorred and spat upon (s.w.) Is. 50:8,9 – The servant has a vindicator to vouch for him, and he is confident he will be justified- Job 19:25; 13:18 Job has a redeemer to help him, and he is confident he will be vindicated.
Is. 52:14 – Many were appalled at the servant, whose appearance was distorted- Job 17:8 (cf. 21:5); 2:12 – The upright were appalled at (s.w.) Job’s circumstances, and his appearance was almost unrecognizable to his friends.
Is. 53:3 – The servant was despised by men- Job 19:18 Job was despised even by children.
Is. 53:3 – The servant was rejected by men- Job 19:14 – Job was rejected (s.w.) by his loved ones.
Is. 53:3 – The servant was a man of suffering- Job 2:13 – Job’s suffering (s.w.) was very great.
Is. 53:3,4 – The servant bore the diseases of the people- Job 2:7; 7:5 – Job was afflicted with disease.
Is. 53:4 – The people accounted the servant touched by God- Job 19:21 – Job said that the hand of God had
touched (s.w.) him.
Is. 53:4 – The people accounted the servant struck by God- Job 16:10 – Job was struck (s.w.) on the cheek 
Is. 53:6 – God afflicted the servant- Job 7:20 – Job felt he was the target of God’s affliction (s.w.)
Is. 53:9 – The servant was not guilty of violence- Job 16:17 – Job claims there was no violence (s.w.) in his hands.
Is. 53:9 – There was no deceit in the mouth of the servant- Job 27:4; 31:5 – Job declares that his tongue will not utter deceit (s.w.), and his foot has not hurried to deceit (s.w.).
Is. 53:9 – The servant is innocent of wrongdoing- Job 1:8 Job is blameless.
Is. 53:10 – It was God’s will to crush the servant- Job 6:9 Job’s desire is that God would be willing to crush (s.w.) him. Is. 53:10 – After God crushed him, the servant would see his offspring and prolong his days- Job 42:13,16 After his suffering came to an end, Job had more children and lived to see four generations of his descendants.
Is. 53:12 – God reinstated the servant- Job 42:10 God restored Job’s fortunes, giving him twice the riches he had before.
Is. 53:12 – The servant made intercession for transgressors- Job 42:8, 10 Job made intercession for his friends.</p>


text:
<p>Surely he has borne our sickness, and carried our suffering- God speaks of being burdened by Israel’s sins (<a href='B:290 43:24'>Isa 43:24</a>)- and yet this is a prelude to the passages which speak of the Lord Jesus bearing our sins on the cross (<a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a>; <a href='B:290 53:11-12'>Isa 53:11-12</a>). We even read of God being wearied by Israel’s sins (<a href='B:290 7:13'>Isa 7:13</a>; <a href='B:300 15:6'>Jer 15:6</a>; <a href='B:330 24:12'>Eze 24:12</a>; <a href='B:460 2:17'>Mal 2:17</a>). Even though God does not "grow weary" (<a href='B:290 40:28'>Isa 40:28</a>) by nature, it seems to me that in His full entering into His people’s situation, He does allow Himself to grow weary with the sins of those with whom He is in covenant relationship. It was this kind of capacity which God has which was supremely revealed in His ’sharing in’ the crucifixion of His Son.</p><p>The Lord Jesus during His ministry fulfilled the prophecy of <a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a> that on the cross He would ‘take our infirmities’ (<a href='B:470 8:17'>Mat 8:17</a>). These “infirmities” according to <a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a> were our sins, but sin’s effect is manifested through sickness. The moral dimension to these “infirmities” is established by Paul in Romans, for in <a href='B:520 5:6'>Rom 5:6</a> he uses the word to describe how “when we were yet weak [s:w. ‘infirm’], Christ died for the ungodly; and he explains his sense here as being that “when we were yet sinners” (<a href='B:520 5:8'>Rom 5:8</a>). Jesus as the Lord the Spirit engages with our infirmities, on the plane of the spirit, the deep human mind and psyche. What He did on the cross in engaging with our moral infirmity He did in His life, and He continues to do for us in essence.</p><p>Yet we considered him plagued, struck by God, and afflicted- "We esteemed him [as He hung on the cross] smitten of God" (<a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a> AV). It was in a sense God who "clave the rock" so that the waters gushed out (<a href='B:230 78:15'>Psa 78:15</a>; <a href='B:290 48:21'>Isa 48:21</a>). "Clave" or "struck" / "smitten" implies that the rock was literally broken open; and in this we see a dim foreshadowing of the gaping hole in the Lord’s side after the spear thrust, as well as a more figurative image of how His life and mind were broken apart in His final sacrifice. See on <a href='B:290 48:21'>Isa 48:21</a>.
The "affliction" of the servant in His sufferings is noted again in :7. This is the word used for how the Babylonians and others had afflicted God's people (Is. 60:14 "Them that afflicted you"; Lam. 3:33; 5:11; Zeph. 3:19). The servant took upon himself all the experiences of Israel in their condemnation and consequence of sin. Just as on the cross, the Lord took upon Himself all our experiences and results of sin. Truly He was our representative. The word for "affliction" is several times translated 'humbled', 'brought down', and is alluded to in Phil. 2, speaking of the progressive humbling of the Lord Jesus, coming to a pinnacle in His dying "even the death of the cross".  </p>


text:
<p>But he was pierced for our transgressions- This verse is at the very centre of the Song, seeing it begins in Is. 52:13. We are to reconstruct in our own minds the process of the crucifixion. As the nails pierced His skin and flood flowed... this was for my transgressions.</p><p>He was crushed for our iniquities- AV "bruised". Note that the Lord was beaten up at least three times: by the Jewish guards, by Herod’s men and by the Roman soldiers. In a literal sense He was bruised for our iniquities, and chastised for us to obtain the peace of sin forgiven (<a href='B:290 53:5'>Isa 53:5</a>). The Father surely foresaw all this back in <a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a>, where the promised seed was to be bruised. He was bruised "and by his bruises we are healed" (LXX). The Lord Jesus was “wounded in the heel” through his death. <a href='B:290 53:4-5'>Isa 53:4-5</a> describes Him as being ‘bruised’ by God through his death on the cross. This&nbsp;plainly alludes to the prophecy of <a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a> that the serpent would bruise Christ. However, ultimately God worked through the evil which Christ faced, He is described here as doing the bruising (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>), through controlling the forces of evil which bruised His Son. And so God also works through the evil experiences of each of His children.</p><p>The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed- The idea seems to be: "The penalty we should have paid was upon him". This is the language of financial transaction. This connects directly with the great theme of redemption in Isaiah. As discussed on Is. 40:2, Israel had sold themselves into slavery to pay the debt of their sins. But Yahweh as their go'el redeemer had offered to pay the debt [to Himself] and thus free them from their debt slavery, to cut short the period of slavery in Babylon. Now we have explained the price He paid. God's people were redeemed "without money" in the sense they didn't need to pay it. But God did- and it was through the suffering and death of His Servant, ultimately the Lord Jesus.
Many have pointed out the connections between the promises to David in 2 Samuel 7 about Jesus, and the later commentary upon them in Psalms 89 and Isaiah 53, with reference to the crucifixion.</p><p>If he [Jesus] commit iniquity = If his children [us] forsake my law… = The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all</p><p>I will chasten him with the rod of men = Then will I visit their transgression with the rod = For the transgression of my people was he stricken</p><p>And with the stripes of the children of men = And their iniquity with stripes = With his stripes we are healed.</p><p>The point of all this is to show how our sins were somehow carried by the Lord Jesus, to the extent that He suffered for them. But how was this actually achieved? It is one thing to say it, but we must put meaning into the words. I suggest it was in that the Lord&nbsp; so identified with us, His heart so bled for us, that He felt a sinner even though He of course never sinned. The final cry “My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” clearly refers back to all the many passages which speak of God forsaking the wicked, but never forsaking the righteous. The Lord, it seems to me, felt a sinner, although He was not one, and thus entered into this sense of crisis and fear He had sinned. He so identified with us. In the bearing of His cross, we likewise must identify with others, with their needs and with the desperation of their human condition… and this is what will convert them, as the Lord’s identification with us saved us.</p><p>The Lord was chastened with the rod of men "and with the stripes of the children of men", i:e. Israel (<a href='B:290 53:5'>Isa 53:5</a>; <a href='B:670 2:24'>1Pe 2:24</a>; <a href='B:400 5:1'>Mic 5:1</a>), in His death on the cross. But punishment with rod and stripes was to be given if Messiah sinned (<a href='B:100 7:14'>2Sa 7:14</a>). Yet the Lord Jesus received this punishment; because God counted Him as if He were a sinner. His sharing in our condemnation was no harmless piece of theology. He really did feel, deep inside Him, that He was a sinner, forsaken by God. Instead of lifting up His face to Heaven, with the freedom of sinlessness, He fell on His face before the Father in Gethsemane (<a href='B:470 26:39'>Mat 26:39</a>), bearing the guilt of human sin.</p>


text:
<p>All we like sheep have gone astray; each one has turned to his own way- This verse is at the centre of the fourth servant song. This is the essence of it all. The sheep have gone astray, but the servant as one of them, a sheep or baby sheep led to shearing and slaughter, would save them. By representation. 
The Bible is in one sense a very long history book, recording human behaviour over time from God’s perspective. One thing at least is clear from that history- the majority are usually wrong. People go astray “like sheep”, in that they follow each other into sin. Time and again we see that the minority position was the right and Godly one, and the majority position was wrong. We each sin in our own unique and personal ways; but we do so because we follow the flock. And the context of Isaiah 53 is that the crucifixion of the Lord was necessary exactly because of this. He was the ultimate strong man psychologically, who ultimately went the Father’s way when no other human ever did.</p><p>In the short term, the sheep were scattered by the wolf, even though the Lord died so this wouldn’t happen. And He knew in advance that this would happen (<a href='B:290 53:6'>Isa 53:6</a>; <a href='B:480 14:27'>Mar 14:27</a>; <a href='B:500 16:32'>Joh 16:32</a>). The Lord faced His final agony with the knowledge that in the short term, what He was dying in order to stop (i:e. the scattering of the sheep) wouldn’t work. The sheep would still be scattered, and He knew that throughout the history of His church they would still keep wandering off and getting lost (according to <a href='B:490 15:3-6'>Luk 15:3-6</a>). Yet He died for us from the motive of ultimately saving us from the effect of doing this. He had clearly thought through the sheep / shepherd symbolism. Unity and holding on to the faith were therefore what He died to achieve (cp. <a href='B:500 17:21-23'>Joh 17:21-23</a>); our disunity and apostasy, each turning to his own, is a denial of the Lord’s sufferings. And this is why it causes Him such pain.</p><p>And Yahweh has laid on him the iniquity of us all- see on <a href='B:490 15:4-6'>Luk 15:4-6</a>. That piece of wood that was laid upon the Lord by the Father, however the Lord physically took it up, represented our sins, which were laid upon Him; your laziness to do your readings early this morning, my snap at the woman in the bus, his hatred of his mother in law... that piece of wood was the symbol of our sins, every one of them. This is what we brought upon Him. It was our laziness, our enmity, our foolishness, our weak will... that necessitated the death of Jesus in this terrible way. It was Yahweh who laid on the Lord the iniquity of us all, as if He was present there when the soldiers laid the cross upon the Lord’s shoulders(<a href='B:290 53:6'>Isa 53:6</a>).
The LXX here has "The Lord handed him over (paradidômi) for our sin" and this is surely alluded to in the language of "the Son of Man will be handed over (paradidomi) to be crucified" (Mt. 26:2). The handing over or betrayal of the Lord by Judas in fact had God's hand behind it.  In Mt. 26:16 Judas was looking for a convenient time to hand Him over, again paradidomi.</p>


text:
<p>He was taken away- "Taken away" in Is. 53:8 is the word used just prior to the commencement of this fourth servant song: "what do I do here, says Yahweh, seeing that My people are taken away for nothing... oppressed without cause?" (Is. 52:5). They were taken away because of their sins. But Yahweh identified Himself with the exiles as if with them in exile (reflected by the visions of the cherubim glory seen by the rivers of Babylon). And He wonders why He and His people are in exile, seeing the people had been "taken away for nothing". Somehow the reason for their exile had been removed. And Is. 53:8 explains how this could have happened- the suffering servant "was taken away" and had been "stricken for the disobedience of My people". The debt had been paid, the sin removed, so Yahweh and His people were now in exile for no reason. Sin has been made an end of, according to Dan. 9. Tragically, most of them chose to remain in that exile rather than accept this amazing offer and truth. Which has therefore been extended to all men.
But GNB may have the sense right: "He was arrested and sentenced and led off to die, and no one cared about his fate". But what man didn't then care about was to become the most crucial act in human history, for which all true men would be eternally grateful.
Much study has been done of the crisis many males go through around the age of 30, the desire to stop experimenting and settle down, to cease being cared for and instead seeking to build up something permanent, the sense that life is passing by…it has all been very well summed up by Daniel Levinson in his study of the"age thirty transition". All this energy was released by the Lord into His three year ministry which changed human destiny, so intense and far reaching and successful was it."I go to prepare a place for you…."is surely an allusion to the Palestinian tradition that the wife came to live with the new husband after a year and a day, whilst He ’prepared the place’ for her. The cross was His purchase of us as His bride. The bridegroom was “taken away” from the wedding guests (<a href='B:480 2:20'>Mar 2:20</a>)- the same word used in the LXX of <a href='B:290 53:8'>Isa 53:8</a> for the ‘taking away’ of the Lord Jesus in His crucifixion death. But the groom is ‘taken away’ from the guests- because he is going off to marry his bride. The cross, in all its tears, blood and pain, was the Lord’s wedding to us.</p><p>By oppression and judgement- LXX"In his humiliation his judgment was taken away". But if as the MT, in what sense did the oppression and lack of justice take away His life? The Lord poured out His soul unto death;"he was taken away by distress"(<a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>; <a href='B:290 53:8'>Isa 53:8</a> AVmg:) suggests that it was the mental crisis in the brain of Christ on the cross which resulted in His death. This is why Pilate marvelled that He died so quickly. It is evident from this that the physical process of crucifixion did not kill Christ, but rather the heart burst (both figurative and literal) which it brought upon Him. Do we not sense that striving in our minds as we fellowship His sufferings? Surely we do, but from a great distance. Yet we should sense it more and more, it should make us get out of this sense of drifting which we all too often have, day by day drifting along with very little stirring up our minds.</p><p>And as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living- “Cut off" is Heb. ‘excluded’, "from the land of the living” (s:w. ‘the congregation’- of Israel). And this was for the transgression of His people. This is undoubtedly reference to the self-sacrificial exclusion of Moses from the land, that Israel might enter. The Lord died the death of a sinner, He chose like Moses to suffer affliction with us, that we might be saved. The allusion is also to how the scapegoat was sent into a "cut off land" with the sins of Israel. However the Hebrew is intentionally ambiguous here. The idea can be 'Who can talk of his children? Nobody, because he has none, he died childless'. The Ethiopian eunuch clearly found this reading attractive. But equally: 'Who can talk of / describe his children? Nobody, for they are so many, more than a man could number!'. Likewise He was cut off / taken away from the land of the living could refer to His death, as well as to His ascension in glory. Just as He was "lifted up" on the cross in both shame [to the human eye] or in glory, in God's eyes. Jn. 12:38 thus quotes Is. 6 and Is. 53 together about the exaltation of the Lord Jesus, arguing that both prophecies were when "Isaiah saw his glory and spoke of him".</p><p>And stricken for the disobedience of My people?- see on <a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a>. The darkness that came down at the crucifixion would have recalled <a href='B:300 33:19-21'>Jer 33:19-21</a> - when day and night no longer follow their normal sequence, God is breaking His covenant. Israel’s condemnation would be that “even at midday you will grope like a blind man in the dark" (<a href='B:50 28:29'>Deu 28:29</a>). And yet the Lord would have known that He was suffering for Israel, treated as an apostate Israel, and thus He was the more inspired to pray for their ultimate forgiveness and salvation, seeing He had borne their condemnation. The Lord suffered “for the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due"(<a href='B:290 53:8'>Isa 53:8</a> RVmg:). There are therefore elements of the crucifixion sufferings of Jesus in every suffering of natural Israel.
"Stricken" as in :4 "we accounted him stricken" is the word for disease or leprosy in Lev. 13:5 etc. The paradox is thus created of an apparently blemished sacrifice atoning for sin. This apparent contradiction would have been immediately apparent to any Jewish reader or hearer of these words. As discussed on Is. 52:14, we again have the powerful message of representation. The Lord was unblemished, but so identified with the blemished that He was counted as blemished. And this was the basis of the efficacy of His work. Had He died as a substitute, the point would be laboured that the unblemished died for the blemished. But in fact the unblemished was identified with the blemished to the point of being counted as blemished, and this was what uniquely empowered His sacrifice. Although sacrificial language is used, and there is indeed allusion to the rituals of sacrifice, this sacrifice was altogether of a different nature. The Lord bore the sins of the many like the scapegoat, which was a "purification offering" (Lev. 16:5)- because He was identified with the impure.</p>


text:
<p>They made his grave with the wicked, and with a rich man in his death; although he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth- see on <a href='B:50 34:6'>Deu 34:6</a>. Sin is likened to violence in <a href='B:290 53:9'>Isa 53:9</a> cp. <a href='B:670 2:22'>1Pe 2:22</a>. There is a clear fulfilment in the Lord’s burial in the graveyard belonging to the rich man Joseph of Arimathea. But this obvious fulfilment of prophecy isn’t noted in the New Testament. A hallmark of God’s Hand in the record is that what to us are the most obvious OT prophecies are not quoted; e.g. <a href='B:290 53:7'>Isa 53:7</a>:"He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth". A human author would have made great capital from such detailed fulfillments. But not so the Almighty. Hebrew, along with all the Semitic languages, has no superlatives. God doesn’t need them. And the record of the cross is a classic example. The record of the resurrection reflects a similar culture. The actual resurrection isn’t ever described [in marked contrast to how it is in the uninspired‘gospels’]. Instead we read of the impact of His resurrection upon His disciples.
"Death" is literally "deaths". This could be an intensive plural- His was the hardest of all human deaths, the greatest death, of the most significance. Or the plural may be another hint at His representative death- He died the death of all who die in and with Him. We are baptized into His death, and so His death became and becomes the deaths of every one in Him. And His resurrection glory likewise.
In the ancient world, how you died and were buried was important. Several times we read of having no burial or a shameful burial; being buried the wrong way was the ultimate shame. The suffering servant was buried honorably, but died shamefully, "with the wicked". He experienced both shame and glory at the same time, just as being "lifted up" is used in John's Gospel of the cross. It was both shame and glory. The NAB renders "A grave was assigned him among the wicked, and a burial place with evildoers" as if in fact the entire death and burial was shameful. If this reading is correct, we can assume that His burial place was "assigned him", in Gehenna, but Joseph of Arimathea overrode that by giving Him an honourable burial. Shame and glory are likewise juxtaposed in our Christian experience. But death, the ultimate shame, turns into the ultimate glory. Thus Is. 40 began this section by saying that the Gospel, the good news, is that all flesh is as grass, but the word of the Lord, the word of eternal restoration of the dead, lasts for ever.
</p>


text:
<p>Yet it was Yahweh’s will to bruise him- It was God who ’bruised’ the Lord on the cross. <a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a> says it was the seed of the serpent who bruised Him. Conclusion: God worked through the seed of the serpent, God was [and is] totally in control. The serpent is therefore not a symbol of radical, free flying evil which is somehow outside of God’s control, and which ’bruised’ God’s Son whilst God was powerless to stop His Son being bruised. Not at all. God was in control, even of the seed of the serpent. However we finally wish to interpret "the seed of the serpent", the simple fact is that God was in powerful control of it / him. The same word for "will" is found in Isaiah's opening criticism of Israel: "I have no pleasure / will in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats” (Is. 1:11 NIV). Yet God's pleasure or "will" was in the bruising and sacrifice of the servant. Is. 1:11 may be saying that God had no pleasure in the sacrifices His people were offering Him at that point, because they were offered with the wrong spirit. If indeed animal sacrifice was not His "will", we naturally wonder why He asked for it in the first place. We recall the language of offerings having a sweet smell to God- when properly offered. But the offering of His Son was supremely His will / pleasure: "By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ" (Heb. 10:10). </p><p>He has caused him to suffer. When You make his soul an offering for sin- His soul making restitution is again the idea of the debt of Judah's sin being cleared by God through the suffering of the servant. <a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a> NIV describes the Lord’s death as a "guilt offering". Ignorance is no atonement for sin, as the Law taught."Forgive them for they know not what they do "sounds as if the Lord felt that He was the offering for ignorance, which was required for both rulers and ordinary Israelites (cp. how Peter and Paul describe both the rulers and ordinary people as"ignorant", implying they had a need for the ignorance offering of Christ, <a href='B:510 3:17'>Act 3:17</a>; <a href='B:510 13:27'>Act 13:27</a>). And significantly, <a href='B:650 5:2'>Heb 5:2</a> describes Christ as a good priest who can have compassion on those (i:e. us) who have sinned through ignorance and want reconciliation. As we come, progressively, to realize our sinfulness, we need to make a guilt offering. But that guilt offering has already been made, with the plea "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do". All our sin, false guilt and real guilt, has been dealt with. We perhaps cannot ultimately decide, at least not by any intellectual process, what parts of our sense of"guilt"are false guilt, and which are legitimate and needful guilt. Whatever, the Lord’s guilt offering has removed all this. And yet the phrase for "guilt offering" could as well be translated ‘restitution’ or ‘reparation offering’, as its use in Numbers makes plain (Num. 5:7,8 "He shall confess his sin which he has done, and he shall make restitution for his guilt in full, and add to it the fifth part of it, and give it to him in respect of whom he has been guilty. But if the man has no kinsman to whom restitution may be made for the guilt, the restitution for guilt which is made to Yahweh shall be the priest’s"). Restored relationships with God and man are possible through this offering. The guilt offering made reparation or restitution (e.g., Lev. 5:15,16). It removed guilt and liability for punishment; as the Lord's offering removed from us the fear of condemnation. The idea of restoration of course connects with the exiles and Kingdom of God being restored at their time. The offering of the servant could have been made then, in some form. It wasn't, and the silver lining of that failure was that it was far more powerfully made and achieved through the Lord Jesus.</p><p>The Lord’s soul was sorrowful unto death in Gethsemane, as if the stress alone nearly killed Him (<a href='B:480 14:34'>Mar 14:34</a>)."My soul is full of troubles, and my life (therefore) draweth nigh unto the grave"(<a href='B:230 88:3'>Psa 88:3</a>). <a href='B:290 53:10-12'>Isa 53:10-12</a> speaks of the fact that the Lord’s soul suffered as being the basis of our redemption; the mind contained within that spat upon head, as it hung on that tortured body; this was where our salvation was won. Death is the ultimately intense experience, and living a life dedicated to death would have had an intensifying effect upon the Lord’s character and personality.</p><p>The LXX is very relevant to Hezekiah:"The Lord also is pleased to purge him from his stroke. If ye can give an offering for sin, your soul shall see a long-lived seed".</p><p>He shall see his seed- It seems to me that in some sense the Lord Jesus had a vision of us in the Kingdom just before his death (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>; <a href='B:650 12:2'>Heb 12:2</a>; <a href='B:230 22:17'>Psa 22:17</a>; <a href='B:230 22:20'>Psa 22:20</a> cp. <a href='B:560 5:30'>Eph 5:30</a>)."When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed... he shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied"(<a href='B:290 53:10-11'>Isa 53:10-11</a> AV)."When"would suggest that the Lord had some kind of vision of those He was offering Himself for, especially in their future, forgiven state.</p><p>Another take is that when God made His soul sin on the cross [AV “offering for sin" is not in the Hebrew text- it’s an interpretation], then He saw [Heb. to perceive / discern] His seed (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>). This all seems to mean that it was through this feeling as a sinner deep within His very soul, that the Lord Jesus came to‘see’, to closely identify with, to perceive truly, us His sinful seed / children. And He did this right at the very end of His hours of suffering, as if this was the climax of His sufferings- they led Him to a full and total identity with sinful men and women. And once He reached that point, He died. The total identity of the Lord with our sinfulness is brought out in passages like <a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a>, describing Jesus as being “in the likeness of sinful flesh"when He was made a sin offering; and <a href='B:670 2:24'>1Pe 2:24</a>, which speaks of how He “his own self…in his own body" bore our sins “upon the tree". Note that it was at the time of His death that He was especially like this. I believe that these passages speak more of the Lord’s moral association with sinners, which reached a climax in His death, than they do of His ‘nature’.</p><p>He shall prolong his days- The victory of the Lord Jesus is described as Him ’prolonging his days’, in allusion back to the way <a href='B:50 17:20'>Deu 17:20</a> teaches that the King of Israel must study the word all the days of his life, with the result that he would"prolong his days". The almost unbelievable victory of the man Christ Jesus against every aspect of the flesh was due to His saturation with the spirit of God’s word.</p><p>And the will of Yahweh shall prosper in his hand- The pleasure or will of our loving Father is that we should share His Kingdom (<a href='B:490 12:32'>Luk 12:32</a>), and that pleasure / will prospered through the cross of Jesus (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>). God isn’t indifferent. He wants us to be there. That’s why He gave His Son to die. It’s as simple as that. The deepest longings we feel in our earthly lives, as parents, as lovers, are mere flickers of the hungering desire God feels for us. It is a desire that cost Him His very own crucified son. He willed (not"pleased", as AV) this bruising, and this putting to grief (<a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a>). The parallel here between the bruising, beating and putting to grief may suggest that the beatings up (’bruisings’) really grieved the Lord. And note that the final sacrifice of which Isaiah 53 speaks was not only achieved by the hours spent hanging on the cross. This earlier beating and abusing was just as much a part of His final passion, as, in essence, His whole life was a living out of the principles of the cross.</p>


text:
<p>After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light and be satisfied- I prefer AV"He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied". He will and does now see in us the [result of] the travail of His soul. We note that His travail was so much internal,"of his soul". The term"travail / suffering of [the] soul"effectively means ’His life’s work’ (<a href='B:250 2:24'>Ecc 2:24</a>; <a href='B:250 4:8'>Ecc 4:8</a>; <a href='B:250 6:7'>Ecc 6:7</a> s:w:). As we die, one by one, and He knows that for sure He will resurrect and save us at the last day... this verse comes true, time and again. He sees the result of His life’s work and His final death... and is"satisfied".</p><p>My righteous servant will justify many by the knowledge of himself- “Raised for our justification’ (<a href='B:520 4:25'>Rom 4:25</a>) is an allusion to the LXX of <a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a>, which speaks of “the righteous servant” (Jesus) “justifying the righteous”. The repetition of the word “righteous” suggests that on account of the Lord’s death, and resurrection, His righteousness becomes ours, through this process of justification. But how and why, exactly, does Christ’s death and resurrection enable our justification? Paul has explained that faith in God brings justification before Him. Now Paul is explaining how and why this process operates Jesus died and rose again to eternal life as our representative. If we believe into Him (which Romans 6 defines as involving our identification with His death and resurrection by baptism), then we too will live for ever as He does, as we will participate in His resurrection to eternal life. Our final justification, being declared in the right, will be at the day of judgment. We will be resurrected, judged, and declared righteous- and given eternal life, never again to sin and die. This is the end result of the status of ‘justified’ which we have now, as we stand in the dock facing God’s judgment.</p><p>Through the cross, the Lord Jesus would"justify the many". Yet this phrase is picked up in <a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a> and applied to those who preach the Gospel- and thereby become"those who justify the many". The implication is plain enough. Through preaching, we live out the Lord’s death for others in practice, we placard Him crucified before the world’s eyes. We are not simply"Him"to them; we are Him crucified to them. The honour of this is surpassing.
The language is very similar to that of Dan. 9, about "Messiah the prince" being "cut off", making an end of sin, and bringing in eternal righteousness, i.e. justification, for "the many".
We naturally wonder how the offering of one righteous servant could "justify the many" when they are presented as sinners. For Ex. 23:7 is clear: “I will not justify the wicked”. A good man cannot get a bad man out of his death sentence. Judaism, and all forms of 'religion', wriggle and struggle with this. They have no realistic, credible path towards the salvation of sinners. Short of making God turn a blind eye and renege on His own clearly stated ethics and principles. God's justice and rightful refusal to justify the wicked... appears as too large a roadblock, intellectually, morally, ethically, practically, in the path to human salvation. There are allusions to Mosaic sacrifices throughout the song of this suffering servant. But none of them are exact; and there is no priest, nor sanctified place of offering mentioned. Nor do Mosaic sacrifices resurrect and bring forth eternally saved children. But the God who would not justify the wicked under the old covenant has found a way to achieve all this, through His servant who is the personification of His ideal "Israel". All who identified in Him, as we do through baptism, can have this amazing experience. He is Israel and he restores Israel. Isaiah's words have been clear enough, that Jacob is and was Yahweh's servant: "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified" (Is. 49:3 and often, e.g. Is. 41:8-10; 44:1-3,21; 45:4; 48:21).  "You, Israel My servant, Jacob whom I have chosen...  you whom I have taken hold of from the ends of the earth and called from its corners and said to you, ‘You are My servant, I have chosen you" (Is. 41:8,9). Judaism is not wrong on this point. The mission and sufferings of the servant are indeed full of connection with passages about Israel; e.g. a sheep led to slaughter (Is. 53:7 = Ps. 44:22). But the servant Israel are declared blind, lame and useless. "Israel" are also not the servant- "Who among you [Israel] fears the Lord? Who obeys the voice of His Servant?" (Is. 50:1). And it is the servant figure who brings good news to Israel and who is sent to bring Israel back to Yahweh (Is. 49:5). This difference between the servant and Israel becomes clearest and most acute here in Is. 53, where Israel fail to acknowledge the servant; and finally "For the transgressions of My people [Israel] He [the Servant] was stricken" (Is. 53:8). So in this fourth servant song, the singular servant arises to be Israel in one man. To save not only Israel, but all in Him: "Now says Yahweh who formed me from the womb to be His servant, to bring Jacob again to Him, and that Israel be gathered to Him... yes, He says, It is too light a thing that you should be My servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give you for a light to the nations, that you may be My salvation to the end of the earth" (Is. 49:5,6). This was indeed "what the law could not do" (Rom. 8:3); "And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses" (Acts 13:39). And so you understand why indeed I would crawl, on my hands and knees if necessary, from one side of London to the other, from one side of England to the other, from one side of Europe to the other, from one side of this world to the other, to baptize just one man "into Christ". For all the grief, the cost, the angst, the drama... I would do it again and again, to the end. And you understand now why I urge each of you likewise, to bring men into Christ.
</p><p>And he will bear their iniquities-  “Bearing sin” in other Old Testament passages (Lev. 19:17; 20:2; Num. 9:13; Lam, 5:7) refers to a person bearing the consequences of his or her own sin. He was a sin bearer; and the idea of sin bearing was almost an idiom for being personally guilty and sinful (<a href='B:40 14:34'>Num 14:34</a>; <a href='B:20 28:43'>Exo 28:43</a>). The Lord was our sin bearer and yet personally guiltless. This is the paradox which even He struggled with; no wonder we do, on a far more abstract level. As He bore away our iniquities (<a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a>), so “we then that are strong ought to bear the iniquities of the weak” (<a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a>). The Lord Jesus didn’t sin Himself but He took upon Himself our sins- to the extent that He felt a sinner, even though He wasn’t. Our response to this utter and saving grace is to likewise take upon ourselves the infirmities and sins of our brethren. If one is offended, we burn too; if one is weak, we are weak; we bear the infirmities of the weak (<a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a>). But in the context of that passage, Paul is quoting from <a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a>, about how the Lord Jesus bore our sins on the cross. We live out the spirit of His cross, not in just bearing with our difficulties in isolation, but in feeling for our weak brethren. The description of the believer as a “living sacrifice” (<a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a>) alludes to the scapegoat, the only living sacrifice, which was a type of the risen Lord (<a href='B:30 16:10'>Lev 16:10</a> LXX = <a href='B:510 1:3'>Act 1:3</a>). As the Lord ran free in His resurrection, bearing away the sins of men, so we who are in Him and preach that salvation can do the same. As He bore away our iniquities (<a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a>), so “we then that are strong ought to bear the iniquities of the weak” (<a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a>). We live out the spirit of His cross, not in just bearing with our difficulties in isolation, but in feeling for our weak brethren. Bearing sin was clearly a reference to the scapegoat, and being cut off from the land of the living (:8) alludes to the scapegoat being sent to a land "cut off". We note there is no mention in Is. 53 of a priest officiating- the absent priest in the ritual points to God Himself officiating, after the pattern of Abraham offering Isaac.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong- Graciously dividing the spoil with those who didn't fight for it evokes the behaviour of Abraham (Gen. 14:22-24) and David (1 Sam. 30:24-26). Clearly we are to get that this servant is the promised seed of Abraham and David. The idea of the Lord binding Satan (the"strong man"), stealing his goods and sharing them with His followers is a picture of His victory on the cross. It is full of allusion to <a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>, which says that on account of the fact that the Christ would pour out His soul unto death and bear our sins,"he shall divide the spoil with the strong (Heb. ’those that are bound’)". This dividing of the spoils to us by the victorious Lord (<a href='B:490 11:22'>Luk 11:22</a>; <a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>) recalls how the Lord divided all His goods between His servants (<a href='B:470 25:14'>Mat 25:14</a>), the dividing of all the Father’s goods between the sons (representing the good and bad believers, <a href='B:490 15:12'>Luk 15:12</a>). We have elsewhere shown that these goods refer to the various aspects of the supreme righteousness of Christ which are divided between the body of Christ. The spoils divided to us by the Lord are the various aspects of righteousness which He took for Himself from Satan. The picture of a bound strong man having his house ransacked before his eyes carries with it the idea of suspense, of daring, of doing something absolutely impossible. And so the idea of Christ really taking the righteousness which the Satan of our very natures denies us, and giving these things to us, is almost too much to believe.</p><p>Because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors- The Lord clearly understood this about Himself in Lk.  22:37 (also Mk. 15:28): "For I say unto you, That this that is written must yet be accomplished me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end", i.e. a completion, a fulfillment. And the Lord surely had these words in mind when in Mt. 26:28 He spoke of "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for
the forgiveness of sins". The New Testament quotes or alludes to the fourth servant song more than any other section of the Old Testament.There would have been a loss of lymph and body fluid to the point that Christ felt as if He had been"poured out like water"(<a href='B:230 22:14'>Psa 22:14</a>); He"poured out his soul to death", as if His sense of dehydration was an act He consciously performed; He felt that the loss of moisture was because He was pouring it out Himself. This loss of moisture was therefore due to the mental processes within the Lord Jesus, it was a result of His act of the will in so mentally and emotionally giving Himself for us, rather han just the physical result of crucifixion.</p><p>In the Lord’s death we see the heart that bleeds, bared before our eyes in the cross. It is written of Him in His time of dying that He"poured out his soul unto death"(<a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>). The Hebrew translated"poured out"means to make naked- it is rendered as"make thyself naked"in <a href='B:310 4:21'>Lam 4:21</a> (see too <a href='B:30 20:18-19'>Lev 20:18-19</a>; <a href='B:290 3:17'>Isa 3:17</a>). The Lord’ sensitivity was what led Him to His death- He made His soul naked, bare and sensitive, until the stress almost killed Him quite apart from the physical torture. To be sensitive to others makes us open&nbsp;and at risk ourselves. A heart that bleeds really bleeds and hurts within itself. And this was the essence of the cross.</p><p>The Lord poured out His soul unto death as a conscious act performed to enable our redemption (<a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>). Materially, this may refer to the way in which every respiration of the Lord would have scraped His sensitive skin against the rough wood, so that there would have been constant blood flow from His back. This was sometimes a cause of death through crucifixion: blood loss through repeated agitation of the wounds by lifting up the body to breathe and exhale. In this sense He poured out His soul unto death. Muscle cramps would have tended to fix the muscles and make respiration difficult without a wilful yanking of the body weight upwards on the wounded nerves.</p><p>The Lord Jesus Christ “made himself of no reputation”, or “emptied himself” (Php_2:7 R:V:), alluding to the prophecy of his crucifixion in <a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a>: “He poured out his soul unto death”. He “took upon himself the form (demeanour) of a servant” by his servant-like attitude to his followers (<a href='B:500 13:14'>Joh 13:14</a>), demonstrated supremely by his death on the cross (<a href='B:470 20:28'>Mat 20:28</a>). <a href='B:290 52:14'>Isa 52:14</a> prophesied concerning Christ’s sufferings that on the cross “his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men”. This progressive humbling of himself “unto death, even the death of the cross” was something which occurred during his life and death, not at his birth. The context of Philippians 2 relates to the mind of Jesus, the humility of which is being held up to us as an example to copy. These verses must therefore speak of Jesus’ life on earth, in our human nature, and how he humbled himself, despite having a mind totally in tune with God, to consider our needs.
Phil. 2 is a hymn or poem, stressing the seven stages of the Lord's humiliation, culminating in "death, even the death of the cross", followed by seven stages of exaltation. There are multiple allusions to Is. 53 throughout the poem. The 'V' shaped image of Phil. 2 is actually a conceptual reflection of what we have in this fourth servant song. The same Hebrew words are used of the Lord's humiliation as they are of His exaltation. Thus:
He "lifted up" our sicknesses and sins (53:4,12) but was "lifted up" in exaltation (Is. 52:13)
He "knew" sickness (53:3) but by His knowledge He justified many (53:11)
"The many" were astonished at His humiliation (52:14) but "the many" receive a share in the spoils of His victory (53:11,12)
He opened not His mouth in His humiliation (53:7) but kings would not open their mouths as they stood before the realization of what He had achieved (52:15)
Yahweh "purposed" to bruise Him, but Yahweh's purpose prospered in His hand (53:10)
</p><p>Yet he bore the sin of many- "Bear" is the word used at the start of the song, "he shall be lifted up" (Is. 52:13). It was as if the sin of "the many" was publically displayed in Him, lifted up, but in glory. The Lord knew from Isaiah 53 that He was to bear Israel’s sins, that the judgments for their sins were to fall upon Him. Israel ‘bore their iniquities’ by being condemned for them (<a href='B:40 14:34-35'>Num 14:34-35</a>; <a href='B:30 5:17'>Lev 5:17</a>; <a href='B:30 20:17'>Lev 20:17</a>); to be a sin bearer was therefore to be one condemned. To die in punishment for your sin was to bear you sin. There is a difference between sin, and sin being laid upon a person. <a href='B:40 12:11'>Num 12:11</a> brings this out: “Lay not the sin upon us… wherein we have sinned”. The idea of sin being laid upon a person therefore refers to condemnation for sin. Our sin being laid upon Jesus therefore means that He was treated as if He were a condemned sinner. He briefly endured within Him the torment of soul which the condemned will feel.</p><p>And made intercession for the transgressors- On the cross, the Lord prayed for men to be forgiven. This was a fulfilment of this prophecy that He would"justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities", be wounded for our transgressions, be bruised for our iniquities, make a sin offering for His seed, heal us through His stripes, achieve our peace with God through His chastisement, bear the sin of many, be numbered with the transgressors, be stricken"for the transgression of my people", and make"intercession for the transgressors". These are all broadly parallel statements."The transgressors"are primarily"my people", Israel, who despised and rejected him. And yet they also refer to us, insofar as we become identified with Israel in order to be saved. The prophesy that Christ would make"intercession for the transgressors"in His time of dying was surely fulfilled when He prayed"Father forgive them".</p><p>The risen and exalted Lord is spoken of as being shamed, being crucified afresh, as agonizing in prayer for us just as He did on the cross (<a href='B:520 8:24'>Rom 8:24</a> cp. <a href='B:650 5:7-9'>Heb 5:7-9</a>). On the cross, He made intercession for us; but now He ever lives to make such intercession (<a href='B:650 7:25'>Heb 7:25</a>). There He bore our sins; and yet now He still bears our sins (<a href='B:290 53:4-6'>Isa 53:4-6</a>; <a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a>). Somehow, the cross is still there. The blood of Jesus cleanses us, in the present tense, from all our sins; the Lord Jesus loves us and frees us from our sins by His blood (<a href='B:690 1:7'>1Jn 1:7</a>; <a href='B:730 1:5'>Rev 1:5</a>). We are cleansed by an ever ’freshly slain’ sacrifice (<a href='B:650 10:20'>Heb 10:20</a> Gk:).</p><p>LXX"and was delivered because of their iniquities"is alluded to in <a href='B:520 4:25'>Rom 4:25</a>: “Handed over because of our trespasses”. The Gospel accounts of the crucifixion give special emphasis to the moment of the Lord being handed over to those who would crucify Him. Paul is going on to show the mechanics, as it were, of how God has chosen to operate. His scheme of justifying us isn’t merely a case of Him saying ‘So you are declared right by Me’. He can do as He wishes, but He prefers to work through some kind of mechanism. We are declared right by God although we are sinners; which raises the obvious question: So what becomes of our sins? And so Paul explains that by talking about the crucial role of the death of Christ. Because He was of our nature, He is our representative. Although He never sinned, He died, yet He rose again to eternal life. Through connection with Him, we therefore can be counted as in Him, and thereby be given that eternal life through resurrection, regardless of our sins. In this sense, Jesus had to die and resurrect because of our sins.</p>


text:
<p>Sing, barren, you who didn’t bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, you who did not travail with child- 
Zion had had sons whom she "bore", but they were dead (s.w. Is. 51:18 "there is none to guide her of the sons she has brought forth"). Now she is presented as a woman who was always barren and never brought forth. It could simply be that various images are used for Zion (divorced for adultery, a self harming alcoholic lying naked in the dust and sexually abused, abandoned by a capricious and bad tempered husband, an abandoned wife of youth, barren, an older woman bereaved of her adult sons, widowed) to express the various aspects of her feelings and to reflect to us her fractured self-identity. Although we can just about put all those images together in one single characterization of "Zion". In this case we have the picture of an attractive young woman who married a man who loved her, had children by Him, but committed adultery; was  divorced by her husband and sent away from Him after multiple opportunities to change; wrongly perceives and misremembers him as having abandoned her for other women and being a short tempered, angry man; her children were killed; she became barren, or feels barren because her children were dead; her husband died [so she thinks]; and she ended up a self harming alcoholic lying naked in the dust and sexually abused by passers by. This would be true to observed experience, in my decades of running soup kitchens and dealing with older people in addiction. And yet from that low point she could have been transformed... And "the power that hath saved thee" and made Zion free is now available to all who want to be God's woman. 
But all the images are what Zion thought within her mistaken and non factual narrative. She thought God was an angry God who in a burst of anger had sent her away; when His heart was bursting with love for her, and He was aware of her as a mother is aware of her newborn baby. He says that in fact there is no "bill of divorce"- possibly implying He had not divorced Judah, although He had divorced Israel. She says she is barren- when she had had children, who had died. Her husband had died, so she thinks- because of the belief that a god was married to his capital city, and if the city fell to another god and the inhabitants taken away, then this meant the god had died. Yet God goes along with her narrative, as His Son did with the issue of demons. And reasons with her on each point as if it were true, rather than making point blank attacks on her wrong positions. This is the behaviour of many Protestant groups who think it's all about winning theological battles, rather than saving people one by one.
There are other options, however, to considering all the descriptions of Zion as describing the singular characterization of one woman. The phenomenon of "communal amnesia" can occur in exiled communities, and maybe this feeling as if she has never had children is a way of reflecting that. Or we could consider that seeing her sons had been slain, she had the mentality of a barren woman. For to not have children was social death for a woman; hence the tragedy of sons being slain during the mother's lifetime. In this case, God feels so deeply her pain, recognizing how defined she was by the social views around her, sensitive to how she felt that losing her sons made her feel as if she had never in fact given birth to them. Such feelings may not be applicable to many modern women; but they were how women felt at that time, and Yahweh appreciated that. And gave her an opportunity to have children again, new children who would be counted hers and who would take away her shame amongst women and elevate and fulfil her. The idea is that adopted children were as legitimate to a woman as those she gave birth to. This may be hard for us to appreciate. But having children was such a huge social issue, and was a woman's sole purpose and pride. If she had children named to her and their mother was not around, this was indeed as fulfilling as having her own native children.  
The language of crying aloud and breaking forth is that of the pain of childbirth. But this once barren woman gives birth without pain, and instead with cries of joy: "burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs". The curse would be removed, which goes along with the language of Eden being restored. The same idea is in Is. 66:7 "Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered or a man child". However, a totally different scenario had been originally envisaged- the trauma of the Babylonian invasion was to be Zion's painful labour, but she would go to Babylon and there be delivered of a child- hinting surely at her repentance, bringing forth a spiritual child: "Be in pain, and labour to bring forth, daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail; for now you will go forth out of the city, and will dwell in the field, and will come even to Babylon. There you will be delivered. There Yahweh will redeem you from the hand of your enemies... Therefore He will abandon them until the time that she who is in labor gives birth. Then the rest of his brothers will return" (Mic. 4:10; 5:3). All that had changed. Yahweh did abandon them in exile (Is. 54:7) but He put an end to that- even though Zion didn't give birth as intended. She didn't give birth to the child- instead she was given the Gentiles as children. But she refused them. Now another scenario is presented, quite different and far more gracious than that found in Micah. Zion had not brought forth the child in Babylon. But God didn't abandon them. The idea was that although in Isaiah's time the child had come to the birth but there had been no strength to deliver (Is. 37:3), yet she would deliver the child in Babylon. But she didn't. In another figure, her children were dead and she was barren, laying drunk in the dust having drunk the wine of condemnation and having become addicted to it. And they had refused to accept the redemption from Babylon when it was offered. She had indeed been in labour pains but had brought forth the wind, nothing (Is. 26:17,18), they conceived chaff and brought forth stubble (Is. 33:11). Now, by absolute grace, God is offering yet another scenario, whereby the barren and bereaved Zion has children, without pain. And even then they resisted, retreating into hard right wing nationalism and xenophobia, resisting any idea of the Gentiles becoming Zion's spiritual children. And so God redefined Zion, and the essence of these things comes true for that new Jerusalem.
God's hope here in Is. 54:1 is that Zion would cry out in joy as she gave birth to the Gentiles, and had those children counted to her. But it was Yahweh Himself who had likened Himself to a woman who had been in labour throughout the years of exile, and would now "cry out like a travailing woman" (Is. 42:14). He would be totally identified with them in this birth process. But still they refused that personal identity with Him, remaining merely culturally associated with Yahweh on the level of religion.     
The allusion is to Sarah, to whom the exiles had earlier been bidden to"look"for inspiration (<a href='B:290 51:2'>Isa 51:2</a>). Sarah in her time of child-birth is likened to us all as we enter the Kingdom, full of joy (<a href='B:290 54:1-4'>Isa 54:1-4</a>); and yet at that time she was eaten up with pride and joy that she could now triumph over her rival; see on <a href='B:10 21:10'>Gen 21:10</a>. And yet Sarah at that time is seen from a righteous perspective, counted as righteous, in that she is a type of us as we enter the Kingdom:&nbsp;God’s mercy to Sarah and Abraham is repeated to us daily.</p><p>It could also be that what is in view here are spiritual children. The Divine hope was that the lack of spiritual ’children’ amongst the exiles, repentant converts to the prophetic message, was going to be replaced by such "children" from among the Gentiles.</p><p>For more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, says Yahweh- "The city of your holiness has become desolate / barren, Zion has become as a wilderness, Jerusalem, a curse" (Is. 64:10). Her barrenness was because of a Divine curse. The children of Zion are clearly defined in Gal. 4 as the Christian believers, having Jerusalem as "the mother of us all". The bridegroom of Zion is presented in Revelation as the Lord Jesus, for He marries a new, beautifully adorned Jerusalem. And yet Paul seems to interpret "the desolate", barren woman as Sarah, and the "the children of the married wife" as Jews under the law, being the children of Hagar, born into slavery. But in that case, here Hagar is called "the married wife". Possibly the connection is with Rom. 7:2, "A married woman is subject to the law of her husband so long as he lives". But the idea is that Zion had been an unfaithful wife, a prostitute who was now barren [so Hosea; and Is. 1:21 "the faithful city of Jerusalem has become a harlot"; who could be transformed into "a city of righteousness, the faithful mother-city Zion" (Is. 1:26 LXX). "The married wife" may not be a different woman [Hagar], but a reference to how Zion was when she miserably married, before her divorce with God. What is in view is Sarah when barren, and Sarah who rejoiced at the birth of Isaac. Paul's point in Gal. 4 is that if you want to live as a slave to the law, then you are the child of Hagar the slave; for she "bore children into slavery" (Gal. 4:27). And so the allusion may not be so much to Hagar, but the point may rather be that the two women represent Zion past and present. When she had been married to Yahweh she was barren; but the paradox is that now she was"desolate"she was going to have children, and she would do so without going through"travail"for them (<a href='B:550 4:27'>Gal 4:27</a>). <a href='B:550 4:27'>Gal 4:27</a> confirms this interpretation and develops it, connecting unbelieving Israel with the barren woman and the largely Gentile church with the fruitful one.</p><p>The idea of God being destroyed in the destruction of His people (see on <a href='B:300 6:26'>Jer 6:26</a>) may be the basis of the descriptions of Zion as being left widowed (<a href='B:310 1:1'>Lam 1:1</a>; <a href='B:290 54:1-8'>Isa 54:1-8</a>). We ask the question- if she was a widow, who died? Her husband, God, was as it were dead. The very idea of the death of God&nbsp;is awful and obnoxious. But this was and is the depth of God’s feelings at His peoples’ destruction.
We must follow the images carefully. Zion is presented in Is. 49:14 as a forsaken young wife. She is also presented as a young mother who had lost her children, who suddenly gets them back. But Is. 49:15 then applies feminine imagery to God as Zion's mother. God is the eternal mother, the figure that every man, if he is honest, would dearly love to have. Not an old frail lady with dementia, as his last memories of her might be, but the younger woman who, as a child, apparently had all the answers and made all the provisions. Even if man never had a mother or had a bad mother, that is the idea desire of every man. It is clearly enough why men have a "thing" about women's breasts. And that is God to man. God has set eternity in our hearts, a longing for things which we shall never quite achieve in this life. But that longing is met uniquely in Him. The woman longs for a strong father, a wonderful ever present husband, and children who are always somehow present and not distant, who crown her maturity with teeming happy grandchildren (Is. 49:21-23). She never has those things... her father may or may not have been the strong one, but he grows old and weak. Her husband was not perfect, and is not always strong. Her children are not as she would wish, perhaps she is estranged from one and another is lost to her, under the influence of in-laws or drugs... or not thinking spiritually as she does. But these deep longings are met uniquely in the things of the Father and His Kingdom. Yahweh is revealed as the eternal husband of Zion, the go'el who redeems from all life's problems, the father of her wonderful children. Family life, good as it can be when lived in the Lord, never fully meets these longings of both man and woman. And even the best of human relationships are time limited. Only Yahweh of Israel can be eternally all these things to man. The failures and lack of total fulfilment in family life for both men and women are merely to hone and focus upon what we would ideally wish for- and we shall receive it eternally, in our relationship with God and His peoplee in His Kingdom. And in Is. 54, Zion is presented as a once barren woman. Now and for eternity she not only has children but her children are abundant (Is. 54:1), widespreading (Is. 54:22) and prosperous (Is. 54:13).</p>


text:
<p>Enlarge the place of your tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of your habitations; don’t spare: lengthen your cords, and strengthen your stakes- They would need more space for all the children- the Gentile converts who would be made seeing that the Jews were unresponsive (:1). This extension of her tents meant enlarging the boundaries of the land (:3). The implication could even be that the further they lengthened their tent cords, the more Gentile converts would come in."The place"of the tent, the territory where it was pitched, had to be expanded. God’s redeemed family was to be extended beyond the limits of the eretz promised to Abraham.</p><p>Isaiah so often uses the idea of ‘stretching out’ the Heavens with reference to His creation of His new Kingdom (<a href='B:290 40:22'>Isa 40:22</a>; <a href='B:290 42:5'>Isa 42:5</a>; <a href='B:290 44:24'>Isa 44:24</a>; <a href='B:290 45:15'>Isa 45:15</a>; <a href='B:290 51:13'>Isa 51:13</a>; Isa 6517-18). <a href='B:450 1:6'>Zec 1:6</a> cp. 12:1 show that to stretch out Jerusalem is parallel with stretching out the ‘heavens’. The ‘singing’ of the heavens refers to Judah’s intended joy at the restoration (<a href='B:290 49:13'>Isa 49:13</a> cp. 48:20). Israel were being told to peg out their tent as wide and far as they could; because this would be the extent of their Kingdom. The Kingdom would be as ‘large’ for them as they had vision for in this life.</p><p>The God who stretched out the heavens would have no difficulty in stretching out barren Zion's tent to include new children. But she had to herself move the tent pegs. And how far she moved them limited how many children God would give her. All things are possible to those who believe, God Himself is unlimited.
This expansion of the tent or tabernacle of the once barren Sarah is in order to include the Gentiles. This implies they are within the tabernacle, and this is perhaps why Paul alludes to this passage in Galatians 4- in argument against the Judaizers who were against the inclusion of the Gentiles within the tent of meeting.
</p>


text:
<p>For you shall spread out on the right hand and on the left; and your seed shall possess the nations- "Spread out" is the word used in Gen. 28:14 of the promised seed spreading forth to all points of the compass. This fulfilment of the Abrahamic promises was to be an outcome of accepting the new covenant. They would have responded to the appeal of Is. 51:1 to look to Abraham and Sarah, to be likewise energized by the Spirit and made fruitful out of the most fruitless, barren position. See on :2. GNB"You will extend your boundaries on all sides; your people will get back the land that the other nations now occupy". The idea is that Israel would possess all the nations within the eretz promised to Abraham, and yet expand those borders. The Abrahamic promise was that the seed would possess the gate of their enemies- the nations on the edges of and bordering on the eretz (<a href='B:10 22:17'>Gen 22:17</a>; <a href='B:10 24:60'>Gen 24:60</a>).</p><p>And make the desolate cities to be inhabited- At the restoration the temple still lay “waste” (<a href='B:440 1:4'>Hag 1:4</a>; <a href='B:440 1:9'>Hag 1:9</a>) just as it had lain “desolate” [s:w. <a href='B:300 33:10'>Jer 33:10</a>; <a href='B:300 33:12'>Jer 33:12</a>] after the Babylonian destruction. The ‘restoration’ was in fact not really a restoration at all, in God’s eyes. Thus Ezra sat down desolate [AV “astonied”] at the news of Judah’s apostasy in marrying the surrounding women; using the very same word as frequently used to describe the ‘desolate’ Jerusalem that was to be rebuilt (<a href='B:150 9:3'>Ezr 9:3</a> cp. <a href='B:290 49:8'>Isa 49:8</a>; <a href='B:290 49:19'>Isa 49:19</a>; <a href='B:290 54:3'>Isa 54:3</a>; <a href='B:290 61:4'>Isa 61:4</a>). He tore his priestly garment (<a href='B:150 9:3'>Ezr 9:3</a>), as if he realized that all Ezekiel’s prophesies about those priestly garments now couldn’t come true (s:w. <a href='B:330 42:14'>Eze 42:14</a>; <a href='B:330 44:17'>Eze 44:17</a>; <a href='B:330 44:19'>Eze 44:19</a>). <a href='B:290 58:12-13'>Isa 58:12-13</a> prophesied that the acceptable rebuilding of Zion was dependent upon Judah keeping the Sabbath acceptably; and yet Nehemiah’s record makes clear their tragic abuse of the Sabbath at the time of the restoration; and this therefore meant that the rebuilding of the temple and city were not going to fulfill the Messianic prophecies about them which existed.</p>


text:
<p>Don’t be afraid; for you shall not be ashamed: neither be confounded; for you shall not be disappointed- Ancient society was shame based. People were humiliated because they had been shamed. But Zion is encouraged: "do not be humiliated, for you will not be ashamed". This fear of shame is still a major issue in human psychology. Those redeemed in Christ are in Him, who refused to feel shame because He was innocent (Is. 50). Insofar as we feel in Him, we too can live without shame in this world. Humbled before Him, but without the fear of possible shame... if people knew my sins, if life doesn't work out, if my poverty is revealed as it is, if my family life goes wrong. </p><p>Harmonizing with the second half of the verse, LXX has"Fear not, because thou has been put to shame, neither be confounded, because thou was reproached". The shame of the Babylonian captivity was strong in their reasoning; they feared leaving Babylon lest such shame be repeated. It was to be the makers of idols who were"confounded"(s:w. <a href='B:290 41:11'>Isa 41:11</a>; <a href='B:290 45:16'>Isa 45:16</a>) and only the true Israel would not be"confounded"(<a href='B:290 45:17'>Isa 45:17</a>; <a href='B:290 54:4'>Isa 54:4</a>). The sinners in Israel had refused to be confounded or ashamed of their sins (<a href='B:300 3:3'>Jer 3:3</a> s:w:) and so they would be shamed in condemnation. Repentance involves an imagination of ourselves coming to judgment day and being condemned, and feeling shame for that; that is how we shall not be ashamed. And it is the servant alone who shall not be ashamed / confounded because of His righteousness (<a href='B:290 50:7'>Isa 50:7</a>). Our identity with Him removes that shame. If we condemn ourselves, we shall not be condemned (<a href='B:530 11:31'>1Co 11:31</a>). The enemies of Israel would perish alongside the apostate within Israel, in the same judgment.</p><p>Yahweh had promised support for them if they returned to the land; He would preserve them on the way. Consider <a href='B:290 50:10'>Isa 50:10</a>: “Who is among you that feareth the LORD, that obeyeth the voice [s:w. Ezra 1 :1 re the proclamation of Cyrus] of his servant [i:e. Cyrus, <a href='B:290 45:1'>Isa 45:1</a>], that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? let him trust in the name of the LORD, and stay upon his God”. Yet Ezra was ashamed to ask the king for soldiers to guard them on the journey only because he had earlier told the king that Yahweh would be with them (<a href='B:150 8:22'>Ezr 8:22</a>), as if he really did want the support but was ashamed to ask for it. He disallowed Isaiah’s prophesy that the restored Israel would never be ashamed [s:w. <a href='B:150 8:22'>Ezr 8:22</a>; <a href='B:150 9:6'>Ezr 9:6</a>] nor confounded (<a href='B:290 45:17'>Isa 45:17</a>; <a href='B:290 49:23'>Isa 49:23</a>; <a href='B:290 54:4'>Isa 54:4</a>). Nehemiah accepted such support when he came up from Babylon (<a href='B:160 2:9'>Neh 2:9</a>).</p><p>For you shall forget the shame of your youth; and the reproach of your widowhood you shall remember no more- Their widowhood implied their husband Yahweh had as it were died; see on :1.
GNB "You will forget your unfaithfulness as a young wife, and your desperate loneliness as a widow". This death of God was not just a reference to His total identification with the exiles' sufferings and deaths. "God was in Christ" in the Lord's death. Whilst God is not Jesus and neither can God die, He was totally identified with the death of His Son. And that left Israel a widow, as it were. 
The "reproach" of widowhood was that if a husband died without having had children by the wife, the woman was shamed for not having had children. The word is used by Rachel when she rejoices at her pregnancy because "God has taken away my reproach" (Gen. 30:23). This shame was to be taken away by suddenly being given other children, just as happened for Job. For Job lost his children but then suddenly got them back in the form of other children, when his captivity was turned by Yahweh. Job's story was clearly written for the exiles. But they didn't want this "reproach" removed, because the word is repeatedly used of how things were for the returned exiles (Neh. 1:3; 4:4; 5:9). Because they didn't want the Gentile children offered to them by God. That reproach could have been taken away (Is. 25:8), if they had accepted the command to identify with the reproach-less Servant and "not fear the reproach of men" (Is. 51:7). The removal of reproach was a feature of the new covenant (Ez. 36:15,30; Joel 2:19). But they refused. This offer to be free from all shame placed on us by society, because of our identification with the Lord, is now made to us. Earlier, God had told Judah that their reproach was indelible: "Because you say this word, The burden of Yahweh, and I have sent to you saying, You shall not say, The burden of Yahweh; therefore, behold, I will utterly forget you, and I will cast you off, and the city that I gave to you and to your fathers, away from My presence: and I will bring an everlasting reproach on you, and a perpetual shame, which shall not be forgotten" (Jer. 23:38-40). It was of God's grace alone that He was offering a way out of this reproach and shame- and they refused it. 
This refusal is remarkable [as is all refusal of the Gospel of God's love]. It was understood that a deity was married to his capital city, and thus Yahweh had been married to Zion / Jerusalem. If a city was destroyed and the inhabitants taken into captivity, it was as if the deity had died. Thus Babylon would become a widow when she fell (Is. 47:9). And thus Zion is described as widowed. But Yahweh is telling the exiles that Zion is free, is redeemed, He their God is gloriously alive, and they can now return to Zion and thus to Him. But they refused. Although they zealously retained the appearance of being His people, in reality they preferred the Babylon life and did not want actual restored relationship with Him. Which seems how it is for many 'Christians' today, who effectively have no active relationship with God.

The continued assurances of freedom from shame are in the context of Yahweh as Israel's go'el or "redeemer" (:5). The redeemer paid money to get the family member out of debt, took vengeance for his blood- all to save the family from shame. And this work of the "redeemer" to free from shame is applied to God's people generally; and it applies to us too. The verse opens using three separate words for shame, translated here "ashamed... confounded... disappointed". In ancient societies, public disgrace, humiliation and embarrassment were feared more than death- and they still are today. Whether in life on a council estate, or high society. In Christ, we are ultimately freed from all aspects of shame, requiring four different words for it in just this one verse- through being declared righteous / innocent, justified, free from condemnation, in Christ. </p>


text:
<p>For your Maker is your husband; Yahweh of Armies is His name: and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; the God of the whole earth shall He be called- As explained on :2,3, the entire eretz promised to Abraham would convert to Yahweh. LXX"He that delivered thee, He is the God of Israel, and shall be called so by the whole earth":&nbsp; And this could have potentially happened had the exiles returned in faith and repentance:&nbsp;"The Holy One of Israel; the God of the whole earth"- a phrase used in Zechariah regarding the Angel co-ordinating the restoration.</p><p>Israel is so often set up as the bride of God (<a href='B:290 54:5'>Isa 54:5</a>; <a href='B:290 61:10'>Isa 61:10</a>; <a href='B:290 62:4-5'>Isa 62:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 2:2'>Jer 2:2</a>; <a href='B:300 3:14'>Jer 3:14</a>; <a href='B:350 2:19-20'>Hos 2:19-20</a>). This is why any infidelity of theirs to God is spoken of as adultery (<a href='B:460 2:11'>Mal 2:11</a>; <a href='B:30 17:7'>Lev 17:7</a>; <a href='B:30 20:5-6'>Lev 20:5-6</a>; <a href='B:50 31:16'>Deu 31:16</a>; <a href='B:70 2:17'>Jdg 2:17</a>; <a href='B:70 8:27'>Jdg 8:27</a>; <a href='B:70 8:33'>Jdg 8:33</a>; <a href='B:350 9:1'>Hos 9:1</a>). The very language of Israel ’selling themselves to do iniquity’ uses the image of prostitution. This is how God feels our even temporary and fleeting acts and thoughts of unfaithfulness. This is why God is jealous for Israel (<a href='B:20 20:15'>Exo 20:15</a>; <a href='B:20 34:14'>Exo 34:14</a>; <a href='B:50 4:24'>Deu 4:24</a>; <a href='B:50 5:9'>Deu 5:9</a>; <a href='B:50 6:15'>Deu 6:15</a>)- because His undivided love for them is so exclusive. He expects them to be totally His.</p><p>We note how the description of Yahweh as Israel's "redeemer" often goes together with His title as "the holy one of Israel" (here and Is. 41:14; 43:14; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7). His redemption of His worthless people is what sets Him apart, makes Him so "holy". No other god would have done this. There was and is no greater grace. And He is His people's "Holy one" in the sense of being their / our only one. Israel belongs exclusively to her redeemer, and He belongs exclusively to them. Because His redemption of them is so unique; and the price of that redemption is ultimately in the blood of His son, given as a "ransom [payment] for many". In this same verse we likewise have a similar metaphor- Yahweh is the husband of His people, and they are His wife.</p>


text:
<p>For Yahweh has called you as a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, even a wife of youth, when she is cast off, says your God- see onZec 11:10-11. God speaks as if He died, and therefore Israel was left as a widow (<a href='B:290 54:4'>Isa 54:4</a>; <a href='B:290 54:6'>Isa 54:6</a>); see on :1."Cast off"is the term found later in the prophets: “My God will cast them away” (<a href='B:350 9:17'>Hos 9:17</a>; <a href='B:290 54:6'>Isa 54:6</a>); the same Hebrew word occurs when God says He would “reject” Israel (<a href='B:350 4:6'>Hos 4:6</a>). But even when Israel were to be in the land of their enemies as punishment for their sins, “I will not cast them away” [s:w:] (<a href='B:30 26:44'>Lev 26:44</a>). God will not cast away Israel (<a href='B:290 41:9'>Isa 41:9</a>). Only if Heaven can be measured will God cast away Israel (<a href='B:300 31:37'>Jer 31:37</a>). God has not cast away His people (<a href='B:520 11:2'>Rom 11:2</a>). We see here the deep tension within God’s mind as He considers His status and position toward His unfaithful people. He here compares Himself to a young man hopelessly in love with a woman (Israel) who was really no good, a man who took the blame when it was undoubtedly her fault (<a href='B:290 54:6-7'>Isa 54:6-7</a>), grieving that she wouldn’t return to Him (<a href='B:370 4:8'>Amo 4:8</a> etc:)."I am broken with their whorish heart... I am crushed"(<a href='B:330 6:9'>Eze 6:9</a>; <a href='B:300 8:21'>Jer 8:21</a> NIV). God likens Himself to a broken man because of Israel’s fickleness. He went through the pain of the man who knows He has been forgotten by the woman he still desperately remembers (<a href='B:350 2:13'>Hos 2:13</a>). RV “even a wife of youth, when she is cast off”. The Hebrew is difficult. We can read it as an exclamation: "and a wife of youth—can she be rejected?". As if it were unthinkable to permanently reject the wife of your youth. Through Malachi, Yahweh condemned the Jews for doing this to the wives of their youth. He reasons as if the wife of your youth is always your wife. Whatever. And despite all Judah's adultery, He now reasons the same way. For "the shame of your youth" (:4) is related to her having been a wife in her youth. The shameful things of her youth were done whilst she was married to God. 
However, as discussed on :1, we can understand God's words in :6,7 as merely reflecting the claims Zion was making- that her husband had abandoned and forsaken her. God would then be using those terms and running with them, not arguing that they were false accusations, but rather saying that 'Fair enough, so you say, but now there is a glorious and eternal future possible for our marriage'. And that is typical of how He responds to criticism, and it was how His Son dealt with false accusations too. This may also explain how Zion is described as "barren", when barrenness would not be her fault. She had in fact had children, but the idea she had been "barren" was part of her own false narrative. And God runs with that, saying that the barren will bear children, as did Sarah (Is. 51:1,2). Too quickly we write off people who have spun a false narrative and bought into it and repeated it to the point they believe it is true. God instead runs with their narrative, and seeks to show it leads to something far greater and better. And His narrative is to be the final Truth.
</p>


text:
<p>For a small moment have I forsaken you; but with great mercies will I gather you- But even in this small moment [intended to be 70 years], He was watering them and caring for them. He is involved"every moment"in the life of His people; Job, presented as the suffering exiles, came to realize this (<a href='B:290 27:3'>Isa 27:3</a> cp. <a href='B:220 7:18'>Job 7:18</a> s:w:).</p><p>The sufferings of Christ on the cross have connections with the punishments for Israel’s sins (e.g. being offered gall to drink = <a href='B:300 8:14'>Jer 8:14</a>; <a href='B:310 3:5'>Lam 3:5</a>). Israel were temporarily forsaken by God because of their sins (<a href='B:290 49:14'>Isa 49:14</a>; <a href='B:290 54:7'>Isa 54:7</a>), and therefore so was the Lord. He too was chastened with the rod of men"and with the stripes of the children of men", i:e. Israel (<a href='B:290 53:5'>Isa 53:5</a>; <a href='B:670 2:24'>1Pe 2:24</a>; <a href='B:400 5:1'>Mic 5:1</a>), in His death on the cross.</p><p>The deathless love of Hosea for Gomer, the very intensity and height of it, in itself highlights the tragedy of God. That His love, yes, the passion and longing of God Himself, was rejected by His people. There are some reasons to think that the book of Hosea was rewritten (under inspiration) during the captivity. Isaiah had explained here that although God and Israel had departed from each other, they would come together again by Israel being regathered- i:e. by their return from Babylon to the land. And perhaps Hosea was rewritten at the same time, as an appeal for the Jews to ‘return’ to their God, i:e. to return to Judah. And yet, so tragically, whilst they all avowed their allegiance to Yahweh, generously supported the few who did return… the majority of the Jews didn’t return to their God. They chose the soft life in Babylon, where they remained. It’s why the close of the book of Esther is so sad- the Jews are there in prosperity and popularity in Babylon, no longer weeping by the rivers of Babylon.</p><p>And yet we still struggle with the language here. God says He was angry for just "a moment" (:7,8), but will give them eternal love. But 70 years is a human lifetime, and the first generation of exiles died in captivity. His 'forsaking' is compared to His eternal mercies. Likewise His "wrath of a moment" is favorably contrasted with "everlasting loving kindness" (:8). But His wrath had been very real, resulting in the deaths of so many, and the total wreck of their lives. It could seem that God is rationalizing His wrath and the extent of it. For as Job would complain, He doesn't see as man sees, He doesn't have "eyes of flesh" (Job 10:4); for Him, 70 years is a moment, for man it is a lifetime. Moses in Ps. 90 complains likewise. So is this really God out of touch, using inadvertently upsetting language, because He doesn't "get it" as to how His words will be taken by humans? I suggest not. He also speaks of how He has co-suffered in silence throughout the exile "for a long time" (Is. 42:14), as if in labour pains for His people for 70 years. He presents it as a matter of perspective- a long time in one sense, a moment of time in the prospect of the infinity which He had offered Zion. He is intentionally provoking us with this reasoning- and demanding we see things from an eternal, Kingdom perspective. In which perspective, all human sufferings is miniscule and momentary. He is forcing us to engage with Him. As often noted, He had offered Judah restoration only if they repented, and had in any case consigned them to perish amongst the Gentiles. Because of generations of whoredom on their side. Any complaint that 'God is being insensitive to man' drives us to that recognition of the total unworthiness of man to even be alive. We have no right to life, no human rights. We are sinners. By grace, God was prepared to upend His own words of judgment. And we should be grateful for that. </p>


text:
<p>In overflowing wrath I hid My face from you for a moment; but with everlasting loving kindness will I have mercy on you- "In a little wrath" is literally 'In an outbreak of wrath' as if God as the husband desperate to reconcile is now taking false guilt, misrepresenting Himself as a bad tempered man who had sent his wife away in a moment of rage. He presents as wanting to take all the responsibility, to say or do anything in order to get her back. Or we can read this, as discussed above, as God 'going along' with Zion's wrong narrative. And reasoning onwards from where she stood, rather than trying to correct her. We read of the anger of God"for a moment"(<a href='B:230 30:5'>Psa 30:5</a>; <a href='B:290 54:7-8'>Isa 54:7-8</a>), and of His wrath coming and going, leaving Him"calm"and no longer angry (<a href='B:330 16:42'>Eze 16:42</a>). When we sin, we provoke God to nger- i:e. at a point in time, God sees our sin, and becomes angry. This is attested many times in Scripture. But it’s meaningless if God is somehow outside of our time and emotions. The very use of the terms ’remembering’ and ’forgetting’ suggest God is so fully willing to enter into our kind of time; for a Being cannot forget and remember simultaneously, an element of time is involved. Likewise at times we read of God being slow to anger (<a href='B:20 34:6'>Exo 34:6</a>), at others, of Him not restraining His anger, or restraining it (<a href='B:230 78:38'>Psa 78:38</a>; <a href='B:290 48:9'>Isa 48:9</a>; <a href='B:310 2:8'>Lam 2:8</a>; <a href='B:330 20:22'>Eze 20:22</a>), and holding His peace (<a href='B:290 57:11'>Isa 57:11</a>; <a href='B:230 50:21'>Psa 50:21</a>), and being provoked to anger by the bad behaviour of His covenant people (<a href='B:50 32:21'>Deu 32:21</a>; <a href='B:230 78:58'>Psa 78:58</a>; <a href='B:290 65:3'>Isa 65:3</a>; <a href='B:300 8:19'>Jer 8:19</a>). God clearly has emotions of a kind which are not unrelated to the emotions we experience, as beings made in His image. But those emotions involve a time factor in order to be emotions.</p><p>The prophets spoke of the amazing grace and eternal love of God for Israel, how His wrath endured but for a moment (<a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>; <a href='B:290 57:16'>Isa 57:16</a>); and yet Israel asked: “Will He be angry for ever?” (<a href='B:300 3:5'>Jer 3:5</a>). It was more than frustrating for the prophets; they shared God’s feelings of having poured out so great a love, to see it ignored and disregarded, no time to look at it, too busy sowing my seeds, weeding my garden, having coffee…</p><p>Says Yahweh your Redeemer- As Hosea ‘redeemed’ Gomer in His attempt to force through His fantasy for her (<a href='B:350 3:1'>Hos 3:1</a>), so Yahweh is repeatedly described in Isaiah as Israel’s go’el, redeemer (<a href='B:290 41:14'>Isa 41:14</a>; <a href='B:290 43:14'>Isa 43:14</a>; <a href='B:290 44:6'>Isa 44:6</a>; <a href='B:290 44:24'>Isa 44:24</a>; <a href='B:290 47:4'>Isa 47:4</a>; <a href='B:290 48:17'>Isa 48:17</a>; <a href='B:290 49:7'>Isa 49:7</a>; <a href='B:290 49:26'>Isa 49:26</a>; <a href='B:290 54:5'>Isa 54:5</a>; <a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>). The redeemer could redeem a close relative from slavery or repurchase property lost during hard times (<a href='B:30 25:25-26'>Lev 25:25-26</a>; <a href='B:30 25:47-55'>Lev 25:47-55</a>; <a href='B:80 2:20'>Rth 2:20</a>; <a href='B:80 3:9'>Rth 3:9</a>; <a href='B:80 3:12'>Rth 3:12</a>). The redeemer was also the avenger of blood (<a href='B:40 35:9-28'>Num 35:9-28</a>; <a href='B:60 20:3'>Jos 20:3</a>; <a href='B:60 20:9'>Jos 20:9</a>). All these ideas were relevant to Yahweh’s relationship to Judah in captivity. But the promised freedom didn’t come- even under Nehemiah, Judah was still a province within the Persian empire. And those who returned complained: “We are slaves this day in the land you gave…” (<a href='B:160 9:36'>Neh 9:36</a>). The wonderful prophecies of freedom and redemption from slaveryweren’t realized in practice, because of the selfishness of the more wealthy Jews. And how often is it that the freedom potentially enabled for those redeemed in Christ is in practice denied them by their autocratic and abusive brethren</p>


text:
<p>For this is like the waters of Noah to Me; for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah shall no more go over the earth, so have I sworn that I will not be angry with you, nor rebuke you- LXX offers"From the time of the water of Noe this is my purpose". The idea is that out of judgment comes a new creation, where the wrath of God doesn’t figure because it has as it were been dealt with through the judgments. What is in view is a time when His judgments shall never again need to be revealed upon His people. This could have happened at the restoration but it evidently didn’t, and all this is therefore reapplied to the time of the Lord’s return. It applies to His people now in that we are free from condemnation. Because we are "in" the Servant, who can ask "Who is he that shall condemn Me?", and those words are applied to all in Christ in Rom. 8:32,33.
God is changing the metaphors. Initially, it was His people who were to be slain for their sins in exile, and only the repentant minority would survive. Then He moves to the image of His people having sold themselves into debt slavery for a period. But He has now bought them out by a redemption payment. Then He speaks of His having divorced them but having destroyed the bill of divorce, so they are free to return. Now He speaks of His having died, leaving them a widow; and finally of His having briefly thrown them out of the house in a fit of wrath. The movement of the metaphors is all one way, towards a growing desperation to persuade His people to return to Him. He ends up both minimizing their sin and His wrath. In Is. 54:9 He speaks of how His wrath was only "a little" when it had been flaming and intense. He begs them to return to them, saying He will never again even "rebuke" them, He will impute such righteousness to them that He will see them as never needing His criticism. He likens their exile to the flood, and after the flood there had been a new covenant and realisation by God of human weakness. He as it were downgraded His hopes of man. As He had promised never to judge the earth again with water, now He says He will never condemn His people again. If they are "in" His servant, they will be free of condemnation. 
</p>


text:
<p>For the mountains may depart, and the hills be removed; but My loving kindness shall not depart from you- The departure of the mountains may refer to the huge geological changes at the time of the flood, but the mountains also figuratively refer to the nations and kingdoms which would be subsumed beneath the mountain of Yahweh’s Kingdom- which could have come when the little stone of the exiles were cut out of the mountain of Babylon / Persia and returned to the land. But another, longer term fulfilment of the image prophecy of Daniel 2 had to come into play. As discussed there, the metals of the image initially represented"kings", and the application to"kingdoms"was brought about by the refusal of the exiles to repent and act as the little stone destroying the image of Babylon.</p><p>Neither shall My covenant of peace be removed, says Yahweh who has mercy on you- Every Israelite was intended to be a priest; they were to be"a Kingdom of priests". The"covenant of my peace"was with both Israel (<a href='B:290 54:10'>Isa 54:10</a>) and the priesthood (<a href='B:460 2:5'>Mal 2:5</a>). The same is true of spiritual Israel;"a spiritual house, an holy priesthood"(<a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a>). But the covenant in view was likely the new covenant of peace with God which the exiles could have accepted (Ezekiel 20; Jeremiah 31).</p>


text:
<p>You afflicted- This is the word usually translated"poor"in the material sense. It was the poor who were to enthuse about the reestablishment of Zion (<a href='B:290 14:32'>Isa 14:32</a>; <a href='B:290 41:17'>Isa 41:17</a>; <a href='B:290 66:2'>Isa 66:2</a> s:w:). The book of Esther makes clear that there were many wealthy Jews in Babylon / Persia. It was the simple pull of materialism which kept many of them from responding to the Gospel of quitting all that for the sake of the restored Kingdom of God. And it is the same today where"to the poor the Gospel is preached" with most response. Or we can simply read this as God hearing all their false excuses why they couldn't accept His love, and responding and feeling: 'You poor thing'. </p><p>Tossed with storms- The usual word for"whirlwind", the symbol of God’s judgment which had scattered them in exile. It is also the term used for Jonah’s experience in the storm (<a href='B:390 1:11'>Jon 1:11</a>; <a href='B:390 1:13'>Jon 1:13</a>); and he is to be read as representative of a disbelieving Israel.</p><p>And not comforted- The"comfort"of Isaiah 40 had been offered to them, but they had refused. But here God as it were feels sorry for them even in their"not comforted"position, which was due to their refusal of His comfort. Such is His grace and His earnest&nbsp; desire to as it were force through, as far as legitimate, His saving purpose with His people.</p><p>Behold, I will set your stones in beautiful colours, and lay your foundations with sapphires- The “stones” were laid (<a href='B:160 4:2'>Neh 4:2</a> s:w:), but not with colours, as could have been (<a href='B:290 54:11-14'>Isa 54:11-14</a>). And neither were the foundation stones gemstones, as could have been. This prophecy was therefore reapplied in Revelation to the things of the Kingdom to be established at the Lord’s return. RVmg. "with antimony", a precious eye-powder. God says He will use this as liberally as cement for the setting of the previous stones. This suggests the precious stones were like eyes; and "sapphires" recalls the cherubim Ezekiel had seen hovering in exile (Ez. 1:26). It's as if the cherubim would return to Zion and settle in the new temple. Ezekiel's final visions of the glory returning have this also in view. It never happened as the exiles precluded it. And so it has application to the indwelling of the spiritual Zion by the Spirit.
The precious stones of :11-13 are typical of the wedding gifts given by a husband at a royal wedding. Zion the city is of course effectively God's people. She is adorned by her husband with these gifts, in the most glorious remarriage ever conceivable. For Yahweh had done the same to Israel at their previous wedding at Sinai: "I beautified you with ornaments, put bracelets on your hands and a chain on your neck. I put a jewel on your forehead, earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head" (Ez. 16:11,12). Now He does it again to her. He marries her as if she is a virgin, when in fact she has been a prostitute whilst married to Him before, and this is a remarriage: "For as a young man marries a virgin, so your sons shall marry you; and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so your God will rejoice over you" (Is. 62:5). This is the extent to which God can sanctify man from sin and make us a new creation. And yet the wedding jewels are interpreted as her Gentile converts- which the exiles increasingly refused to accept as legitimate: "Lift up your eyes all around, and see: all these gather themselves together, and come to you. As I live, says Yahweh, you shall surely clothe yourself with them all as with an ornament, and dress yourself with them, like a bride" (Is. 49:18).
</p>


text:
<p>I will make your pinnacles of rubies, and your gates of sparkling jewels, and all your walls of precious stones- LXX"and thy gates crystal"; GNB"and the wall around you with jewels"; see on :11. This is all alluded to in the description of the new Jerusalem in Revelation 21, 22. It could’ve come true at the time of the exiles, had they repented; but is deferred to the second coming of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>All your children shall be taught of Yahweh; and great shall be the peace of your children- Their children were not taught of Yahweh, because the priests were lazy to do so (Malachi 2). And so Yahweh Himself (who is speaking here) will teach them; hence GNB"I myself will teach your people". eaching was envisaged as going forth from the restored Zion (<a href='B:290 2:2-4'>Isa 2:2-4</a>). But many of the exiles preferred to remain in exile because they likely excused themselves with the argument that remaining would be better for their children. Seeing the exiles refused this, these words are quoted of us in Jn. 6:45. It is the language of the new covenant, the law being written on our hearts directly by God, of being taught directly by Him through the Spirit, free from any human teacher; of having the ear of the disciple as the Lord had (see in Is. 50:4). This is not to decry human teachers, but they only have legitimacy insofar as they teach God's words led by His Spirit. "Shall be taught" is literally 'shall be disciples'. </p>


text:
<p>In righteousness you shall be established: you shall be far from oppression, for you shall not be afraid; and from terror, for it shall not come near you- This could be an appeal for the exiles to act rightly and justly so that the Kingdom could come about. Hence LXX"abstain from injustice, and thou shalt not fear; and trembling shall not come nigh thee". Our eternal establishment in the Kingdom will be "right", not because we personally were righteous but because God judged us in Christ as right, we were eternally justified as right.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, they may gather together, but not by Me: whoever shall gather together against you shall fall because of you- The idea may be that whoever now attacks Judah, would not be doing so under God’s direction as had previously been the case. And they would therefore face His wrath and destruction (:17). LXX"Behold, strangers shall come to thee by me, and shall sojourn with thee, and shall run to thee for refuge".</p><p>God had previously threatened to judge His people by gathering their enemies together to destroy them by acting like a smith blowing fire upon them. But we will read that the judgment / condemnation of His people which He had planned- would now no longer come about. He would count them righteous, so this would not happen: "they may gather together, but not by Me... Behold, I have created the smith who blows the fire of coals, and brings forth a weapon for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy. No weapon that is formed against you will prevail; and you will condemn every tongue that rises against you in judgement... their righteousness is of Me, says Yahweh" (Is. 54:15-17). 
It is another way of saying that His people would be free from the condemnation from Him which on one hand was just. We will now read of the smiths making weapons with which to destroy Israel, and the allusion is clearly to the threat against the exiles made in Ez. 21:31: “And I will pour out upon you My indignation; with the fire of My wrath I will blow upon you; and I will give you into the hands of fiery men, smiths of destruction”. God likens Himself to a smith, gathering materials and blowing fire upon them in judgment of Judah: "As they gather silver, brass, iron, lead and tin into the midst of the furnace to blow the fire onto it to melt it; so will I gather you in My anger and in My wrath, and I will lay you there, and melt you. Yes, I will gather you, and blow on you with the fire of My wrath, and you shall be melted in its midst" (Ez. 22:20-22). God is now saying that this will not in fact happen. He would not be in this 'gathering'. The weapons He had formed / sharpened against His people would not in fact prosper. We too "are saved from [God's] wrath through Him", the Lord Jesus.
</p>


text:
<p>Behold, I have created the smith who blows the fire of coals, and brings forth a weapon for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy- This leads on to the statement in :17 that the forming of any weapon against Israel is doomed. The creators were themselves created, by God- including those who had been created to destroy God’s people in judgment. Both evil and good were from God (<a href='B:290 45:5-7'>Isa 45:5-7</a>). These who were created by God to destroy contrast with the category noted in :15, who were not sent by God in this mission.</p><p>The Jewish commentator Rashi has it about right: ""Behold I am He Who created a smith who devises a weapon, and I am He Who has created a destroyer that destroys it". That is, to say: I am He Who incited the enemy against you; I am He Who has prepared retribution for him". The idea is that God is the creator of the men who form weapons which frighten His people. If He created those men, He is well in control of what they may create.</p>


text:
<p>No weapon that is formed against you will prevail- "Formed" can be understood as whetted or sharpened. This will be true in the latter day context of Joel 3:9,10: "Sanctify war [against God's people]! Stir up the mighty men. Let all the warriors draw near. Let them come up. Beat your ploughshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears".</p><p>The "weapon" is that of :16. The exiles imagined all manner of opposition if they were to accept the prophetic call to quit Babylon / Persia and return to Judah. But God’s promise was that they would leave in peace, be led by His visible presence and have the natural creation bursting into applause on the way (see on <a href='B:290 55:12'>Isa 55:12</a>). But they doubted that, focusing upon all the human devices ["weapons"] which they imagined might stand in the way. So many today likewise resist the call of the Gospel of the restored Kingdom of God for the same reasons. The word for"prevail"is used four times in the record of Rebekah’s journey from the east (where the exiles were) to the land of promise; it was indeed made prosperous (<a href='B:10 24:21'>Gen 24:21</a>; <a href='B:10 24:40'>Gen 24:40</a>; <a href='B:10 24:42'>Gen 24:42</a>; <a href='B:10 24:56'>Gen 24:56</a>). And their journey to the land of the Kingdom likewise would have been made prosperous, and no opposition to it could have prospered with God on their side. The prophetic word of the restoration was to prosper and achieve their return and revival (<a href='B:290 55:11'>Isa 55:11</a>).</p><p>And you will condemn every tongue that rises against you in judgement- We are "in" the Servant who cannot be condemned and condemns every tongue that speaks against Him. And Rom. 8 applies those words to each of us in Christ; "Who shall condemn us?". Those suffering with the pain of others' words need to remember this rather than just playing the tape of those words. See on <a href='B:290 51:1'>Isa 51:1</a>; <a href='B:290 51:6-7'>Isa 51:6-7</a>. As explained on <a href='B:290 50:8'>Isa 50:8</a>, we need not fear insults nor false accusation from men because we shall ultimately be justified, and even now have righteousness imputed to us. And the exiles were invited to believe that, as they imagined all the verbal opposition they might encounter by returning to Judah.</p><p>This is the heritage of the servants of Yahweh, and their righteousness which is of Me, says Yahweh- This again refers to what Paul would term imputed righteousness, counting right those who believe in God’s grace. LXX"ye shall be righteous before me". Israel are the plural "servants" because they have found identity in the singular servant "Israel" who was sent to redeem Israel. From now on in Isaiah we never read of "the servant" singular, but only of the plural "servants"- those in Him. "Says Yahweh" is literally "The utterance of Yahweh", and can be a legal allusion, especially if we render it as a separate sentence. This is as it were His final statement as the judge of all. His people have been declared righteous. With all that eternally implies.</p>


text:
<p>Come, everyone who thirsts, to the waters! Come, he who has no money, buy, and eat! Yes, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price- It could be argued that this invitation is to the "servants" of Is. 54:17. But we note that :6-9 call upon the exiles to repent of their unGodly thoughts and ways. It is a call to leave Babylon. "Come!" [AV "Ho!"] recalls how the exiles in Zech. 2:10 are bidden flee from Babylon: “Ho! Ho! and flee from the north land”. It is a command; indeed there are at least ten imperatives in :1-3. Come, come, buy, eat, buy, listen, delight, turn... The only requirement is to hunger and thirst for spiritual things, and to take them by faith. But just as Is. 51:1 addresses those who "seek righteousness", here those who are spiritually thirsty and hungry are addressed. Perhaps the Lord perceived the connection between Is. 51:1 and Is. 55:1 when He spoke of the blessedness of those who "hunger and thirst after righteousness". The language is an inversion of the cry of a water seller, to come and buy water. The materialistic, money centered worldview of the exiles is perhaps addressed. Everything costs in this world- but not the most important things of salvation. The exiles refused the invitation, and so it has been offered to us by the great Servant, the Lord Jesus: “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened” (Mt. 11:28). And His offer to all men to come to Him and drink surely suggests that He saw these things as reapplied to Himself, seeing Israel had refused God's offer at the time of the exiles (Jn. 7:37-39). Perhaps this verse is the background of His parable of how the places at the feast were declined by the Jews and then the feast was thrown open to all. Jerusalem was always known for its lack of water, and that water had to be bought in Jerusalem. Previously God had judged Zion by taking away her water (Is. 1:30; 3:1; 50:2). The Lord presents Himself as the source of spring water in Zion, freely available to all. The water in earlier Isaiah had been representative of salvation: "With joy will you draw water from the wells of salvation" (Is. 12:3). And the free nature of this water [when water or usage of wells usually had to be paid for] is alluded to in Rev. 21:6; 22:17: "He that is thirsty, let him come. Let him that desires take the water of life freely". The key qualification is to want it, to be thirsty for it- and to have the faith to take. Wanting and taking salvation are the key issues.</p><p>LXX"wine and fat", associated with the offerings. No longer would poverty or lack of resources mean that sacrifice could not be offered. One by one, every possible excuse in the minds of the exiles was dealt with. God would provide all and overcome every possible fear and imagined problem in responding to the call of the Kingdom, just as He does today. Cyrus even decreed that he would meet the costs of all sacrifices; he let the people go"without price"(s:w. <a href='B:290 45:13'>Isa 45:13</a>), for no personal reward. The same phrase"without money and without price"is found in <a href='B:220 28:15'>Job 28:15</a> regarding the value of wisdom; see on :2. The book of Job is full of connections to Isaiah, as it was rewritten to encourage the exiles in captivity. The greatest wisdom was to leave Babylon / Persia and return to Judah, with all the inversion of values this required. But this&nbsp; appeal to the exiles wasn’t responded to. And so these ideas were reapplied to the Lord Jesus, in His appeal to us:"If any man thirst, let him come unto me"(<a href='B:500 7:37-38'>Joh 7:37-38</a>).</p><p><a href='B:290 55:1-6'>Isa 55:1-6</a> bids Israel seek the Lord, and then comments that His word will accomplish what He wants it to achieve; the earth / land will respond to the rain of His word which He sends upon it (:11). This seems to be saying that somehow there will always be response from Israel to the Gospel. And the following verses hint that this may e specifically so in the last days, for :12 says that the result of the land’s response to the word will be that “ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing”. Their response to the word in the last days ushers in the Kingdom.
The idea of buying without money in Is. 55:1 connects with the entire theme of Yahweh being Israel's "redeemer", their go'el, the One who would pay the price of their debt, rather than them having to work as slave labour for a period. They were thus redeemed without money. Clearly the link is to Is. 52:3 "you shall be redeemed without money". God would pay, not them. This is why Is. 55:11 will go on to talk of how God's word shall achieve His intention- and the "word" immediately in view is the word of restoration of the Kingdom and eternal salvation of God's people.  </p>


text:
<p>Why do you spend money for that which is not bread?- Again, the Lord clearly had this in view when He challenges the people not to labour for the bread that perishes, but to accept His offer of eternal life (Jn. 6:27). LXX "Wherefore do ye value at the price of money?". This invites them to a radical revulation of life and the things which comprise it. The monetarization and capitalisation of everything was going on even in ancient societies. God’s people are asked to a radical revaluation of all things.</p><p>And your labour for that which doesn’t satisfy?- But they continued to do so; they were as greedy dogs who could ’not be satisfied’ (<a href='B:290 56:11'>Isa 56:11</a> s:w:), obsessed with personal gain. Again we detect that it was a love of the soft life of materialism in Persia which was the root cause for the exiles not responding to the invitation, and the book of Esther therefore has a sad ending, portrayin the Jews as wealthy and popular.</p><p>Listen diligently to Me- I noted on :1 an allusion to the appeal of wisdom in Job 28, and this here is a repeat of wisdom’s call in the Proverbs. The way of wisdom was to accept the invitation to the free feast of fat things which Yahweh had prepared in Judah for those who quit Babylon.</p><p>And eat you that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness- This refers to the banquet awaiting them on return to Zion, the feast of fat things of <a href='B:290 25:6'>Isa 25:6</a> - if they would say"Yes"to the Kingdom program. The Messianic banquet could then have come. It has now been reapplied, to our experience in the breaking of bread now, and ultimately to the marriage supper of the lamb when the Lord returns.</p>


text:
<p>Turn your ear, and come to Me-  "Come to Me" or 'Go away from your place toward me', can be read in the spirit of :1, where as noted there, the exiles in Babylon are bidden leave and come to God, who in that sense is located in Zion.</p><p>The invitation therefore was to the great feast of :1,2- all for free. The parable of the great suppor therefore alludes to <a href='B:290 55:1-3'>Isa 55:1-3</a>; and thereby would suggest that we can interpret the call to the supper as the call of the Gospel, and the hungry people sitting down to a fine meal as our ecclesial experience now (although this isn’t to say that we can’t read it as concerning the future Kingdom too).</p><p>Hear, and your soul shall live: and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David- This everlasting covenant refers to the new covenant offered to the exiles in Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 20, but it would only be iven if they ’heard’ in obedience and repentance. The promises to David are described as the mercy of God (<a href='B:290 55:3'>Isa 55:3</a>; <a href='B:230 89:33-34'>Psa 89:33-34</a>). God having a son is the sign of His love for us, and this must elicit a response in us. David himself marvelled that such mercy had been shown to him:"Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house…thou knowest thy servant"(<a href='B:100 7:18-20'>2Sa 7:18-20</a>). And yet in the very next chapters, we read of how David made a renewed attempt to show mercy to the house of Saul. Mephibosheth says that he is"thy servant…what is thy servant, that thou shouldest look upon such… as I am?"(<a href='B:100 9:8'>2Sa 9:8</a>). Mephibosheth is using the very words which David used to God; David is showing mercy to Mephibosheth in the very way in which the promises of God to him were the "mercies" shown to David. Appreciating that the promises concern us personally, and that they reveal such loving grace from the Father, can only lead to a similar response in showing love and grace through entering into the lives and destinies of others. Having expounded the deeper aspects of the promises to Abraham in Romans 9-11, Paul spins the argument round to practical issues: "I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God [a technical term for the promises- ’the sure mercies of David’, <a href='B:290 55:3'>Isa 55:3</a>], that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice"(<a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a>). The"him"of :4 is the"sure mercies of David"of :3, perhaps an intensive plural for the great mercy shown to David, which was in the promise of his Messianic seed, the Lord Jesus.</p><p>“The sure mercies of David” result in the wicked man forsaking his way (<a href='B:290 55:3'>Isa 55:3</a>; <a href='B:290 55:7'>Isa 55:7</a>). The description of the promises to David as “sure mercies” (<a href='B:130 17:13'>1Ch 17:13</a>) may perhaps be with a reference to his sin with Bathsheba; his forgiveness in that incident is typical of that which we all receive (<a href='B:520 4:6-8'>Rom 4:6-8</a>). The very existence of the “mercies of / to David” therefore inspire us in forsaking sinful thoughts and wicked ways (<a href='B:290 55:7'>Isa 55:7</a>).</p><p>The new or "everlasting" covenant offered in Ezekiel was presented as dry bones hearing God's voice and living again. This is surely alluded to here: "hear, and your soul shall live". The exiles (see on :1) are being asked to believe that God has forgiven them their adultery. And so they are here directed to the way God was merciful with David- over the Bathsheba incident. The gracious covenant with David, "I will make with you" plural. "I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David" (Acts 13:34). He was assured of salvation in the promise of 2 Sam. 7... and this is now being promised to all those who accept that same covenant. This explains why many of David's psalms relevant to that sin have clearly been edited and reapplied to the exiles in Babylon, urging them to believe in God's grace. The covenant with David was everlasting in that God's forgiveness and salvation of David was eternal, it would never be abrogated: "I will keep My grace for him forever. My covenant will stand firm through him" (Ps. 89:28). God "shows grace to His anointed, to David and to his seed, forever" (Ps. 18:50). The covenant with David, as with Abraham, was unconditional. Even sin could not take away the eternal grace: "If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men... but My loving kindness shall not depart from him" (2 Sam. 7:14,15). It just had to be believed. And the exiles preferred to remain with partial obedience to the old covenant, rather than accept this new covenant.
Another option is that "David" here refers to Messiah, ultimately the Lord Jesus, as it does elsewhere (Ez. 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Jer. 30:9; Hos. 3:5). The words are quoted in Acts 13:34 of how it was the Lord Jesus who had responded to the call to come and eat and drink, and therefore had been resurrected to life eternal: "As for the fact that He raised him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken in this way: I will give you the holy and sure blessings of David". Hence :4 continues with Him in view. The everlasting covenant offered is the new covenant offered to the exiles in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
</p>


text:
<p>Behold, I have given him for a witness to the peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples- LXX understands"the peoples"here as"the Gentiles". As noted on :3, the"him"is the"sure mercies of David", an intensive plural for the great mercy shown to David, which was in the promise of his Messianic seed, the Lord Jesus. The eternal covenant offered to the exiles was also going to be offered to the Gentiles, who would form a new multiethnic people of God (:5). We could put the emphasis upon "him". Israel were God's intended witness to the nations of God's grace and power to save (Is. 43:10; 44:8). They failed in that; but the Messiah figure, the servant called "Israel", was to be and do what Israel failed to. By being in Him, we are all that we were intended to be. We read no more of the "servant" after Is. 53; it seems here that the idea is that "David", the Messiah from David's line, was to be that servant figure. The previous possible iterations of the servant, in the people of Israel, Cyrus etc., had all failed.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, you shall call a nation that you don’t know- As explained in :4, a new multiethnic people of God was to be formed around the new covenant being offered to all. The Jews would"call"the Gentiles by the name of their own nation, Israel. They would ’know’ them in the Hebraic sense of knowing, i:e. having a spiritual relationship with them:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>And a nation that didn’t know you shall run to you, because of Yahweh your God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for He has glorified you- Again, the Hebraic sense of ’knowing’ includes the idea of having a spiritual relationship with the other party. The remnant of the Gentile nations in the land would see how Yahweh had glorified the returned exiles, and would eagerly ["run to..."] wish to accept this God as theirs. But in reality, the exiles returned to the land and mixed with the Gentiles, worshipping their gods and marrying their women as they had done in the lands of their exile.</p><p>If these words are addressed to "David" and this name refers to Messiah (:3), then the "He" who has glorified "You" [God] would be the Lord Jesus, who did so supremely (Jn. 17:5).</p>


text:
<p>Seek Yahweh while He may be found; call you on Him while He is near- In the context of the exiles, the allusion is clearly to the prediction that when in exile for their sins, God's people could still seek and find Him: "If from thence you shall seek the Lord your God, you shall find Him, if you seek Him with all your heart" (Dt. 4:29). We could read Jer. 31:18 as the people sceptically asking God to turn them to Himself: "turn me, and I shall be turned".
"While He is near" refers to how salvation was "near" to the exiles: "I bring near My righteousness... My salvation... My righteousness is near, My salvation is gone forth... My salvation is near to come (Is. 46:13; 51:5; 56:1). Hence we could render with Rabbi Kimchi: "because he may be found: call upon him, because he is near". But there was only a window of opportunity, which would close. And it did close, hence the more angry and judgmental tone of later Isaiah, and the possibilities of salvation and redemption were reapplied to a newly defined Zion, the Christian church. "Call upon him" has been transferred to the Christian era in the invitation to call upon the Lord in baptism (Rom. 10:13). 
The offer of the Messianic banquet (:1-3) and new covenant (:3) was not going to be on the table for ever. The exiles had to repent, leave exile and return to the land in order to reestablish and rebuild the things of God’s Kingdom. There was no such repentance. And those who did return were motivated by personal gain and were not spiritual people, as the restoration prophets and the historical records in Ezra and Nehemiah make clear. So the window of opportunity closed, and the things of the new covenant, Messianic banquet and restored Kingdom became reapplied and deferred. The offered salvation was"near"to them, about to come (see on <a href='B:290 46:13'>Isa 46:13</a>; <a href='B:290 51:5'>Isa 51:5</a>); but it swooped close to them, but they refused to catch it. But the same Hebrew word for"near"is translated “kinsman”. The servant songs go on to explain how Yahweh could become our kinsman through His Son, our representative, of our nature. See on <a href='B:290 49:26'>Isa 49:26</a>. The appeal is therefore urgent, because for the exiles, the amazing offer was time limited. It is therefore an appeal for repentance, hence LXX:"Seek ye the Lord, and when ye find him, call upon him; and when he shall draw nigh to you, let the ungodly leave his ways...".</p><p>Like Israel we can seek God daily, taking delight in approaching unto Him; and yet need the exhortation to urgently seek Him (<a href='B:290 55:6'>Isa 55:6</a> cp. 58:2). We can appear to seek unto Him in prayer and attendance at our meetings, and yet not seek Him in the real sense at all. Likewise men came to Jesus physically, at quite some effort to themselves, and yet He tells them that they have not truly come to Him at all (<a href='B:500 6:24'>Joh 6:24</a> cp. 35-37). We can draw near with our mouth, honour Him with our lips, “but have removed [our] heart far from me” (<a href='B:290 29:13'>Isa 29:13</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return to Yahweh- We note that the way of a man is his thoughts. The appeal for repentance was and is essentially a call to change our thinking, our self talk; and to adopt God’s thoughts, which at that time were not Judah’s thoughts (:8). The return to Yahweh was to be reflected in a return to the land. We might have expected a call to forsake idolatry and other specific sins, but the appeal is to change their thinking. For that is the essential issue. We note the same juxtaposition of ideas in <a href='B:290 57:15'>Isa 57:15</a> - the exalted lofty one, dwelling in the hearts of men.</p><p>And He will have mercy on him; and to our God-"Mercy"is s:w."compassion". Unlike the stone faced gods of the Gentiles, Yahweh had emotion and passion, and internal conflicts. And His word reveals them to us. This"compassion"was only to be shown when Israel repented (s:w. <a href='B:50 30:3'>Deu 30:3</a>) and would not be shown if they were impenitent (s:w. <a href='B:290 9:17'>Isa 9:17</a>; <a href='B:290 27:11'>Isa 27:11</a>; <a href='B:290 55:7'>Isa 55:7</a>). But although they had not repented, Yahweh still felt that fatherly"compassion"toward them (<a href='B:290 49:15'>Isa 49:15</a> s:w:). He is unafraid of appearing to contradict His word, such is the passion of His love.</p><p>For He will abundantly pardon- This is the same word as often used in the law; when sacrifice was offered,"it shall be forgiven him"(<a href='B:30 4:31'>Lev 4:31</a>; <a href='B:30 4:35'>Lev 4:35</a> etc:). But in exile there was no opportunity to offer acceptable sacrifice. A forsaking of thoughts was what was required; for our hearts are the essential sacrifice. This"pardon"would have been given had the exiles had accepted the new covenant (s:w. <a href='B:300 33:8'>Jer 33:8</a>).
We note that Is. 65:1,2 alludes closely to Is. 55:6,7: "I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I’ to a nation that was not called by My name". The exiles had chosen not to seek and find Yahweh; to not call upon Him nor forsake their wrong ways and thoughts:  "I have spread out My hands all the day to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, after their own thoughts" (Is. 65:2).
The Hebrew for "abundantly pardon" is better rendered "Multiply to pardon". Every sin has a specific forgiveness- and we sin countless millions of times. The encouragement is to every individual, that God's pardon is as it were multitudinous. All our many sins, of omission and commission, can be eagerly forgiven. His pardon is of an altogether different nature to our experience of forgiveness at the hands of others. Often they have some vested interest in granting the pardon. Or they will pardon once but not if we repeat. Or they will pardon one or two things, but not many things. And they give our sins against them a weighting, some they can forgive others they cannot. At least, not more than once. And their pardon may be time limited. God pardons "abundantly", and multiplies that pardon.
</p>


text:
<p>For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, says Yahweh- This is a criticism of the people at that time, not a general musing about man. Like Jer. 17:11, this verse has been wrongly harnessed by the 'total depravity of man', 'alienation by nature' brigade- as if having God's thoughts is somehow impossible. The thoughts and ways of God were to be those of God's people, whose current thoughts and ways had to be forsaken (:7). This is not a general statement that God's ways are unreachable by man. Quite the opposite. But God's thoughts and ways are as high as Heaven is above earth (:9). And so our minds are to be in heavenly places. This is possible through the Spirit: "Things which eye saw not and ear heard not and which did not enter into the heart of man, whatever things God prepared for them that love Him, God revealed them to us through the Spirit" (1 Cor. 2:9,10). This is not a statement about the inability of humanity to think as God does. Rather is it a lament that Judah didn’t do this, when they could have done (:7). Note the parallel between the wicked’s" way"and" his thoughts"; they are unrelated to God’s thoughts/ ways (<a href='B:290 55:8'>Isa 55:8</a>). <a href='B:290 55:7'>Isa 55:7</a> is therefore saying that after conversion there must most importantly be a change of mind, an aspiring after God’s unattainable thoughts / ways.</p>


text:
<p>For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts- This is not to say that His thoughts are unattainable. The whole idea of :7,8 is that Judah could have God’s thoughts. They are here being inspired to touch the sky, to rise above the mundane, earthly thoughts of the flesh. <a href='B:290 55:6-7'>Isa 55:6-7</a> implies that we can find God in this life, we can return to Him. But <a href='B:290 55:9'>Isa 55:9</a> then says that" as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are (God’s) ways higher than your ways". This seems to be one of the many Isaiah allusions to the book of Job:"Canst thou by searching find out God?", the answer being ’No’. This shows that although ultimately we cannot find God by our searching, such is His moral infinity, yet if we seek to find Him, He will count us as if we have found Him; and we can think His thoughts (:7). Thus God will impute complete forsaking of human thinking to us. Our least response is to impute forsaking of sin to our brethren, and to think as Yahweh does:&nbsp;</p><p>It is specifically God's mercy to His people which is described as high as the heavens. It is this which God seeks to persuade Judah of. Their unspirituality, their lack of having God's thoughts, was insofar as they failed to believe His thoughts and ways of saving them could come true for them. Hence the chapter will go on to assure them that God's word of planned restoration of His Kingdom will not return void. He will in the end save man, even if through a somewhat different path of fulfilment than originally intended with the exiles. Their thoughts were not His in that they did not believe in that mercy and therefore didn't reflect it to other men. His thoughts were above their thoughts in that they could not conceive of the vast degree to which He was ready to forgive them. And this is still why people fail to believe this same good news offered in the Gospel. The nature of God's forgiveness and salvation is of a different order to any experience we have had of human salvation and forgiveness, which amounts to little more than a "play on". God's grace is exactly the proof that  He is God and not man: "I will not execute the fierceness of My anger. I will not return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man" (Hos. 11:9). "Who is a God like You, who pardons iniquity... because He delights in grace" (Mic. 7:18). The gracious redeemer of Israel is often presented as "the holy one of Israel", the unique one, unlike any other. His ways and thoughts are summarized in :10 as His word, His word of restoring the Kingdom, of salvation. Here is the evidence that it is God's saving grace and forgiveness which is as high as the heavens: "For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is His grace toward them that fear Him" (Ps. 103:11). "For Your mercy is great unto the heavens, and Your truth unto the clouds" (Ps. 57:10). "Mercy shall be built up forever, Your faithfulness You shall establish in the very heavens" (Ps. 89:2). God's ways are His thoughts; and His thoughts of grace towards us are more than man can number (Ps. 40:5). "I know the thoughts I think toward you, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you an expected end" (Jer. 29:11). It was these thoughts that the exiles didn't believe; it was those thoughts which were and are the basis of the new covenant and the Gospel of the Kingdom offered to us today. The exiles were full of bad thoughts, with no grace toward others, no mercy, no intention of salvation: "Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity... they walk in a way that is not good, after their own thoughts... I know their works and their thoughts... O Jerusalem, how long shall your vain thoughts lodge within you?" (Is. 59:7; 65:2; 66:18; Jer. 4:14). By contrast, the God who dwells in Heaven dwells there with the man of a humble and contrite spirit: "For thus says the high and lofty One who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also who is of a broken and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite" (Is. 57:15). The humble spirit is the one who has God's ways and thoughts in his heart. And he is 'in heavenly places' with God, as Paul would put it.</p>


text:
<p>For as the rain comes down and the snow from the sky and doesn’t return there but waters the earth, and makes it bring forth and bud, and gives seed to the sower and bread to the eater- The rain does return to God in the water cycle, as various Bible verses state. So we need to translate to the effect that it doesn't return "until it waters the earth" etc. "Bring forth" is a word typically used of a woman bringing forth a child. We have just read God's promise to make the barren Zion bring forth children (Is. 54:1). This was to be performed by His word, the same word that they saw making the earth and natural creation 'bring forth'. The exiles refused this, and so this promise of seed and bread is applied to Christian believers (2 Cor. 9:10). The failure of the exiles to respond to so many wonderful, generous prophetic words might appear to be the greatest failure of God's words. But the point is, that those words came true still- in that an even greater Gospel of Salvation was offered not just to Israel but to the world. And it has been accepted by a new Israel. Always a phoenix arises from the ashes of apparent failure in the work of evangelism.</p><p>This statement about the power of God’s word is in the context of urging Judah that they can in fact repent, and think God’s thoughts (:7-9). The returned exiles, or [later] all who wished to become part of God’s restored Kingdom, would be empowered by the water of the Spirit (see on <a href='B:290 44:3'>Isa 44:3</a>) to"spring up"on what had previously been dry ground (<a href='B:290 44:4'>Isa 44:4</a>). That Spirit would be articulated partly through the prophetic word (<a href='B:290 55:10'>Isa 55:10</a> s:w."bud","spring up"). This will be the restored Eden, where Yahweh had caused the vegetation to"spring up"(s:w. <a href='B:10 2:5'>Gen 2:5</a>). This sringing up or growing would be in the fulfilment of the promises to David of the establishment of the Kingdom of his seed (s:w. <a href='B:100 23:5'>2Sa 23:5</a>; <a href='B:230 132:17'>Psa 132:17</a>). But the springing up would be of a community of people, the plural seed who were"in"the singular Messianic seed, who would think God’s thoughts (:7). And this is now experienced through baptism into the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a>). It is"righteousness"which would"spring up"(s:w. <a href='B:290 61:11'>Isa 61:11</a>); the work of the Spirit would result in the seed becoming righteous through their mental, spiritual transformation. And yet it will also be on account of their status as"in"the"branch of righteousness"which will"spring up"(Jer 3315). The work of the Spirit will be, and is, to transform the plural seed in practice into what they are by status in the Messiah- righteous. And it is this power, this gift, this Divine ’causing’ us to be righteous, which every spiritual person so thirsts for.</p><p>Repeatedly, later Scripture alludes to the fact that it was by the word of God that the world was created; and that same powerful, re-forming, saving word was and is that heard by His people still (<a href='B:230 33:6'>Psa 33:6</a>; <a href='B:230 33:9'>Psa 33:9</a>; <a href='B:230 104:7'>Psa 104:7</a>; <a href='B:230 147:15-18'>Psa 147:15-18</a>; <a href='B:230 148:3-5'>Psa 148:3-5</a>; <a href='B:290 40:26'>Isa 40:26</a>; <a href='B:290 44:23'>Isa 44:23</a>; <a href='B:290 48:13'>Isa 48:13</a>; <a href='B:290 50:2'>Isa 50:2</a>; <a href='B:290 55:10'>Isa 55:10</a>). A. Heidel comments: “The word of the Babylonian deities was not almighty. On the contrary, the word of the creator in Genesis 1 is almighty. He commands and the result is in perfect conformity to his command…there is a profound difference between the Bible and non-biblical religions” [on this point of the word being the agency of creation] (Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), p. 126).</p>


text:
<p>so shall My word be that goes forth out of My mouth: it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing I sent it to do- The word of restoration was going to ultimately succeed, as will all sending forth of God's word- even if the exiles refused it, the good news of the restored Kingdom would be accepted by the Christian church, even if much later. Indeed the whole idea of a word going out from God to earth, achieving God's will and then returning to Him... is all the language of John's Gospel about the successful, saving work of the Lord Jesus, the word made flesh (Jn. 7:28,29,33; 8:14,21,22,42; 13:1,3; 16:27-30; 17:8,11,13). He was the servant who would prosper- "the will of Yahweh will prosper/succeed [s.w.] by his [the Servant's] hand" (Is. 53:10). So many of us labour under the impression that our efforts to spread God's word are fruitless. But overall, His word of salvation will succeed. Even if we lose our battles, our side gloriously wins the war, and because we fought, we have the absolute right to glory in the victory. And we will be surprised how our witness of the word does produce effect, even if after our death, and only to be perceived by us in the Kingdom.</p><p> In the immediate context of the exiles, the LXX seems to suggest that God’s word of judgment on His people would not end until that word had produced the required response, which was repentance:"It shall by no means turn back until all the things which I willed shall have been accomplished; and I will make thy ways prosperous, and will effect my commands". The prospering of the prophetic word of restoration was certain, if they accepted it; see on <a href='B:290 54:17'>Isa 54:17</a>. But the context here is of thinking God’s thoughts, even if His thoughts are higher than the earth (:7-9). It was His word of promised restoration which could achieve that; if they believed they would and could be restored to God, then this would affect their thinking.</p><p>We put God to endless pain and labour in order to fulfil His wish to save men, if we don’t fulfil what in prospect we could fulfil. In the context of the restoration, Yahweh truly said that “…so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (AV). His word will have fulfilment in the end, but it can have its fulfilment in us, here and now. Nehemiah twice stated that Yahweh was prospering him in his work of restoring Zion [<a href='B:160 1:11'>Neh 1:11</a>; <a href='B:160 2:20'>Neh 2:20</a> s:w:]; but generally, the word of prophecy was deferred in its fulfilment. Let’s not be satisficers as Israel were, minimalists happy so long as we have our bit of land to live on, our cieled roof to dwell under... and neglect His house.</p><p>The RV translates the parable of the sower as if the seed sown is the convert: “he that was sown…” (<a href='B:470 13:19'>Mat 13:19</a> RV). And later on in <a href='B:470 13:38'>Mat 13:38</a> we are told so again: “the good seed are the children of the Kingdom”. Yet the seed was a symbol of the word of God. The parallel between the seed and the convert is such as to suggest that the word of God will produce converts in some sense; it will not return void (<a href='B:290 55:11'>Isa 55:11</a>). The apparent dearth of response to some&nbsp; preaching therefore poses a challenging question. Are we preaching the word of God alone, or our own ideas? Does God withhold blessing for some reason unknown to us? Is this parable only part of a wider picture, in which somehow the word does return void due to man’s rejection? Thus the word of God was ‘made void’ by the Pharisees (<a href='B:480 7:13'>Mar 7:13</a> RV- a conscious allusion to <a href='B:290 55:11'>Isa 55:11</a>?)…. This is perhaps one of the most defiantly unanswerable questions in our experience. As an aside, one possible explanation is that “the word” which is sent forth and prospers, achieving all God’s intention, is in fact Messiah. The same word is used about the ‘prospering’ of the Servant in His work: <a href='B:290 48:15'>Isa 48:15</a>; <a href='B:290 53:10'>Isa 53:10</a> cp. <a href='B:230 45:4'>Psa 45:4</a>. Another is to accept the LXX reading of this passage: “…until whatsoever I have willed shall have been accomplished”. Here at least is the implication that something happens and is achieved when we preach God’s word. The same idiom occurs in <a href='B:330 9:11'>Eze 9:11</a> AVmg:, where we read that “the man clothed with linen”- representing Ezekiel or his representative Angel- “returned the word, saying, I have done as thou hast commanded me”. The word ‘returned’ in the sense that someone, somewhere, was obedient to it even if others weren’t.
"Deal wisely" in Is. 52:13 could also be translated "succeed"; and the fourth servant song concludes with the same idea: "Through him Yahweh's purpose will succeed" (Is. 53:10). The implication could be that He will be the succesful servant, whereas the other possible iterations of the servant in Israel, Cyrus and Zerubbabel had not succeeded. The same word for "succeed" used in Is. 53:10 is found in Is. 55:11 "so shall My word be that goes forth out of My mouth: it shall not return to Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [succeed] in the thing I sent it to do". That word of restoration of the Kingdom would succeed, because the servant would succeed. It was made possible through His sufferings.</p>


text:
<p>For you shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing; and all the trees of the fields shall clap their hands- Leaving Babylon with a voice of singing / joy is in view in  Is. 55:12: "For you shall go out in joy, and be led back in peace". But this was a commandment in Is. 48:20, which the exiles generally disobeyed. They returned hardly with joy, but with nervousness and expectation only that there might be some material benefit for themselves.
 The immediate possibility was that the exiles would leave Babylon in peace, after"the servant"negotiated their release from there with full blessing and no violence; and the natural creation would as it were burst into applause as they journey to Zion. Thus GNB"You will leave Babylon with joy; you will be led out of the city in peace. The mountains and hills will burst into singing, and the trees will shout for joy".</p><p>But this could have had a yet earlier fulfilment in Isaiah’s time. As the Jews of Hezekiah’s time went out of Jerusalem to a revitalized land and started to receive the tribute of the surrounding nations (the primary application of Isaiah’s Kingdom prophecies), so the saints will pour forth from Jerusalem to establish the Kingdom worldwide."Ye shall go out (from Jerusalem) with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and hills shall break forth before you into singing..."(<a href='B:290 55:12'>Isa 55:12</a>). After the surrounding of Christ in Jerusalem and the defeat of Gog, Psalms 2 describes the establishment of the Kingdom worldwide:"I shall give the heathen for thine inheritance... kiss the son, lest He be angry "(:8,12).</p><p>Even as late as the time of Esther, this could have had a fulfilment. For the same word for"gladness"is used of the joy of the exiles when they were saved from Haman’s destruction (<a href='B:190 9:17'>Est 9:17</a>). The subtext to the otherwise positive picture of good triumphing over evil at the end of Esther, with a day of feasting and gladness proclaimed, is that their day of feasting and gladness was prophetically intended to be in Zion (<a href='B:290 25:6'>Isa 25:6</a> s:w:). They went into exile exactly because they had days of ’feasting’ and didn’t respond to the prophetic message (s:w. <a href='B:290 5:12'>Isa 5:12</a>). It was in Zion that they were to experience"gladness"(<a href='B:290 35:10'>Isa 35:10</a>) when they returned (<a href='B:290 51:11'>Isa 51:11</a>). They were to leave the lands of their captivity in"gladness"and thus come to Zion (<a href='B:290 55:12'>Isa 55:12</a> s:w:). But they didn’t return. The"day of gladness"was to be accompanied by the blowing of trumpets (s:w. <a href='B:40 10:10'>Num 10:10</a>), summoning them to Zion. But there is no mention of this; because they didn’t want to return there, but to remain in prosperous Persia:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p>Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree; and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree: and it shall be to Yahweh for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off- This could literally refer to the transformation of the desert before the exiles as they returned from Babylon to Zion, as discussed on Is. 41:19. This marvellous vegetation springing up as the redeemed passed by would remain throughout the future ages as a monument to God's grace. Ultimately, the eternal sign will be a transformed, immortal people in a transformed, eternal world.
They refused to believe and leave, and so the far grander fulfilment will be in the day when the curse [thorns] will be removed from earth. We can also simply understand these trees and plants as representative of people; the rough and useless thorns would be transformed into the beautiful and useful fir / cypress and myrtle. Which is the work of the Spirit.
The myrtle (="Esther") was a native of Persia and not Palestine. The idea is that the captives would return from Persia and be planted in the restored kingdom. The curse of thorns and thistles placed upon the eretz in Eden would then thereby be removed. But the book of Esther has a sad ending, in spiritual terms; for God’s people were prosperous and accepted in Persian society, and preferred to remain there rather than do the work of the Kingdom and allow its restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says Yahweh, Keep justice, and do righteousness; for My salvation is near to come, and My righteousness to be revealed- The idea is that those addressed were to keep justice because salvation was near- implying, they could bring about its arrival by living righteously. The implication is that if they didn't, then it wouldn't come. "Salvation near to come" in Is. 56:1 is the same idea as discussed on Is. 46:13; 51:5: "I bring near My righteousness, it shall not be far off, and My salvation shall not wait; and I will place salvation in Zion... My righteousness is near, My salvation is gone forth". The idea was that the restoration of God's Kingdom, "salvation", had come near to the Jews in exile- and all they had to do was accept it, leave Babylon and go to Zion in faith and live it. But they refused, and most didn't even leave Babylon at that time. But God's word [of this restored Kingdom] didn't return to Him without having achieved its end- because this amazing good news was and is offered to the whole world, of whatever ethnicity, Jew or Gentile. And so the language is taken up in the New Testament- the Kingdom of God 'came near' again in the first century (Mt. 3:2; 10:7 "the kingdom is at hand"; Lk. 10:9,11; 21:31; James 5:8). The Kingdom coming near doesn't therefore have to mean that it was inevitably about to come. "Near", in the context of the Isaiah passages, meant that the possibility of it coming was indeed "near" at that time. But if it wasn't accepted, then the possibility would recede and be reapplied to others. It came near to the exiles in Babylon, it came near to first century Israel- but both times they rejected it. And so it has come near to us, especially in these last days.</p><p>A case can be made that Is. 56-66 forms a so-called 'Third Isaiah'. The tone becomes more critical and harshly judgmental of the Jews for refusing the Gospel of salvation and restoration. The speaker in Is. 56–66 appears to be  in Israel, at a time when the Temple is either built or in the process of being rebuilt  (Is. 56:5,7; 57:13; 60:13; 63:18; 65:11,25; 66:1–4, :20–21). In Isaiah 40–55, the speaker seems to be still n Babylon (Is. 43:14; 44:28; 45:1; 46:1; 47:1,5; 48:14,20).
The salvation of Yahweh’s Kingdom could have soon come, if Judah had ‘kept judgment’. But Malachi and Haggai, along with the record of the injustices of the Jewish nobles in Nehemiah, show the lack of judgment / justice amongst the returnees. Israel should have been just and not abusive of their brethren, precisely because"my salvation is near to come". We are to do righteousness, because God’s righteousness is about to be revealed (RV). We seek to live the Kingdom life now, seeing we will so soon, by grace, be living it anyway.</p><p>The offer of the Messianic banquet in the preceding chapter (<a href='B:290 55:1-3'>Isa 55:1-3</a>) and new covenant (<a href='B:290 55:3'>Isa 55:3</a>) was not going to be on the table for ever. The exiles had to repent, leave exile and return to the land in order to reestablish and rebuild the things of God’s Kingdom. There was no such repentance. And those who did return were motivated by personal gain and were not spiritual people, as the restoration prophets and the historical records in Ezra and Nehemiah make clear. So the window of opportunity closed, and the things of the new covenant, Messianic banquet and restored Kingdom became reapplied and deferred. The offered salvation was"near"to them, about to come (see on <a href='B:290 46:13'>Isa 46:13</a>; <a href='B:290 51:5'>Isa 51:5</a>); but it swooped close to them, but they refused to catch it. The appeal is therefore urgent, because for the exiles, the amazing offer was time limited.</p><p>There is a parallel passage in <a href='B:290 50:8'>Isa 50:8</a>:"He is near who justifies me; who will bring charges against me? Let us stand up together: who is my adversary? Let him come near to me". &nbsp;Those who feel the real justification of the Spirit, the real power of imputed righteousness, will not be unsettled by human criticism or"charges"brought. For the nearness of God’s justification in Christ is more than sufficient. <a href='B:290 56:1'>Isa 56:1</a> speaks of how Yahweh’s righteousness (imputed to us by His justification of us in Christ) is"near to come", and His salvation soon to be revealed. As Paul develops in Romans 1-8, we are saved by the imputation of righteousness, justification by faith. But that is yet to be revealed, although it could have been"near"even in time for the exiles. They refused these wonderful things, but they are true for us too, as we await the soon revelation of the Lord Jesus at judgment day. Keeping this hope in view means we shall ultimately have nobody and nothing charged against us, there will be no legal adversary in court with us at the last day. And this means that we handle accusation, both justified and false, in that perspective. And yet it is criticism and the shame which arises from it which can psychologically and spiritually destroy people in this life.</p><p>The tone in Isaiah appears to change now. The historical interlude in Isaiah 37-39 has demonstrated that the prophecies in Isaiah 1-36 of judgment at the hands of Assyria were ameliorated and deferred by the intense repentance and intercession of Isaiah’s school of prophets. But the interlude concludes with the bad news that the reformation was not thorough, and that Judah would go into captivity in Babylon; and therefore the earlier prophecies of judgment by Assyria would be reapplied to judgment by Babylon. But out of that there was to come a wonderful restoration of God’s Kingdom in Israel, explained in the so called ’second Isaiah’ (Isaiah 40-55). But sadly, the Jews who returned failed to allow that amazing potential to come true; and that is the burden of the so called ’third Isaiah’ (Isaiah 56-66). It seems that God therefore gave up trying to restore the Kingdom in a political, national sense; and looked instead to a purpose with individuals who had His word in their humbled hearts.</p>


text:
<p>Blessed is the man who does this- As noted on :1, God was now looking to build relationships with just some individuals who were spiritually minded, seeing that on a national level His wonderful project for the restoration of His Kingdom had been disallowed by them.</p><p>And the son of man- The appeal is to individuals within the community, but"the son of man"looks forward to the Lord Jesus, the representative servant Messiah called"Israel", who would alone be completely obedient. Because <a href='B:290 64:7'>Isa 64:7</a> laments that there was apparently not a single one in the community who would ’hold fast’ the offered covenant (s:w."who holds it fast").</p><p>Who holds it fast- To"hold fast"means to keep covenant (<a href='B:290 56:4'>Isa 56:4</a>; <a href='B:290 56:6'>Isa 56:6</a>; <a href='B:140 7:22'>2Ch 7:22</a>; <a href='B:300 31:32'>Jer 31:32</a>). The"it"they were to hold fast to was God’s righteousness and not their own (<a href='B:290 56:1'>Isa 56:1</a>). But they refused to do so because like Job, they held fast (s:w:) to their own righteousness (s:w. <a href='B:220 27:6'>Job 27:6</a>). The word means literally,’to harden / strengthen’. Then individual who wanted to accept the new covenant offered to the exiles in <a href='B:300 31:32'>Jer 31:32</a> and Ezekiel 20 would in turn be strengthened / confirmed by God in that way, just as today (s:w. <a href='B:140 16:9'>2Ch 16:9</a>; <a href='B:140 19:11'>2Ch 19:11</a>). Hezekiah had initially ’strengthened himself’ in Yahweh, just as his name means; but didn’t remain in that way (s:w. <a href='B:140 32:5'>2Ch 32:5</a>; <a href='B:140 32:7'>2Ch 32:7</a>). Isaiah is asking his audience to continue as Hezekiah could have been. The returning exiles were initially ’strengthened’ (s:w. <a href='B:150 1:6'>Ezr 1:6</a>; <a href='B:150 6:22'>Ezr 6:22</a>; <a href='B:160 2:18'>Neh 2:18</a> etc:) but on a national level, they hadn’t continued in this. So individuals are now bidden strengthen themselves, and to be strengthened, in the things of the new covenant.</p><p>Who keeps the Sabbath from profaning it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil- There was a problem with Sabbath abuse during the restoration. And so these potential prophecies of what could have happened at the restoration were precluded from fulfilment. The Sabbath was intended to teach self-control, restraining the hand from doing evil. Perhaps also in view is the assimilation of the exiles with the Persian and Babylonian culture. They refused the good news of restoration because of their comfort within that culture. We don't get the impression the likes of Esther and Mordecai kept the Sabbath- people didn't even know Esther was a Jewess.</p>


text:
<p>Neither let the foreigner who has joined himself to Yahweh speak, saying, Yahweh will surely separate me from His people- 
The foreigner in view may be the foreigners whom God intended to return with the exiles from Babylon to Zion. That scenario didn't really happen. The Jews didn't actually want to leave the foreigners and worshipped their gods. But it becomes true in the glorious reapplication to all who say "Yes" to the good news of the restored Kingdom and the new covenant. 
We have here another example of the Bible's huge interest in self talk. For the foreigner and eunuch are being told what not to "say" in their own self talk. The foreigner had indeed "joined himself" and so he should not in his self-talk say the opposite- that he had been separated from Yahweh. We too can join ourselves to the Lord but then in our self-talk, completely deny this. The contrast is between 'Don't you say' (:3) and "For thus says Yahweh" (:4). His word must override the word of our self talk. And if we enquire why the foreigner said to himself "Yahweh will surely separate me from His people", it was because this is what they had heard from the Jews. Their words affected the self talk of the Gentiles. But that was to be displaced by God's words.  
There are many other cases where the Bible tells us to speak or not to speak in a certain way in our heart, in our self talk: "Say not, I will recompense evil; but wait on Yahweh" (Prov. 20:22); "Say not, I will do to him as he has done to me" (Prov. 24:29); "Say not, What is the cause that the former days were better than these?" (Ecc. 7:10); "Say not in your heart, Who shall ascend into heaven?" (Rom. 10:6); "Speak not in your heart saying, For my righteousness Yahweh has brought me in to possess this land" (Dt. 9:4); those who speak "with flattering lips and with a double heart" are saying one thing with their lips when their self talk is the opposite (Ps. 12:2). And we have the records of men's self-talk preserved for millennia in the Bible. Thus we learn what Abraham "said in his heart" thousands of years ago (Gen. 17:17), what Abraham's servant 'spoke in his heart' (Gen. 24:45), what Esau said in his heart about his brother (Gen. 27:41); what David said to himself about Saul (1 Sam. 27:1); what Jeroboam said in his heart about the kingdom (1 Kings 12:26); what the wicked say in their heart about God and His judgment (Ps. 10:6,11,13; 14:1; 53:1); Ecclesiastes is the author writing down in words in later life what he realized had been the self talk of his youth (Ecc. 2:1,15; 3:17,18); what the king of Babylon said in his heart about Jerusalem and himself (Is. 14:13; 47:10); what the king of Tyre said to himself about himself (Ez. 28:2). 
At the end of the book of Esther, many Gentiles became Jews. And yet they it seems were not fully accepted into the Jewish community. Yet Is. 56 stresses God's special interest in them, and His intention they too should go up from Babylon to Zion along with the Jews- and equally offer acceptable sacrifices in the rebuilt temple. There may be reference to how the returned exiles married Gentiles and then separated from them at the times of Ezra and Nehemiah. Perhaps this is saying that this was unnecessary if those foreigners had joined themselves to Yahweh.</p><p>Neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree- The context is of Gentiles who had become Jews (:6) and who were keeping the Sabbath and trying to be obedient to the covenant. These Gentiles are called eunuchs. One suggestion is that the Jews were hostile to these proselytes, and during the required circumcision process they actually castrated them. Or falsely extrapolated from the need for circumcision to demand they be castrated if they wanted to be Jews.</p>


text:
<p>For thus says Yahweh, To the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths, and choose the things that please Me, and hold fast My covenant- Perhaps the "eunuchs" refer to the Jews who had been made eunuchs in Babylon, who were officials in the Babylonian and Persian empires, like Nehemiah. Is. 39:7 had distinctly prophesied: "they will be eunuchs in the king of Babylon’s palace". Perhaps the idea is that they were going to return and find meaning and an eternal name through having returned to Zion and quit the good life and senior positions of Babylon. It's possible that these Jewish eunuchs / officers of Babylon were called "foreigners" by their brethren, who resented how they had been senior political and social figures within Babylon.
We note the stress on "Me", "My Sabbaths... My covenant... My salvation... My righteousness... My desire... My holy mountain... My house... My altar". God was absolutely putting all of Himself into this new covenant. Which we now can take hold of. This is choosing the things that please / delight God; and the same phrase is used three times of how the Jewish exiles did not choose what pleases God, but rather chose the idols which do not please God (Is. 65:12; 66:3,4). Yet they made those choices beneath the umbrella of external devotion to Yahweh. Life is a string of choices, and God looks carefully at those choices. 
The classic case of a foreigner who was a eunuch is in the account of the Ethiopian eunuch being baptized into the Lord, after having been rejected [we can deduce] by the Jerusalem authorities and not allowed to enter the temple beyond the court of the Gentiles (Acts 8:27). The scenario in Isaiah 56 thus again 'came near' to fulfilment in the first century. But again, God's people refused it. And now after a gap of 2000 years, it seems we have another chance. Again the day of the Lord draws near- but God's people must accept it. But for all time, the new covenant, membership in God's people, is here thrown open to the rejected and marginalized, summed up in the Gentile and eunuch. Their lives, like those of so many today caught up in postmodern hopelessness, were of futility and abandonment. But God could powerfully transform them. Although Abraham isn't mentioned specifically in Is. 56, we could think that there is an allusion to him- for he was a foreigner in the promised land, and was unable to have children by Sarah. The foreigner lacked land [foreigners couldn't own land in a foreign land] and the eunuch lacked children. The promises of land and seed were the basis of the promises to Abraham; and those promises were the basis of the new covenant which God was now offering to all men. Including the foreigners and eunuchs at the time of the restoration.
The foreigner is often mentioned together with "the poor", as life as an immigrant was economically difficult in the family and kinship based economy of the ancient world. But eunuchs were in this case senior servants of a king or empire. The mention of foreigners and eunuchs thereby presents the picture of the spiritually marginalized, both rich and poor, who were apparently powerless to come close to God as they wished to. For there was no ritual of purification which could make a Gentile not a Gentile or a eunuch not a eunuch- let alone to empower them to become 'ministers' / priests. These are exactly the types whom God rejoices to bring close to Him. 
Seeing the old covenant precluded foreigners and eunuchs from priestly service or entry to the sanctuary, the covenant they "held fast" was not the old covenant. The very passage which excluded foreigners and eunuchs from the people of God (Dt. 23) was read to the exiles in Neh. 13 as the basis for demanding their divorce from foreigners. The returned exiles chose to remain under the old covenant rather than accept the new covenant. What they should've done with their foreign wives was to bring them into the new covenant. In Is. 66:2 we read of God dwelling with those who 'trembled at His word'. The initial application would be to Ezra 9:4 [the only other place we read this phrase] where some amongst the returned exiles trembled at God's word and divorced their Gentile wives. Although actually the better response would have been not to divorce those women, but to lead them into covenant with Israel's God. So these who trembled at God's word responded to the word, but in a less than ideal way. Still God was thrilled with them.
So when we read here in Is. 56 of gentiles and eunuchs holding fast to the covenant, this was the new covenant offered now to just individuals within the community of exiles, who were urged to"hold fast"the righteousness imputed from God which was part of the new covenant offered to the exiles in <a href='B:300 31:32'>Jer 31:32</a> and Ezekiel 20 (see on :2).</p><p>It seems a reasonable assumption that Hezekiah chose to be a eunuch for the Kingdom’s sake. There is the implication in <a href='B:290 56:3-8'>Isa 56:3-8</a> that his example inspired others in Israel to make the same commitment. They are comforted by Isaiah:"Neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. For thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep my Sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold (the same Hebrew word is used five times about Hezekiah, <a href='B:140 29:3'>2Ch 29:3</a>; <a href='B:140 29:34'>2Ch 29:34</a>; <a href='B:140 31:4'>2Ch 31:4</a>; <a href='B:140 32:5'>2Ch 32:5</a>; <a href='B:140 32:7'>2Ch 32:7</a>) of my covenant; even unto them will I give in mine house, and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off”. Hezekiah had lamented that he would die without a seed (<a href='B:290 38:12'>Isa 38:12</a>; Isaiah 53), and so did those who had also become (in their minds?) eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom. There was that human desire for a seed, a "house" to perpetuate their name. But they are promised a name in God’s house (family) in the Kingdom, better than of sons and daughters in this life. This alludes to <a href='B:80 4:15'>Rth 4:15</a>, where Ruth is described as being better than sons to Naomi. In other words, the Ruth: Naomi relationship, featuring as it did a willingness to deny marriage for the sake of the God of Israel, was a type of our relationship with God:&nbsp;In its restoration context, it has been suggested that this passage was a comfort to Nehemiah, who appears to have been a (physical) eunuch, and hence barred from entry to the temple which he was devoted to. Hence his words: "Who is there, that being as I am would go into the temple…?" (<a href='B:160 6:11'>Neh 6:11</a>). Isaiah is comforting him and those like him that they would eternally live in the temple.</p>


text:
<p>to them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial and a name better than of sons and of daughters; I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off- The Gentiles who truly joined themselves to Yahweh would be "better than" the ethnic Jews, God’s previous "sons and daughters". Or we can read this as saying that their eternal memorial and being before God would be infinitely better than having had children in mortal life.</p><p>All the faithful will be given a name and place in the temple; so what especial consolation was this to those eunuchs? Surely the point is that the name (personality) they will then have will gloriously reflect the self-sacrifice and personal Biblical understanding which they went through in this life. This alone proves that the reward will be individual. The Lord’s picture of men entering the Kingdom without limbs is surely making the same point (<a href='B:480 9:47'>Mar 9:47</a>); the result of our self-sacrifice in this life will be reflected by the personality we have in the Kingdom. And there is evidence that the Man we follow will still bear in His body, throughout eternity, the marks of the crucifixion (<a href='B:450 13:6'>Zec 13:6</a>; <a href='B:730 5:6'>Rev 5:6</a>). The "name" will be eternal; their personality and being will endure literally for ever. Again we see pointed `up the eternal, critical importance of the character / personality we allow to be developed in us in this life. It will literally be "eternal glory" to them. And not the fading glory given by men, engraved on war memorials and tombstones. "Forever in our hearts", "We will remember them" etc. are all time limited. One day soon, those people will be eternally forgotten and nobody will remember them, in the spectrum of infinite time. People like to think that their memory continues in the hearts of their children and descendants. The eunuch had no such hope; but in fact neither does any man, for he too will soon be totally forgotten. But God will remember these eunuchs eternally, their name will be eternal, in God's memory- far greater than any memory of themselves preserved in the hearts of any immediate descendants. The word for "memorial" is used for a memorial monument (1 Sam. 15:12). Absalom built one as he had no children. Eunuchs had nobody to carry on their family name; but that itself is mythical, lasting a few generations at best. But eunuchs for the Lord will have a name that endures eternally. It's as if, through perpetuating their name, God Himself is erecting an eternal monument to remember the sacrifices and devotions made by some obscure "eunuch", someone who was excluded and forgotten by the religious people of God- but eternally glorified by God. Ez. 43:7-9 criticizes the Jews for burying the dead bodies of their kings and making [memorial] "doorposts" to them in the temple, in the belief this would eternally memorialize them. Indeed they are told to remove those bodies. For the eternal memorial is in a character remembered and eternally preserved by God, re-articulated in a bodily form for ever. And the personality of the eunuchs and Gentiles was to be memorialized eternally within the walls of God's house, as if they were the royalty whose memorials God did not want inside His house. The eunuchs may have felt a 'cutting off' of their manhood; but the name they would be given would never be cut off.       </p>


text:
<p>Also the foreigners who join themselves to Yahweh- The same word is used of the foreigners joining the exiles in asking the way to Zion and saying "Let us join ourselves to Yahweh in an everlasting covenant" (Jer. 50:5). That didn't happen at the time of the restoration. So it has been reframed and reapplied to us now. This is the time envisaged in Zechariah when "Many nations shall be joined to Yahweh in that day, and shall be My people; and I shall dwell in the midst of you" (Zech. 2:11). This was the new covenant offered now to just individuals within the community of exiles, who were urged to "hold fast" the righteousness imputed from God which was part of the new covenant offered to the exiles in <a href='B:300 31:32'>Jer 31:32</a> and Ezekiel 20 (see on :2). But this new covenant wasn’t only open to Jews or Israelites; it was also open to the repentant minority of Gentiles which the prophets often foresee. On the basis of this new covenant, a new, multiethnic people of God could be formed; and that is what is happening today. But it could have happened then too, and the story of Jonah is surely to underline the possibility. As noted throughout Isaiah 13 onwards, the judgments upon the Gentiles in the land are only because they have refused to repent. God’s desire was that the Gentile "briers and thorns" upon whom He would march (<a href='B:290 27:4'>Isa 27:4</a>) would "take hold" of Him and make peace, entering into covenant with Him as He offered. <a href='B:290 27:5'>Isa 27:5</a> likewise speaks of this latter day ’taking hold’ (s:w:) of Yahweh by the remnant of the judged Gentiles.</p><p>To minister to Him and to love the name of Yahweh, to be His servants, each one who keeps the Sabbath from profaning it, and holds fast covenant- Ministering and being Yahweh’s servants is the language of priesthood. The new covenant offered to the exiles was not a repeat of the Mosaic covenant. Now, Gentiles who took hold of the new covenant could serve on an equal footing. <a href='B:290 56:6'>Isa 56:6</a> defines what is meant by “a house of prayer for all nations”- it was for those of all nations who “join themselves to the Lord, to serve him and to love the name of the Lord... every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant”. “The people of the land” were to have a part in the new system of things (<a href='B:330 45:16'>Eze 45:16</a>; <a href='B:330 45:22'>Eze 45:22</a>; <a href='B:330 46:3'>Eze 46:3</a>; <a href='B:330 46:9'>Eze 46:9</a>), and yet this very phrase is repeatedly used concerning the Samaritan people who lived in the land at the time of the restoration (<a href='B:150 4:4'>Ezr 4:4</a>; <a href='B:150 10:2'>Ezr 10:2</a>; <a href='B:150 10:11'>Ezr 10:11</a>; <a href='B:160 9:24'>Neh 9:24</a>; <a href='B:160 10:30-31'>Neh 10:30-31</a>). God’s intention was that they should eventually be converted unto Him; it was His intention that Ezekiel’s temple be built at the time of the restoration under Ezra. And yet <a href='B:450 7:10'>Zec 7:10</a>; <a href='B:460 3:5'>Mal 3:5</a>&nbsp; criticize the Jews who returned and built the temple for continuing to oppress the stranger / Gentile. Israel would not.</p><p>But these things have all been reapplied to we who accept the new covenant today. We have joined ourselves to the Lord (in baptism, in our case) in order to be His slaves. We love our Master, and are committed to Him and His cause 24 hours / day. And the future Kingdom will involve the same; for quite simply "His servants shall serve him" in that age, continually and eternally (<a href='B:730 22:3'>Rev 22:3</a>). We have noted earlier that we now read no more of the singular "servant" after Is. 53, but rather of plural "servants". His suffering would enable the true Israel to become "in" Him, and thus become the servants within the one perfect servant. And the opportunity to become "in" Him was open to the Gentiles. Hence they are His "servants".  
The sabbath is emphasized. But the sabbath was the sign of the old covenant relationship between God and His people Israel (Ex. 31:13,17). Yet the Gentiles and eunuchs, which we can take as a summary of all those religiously excluded from Israel, would enter the new covenant, which has no element of Sabbath keeping. Paul, a great preacher of the new covenant, describes the Sabbath as irrelevant to new covenant living, and at best a matter of personal conscience. But the foreigners and eunuchs are characterized by sabbath keeping. I suggest that the idea was that these Gentile proselytes had sought to enter covenant relationship with God under the old covenant, and therefore kept the Sabbath. But in reward, they were given the new covenant. This is why there is no mention of them being circumcised, which was the sign of entry into the old covenant. Or we could see the focus on the sabbath [which we also see in Ezekiel's teaching of the exiles] because the Gentiles kept it from the viewpoint that it looked ahead to the restored Kingdom. As Abraham Heschel called it, "a sanctuary in time". Their keeping of it was to be rewarded in that they would indeed have an eternal part in the restored Kingdom of God on earth; their faith thus expressed would be turned to sight.   
We must not fail to recognize how radical was the statement that the "ministers" in the restored city and temple would be Gentiles (Is. 56:6). For "ministering to Yahweh" is the language of the Levites and priesthood. The priesthood was going to be radically changed; clearly enough, a new covenant is in view. We must compare this with the statement that the restored Zion and people of God would be the ministers, whilst Gentiles would be their servants: "Gentiles shall stand and feed your flocks, and foreigners shall be your plough men and your vine dressers. But you shall be named the priests of Yahweh; men will call you the ministers of our God" (Is. 61:5,6). The contrast appears to be between the "Gentiles" and the "you" who will be "the ministers of our God". That "you" is defined in Is. 61:3 as the restored Zion / people of God. But Is. 56:6 says that Gentiles and eunuchs would be the "ministers of our God". We conclude that "Zion" is being redefined to include Gentiles, eunuchs and whoever wants to be "in" the Servant Israel.  But "Gentiles" are still mentioned as if it were unbelievers; but believing foreigners / Gentiles are included in the people of God and spoken of differently: "foreigners will not drink your must for which you have laboured... foreigners shall till your land and dress your vines, but you shall be called priests of Yahweh" (Is. 62:8; 61:5,6). 
</p>


text:
<p>Even them will I bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on My altar; for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples- See on :6. Their sacrifices, those of the Gentiles, were not just those they offered for themselves, but for others; for they were also to be ministers / servants of the sanctuary (:6).  Hence GNB "accept the sacrifices you offer on my altar".</p><p>The Sabbath was polluted, as Nehemiah recorded, and theGentiles were mixed with and affirmed in their idolatry, rather than converted and brought to worship in the temple. And so the revelation of Yahweh’s salvation and righteousness in the Kingdom was deferred. The way Jews and Gentiles ate together at Nehemiah’s table (<a href='B:160 5:17'>Neh 5:17</a>) pointed forward to what was almost possible. But in the end, they mixed with and adopted the ways of the Gentiles, and their leadership arrogantly developed a theology that said that dirty Gentiles could never be saved; for salvation, they reasoned, was only for Jews. The idea that the temple was to be a place for Gentiles also to worship not only didn’t come true; but the very opposite happened. The Jews became intolerant of the Gentiles, nationalistically proud, and rejected the Samaritans from worshipping in the rebuilt Jewish temple. And therefore the Samaritans had to build their own temple on Mount Gerazim. Historical records suggest that the Samaritans dearly wished to worship in the Jews’ temple, and only built their own one because the Jews disallowed them. See M. Gaster, The Samaritans (Oxford: O:U:P:, 1925) p. 28 ff. .</p><p>The Ezekiel prophecies of Ezekiel 40-48 had an intended and possible fulfilment at the time of the restoration under Ezra, but this was nullified by Israel’s lack of response; and therefore, at least in principle, the prophecies had their fulfilment delayed until the second coming. This enables the prophecies to fit in with others which speak of some kind of centralized worship system in the future restored Kingdom (e.g. <a href='B:290 2:2-4'>Isa 2:2-4</a>; <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>). Or it could be that these prophecies of Isaiah are likewise talking about what was potentially possible for a restored, obedient Israel; particularly at the time of the restoration from Babylon. The lesson that comes out of all this is the extent to which God is willing to work with us, to tailor His purpose according to how far we are prepared to work with Him, and in that sense to allow Himself to be limited by us. There could be no greater inspiration to a maximal commitment to His purpose and His work.</p><p>Some of the Bible’s ‘prophecies’ are command more than prediction. The Lord Jesus criticized the Jews for trading in the temple because “Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer” (<a href='B:480 11:17'>Mar 11:17</a>). We can easily read this as meaning that one day, a ‘house of prayer for all nations’ was to be built in Jerusalem. But in that case, why should not the Jews trade in the temple there and then, well before this was to happen, say, 2000 years later? The Lord surely means that the prophecy that the temple “shall be called…” a house of prayer was a command more than a prediction. It “shall be” a place for prayer and not trading. The ‘fulfilment’ of this statement was dependent upon them praying there and encouraging all nations to pray there; yet they could limit the fulfilment of the ‘prophecy’ by stopping Gentiles praying there, and by discouraging prayer there because of their trading policies. Thus the Lord saw the prophecy as more of a command than mere prediction. ‘Prophecy’ really means the speaking forth of God’s word, rather than the foretelling of the future. The prophecies of Ezekiel about the temple can be understood more as command than as simple prediction. This is how Israel were to behave and how they were to rebuild the temple. The Lord several times quoted an Old Testament passage which if quoted further would have made a telling point. Thus He quoted <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>: “My house shall be called an house of prayer”, leaving His hearers to continue: “…for all people”. He recited <a href='B:230 8:2'>Psa 8:2</a>: “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise”, leaving them to complete: “…that thou mightest still [through their witness] the enemy and the avenger”. For the Bible minded, these things ought to have taught them. There is reason to think, in the subsequent response of a Jewish minority after Pentecost, that at least some did make these connections. They made use of the spiritual potential they had been given. The fact is, the Kingdom of God 'came near' to the Jewish exiles. But they didn't rebuild the temple according to the patterns given, and excluded Gentiles rather than welcoming them to it. By driving the merchants out of the temple (Mk. 11:17), the Lord Jesus cleared the way for this prophecy to come true at His time; for the Kingdom again 'drew near' to possible fulfilment in the first century. As Isaiah's prophecies have laboured, it was God's intention to bring the exiles from Babylon to Zion. But they refused. And so He will bring to Zion the Gentiles and eunuchs, LXX "I will lead them in to my holy mountain"- and they will not only come to Zion, but will serve as priests in His new temple. Ez. 44:9-11 says otherwise: "No foreigner... shall enter into My sanctuary... But the Levites... are to be ministers in My sanctuary". Again we have a case of a prophetic scenario not being obeyed, and so another one is presented, with some nuances on the initial scenario. None of these things immediately happen at the time of the restoration; and so again, it has been reapplied and reinterpreted, in relation to the Gentiles coming into God's spiritual house. Clearly enough, the promise here requires the old covenant to have come to an end, under which "no one whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off" can enter the assembly, and "No Ammonite or Moabite [i.e. foreigners] shall be admitted" (Dt. 23:1,3). Clearly God was eager to put a new covenant into operation even at the time of the exiles. This is why the rebuilt temple is called a "house of prayer", when earlier it had been a place for sacrifice, "a house of sacrifice" (2 Chron. 7:12).  </p>


text:
<p>The Lord Yahweh who gathers the outcasts of Israel says, Yet will I gather others to him, besides his own who are gathered- Gathering the outcasts is alluding to Dt. 30:4, speaking  of Yahweh gathering the "outcasts" of Israel after their repentance: "If your outcasts are at the ends of the earth / land [which they were at Babylon], from there Yahweh your God will gather you". But this gathering of the outcasts was to be God's response to Israel's repentance in exile, when they "call to mind among all the nations... and return to Yahweh your God and obey His voice according to all that I command you... with all your heart and with all your soul; then Yahweh your God will turn your captivity and have compassion on you. He will return and gather you from all the peoples where Yahweh your God has scattered you" (Dt. 30:1-3). The promise of Is. 56:8 is that this regathering of God's people will include a gathering of "others"- the Gentiles and eunuchs. But this scenario didn't work out, in that exiles didn't repent, as the rest of Is. 56 bitterly laments. And "yet will I gather others..." was to come true, in a longer term than intended, in the gathering of the Gentiles to Zion. They are gathered "to him", to Israel, in that the Jerusalem / Zion that is above becomes the mother of us all. And "Israel" becomes the servant called "Israel". The Lord surely has these ideas in mind in teaching that He has "other sheep", the Gentiles, whom He must also bring / gather (Jn. 10:16).
This verse is connected with :7 and explains it, according to the LXX. The Gentile "others" are going to be accepted by God on an equal footing with the ethnic Jews, and even become "ministers" in the sanctuary on the same basis as the Levites (:6). They would be "gathered" to the "ensign", the standard pole, in Zion. This now refers to the cross of the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:290 11:12'>Isa 11:12</a>; <a href='B:290 43:5'>Isa 43:5</a> s:w:). Theexiles "gathered" from the nations were to come to Zion along with the repentant Gentile remnant who were likewise "gathered". This is to become the multiethnic ecclesia- LXX "for I will gather to him [Israel] a congregation / ekklesia". That ecclesia is based around the hope of Israel, for they are gathered "to Israel". They would gather themselves (<a href='B:290 60:4'>Isa 60:4</a>) and yet be confirmed in this by being gathered. Likewise all who respond to the call of the new covenant are confirmed by the Spirit in that response. See on <a href='B:290 57:13'>Isa 57:13</a>.</p>


text:
<p>All you animals of the field, come to devour, all you animals in the forest- But despite all the wonderful spiritual potentials outlined in :1-8, the reality was that the people would not respond. Instead of the repentant Gentiles gathering themselves to Zion, they would like wild beasts gather together to yet again devour God’s people for their impenitence. The language is so similar to Jer. 12:9, the judgment on Judah's leaders before the exile. And now after the exile, their leaders had learnt nothing from their sufferings and needed the same rebuke: "Go, assemble all the animals of the field, bring them to devour". The idea might be, as hinted at in Zechariah, that God was going to judge the returned exiles with another judgment, captivity and possible return to Babylon (Zech. 5, being taken to the land of Shinar). We can take Is. 56:9 - 57:21 as one section. The chapter break inserted between Isaiah 56 and 57 is unfortunate. Thus the "way" of "unjust gain" in Is. 56:11 is repeated in Is. 57:17. From Is. 40 onwards, God has offered an amazing grace to the exiles. He has used every argument possible to answer every possible objection to His grace. But the love of God is related to His wrath, and such loving grace cannot be repeatedly rejected without judgment. Now we start to read about this.</p>


text:
<p>His watchmen are blind, they are all without knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they can’t bark; dreaming, lying down, loving to slumber- The initial reference is to the false prophets at the time of the return from exile, like Tobiah, Sanballat and Noadiah (Neh. 6:12–14). They were blind watchmen and dogs who didn't bark. We naturally enquire what they were supposed to be warning of? What impending catastrophe was in view for the returned exiles? I suggest that God had in mind to punish them for their apostacy, send invaders against them again, and return them to exile [Zech. 5 predicts them being taken back to Shinar / Babylon]. This never happened, but God had it in mind. The watchmen of God’s people would not see the gathering of the wild beasts of the nations in judgment against them (:6). The LXX suggests this blindness and lack of knowledge was given to them, as confirmation of how they didn’t want to see: "See how they are all blinded: they have not known".</p><p><a href='B:290 62:6-7'>Isa 62:6-7</a> speaks of watchmen [= the prophets, <a href='B:330 3:17'>Eze 3:17</a>; <a href='B:300 6:17'>Jer 6:17</a>; <a href='B:420 2:1'>Hab 2:1</a>] set upon Jerusalem’s walls as watchmen, keeping no silence [in their prophesying] until Jerusalem was established. For the link between the prophets and standing on a watchtower, see <a href='B:420 2:1'>Hab 2:1</a>. But false prophets arose, as we see in Ezekiel’s experience amongst the exiles. Watchmen upon the walls were supposed to be looking for something- for the approach of the Messianic messenger with good tidings of Judah’s full return from captivity, of which Isaiah had spoken in <a href='B:290 52:7-8'>Isa 52:7-8</a>. But most of Judah preferred to stay in Babylon, took up a collection for the few who did return… and no Messiah could appear with that news. God had promised this- but He asked to be put in remembrance of His promises (<a href='B:290 43:26'>Isa 43:26</a>), i:e. He asked for those watchmen to be His ‘rememberancers’, even though He cannot in that sense forget them (<a href='B:230 119:49'>Psa 119:49</a>; <a href='B:300 14:21'>Jer 14:21</a>). In all this we see an exquisite picture of how God works with men, how His promised faithfulness and omnipotence all the same has built into it a requirement for human prayerfulness and response. The reality was that the watchmen / prophets of Israel were blind, ignorant and sleepy.</p>


text:
<p>Yes, the dogs are greedy, they can never have enough; and these are shepherds who can’t understand: they have each turned to their own way, each one to his gain, from every quarter- "Can never have enough" are the same words as the lament in <a href='B:290 55:2'>Isa 55:2</a>: "And your labour for that which doesn’t satisfy?". They were as greedy dogs who could ’not be satisfied’, obsessed with personal gain, and disregarding the free feast of fat things Yahweh had prepared for them in Judah. Again we detect that it was a love of the soft life of materialism in Persia which was the root cause for the exiles not responding to the invitation, and the book of Esther therefore has a sad ending, portraying the Jews as wealthy and popular. See on <a href='B:290 57:17'>Isa 57:17</a>.</p><p>The language here of false religious leaders doing anything for "gain" is that used by Ezekiel in describing how things were among the exiles (Ez. 13:19 "You have profaned Me among My people in order to get handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to kill the people who should not die, and to save the people alive who should not live, by your lying to My people who listen to lies"; Ez. 22:25 "There is a conspiracy of her prophets in its midst, like a roaring lion tearing the prey: they have devoured souls; they take treasure and precious things"); and those exiles who returned may well have taken these attitudes with them.
"Their own way" is "the way of their own heart" (Is. 57:17), for the inner heart defines our way in life. As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. And the Lord died to redeem all who want it from having gone their "own way" (Is. 53:6). These are those who have refused that great redemption and opportunity for psychological reversal. And in this case, they stayed in their "way" for money, for their own gain; we could render:  "turned their own way to their own gain". The attitude of the leaders was that of the people. They mutually influenced each other. And yet the death of the servant could and can save even from that self centered narcissism. "From every quarter" is better "without exception". Hence God's shock that there was not one righteous amongst them.
A spirit of self-indulgence and of slumber, laziness, avarice and selfishness... that in reality was what the Babylon life had become for the Jews, and those who returned to Judah maintained it. They didn't want to quit it. Further, they had covered it with a veneer of spirituality, claiming Yahweh as their God- on a merely cultural level. For they hypocritically continued their quiet idolatry, as alluded to in Is. 57:3-13; 65:1-7. Whilst also being religiously exclusive and xenophobic towards 'Gentiles' and 'eunuchs', those whom they had excluded from their community: "Keep to yourself, do not come near me, for I am too holy for you" (Is. 65:5). They entered into idol worship, but perhaps subconsciously justified it by refusing to allow Gentiles to participate in their Jewish religion. The height of their hypocrisy and ingratitude was in that they who had been released from debt slavery by Divine redemption, forced their own brethren into debt slavery (Is. 58:6,9). 
Putting the various pictures together of the weaknesses of the exilic community [found in Is. 56:9–12; 57:3–13,17–21; 58:1–14; 59:1–8; 65:1–7,11,12; 66:3–6,17], it sounds so much like the church of today; and exactly those characteristics are what turn people off the church. We could argue that the community of exiles was divided into various parts, each of which is addressed for various failures. But my suggestion is that the overall picture is quite credible- of a community that had all these weaknesses ongoing at the same time. Indeed they would quit idolatry- but their other weaknesses remained, and thus they developed into the xenophobic hypocrites they were at the Lord's time. The corrupt state of the priesthood and leadership at the time of the restoration is criticized in Hag. 2:10-14 [" ‘So is this people, and so is this nation before Me’, says Yahweh; ‘and so is every work of their hands. That which they offer there is unclean"] and Zech. 7:4-10 "Don’t oppress the widow, nor the fatherless, the foreigner, nor the poor; and let none of you devise evil against his brother in your heart". These are the very same criticisms of the priests and leaders at the time of the restoration in Is. 56-58. Zechariah 5 [the vision of the stork and the ephah] speaks of the moral filth of the returned exiles in the land, and God's plan to return them to "Shinar" / Babylon. Indeed, Zechariah's visions give a peek behind the scenes into how God from Heaven saw the abominations going on in the land soon after the restoration from Babylon. Here in Isaiah we have more literally spelt out what was happening.
</p>


text:
<p>Come, say they, I will get wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow shall be as this day, great beyond measure- This is the way the flesh reasons; that life shall continue as it is today. Living for the moment is the temptation we continually battle with. Faith is all about looking to the future, and beyond the very narrow horizons of the immediate present. Drunken feasts are used as a metaphor of judgment; they were drinking their own condemnation, and what was so tragic was that they could have worked towards the reestablishment of God’s Kingdom and their own place in eternity. The context in the next chapter is of their idolatry so we can assume these drunken feasts were part of idol worship rituals; like the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 11, they turned the worship of the true God into a form of idolatry. Again we see that the false prophets / teachers of :10 are condemned not to much for theological error arising from incorrect intellectual process in expounding God’s word, but for moral false teaching. This is likewise the nature of false teaching in the New Testament. The same language about being filled with strong drink is used in Is. 5:11 of how the Jews were before the exile. Priest and prophet before the exile are accused of just the same: "They also reel with wine, and stagger with strong drink; the priest and the prophet reel with strong drink. They are swallowed up by wine, they stagger with strong drink. They err in vision, they stumble in judgement" (Is. 28:7). The exile had failed to reform them, as God had intended. "And tomorrow shall be as this day..." is the language of hard core alcoholism. And that is just the picture used of Zion in Is. 51, an alcoholic lying drunk and naked in the dust, being abused as she lay there, chewing the dregs of the alcohol to get a little bit more alcohol out of it. God had offered to take her hand and help her arise, be clothed with royal garments, brush the dust off her, and be remarried to Him in glory. She preferred to wallow in her alcoholism, addicted to the wine of her own condemnation. She did this when God had insisted He had given the exiles His Spirit, He had enlivened their dead bones (Ez. 37); and yet they refused and resisted the Holy Spirit, just as their fathers had done and just as they would in the first century (Acts 7:51): "They shall know that I am Yahweh their God, in that I caused them to go into captivity among the nations, and have gathered them to their own land; and I will leave none of them any more there; neither will I hide My face any more from them; for I have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel, says the Lord" (Ez. 39:28,29). The Spirit was poured out upon the dry bones, but they refused to come to life and stand up and return to Zion. They resisted the Holy Spirit. Salvation again 'came near' in the first century and again they refused. But they were resisting that which cannot be resisted; they couldn't resist the spirit by which Stephen spoke (Acts 6:10), yet he says they resisted the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51). This is the miserable position of all who refuse to the good news of the Kingdom.
</p>


text:
<p>The righteous perishes, and no man lays it to heart; and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the coming evil- "None understanding / considering" connects with Is. 56:11: "these are shepherds who can’t understand". The chapter break between Isaiah 56 and 57 is unwarranted. This is all the same section, beginning in Is. 56:10. The idea is that the shepherds of the righteous didn't understand. And yet the righteous were still righteous, despite having bad shepherds. And that is the case within so much of organized, religious Christianity today.</p><p>This is probably alluding to what God did to Josiah (<a href='B:120 22:20'>2Ki 22:20</a> cp. 23:29). The allusion is to Josiah dying in peace without having to witness the Babylonian judgment and exile of Judah. For that is the referent of "the coming evil" in Jer. 22:10; 2 Kings 22:16-20. Perhaps the idea is that nobody much had reflected upon that; and this leads straight on from the criticism of the shepherds in the previous verses. They had not protected the righteous and were not bothered about the death of the faithful. The same word for "righteous" translated 'saints' is found in Ps. 116:15, "Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints". The people were committing the same sins they had before the exile. They had not repented nor been transformed by their experiences; just as so many suffer so much but to no avail. And so the cycle would have to repeat. Or we could conclude that this was happening to the righteous amongst the exiles. They were suffering real persecution even unto death from the false prophets. Jewish tradition claims that Isaiah and Ezekiel died violent deaths at the hands of the Jews, and likely there is some truth in that. We notice the parallel here between "righteous men" and "merciful men". "Mercy" alludes to the covenants which they were faithful to, but they all the same were characterized by "mercy" as the lead characteristic of those who accepted them and were transformed by them internally.</p>


text:
<p>He enters into peace; they rest in their beds, each one who walks in his uprightness- The resting of the righteous in their beds could refer to their sleeping in death, at peace and awaiting a certain resurrection to life. For :1 has spoken of their death. The contrast is with the wicked shepherds who are three times mentioned as getting into a "bed" of adultery before the idol shrines (:7,8). </p><p>See on <a href='B:730 21:12'>Rev 21:12</a>. RVmg. "each one straight before him". <a href='B:300 31:9'>Jer 31:9</a> had prophesied of the restoration: “They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble”. Likewise <a href='B:290 63:13'>Isa 63:13</a> reminded the returnees that when they had been led through the wilderness to Canaan under Moses, they did not stumble [s:w:]. Although these righteous individuals died without seeing the restored Kingdom of God (:1), they entered into peace and would later be resurrected to participate in it. That is the implication I see in these words.</p><p>Despite the promise of a "straight way" to Zion, both Ezra and Nehemiah wanted to have a Babylonian military escort on the journey back; they weren’t sure that they would be given “a straight way” with Yahweh’s protection. <a href='B:160 4:10'>Neh 4:10</a> records that “Judah said, The strength of the bearers of burdens is decayed [s:w. “stumble”, <a href='B:300 31:9'>Jer 31:9</a>], and there is much rubbish; so that we are not able to build the wall”. They were easily discouraged by the words of the surrounding world, by the apparent hopelessness of their task; and thus they stumbled. <a href='B:150 8:21'>Ezr 8:21</a> LXX describes how Ezra fasted for them to be given a “straight way”, as Jeremiah had foretold they could have. He saw the need for them to make the effort to fulfill the prophecy. Note how Ezekiel’s vision of the cherubim featured “straight” progress; the wheels on earth surely connect with how Israel should have been, moving in a straight way back to the land, in harmony with the Angel-cherubim above them likewise moving in a straight way. But they failed to “keep in step with the Spirit”... They were to walk “each one straight before him” (<a href='B:290 57:2'>Isa 57:2</a> RVmg:), as each of the cherubim went straight ahead (<a href='B:330 1:12'>Eze 1:12</a>). <a href='B:230 107:2'>Psa 107:2</a>; <a href='B:230 107:7'>Psa 107:7</a> RV speak of Israel being gathered out of the nations and being led in a “straight way” to Zion, as they had [potentially] been enabled to do on their departure from Egypt. Yet then they spent 38 years walking a distance coverable in just 11 days- because they did not walk in the “straight way”.</p>


text:
<p>But draw near here- They would draw near to Yahweh in judgment, and likewise Yahweh drew near to the returned exiles in judgment for the very issues which Isaiah 57 raises: "I will come near to you in judgment; and I will be an alert witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against the perjurers, and against those who oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow and the fatherless, and who deprive the foreigner of justice" (Mal. 3:5). But those who did these things are asked to draw near to Him in judgment. We are on our way to judgment, and God is on His way to us. Judgment day is our meeting. Our whole lives are to be lived realizing that we are on our way to judgment: "Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are with him in the street. Lest the adversary deliver you to the judge and the judge deliver you to the officer and you be thrown into prison... For as you are going with your adversary before the magistrate, on the way give diligence to be rid of him. Lest he drag you to the judge and the judge shall deliver you to the officer, and the officer shall throw you into prison" (Mt. 5:25; Lk. 12:58). As "draw near" in Is. 41:1; 45:20; 48:16, in an ongoing present sense, this is the language of a summons to judgment. Judgment is in essence ongoing now, and we shouldn’t imagine that God is not paying attention and will only open the books at judgment day. And so those amongst the exiles who were advocating paganism are called to judgment, right then.</p><p>You sons of the sorceress, the seed of the adulterer and the prostitute- They were not in God’s eyes the true Israel. The same ideas are used by Ezekiel about the exiles (<a href='B:330 16:3'>Eze 16:3</a>; <a href='B:330 16:45'>Eze 16:45</a>). The prostitute and sorceress was Babylon; they had so assimilated with Babylon that they were no longer the sons of Zion but of Babylon. The language of sorcery and being sons of a prostitute is that found of Babylon (Is. 47:9-15). They shared Babylon's judgment- after having been urged to flee Babylon lest they share in it. They had been replaced as God's "servants" by the sons of the Gentiles who were now "in" the servant. To call someone's mother a prostitute or a sorceress was the height of rudeness and provocation in their society. It was an almost unthinkable thing to do. But God does it here, concerning His own people who had effectively rejected His Heavenly Fatherhood. And He is saying their father was an adulterer and their mother a whore, whom their father had used. The idea is similar to that in Ez. 16:3,45 (“your father an Amorite, your mother a Hittite”). Again we see how the criticism of the exiles is now repeated about them after they had returned to the land.
We note that "the prostitute" is also a sorceress, and we will read in :9 that the exiles sent their messengers even to sheol, to the underworld, seeking help from the spirits of the dead. And we find just that same parallel between a prostitute and a sorceress who leads men into the occult in Prov. 2:16-18: "The prostitute who has forgotten the covenant of her God; for her house leads down to death, her paths to the spirits of the dead". Their prostitution had a religious connotation to it.
</p>


text:
<p>Against whom do you sport yourselves?- ’To takedelight’; and their delight ought to have been in the things of Yahweh rather than their idols and materialism (<a href='B:290 55:2'>Isa 55:2</a>; <a href='B:290 58:14'>Isa 58:14</a>; <a href='B:290 66:11'>Isa 66:11</a> s:w:).</p><p>Against whom do you make a wide mouth, and stick out your tongue?- The language of persecution and mockery (<a href='B:230 35:21'>Psa 35:21</a>).  We note the mocking body movements, as in Ps. 35:21: "They opened their mouth wide against me"; "They shoot out the lip", "they gape upon me" (Ps. 22:7,13). Lacking expletives in their language, this kind of behaviour was common. Quite possibly they didn't actually literally make these contemptuous body movements. But they effectively despised the prophetic word that they could be saved and redeemed into God's reestablished Kingdom. Just as they had done before the exile (2 Chron. 36:16). And this therefore how He saw their behaviour, as if they were sticking their tongues out at God's word. Despite all their external appearance of being religiously Israelite.</p><p>Aren’t you children of disobedience, a seed of falsehood- See on :3.</p>


text:
<p>You who inflame yourselves among the oaks- The same word in <a href='B:290 61:3'>Isa 61:3</a> of how they should have been trees of righteousness. The continual usage of language about Yahweh worship in the context of idol worship suggests that they were justifying their idolatry as a form of idol worship. For at no time did God’s people ever formally annul their relationship with Yahweh. As they had drunken feasts in the name of Yahweh worship (<a href='B:290 56:12'>Isa 56:12</a>), so they inflamed themselves in sexual lust as part of the same rituals.</p><p>Under every green tree; who kill the children in the valleys, under the clefts of the rocks?- Offering of children to idols was continuing even amongst the exiles, and Ezekiel appears to allude to it (<a href='B:330 6:13'>Eze 6:13</a>, Ezek. 6:21). They did it under clefts of the rocks, thinking it would be hidden. When instead they should have been as Moses, cowering there in fear and respect of Yahweh’s majesty and glory.</p><p>The language here suggests Canaanite religious practices, especially the child sacrifices specifically in valleys (mentioned in 2 Kings 23:10). The references to wadis, clefts of the rock, terebinths etc. sound very much like the geography of Palestine rather than Babylonia. I suggest therefore that these words are addressed to the returned Jewish exiles in the land; who claimed to do works of righteousness for Yahweh (:12) at the same time as idolatry.</p>


text:
<p>Among the smooth stones of the valley is your portion; they, they are your lot; you have even poured a drink offering to them- There is a word play between the Hebrew for "smooth stones" and "portion". The reference may be to some idolatrous practice involving smooth stones. But the word for "smooth stones" also means deceit or flattery, and is used about the idols the exiles worshipped in <a href='B:330 12:24'>Eze 12:24</a>. Yahweh was the portion of His people, but through idolatry done in His Name, He was no longer their portion (<a href='B:50 4:19'>Deu 4:19</a>; <a href='B:300 10:16'>Jer 10:16</a>). Clearly the idea is that they had now returned to the land [s.w. "You shall inherit the land by lot", Num. 33:54] and yet they were worshipping idols in their inheritance. "They are your lot" could also mean that as an adulteress she should be stoned with those stones.</p><p>You have offered an offering- This again confirms the impression that they were offering to the idols as a form of Yahweh worship.</p><p>But shall I be appeased for these things?- Judgment was going to have to come for them (<a href='B:300 5:9'>Jer 5:9</a>), rather than the restoration of the Kingdom which had been possible. Rashi: "in the face of these shall I relent from doing harm to you?". The question is left rhetorical. Could God be appeased? He could not, only His love for His people could appease Himself.</p>


text:
<p>On a high and lofty mountain you have set your bed; there also you went up to offer sacrifice- This is surely an allusion to mount Zion. It could be that the returned exiles committed adultery with their idols there, and that idea is confirmed in :8; or that they used&nbsp; other high mountains as an equivalent of mount Zion. If the temple mount is in view, then we have the tragic picture of the returned exiles committing spiritual adultery in the temple area, rather than enabling the glorious prophecies of a restored Zion to come true. They had set up a giant bed of adultery on mount Zion (:8). To 'go up' to a mountain means to worship. She 'goes up' to this mountain but also 'goes up' to the bed of adultery (:8). We have here the image of the prostitute going up a high mountain- clearly showing that the image of prostitution means 'to worship other gods'. But in :9, she sends messengers to the grave, alluding to her worship of the dead and seeking their help and blessing. She "debased" herself to sheol (:9). She traverses as it were between the "high and lofty" place, and the depths of the earth. This is the language of God, dwelling in the high and lofty place-  "the high and lofty one that inhabits eternity" (:15) but by grace, a grace as far as heaven is above earth, lives with the humblest of hearts on earth. The Hebrew word for "the humble" in :15 is that translated "debased" in :9. Her gadding about, as it were, between the heights and the depths, contrasts with the totally 'other' life she could enjoy- of fellowship with God Almighty by His grace. Life with Him in joyful humility was a complete inversion of how she was living. What an honour it is to be able to persuade men and women that there is this totally 'other' way. May we devote our lives to trying to get others to accept and live it.</p>


text:
<p>Behind the doors and the posts you have set up your memorial- It seems that within the rebuilt temple in Zion there was idolatry going on (see on :7). Or the door posts could refer to their own homes, where God’s law ought to have been written for a memorial (<a href='B:50 6:9'>Deu 6:9</a>; <a href='B:50 11:20'>Deu 11:20</a>); but instead they effectively had there a memorial to their idols, right at the heart of domestic life. The verse goes on to imply sexual sin; the "memorial" may refer to a sign, perhaps a phallic symbol, used by prostitutes or to signpost a brothel. It contrasts with the eternal sign or memorial to the righteous (Is. 55:13; 56:5).</p><p>For you have uncovered to someone besides Me, and have gone up; you have enlarged your bed, and made you a covenant with them: you loved their bed wherever you saw it- This is the whoredom with other gods amongst the exiles spoken of in <a href='B:330 16:25'>Eze 16:25</a>; they were doing the very things for which they had gone into exile for (<a href='B:300 2:20'>Jer 2:20</a>; <a href='B:300 3:2'>Jer 3:2</a>; <a href='B:350 4:12'>Hos 4:12</a>). Covenant relationship with Yahweh is intimate, an exposing of our nakedness before Him in a way we cannot do to anyone or anything else. They had rejected the new covenant which was offered for a covenant with idols. They had made their bed bigger in order to get more lovers into that bed at the same time. For all their loudly proclaimed religious piety, that is in fact what they were doing at the time of the exile and restoration. And she also went to their beds. The Jewish commentator Rashi renders the difficult Hebrew here: "for while with Me, you uncovered [us] and went up [to their bed]". As if she cast off the bedding, got out of bed with God and went to their bed. "Gone up" would refer to going up not to Zion but to the high places of the idols.  Or we could read: "for away from me thou hast uncovered and ascended and enlarged thy bed". And she not only had them in her bed, but went to their bed, literally "You loved their bed and provided a place for it". This would imply they were constructing idol shrines in the land upon their return to it.
We are naked before God (Heb. 4:13). But relationship with God is here described as exposing your nakedness before God. The figure therefore speaks of our realization of who we actually are- accepting that we are in fact anyway naked before God. The idea of nakedness with God suggests the situation in Eden before Adam sinned, when man walked naked with God without shame. The conclusion surely is that this to some extent is possible now in covenant, marital relationship with God. It leads to the kind of transparency before God which David achieved in the Psalms, telling God precisely how you are and how you feel, despite those feelings not being very spiritual, and despite not being in a good place spiritually.   
</p>


text:
<p>You went to the king with oil and increased your perfumes, and sent your ambassadors far off, and debased yourself even to Sheol- "The king" is "Moloch", hence GNB "You put on your perfumes and ointments and go to worship the god Molech. To find gods to worship, you send messengers far and wide, even to the world of the dead". By such sin, they brought themselves down to the grave. Just as they had sent ambassadors to other nations in seeking help against theBabylonians and Assyrians, now they were doing just the same. All this arose because Babylon sent its ambassadors to Judah and they accepted them and later their gods, as noted on Isaiah 39. But now they were sending their ambassadors to the nations, seeking help and relationships rather than being exclusively for Yahweh. </p><p>The connection would be with Ez. 23:16 which speaks of how before and during the exile, the Jews sent messengers to Babylon to get their idols. Now they had returned from Babylon, they were doing just the same. The point is being made time and again that the exile hadn't reformed Judah; they were doing what they had done before it. And here we have another example.</p>


text:
<p>You were wearied with the length of your way; yet you didn’t say, ‘It is in vain’. You found a reviving of your strength; therefore you weren’t faint- Not only is the logic of choosing God’s way so powerful, but the way of the flesh is not satisfying. Sin became a weariness to Israel even before they reaped the punishment for it (<a href='B:290 57:10'>Isa 57:10</a>); their mind was alienated from the lovers they chose; they left the one they left the God of Israel for (<a href='B:330 23:17'>Eze 23:17</a>). They always wanted new gods; they were never satisfied with their idols (<a href='B:300 44:3'>Jer 44:3</a>). GNB "You think your obscene idols give you strength, and so you never grow weak" reveals the classic situation of the addict. They continued in the addiction because they apparently were getting some strength to continue in it from the addiction.</p><p>"You weren't faint" means surely that they did not feel weak despite God's corrective judgments. This is just how they were before the exile: "You smote them and they did not become sick" (Jer. 5:3). They simply resolved to continue in their ways, both before the exile (Jer. 2:25; 18:12) and now the same after it. Although exhausted by sin, they found a second wave to continue in it. Is. 51 has called them alcoholics and this is the same image. </p>


text:
<p>Of whom have you been afraid and in fear, that you lie, and have not remembered Me, nor laid it to your heart?- This connects with their fear of the Babylonian leadership, which meant they didn’t take seriously the offer of restoration to Judah and the reestablishment of the Kingdom (<a href='B:290 51:12'>Isa 51:12</a>). And this resulted in their ’lying’, breaking covenant with Yahweh through not having their covenant with Him laid "in your heart".</p><p>One thing that works against truthfulness is the neuroses that come from fear, the fearful tensions that arise between our real self and the false self. Fear and truth are opposed. This isn’t merely psychotherapeutic babble. The life of brave faith, the life that is lived in the overcoming of fears, the fearless breaking out of our comfort zones… this is the true life, the life in which we have no need to lie nor believe in lies. But of course it’s hard, because we think that the truth, the reality, is what we see around us; whereas faith is believing in what is not seen. Yet actually what is not seen is the reality, and what is seen is very often a lie. And the true life is a life of faith in those things which are not yet visibly seen.</p><p>Haven’t I held peace even of long time, and you don’t fear Me?- God’s patience and lack of immediate judgment against sin ought to lead to yet greater awe and respect of Him; but for many, it becomes a reason to think they can continue in sin.  The "long time" refers to the years of exile (as stated in Is. 42:14); for He had not been silent at their sins when the Babylonians conquered Judah. And yet :17 LXX speaks of the exile as just a "short time". Time is relative; God had been silent a long time in that He did not further judge their sins. And so now He was offering unconditional forgiveness [if they would accept it], the period of His separation from them was just a short time compared to the eternity He now offered them. GNB "Who are these gods that make you afraid, so that you tell me lies and forget me completely? Have you stopped honoring me because I have kept silent for so long?".</p>


text:
<p>I will declare your righteousness; and as for your works, they shall not profit you- This is embedded within condemnation of Israel for idolatry. So we are to read this as irony, with GNB: "You think that what you do is right, but I will expose your conduct, and your idols will not be able to help you". When exactly this happened historically is hard to say; but it will surely come true at the last day. It was idols which would "not profit" (s:w. <a href='B:90 12:21'>1Sa 12:21</a>; <a href='B:300 2:8'>Jer 2:8</a>, and about the Egyptians whose idols they accepted, <a href='B:290 30:5-6'>Isa 30:5-6</a>). Their "works" were their idols; and so we have the abiding lesson that any trust in human works is effectively idolatry. Our performance based society makes intensely relevant to us.</p>


text:
<p>When you cry, let those who you have gathered deliver you; but the wind shall take them, a breath shall carry them all away: but he who takes refuge in Me shall possess the land, and shall inherit My holy mountain- "Those who you have gathered" may refer to their collections of idols. Finally all these things will be fulfilled when the wind of the day of judgment reveals all things for what they are (Mt. 7:26,27).  Instead of allowing themselves to be gathered by God, back to the land to Himself (see on <a href='B:290 56:8'>Isa 56:8</a>), they instead gathered idols to themselves. This is the essence of idolatry; a trusting in our own works (:12), rather than the faith to let God work in us. The allusion may be to the image vision of Daniel 2. The Jews who associated themselves with Babylon would share her judgment, and be blown away by the wind; whereas the faithful remnant would grow into the mountain which would begin as the holy mount in Zion, and then spread to cover the earth. We note the offer of possession of the land and mount Zion is now made to "he who takes refuge in Me", and not "they". This is in line with the refocus of Yahweh upon individuals rather than the collective, national group (see on <a href='B:290 56:1-2'>Isa 56:1-2</a>)</p>


text:
<p>He will say, Cast up, cast up, prepare the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of My people- The context has spoken of Israel’s idolatry, and so the stumbling-blocks to be cleared refer to their idolatry. This teaches that a level way must be made amongst the Jewish people, i:e. the stumbling blocks and ‘valleys’ must be removed from their path. “Cast ye up, prepare the way, take up the stumbling block out of the way of my people” is therefore a command to God’s people to undo the generations of false shepherding which Israel have experienced: “They have caused them to stumble in their ways from the ancient paths, to walk in paths, in a way not cast up” (<a href='B:300 18:15'>Jer 18:15</a> s:w. “cast… up” in <a href='B:290 57:14'>Isa 57:14</a>). Once we have prepared the way in this sense in the last days, then the highway is in place over which the Lord Jesus will return. This is how vital our work is for the Jewish people. Then the essence of the prophecies of the way to Zion in Isaiah 40 will come about. But for the exiles, their way was blocked by their addiction to idolatry.</p><p>All obstacles in the way of their salvation will be removed; only the wicked who persist in their impenitence are excluded from the promised blessing. The language of a highway being made is used in Is. 40:3 to refer to a literal highway for the return of the exiles through the desert; but now this figure has been reapplied and reinterpreted. It is understood here as meaning a path would be made spiritually for every man who wishes to make the journey from Babylon to Zion; it becomes a figure for the removal of spiritual obstacles to the redemption of God's people, however they are defined. This section began in Is. 56:11 with the lament that "they have each turned to their own way". They "walked in the way of their own heart" but the new way being made was to give them a new way spiritually (Is. 57:17,18). Truly God makes a way where there is no way. And God would lead His people in that way (:18), in response to how they were "backsliding in the way" (:17). He would as it were grab them as they slipped back, and lead them in the way. As promised, "I will heal your backslidings" (Jer. 3:22). Those apparently gripped in addiction to sin can miraculously be turned around.   </p>


text:
<p>For thus says the high and lofty One who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also who is of a broken and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite- The contrast is between the immeasurable highness of God, and how He loves dwelling with those who have been brought down to the lowest point. This is repeated in Ps. 34:18; 138:6. The revival of the dry bones of Judah through the gift of the Spirit is what is in view here. The same word for "revive" is used in Ez. 37:5 "I will cause breath [spirit] to enter into you, and you shall live [s.w. revive]". But the Jewish exiles refused that, and so the new covenant and associated gift of the Spirit have now been given to all who want it. The humbled or depressed spirit initially referred to the exiles- the idea was that there would be revival and lifting up for those humbled and brought down / depressed by their own sins and the judgment of them. These are exactly the types who respond today to the new covenant Gospel.
The dwelling of God "in the high and holy place" clearly alludes to His dwelling in the shekinah between the cherubim, over the ark, in the Most Holy place (Ex. 25:22; 26:34). Access to this was only possible for the High Priest for a few moments each year. But God here says that He permanently dwells there "with him also who is of a broken and humble spirit". Just as David felt he lived permanently beneath the wings of the cherubim, so God is here saying that He will dwell permanently with the humble- in contrast to the nervous High Priest entering His presence for a few moments each year. His greatness is shown in the way He dwells with the humble, the broken, the depressed, the lowly. For they have always been the majority of those who are His true people. Indeed "to the poor [in spirit and materially] the Gospel is preached".
This wonderful statement comes within the context of a withering exposure of Judah's sins, beginning at Is. 56:9. Their idolatry, sacrilege on the temple mount, literal and spiritual adultery, abuse of their brethren... all makes a devastating read. Especially when put together with the related criticisms of them in Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. And yet it is in this context that God says He is eager to dwell with the basest of men. If they open their hearts to Him. Those exiles who seemed way too far gone, incurable, could in fact be inhabited by God through His Spirit. And nobody today can therefore ever feel that they are too far gone for God's Spirit to change and indwell. 
The idea may be that when and if Yahweh returned to Zion, He would again dwell in the holiest place (LXX), the shekinah would again be seen in the Most Holy place; but no less would He dwell in the hearts of the&nbsp; humble, those with broken spirits like David’s after his repentance. This is in line with the refocus of Yahweh upon individuals rather than the collective, national group (see on <a href='B:290 56:1-2'>Isa 56:1-2</a>). We note the juxtaposition of ideas- the exalted lofty one, dwelling in the hearts of men. It’s the same idea as in <a href='B:290 55:7-9'>Isa 55:7-9</a>; the God whose thoughts are not the thoughts of men can have His thinking experienced and shared by mere men. Yet the temple system of Ezekiel 40-48 had no "Most Holy place". Perhaps the idea was that seeing they had refused to rebuild the temple as asked, God would instead send His Spirit into the hearts of repentant people to "revive" them. This is exactly what He offered the exiles under the new covenant. See on :16.</p><p>Israel had lost their hold on true doctrine, many scarcely knew the Law (<a href='B:290 57:4-5'>Isa 57:4-5</a>; <a href='B:290 59:3'>Isa 59:3</a>). They got drunk at the temple feasts (<a href='B:290 36:10-12'>Isa 36:10-12</a>; <a href='B:290 58:3-4'>Isa 58:3-4</a>), like Corinth they had an "eat, drink, for tomorrow we die" mentality (<a href='B:290 22:12-13'>Isa 22:12-13</a>); they committed all manner of sexual perversions, along with almost every other form of doctrinal and moral apostasy (<a href='B:290 5:11-13'>Isa 5:11-13</a>; <a href='B:290 5:24'>Isa 5:24</a>; <a href='B:290 8:19'>Isa 8:19</a>; <a href='B:290 9:15'>Isa 9:15</a>; <a href='B:290 22:12-13'>Isa 22:12-13</a>; <a href='B:290 24:5'>Isa 24:5</a>; <a href='B:290 27:11'>Isa 27:11</a>; <a href='B:290 28:7'>Isa 28:7</a>; <a href='B:290 30:10'>Isa 30:10</a>; <a href='B:290 31:6'>Isa 31:6</a>; <a href='B:290 44:8-20'>Isa 44:8-20</a>; consider the similarities with Corinth). This list is worth reading through. And consider the terrible implications of their perversion in <a href='B:290 66:17'>Isa 66:17</a>. But the early chapters of Isaiah sternly rebuke Israel for their pride- there is not a whisper of all these other things until later (<a href='B:290 2:11-22'>Isa 2:11-22</a>; <a href='B:290 3:16-20'>Isa 3:16-20</a>; <a href='B:290 5:15'>Isa 5:15</a>; <a href='B:290 9:9'>Isa 9:9</a>). And even throughout the later rebukes, there is the repeated criticism of their pride (<a href='B:290 13:11'>Isa 13:11</a>; <a href='B:290 16:6'>Isa 16:6</a>; <a href='B:290 23:9'>Isa 23:9</a>; <a href='B:290 24:4'>Isa 24:4</a>; <a href='B:290 25:11'>Isa 25:11</a>; <a href='B:290 26:5'>Isa 26:5</a>; <a href='B:290 28:1'>Isa 28:1</a>; <a href='B:290 28:3'>Isa 28:3</a>; <a href='B:290 28:14'>Isa 28:14</a>; <a href='B:290 29:4'>Isa 29:4</a>; <a href='B:290 30:25'>Isa 30:25</a>; <a href='B:290 57:15'>Isa 57:15</a>). This is why Isaiah’s prophecies of Christ stress His humility (<a href='B:510 8:33'>Act 8:33</a>), and the "lofty", "high", "exaltation" of God. These words, common in Isaiah, are those translated “pride"in Isaiah’s condemnations of Israel’s arrogance; as if to say that God was the only one who could be ’proud’.</p>


text:
<p>For I will not contend forever, neither will I be always angry; for the spirit would faint before Me, and the souls who I have made- GNB "I gave my people life, and I will not continue to accuse them or be angry with them forever". Because God is the creator of His people, He will not be angry with them forever; He created them and therefore intends to live eternally with them, and somehow get over the barrier created by their sin.  This continues the allusion to a court case which began in :3. Yahweh will not endlessly contend in court with sinners- otherwise He would end up destroying all His creation, those in whom He had placed His Spirit. He would cut short His quite legitimate contention and judgment of His people in order to save at least some. Verse 15 has just spoken of God reviving the hearts of the repentant. The LXX suggests that here we have an extension of that thought:"I will not take vengeance on you for ever, neither will I be always angry with you: for my Spirit shall go forth from me, and I have created all breath". The gift of the Spirit was to be given when the judgment of God finished. At the end of the 70 years there could have been a restoration&nbsp; based around the gift of the Spirit to revive the hearts of the repentant (:15). But they weren’t interested in repentance nor in true spirituality (see on :17).</p><p>The prophets spoke of the amazing grace and eternal love of God for Israel, how His wrath endured but for a moment (<a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>; <a href='B:290 57:16'>Isa 57:16</a>); and yet Israel asked: “Will He be angry for ever?” (<a href='B:300 3:5'>Jer 3:5</a>). It was more than frustrating for the prophets; they shared God’s feelings of having poured out so great a love, to see it ignored and disregarded, no time to look at it, too busy sowing my seeds, weeding my garden, having coffee… God is angry with sinners, but He will not be angry for ever because “from me proceeds the spirit, and I have made the breath of life”; His passionate, constant outpouring of energy into His creation means He simply won’t be angry with man for ever. But amongst the Jews there was a revulsion against the idea of God having passion, being angry, and His children sharing those same emotions. It’s the same basic approach as the obsession we have today with ‘nice speak’- don’t be too committed, go so far but no further, don’t appear extreme. Here the spirit of the prophets must be our urgent example- we are to have passion for the positions we adopt. And of course that involves us in being careful, Biblical and prayerful about what positions we adopt. It was the passion with which the Lord Jesus held to His positions that so endeared Him to the Father. Because He so loved righteousness and hated iniquity, the Father so highly exalted Him (<a href='B:650 1:9'>Heb 1:9</a>).</p><p>Ps. 103:9 says that the reason "He will not always accuse" or legally "contend" is because we are in covenant relationship with Him, and that relationship is based upon grace. I take this to mean in practice that God doesn't always 'take up' with us the issues of our sins. He deals with some sin by overlooking, by not accusing. Just as we also do in a loving relationship. And when He does judge sin, when He does accuse, that judgment [for us who are in covenant relationship with Him] is not proportionate to our sins (Ps. 103:10). A similar idea is in Is. 57:15,16, which seems to be saying that those with whom God lives, i.e. those in covenant relationship with Him, will not be constantly accused of their sins. Their sins are accepted as being an ever present reality, but God will not 'take up the matter' with them regarding these sins- because He lives with them in covenant: "I also live with people who are humble and repentant, so that I can restore their confidence and hope. I gave my people life, and I will not continue to accuse them or be angry with them forever" (GNB).</p><p>It is a repeated theme that the nature of God's anger is that it doesn't last; unlike human anger which can burn for a lifetime in the hearts of people: "Many a time turned He his anger away, and did not stir up all his wrath. For [because] He remembered that they were but flesh; a wind that passes away and returns not again" (Ps. 78:38,39). Likewise "He will not always chide; neither will He keep His anger forever. Like as a father pities His children, so the Lord pities them that fear Him. For [because] He knows our frame; He remembers that we are dust" (Ps. 103:6,13,14). The basis of His turning away from anger is not so much human repentance but His pity on His creatures. As argued in Is. 45:18, Yahweh will not undo His own creation. The continuance of His anger would mean the destruction of the souls which He Himself has made.</p>


text:
<p>For the iniquity of his covetousness was I angry, and struck him- The LXX gives another take: "On account of sin for a little while I grieved him, and smote him, and turned away my face from him; and he was grieved, and he went on sorrowful in his ways". The "little while" would then connect with God's previous description of the exile as but a "little while"; and yet it had not brought His people to repentance. See on :11. GNB speaks of God abandoning His people, which is how Zion [wrongly] felt in Is. 54: "I was angry with them because of their sin and greed, and so I punished them and abandoned them. But they were stubborn and kept on going their own way".
Note God's special hatred of covetousness, a malaise that is ever stronger in our world, bombarded as we are online by visual images of things we would like to have. No longer might we hanker for a holiday in a resort in our own country; now we are bombarded by images of worldwide destinations. Jer. 6:13 shows this was their problem also before the exile, and they had not been reformed: "For from the least of them even unto the greatest of them, every one is given to covetousness". If we enquire why idolatry was so attractive to the Jews, the answer is 'covetousness'. Worship this or that idol, make a sacrifice to this god... and you will get prosperity, good harvests and wealth. Truly does Paul comment that "Covetousness is idolatry" (Col. 3:5). The mentality is identical to that behind the attraction of the prosperity Gospel today; it's a covering of crude human covetousness with a religious veneer. The book of Esther reveals the wealth of the Jewish exiles and also the extent of their assimilation and their idolatry [Mordechai = Marduk etc.]. It is unlikely they suddenly dropped all that on their return to Jerusalem. 
We would rather expect God to give their idolatry and marital unfaithfulness to Him as reason for His anger. But rather it was their covetousness which is cited here, the petty materialism which so took a grip upon them that they turned to idols in the hope of some petty material blessing. See on <a href='B:290 56:11'>Isa 56:11</a>.</p><p>I hid Myself and was angry; and he went on backsliding in the way of his heart- I noted on :16 that the Holy Spirit would have been given to the exiles to change their hearts- if they wanted it and if they were brokenhearted like David for their sins. But they didn’t want that transformation- and went on backsliding in the way of their heart / spirit rather than accepting God’s heart and Spirit. The implication is that God’s hiding of His face during the exile was in fact to elicit their seeking of His face. And yet they refused. And this partially explains theapparent silence of God in our lives; to elicit a more intense search for Him.</p><p><a href='B:290 30:20'>Isa 30:20</a> describes the reestablished Kingdom as a time when Judah’s repentant eyes would"see"the God who had taught them through the sufferings of defeat and exile (see note there). Their eyes would no longer be blinded, they would see and perceive the ’hidden’ God who had tried to teach them through all their afflictions. Meaning will finally be attached to event, and the problem of evil resolved finally. God had as it were ’hidden’ Himself during the exile (<a href='B:290 45:15'>Isa 45:15</a>; <a href='B:400 3:4'>Mic 3:4</a>); but now He would be revealed to them. Just as Cain was exiled to the east of Eden (which I have suggested was the eretz promised to Abraham) and been hidden from God’s eyes in his exile (<a href='B:10 4:14'>Gen 4:14</a>; <a href='B:50 31:17-18'>Deu 31:17-18</a>; <a href='B:50 32:20'>Deu 32:20</a> s:w:), so with Judah. The hidden things belong to God and only some are now revealed to us, but in the day of exile’s end, all those things, the meaning attached to the events, will at last be revealed (<a href='B:50 29:29'>Deu 29:29</a> s:w:). Then there will be no need for Jeremiah’s Lamentations and struggles about the exile, all developed in the story of the suffering Job, who felt God hidden from him (s:w. <a href='B:220 3:23'>Job 3:23</a>; <a href='B:220 13:24'>Job 13:24</a>) just as God was to hide His face from Zion at the time of the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:300 33:5'>Jer 33:5</a>) and exile (<a href='B:330 39:23-24'>Eze 39:23-24</a>). Therefore all human attempts to see the hidden God were doomed to failure, as Job was finally taught (<a href='B:220 34:29'>Job 34:29</a> s:w:). But the glorious truth of <a href='B:290 30:20'>Isa 30:20</a> is that finally, the Divine teacher will not be hidden any more and our eyes shall see Him and His ways, as Job did at the end (<a href='B:220 42:5'>Job 42:5</a>). And yet Isaiah and his family / school of prophets did look or see the hand of the God who was hiding Himself from Judah (s:w. <a href='B:290 8:17'>Isa 8:17</a>). At the restoration, there was to be no need for Judah to feel that their way was"hid from Yahweh"(<a href='B:290 40:27'>Isa 40:27</a> s:w:) any more, as it had been during the exile"for a little moment"when God hid His face (<a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>). Their eyes would see / perceive. But tragically, the exiles didn’t; God reflected that"I hid me... and he went on proudly in the way of his heart"(<a href='B:290 57:17'>Isa 57:17</a>). Their sins continued to hide His face from them (<a href='B:290 59:2'>Isa 59:2</a>; <a href='B:290 64:7'>Isa 64:7</a>).</p>


text:
<p>I have seen his ways, and will heal him: I will lead him also, and restore comforts to him and to his mourners- The "ways" seen by God were the ways of :17, where His people were "backsliding in the way of his heart", mentally in a downward spiral. But God can heal and lead men who are even in that dire situation. This is the power of His Spirit over the human spirit. Because of God's pity for His creation, seeing their sinful ways, He says He will heal them. Elsewhere He says this healing will be done after their repentance (Hos. 6:1; 14:4; Jer. 3:22). Now He offers to heal them anyway, on the basis of His pity felt for them as He observed their miserable, sinful ways. Likewise Jer. 30:17 speaks of this same healing coming because of how God's Name is being mocked by the Gentiles who see Judah's sinful ways; not because of their repentance: "I will restore health to you, and I will heal you of your wounds, says Yahweh; because they have called you an outcast, saying, It is Zion, whom no man seeks after". 
Is. 53:5 has already explained that "by his stripes we are healed". The death of the suffering servant would lead to healing, in that through the Lord's death, the Spirit is given to His people. It was Judah's backsliding that would be healed (Jer. 3:22; Hos. 14:4), the psychological free-fall of man into sin. The work of the Spirit is therefore fundamentally mental and spiritual, meaning that the [humanly] incurable wounds would be healed (Jer. 15:18 s.w.; Lam. 2:13 "who can heal you?"). 
Having lamented the lack of spiritual transformation in the people, God now looks forward to how ultimately He will give His Spirit to His people (see on :15-17). He will heal and lead by His Spirit, the Comforter which gives comfort. We would perhaps have expected Him to offer this healing and restoration to those who repented. But these is no mention of this; rather does this follow on from God’s statement in :17 to the effect that if He endlessly contends with His sinful people He will end up destroying them. So despite having"seen his (sinful) ways", God now proposes to"heal him"and lead him back to Him, even if he is stubborn to follow. He would"create"peace with Him in order to effect this healing (:19).</p>


text:
<p>I create the fruit of the lips: Peace, peace, to him who is far off and to him who is near, says Yahweh; and I will heal them- See on :18. The idea may be"Peace to him that is far off (in Babylon), and to him that is near"(in the land). But as explained on :17,18, God appears to be saying that if He endlessly contends with His sinful people He will end up destroying them. So despite having"seen his (sinful) ways", God now proposes to"heal him"and lead him back to Him, even if he is stubborn to follow. He would"create"peace with Him in order to effect this healing (:19). And so He is willing to give peace with Him both to those far from Him, and those who had come near to Him. It was only the stubbornly and insistently"wicked"who would not be calmed / given peace (:20). LXX "peace to them that are far off, and to them that are nigh" is quoted in Acts 2 and Ephesians of God's offer to the Christian church. Seeing the exiles refused this offer. The offer of healing (:18) and then peace (:19) is at the heart of the new covenant in Jer. 33:6 "I will bring it health and cure, and I will cure them; and I will reveal to them abundance of peace and truth". That new covenant was rejected by the returned exiles; but has been accepted by all in Christ today.</p>


text:
<p>But the wicked are like the troubled sea; for it can’t rest, and its waters cast up mire and dirt- As noted on :15-18, the Spirit was offered to the exiles, and we have read of the peace this would bring if it was accepted (:18,19); and I suggested on :18,19 that God was willing to as it were force through His healing with even those who were"far off"from Him. But if it were stubbornly refused, then therecould be no peace in the hearts or experience of the unspiritual. The wicked amongst Israel would be like the sea of the Gentiles, always associated with casting up and endlessly recycling dirt.</p>


text:
<p>There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked- See on :20."The wicked"are the Jewish exiles of <a href='B:290 48:18'>Isa 48:18</a> who refused the potential peace with God which was offered if they repented and returned to Judah to reestablish His Kingdom of peace. This conclusion is not so much a threat from an angry God, but rather His lament that despite offering peace with Him through unconditional forgiveness- the wicked chose to refuse it. </p>


text:
<p>Cry aloud- The first 12 verses in this chapter are similar in essence to <a href='B:290 1:1-31'>Isa 1:1-31</a>. This is just one of many connections between the later part of Isaiah (Isaiah 40-66) and the earlier part (Isaiah 1-35). The two sections are connected by the historial interlude of Isaiah 36-39, where Isaiah works with Hezekiah towards repentance, and then has to judge him for his pride and collapse of faith, concluding that his sons shall go into captivity in Babylon. As I explained on Isaiah 36-39, Hezekiah sinned quite badly and let the baton drop. A Messianic Kingdom could have been established after the defeat of the Assyrian invader outside Jerusalem, but this possibility was ultimately deferred until our last days. But God didn’t give up working with Judah. At the time of the restoration, there could again have been a Messianic Kingdom, the temple of Ezekiel 40-48 could have been rebuilt; but due to short termism and lack of repentance, this didn’t happen. Therefore the same appeals are made to the returned exiles as were made to Judah in the days of Isaiah and Hezekiah.</p><p>This appeal in :1 is therefore in order that the returned exiles got a grip on their spirituality and relationship with God, so that yet another disaster and invasion could be avoided, and the Kingdom of God re-established in the land. But such invasions came under Antiochus and others, as Daniel 11 outlines. Again the land and people were dominated by their enemies. The appeal to repent so that this would not happen had already been made by Isaiah in his own day, in the context of Hezekiah and the Assyrian invasion. This explains the copious connections between the first half of Isaiah and the second half, the so-called Deutero Isaiah.</p><p><a href='B:290 58:1-2'>Isa 58:1-2</a> is a criticism of Judah in exile and also of those who did return to the land- they sought God daily, and yet abused their brethren (<a href='B:290 58:6'>Isa 58:6</a>), just as recorded in <a href='B:160 5:15'>Neh 5:15</a>. If they had ceased from their sins,"Then shall your light break forth as the morning", if they had fed the hungry etc, then would’ve been fulfilled the Messianic Kingdom prophecies of the light of Zion rising above the Gentiles etc (<a href='B:290 58:10'>Isa 58:10</a>; <a href='B:290 58:12'>Isa 58:12</a> cp. <a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>).</p><p>But who is being asked to"cry aloud"or ’proclaim’ this call to repentance? The second half of Isaiah begins with this same invitation to ’proclaim’ to Judah the possibility of repentance and forgiveness. The same Hebrew word is used so often in Isaiah 40. John the Baptist, the Elijah prophet, was the one asked to make this proclamation (<a href='B:290 40:3'>Isa 40:3</a> s:w:). And it is the Christian preachers who take over the proclamation (<a href='B:290 40:6'>Isa 40:6</a> = <a href='B:670 1:24'>1Pe 1:24</a>). Initially, it was the ministry of the prophets like Haggai and Zecharahiah who made this call for repentance to the exiles (<a href='B:450 1:4'>Zec 1:4</a>; <a href='B:450 1:17'>Zec 1:17</a>; <a href='B:450 7:7'>Zec 7:7</a>; <a href='B:450 7:13'>Zec 7:13</a>, the prophets cried / called out aloud for Judah’s repentance but were not answered). But it went largely unheeded:"When I called [s:w. "cry aloud"], none answered"(<a href='B:290 50:2'>Isa 50:2</a>; <a href='B:290 65:12'>Isa 65:12</a>; <a href='B:290 66:4'>Isa 66:4</a>; <a href='B:350 11:2'>Hos 11:2</a>; <a href='B:450 1:4'>Zec 1:4</a>). And the prophets themselves didn’t make the call as they ought to have done:"None calls [s:w. "cry aloud"] for justice..."(<a href='B:290 59:4'>Isa 59:4</a>). John the Baptist likewise called for Judah’s repentance, as did the early Christian preachers; and we are to make this call to Israel in the last days. And finally it will be heeded; a minority in Israel will respond, albeit due to the tribulation to come upon the land, and then the Messianic Kingdom shall finally come. The One who ultimately makes the"call"or ’crying aloud’ is the Lord Jesus, the Messiah (<a href='B:290 61:1-2'>Isa 61:1-2</a>"... to proclaim / call out / cry loud liberty... to call out the time of Yahweh’s acceptance / the acceptable year of the Lord"). But He works through the voice of His people, those who are in Him. This is how in practice He will make this appeal / proclamation / crying out aloud to Israel, both now and in the very last days. The calling out to repent is on the basis of the fact that God has called out / proclaimed His radical acceptance. If we accept it, then sin is no longer any barrier between Him and us.</p><p>Don’t spare- Literally, don’t restrain. It’s the same phrase as used in <a href='B:290 54:2'>Isa 54:2</a> about Judah not holding back but lengthening the cords of their tent as far as they can. The idea is that the extent of the fulfilment of God’s purpose is in our hands. These prophecies all had potential fulfilments in the time they were given; the preacher to Israel should be aware that according to his or her success, so the extent of the progress of God’s program goes forward.</p><p>Lift up your voice like a trumpet- As noted above, there are many connections here with the crying out / proclamation of forgiveness and therefore the call to repent, which we find in Isaiah 40. In <a href='B:290 40:9'>Isa 40:9</a> the same phrase is used, of lifting up the voice to tell Jerusalem that there is good news- her God"shall come", through manifestation in His Son, and re-establish Israel’s Kingdom as God’s Kingdom. Yet there the voice is lifted up in calling for repentance. The reality of the possibility of being part of His Kingdom is of itself a call to repentance. Anyone who says yes to those"good tidings", the Gospel, will naturally be moved to repentance by doing so. The trumpet being the crying aloud or proclamation sounds like the proclamation of the day of atonement. But the spirit of that day was to be proclaimed to men as an ongoing experience, which is very much in the spirit of the Lord Jesus now that the ritual feasts have been ended. Now the atonement and the subsequent appeal for repentance to accept it is to be proclaimed to all men, all the time.</p><p>And declare to My people their disobedience, and to the house of Jacob their sins- The family of the historical Jacob were very weak spiritually, and yet from them came the foundations of God’s people. This was and is to be remembered as an encouragement in our witness. These words are quoted in <a href='B:400 3:8'>Mic 3:8</a>; he was one of the prophets called upon to make this proclamation, both in Isaiah’s day and yet also, as with Isaiah, his words therefore also have reference to the exiles who had returned and needed to repent.</p>


text:
<p>Yet they seek Me daily, and delight to know My ways- The word"yet"is such a challenge. They were disobedient, sinful and rejected by God."Yet"they sought God daily, offering the daily sacrifices (’seeking’ in Hebrew thought is to worship), and enthusiastic to have His word explained to them. One can attend meetings regularly, love the worship, and genuinely enthuse to intellectually, academically understand the Bible. And"yet"do no righteousness, and actually forsake the spirit of what"God"is all about. This is the problem with religion. If left at mere religion, it can blind us to true spirituality. They ’delighted’ to know God’s ways and to ’draw near to God’, perhaps a reference to prayer or sacrifice. But this same category of persons chose the things which Yahweh did not delight in, and also"delighted in their abominations"(<a href='B:290 65:12'>Isa 65:12</a>; <a href='B:290 66:3-4'>Isa 66:3-4</a> s:w:). The abominations there listed were not idol worship; their arrogance and exclusivity was as if they offered pig’s flesh to God. Their legally correct sacrifices were therefore seen as no better than that. This dualism in the human nature is encouraged by religion, if our faith is left at mere religion. These verses are one of the greatest challenges to all involved in serving God through organized religion. Prayer, sacrifice, worship, Bible study, attendance at meetings... can all be performed as just one pole of a dualistic, religious mindset. Whilst we get on and"delight"in displeasing God. Once we appreciate&nbsp; the challenge, we will no longer be shocked at the hypocrisy rampant in all forms of organized religion; that a person can do all these things, appearing a stalwart member of a church, and yet at the same time be involved with things which disgust God.</p><p>As a nation that did righteousness, and didn’t forsake the ordinance of their God, they ask of Me righteous judgements; they delight to draw near to God- The call to repentance of :1 was not heeded exactly because of the veneer of religion which these Jews then had. This is the problem with religion. It shields us from the piercing appeal for repentance and real, live relationship with God."Did righteousness"is the phrase translated"do justice"in <a href='B:10 18:19'>Gen 18:19</a>, which was to be a feature of the true seed of Abraham. As noted above, Israel went through all the motions of religious worship, but did not"do justice". The historical accounts in Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi give many examples of this; and the lack of justice was expressed in terms of how they treated their own brothers. If the Jews had ’done righteousness’ at the time of the restoration, then it would have hastened the revelation of God’s justice in the re-establishment of His Kingdom on earth at that time (<a href='B:290 56:1'>Isa 56:1</a> s:w:). For it is Messiah who would ’do justice’ in His Kingdom (<a href='B:300 23:5'>Jer 23:5</a>; <a href='B:300 33:15'>Jer 33:15</a> s:w:). The commands of Ezekiel 40-48 about rebuilding a Messianic temple included the command to ’do righteousness’ (<a href='B:330 45:9'>Eze 45:9</a>). But the Jews didn’t do this, and thereby precluded the possibility of those prophecies coming true at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>‘Why have we fasted’, they say, ‘and You don’t see?- <a href='B:450 7:5'>Zec 7:5</a> says that the Jews at the time of the restoration fasted, but not to God. And here we see part of a major theme in Biblical teaching about spirituality- that spiritual disciplines can be performed, but not really, in God’s book. We can pray and worship, but without achieving real prayer and worship; we can pay lip service to the idea that God’s word is inspired and His real voice to us, and yet let the words glide over us. We can give, but for the sake of appearance and the praise of men. And so they fasted, but not to God. And complained that God apparently didn’t recognize it. If they had really fasted on"the fasting day", then the whole Babylonian invasion and exile could have been averted (<a href='B:300 36:6'>Jer 36:6</a>; <a href='B:300 36:9'>Jer 36:9</a>); they fasted but were not heard (<a href='B:300 14:12'>Jer 14:12</a>). But now the captivity had ended, still they had not learnt that lesson.</p><p>Why have we afflicted our soul, and You take no knowledge?’- The day to ’afflict the soul’ in fasting was specifically the day of atonement, the only fast required under the Mosaic law (<a href='B:30 23:27'>Lev 23:27</a> s:w:). They kept the day of atonement legally, but with no recognition of sin; just as we can keep the Lord’s supper with no sense of our sins, no flame of passion to respond to His grace witha similar grace. <a href='B:30 23:29'>Lev 23:29</a> even taught that the soul who would not afflict themselves would be cut off from the people of God. But that is an example of the Law of Moses revealing how God judges the heart; for no priest could ever&nbsp; ascertain whether or not a worshipper was afflicting their soul as required. If we do not repent, and afflict our souls for our sins, then we likewise are signing ourselves out of God’s true people. And only we know whether or not we do this. For such affairs of the heart cannot be judged by human eyes.</p><p>Behold, in the day of your fast you find pleasure, and oppress all your labourers- If they had truly afflicted their souls in repentance and in awe of their receipt of God’s forgveness, then they would have reflected that grace to others, which is God’s pleasure or will. And that principle is true of us too. We are not to be like the unforgiving servat who demanded what was owed; the AV renders"oppress"as"exact"(<a href='B:470 18:28'>Mat 18:28</a>). Perhaps the Lord had this teaching in mind when constructing His parable. The oppression of their workers was the kind of thing going on at the restoration (Nehemiah 5). Israel failed to do God’s pleasure and instead kept His laws whilst doing their own pleasure or will; and therefore the prophecy of the suffering servant who was to do God’s pleasure at the restoration was changed in fulfilment from Israel as a people to Messiah as a person (<a href='B:290 53:8'>Isa 53:8</a>). The same word for"pleasure"is used in :13 of how these Jews did their pleasure on the Sabbath rather than God’s pleasure. We can so easily serve God for our own pleasure, in ways which simply reinforce our natural passions and personality types. The challenge to us is indeed piercing and insistent.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, you fast for strife and contention, and to strike with the fist of wickedness: you don’t fast this day so as to make your voice to be heard on high- As noted on :3, the restored Jews fasated for their own pleasure rather than God’s. They took pleasure from being more righteous than others, endlessly striving and contending with others as to how fasting should be done, even inventing new fast days (<a href='B:450 7:5'>Zec 7:5</a>; <a href='B:450 8:19'>Zec 8:19</a>). All the Law required was fasting on the Day of Atonement. The endless controversies over interpretation and ritual which have characterized the walk of so many Christians may well have been simply for their own"pleasure"and justification of striking other believers with a wicked fist. The Catholic and Orthodox churches argue bitterly about ritual, and the Protestant denominations argue over interpretation of Bible passages. Much of this was nothing to do with personal relationship with God, making your voice heard in His ears in highest heaven; but rather in order to put others down that we might appear the better. For the way the Jews criticized others for not fasating as they considered they ought to was effectivly striking their brother with a wicked fist. The allusion is to how righteous Naboth was struck down with a wicked fist when a fast had been proclaimed (<a href='B:110 21:9-13'>1Ki 21:9-13</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Is such the fast that I have chosen? The day for a man to afflict his soul?- As noted on :3, the only fast"chosen"or proclaimed by God was that on the Day of Atonement, when every person was to afflict their soul. The Jews kept this feast insincerely, bowing their heads like a bulrush blown in the breeze. All such false humility, using phrases like"Of course, we’re all sinners"insincerely, is so abhorrent to God.</p><p>Is it to bow down his head as a rush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? Will you call this a fast, and an acceptable day to Yahweh?- The repentance and contrition required by the Day of Atonement was internal, rather than an external use of sackcloth. Judah had gone into exile exactly because they had rent their garments and not their hearts (<a href='B:360 2:13'>Joe 2:13</a>). And the restored Jews had not learnt that lesson. The Day of Atonement was the"acceptable day", and the acceptable day is now every day for us as Christians (<a href='B:540 6:2'>2Co 6:2</a>). We are to live our whole lives, every day, in the spirit of the Day of Atonement; both confessing sin and receiving the pronouncement of forgiveness which fills us with all joy and peace.</p>


text:
<p>Isn’t this the fast that I have chosen: to release the bonds of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free, and that you break every yoke?- See on <a href='B:290 42:7'>Isa 42:7</a>. These are the same words as in Is. 52:2: "Release yourself from the bonds of your neck, captive daughter of Zion!". The Jews didn’t perceive the soft life of Babylon as chains around their necks, and so they didn’t loose themselves and leave. See on Is. 51:14. The same words are used in Is. 58:6 of how the exiles refused to release the bonds they had placed upon their brethren. As Nehemiah comments, this was the height of ingratitude- to have been released from debt slavery by Divine redemption, but to force your brethren into debt slavery. And yet they were themselves in bondage, needing release, if only they would realize their true position. But God was simply so positive about His people- Is. 51:14 appears to be a descriptive statement about the Jews, but in reality it wasn’t true: “The bound down one hastens to be loosed”. Sadly, they didn’t respond to the exhortation to loose themselves from the bands upon them (Is. 52:2). They preferred to stay in bondage, as so many do today, despite God willing them to seek release as He did with the exiles. </p><p>As noted on :3 and :4, the result of keeping the Day of Atonement properly was to release the bonds of others because our bonds of sin and its consequence have been released. Instead, the resotred Jews at the time of Ezra and Nehemiah were bringing their own brothers into bondage to them, taking their lands from them and then making them their slaves. Such releasing of others from their bonds, both to us and others, can happen on any day; the Day of Atonement was to be realized in the daily experience of the believers.</p><p>Consider how the Lord brings together various passages from Isaiah in His opening declaration in <a href='B:490 4:18'>Luk 4:18</a>: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach [proclaim] [Heb. ‘call out to a man’] the acceptable year of the Lord”. This combines allusions to <a href='B:290 61:1'>Isa 61:1</a>&nbsp;(<a href='B:30 25:10'>Lev 25:10</a>), <a href='B:290 58:6'>Isa 58:6</a> LXX&nbsp;and&nbsp; <a href='B:290 61:2'>Isa 61:2</a>:&nbsp;<a href='B:290 58:6'>Isa 58:6</a> AV: “To loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free (cp. <a href='B:50 15:12'>Deu 15:12</a> re freedom of slaves, s:w:), and that ye break every yoke?” is in the context of an insincerely kept year of Jubilee in Hezekiah’s time, after the Sennacherib invasion; andalso at the time of the restoration. Isaiah 58 has many Day of Atonement allusions- the year of Jubilee began on this feast. We are as the High Priest declaring the reality of forgiveness to the crowd Hence <a href='B:490 24:47'>Luk 24:47</a> asks us to proclaim a Jubilee of atonement. The Greek for “preach” in <a href='B:490 24:47'>Luk 24:47</a> and for “preach / proclaim the acceptable year” in <a href='B:490 4:19'>Luk 4:19</a> are the same, and the word is used in the LXX for proclaiming the Jubilee. And the LXX word used for ‘jubilee’ means remission, release, forgiveness, and it is the word used to describe our preaching / proclaiming forgiveness in <a href='B:490 24:47'>Luk 24:47</a>. It could be that we are to see the cross as the day of atonement, and from then on the Jubilee should be proclaimed in the lives of those who accept it. It’s as if we are running round telling people that their mortgages have been cancelled, hire purchase payments written off... and yet we are treated as telling them something unreal, when it is in fact so real and pertinent to them. And the very fact that Yahweh has released others means that we likewise ought to live in a spirit of releasing others from their debts to us: “The creditor shall release that which he hath lent… because the Lord’s release hath been proclaimed” (<a href='B:50 15:2'>Deu 15:2</a> RV).</p><p>There are many connections within Isaiah between the servant songs, and the descriptions of the people of Israel into which the songs are interspersed. The saviour-servant was to bring out the prisoners from the dungeons (<a href='B:290 42:7'>Isa 42:7</a>), so was every Israelite “to let the oppressed go free…loose the bonds”, and to “undo the bands of the [heavy] yoke” (<a href='B:290 58:6'>Isa 58:6</a>) as Christ did (<a href='B:470 11:28-29'>Mat 11:28-29</a>); His work of deliverance is to be replicated by each of us in our witness. Whoever is in Him will by this very fact follow Him in this work. In Isaiah’s first context, the suffering servant was King Hezekiah. Yet all Israel were to see themselves as ‘in’ him, as spiritual Israel are to see themselves as in Christ. “He was oppressed”, as Israel at that time were being “oppressed” by Assyria. As they were covered in wounds and spiritual sickness (<a href='B:290 1:5-6'>Isa 1:5-6</a>), so the suffering servant bore their diseases and rose again in salvation victory.</p><p>The passage in :6-13 seems to be a reference to an insincerely kept day of atonement in Ezra or Nehemiah’s time, as well as Hezekiah’s. The Jewish nobles were oppressing the poor and thereby keeping the feast with no meaning. If they had properly kept the feast, then the promised Kingdom conditions would have burst forth to the world around them. But they were too caught up with their own self-benefit to be bothered to show true care for their brethren. If they had, then the glory of Yahweh would have entered the temple, just as Ezekiel 43 had prophesied would happen, if the Kingdom was built as commanded. Notice how <a href='B:290 60:1-3'>Isa 60:1-3</a> speaks of how Zion’s light would certainly come and give light to the world- even though the prophecy was actually conditional on Judah keeping the Sabbath and caring for their poor brethren: “Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee…&nbsp; And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising”. Nehemiah repaired the breaches, Ezra laid the foundations of the temple…the prophecy of Isaiah 58 was fulfilled on the surface, but not in its Kingdom sense, because they failed to keep the Sabbath etc. <a href='B:290 58:10'>Isa 58:10</a> says that if they drew out their soul to the hungry, if they allowed themselves to feel the hunger of others, then would their light rise and their darkness be as the noonday. And thus the prophecy of <a href='B:290 60:1-2'>Isa 60:1-2</a> that Zion’s light is going to dawn was conditional upon the Jews caring for their hungry amongst them- even though in that passage, the condition isn’t directly stated. The restoration was therefore only a sham of what was possible.</p><p>There are several links between Isaiah 58 and Nehemiah 5, where we read of poor Jews who had to mortgage their vineyards and even sell their children in order to pay their debts. The “oppressed” or “broken victim” of Isaiah 58, to whom we are invited to proclaim deliverance, were therefore in the very first instance those under the throttling grip of poverty, who had become bondslaves because of their debts and now had no hope of freedom, apart from the frank forgiveness of a year of Jubilee. We take a like message to Westerners overburdened with mortgage payments, to those suffering from absolute poverty in the developing world, and to all those with a sense of debt and being trapped within their life situation. We pronounce to them a year of Jubilee, a frank forgiveness, a way of real escape and freedom.</p><p><a href='B:290 58:7'>Isa 58:7</a> Isn’t it to distribute your bread to the hungry, and that you bring the poor who are cast out to your house? When you see the naked, that you cover him; and that you not hide yourself from your own flesh?- The leaders of Judah in Nehemiah’s time were abusing their brethren. Their receipt of grace should have led them be generous to their poor brethren, rather than exploiting them. And that principle is true for us; for the restoration is used in the New Testament as a type of our redemption from the Babylon of sin and this world. And yet too many like to kid themselves that their response to grace is to do the opposite; to cast out their own brethren from their houses and then ignore their need, physically and spiritually.</p>


text:
<p>Then your light shall break forth as the morning, and your healing shall spring forth speedily; and your righteousness shall go before you; the glory of Yahweh shall be your vanguard- This is the language of the establishment of the glorious Messianic Kingdom (<a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>; <a href='B:290 60:3'>Isa 60:3</a>; <a href='B:290 60:19-20'>Isa 60:19-20</a>). That Kingdom could have been established then, if the returned exiles had lived as they should have done; and so the prophecies have been deferrred in fulfilment until the Lord’s return. The light of Zion was Messiah; this figure could have arisen then at the restoration. But he didn’t, and the true fulfilment was in the Lord Jesus, who was the light which arose in the darkness (:10; <a href='B:470 4:16'>Mat 4:16</a>; <a href='B:490 1:79'>Luk 1:79</a>)."Healing"translates a word meaning ’restoration’; the Kingdom of God in the form of Israel’s Kingdom would have been restored. The same ideas are found in <a href='B:460 4:2'>Mal 4:2</a>, where again the promise is repeated, that the Messianic sun of righteousness could have arisen at the restoration with healing in His beams. But that had to be delayed in fulfilment until our last days. Judah at this time were spiritually weak;"your righteousness"doesn’t refer to their own, but to that of Messiah as"the Lord our righteousness". The Messiah figure bearing this title could have appeared at the restoration from Babylon (<a href='B:300 23:6'>Jer 23:6</a>; <a href='B:300 33:16'>Jer 33:16</a>; <a href='B:300 51:10'>Jer 51:10</a>). It could have come"speedily"had they heeded these prophetic words. But it didn’t, and was delayed. Yahweh’s glory is parallel with"your righteousness", and this again should be read as a Messianic title. As Paul explains in Romans, it is through faith in Jesus as Messiah and identification with Him that His righteousness becomes ours.
Is. 40 opens with a picture of the triumphant march in glory from Babylon to Zion. This is a great theme in Isaiah, and it speaks of our path from the world to God's Kingdom. Yahweh goes both in front (Is. 52:12) and behind, as the vanguard (Is. 58:8). Just as He is both the one to whom Israel owe their debt, and the one who redeems them from it by paying it off. He is involved in us, including our history of sin, around and above us, all the way through.</p>


text:
<p>Then you shall call, and Yahweh will answer; you shall cry and He will say, ‘Here I am’. If you take away from the midst of you the yoke, the putting forth of the finger, and speaking wickedly- The Jews complained that despite their fasting, God was not answering (:3). The answer is that they were abusing their brethren, as recorded in Nehemiah 5. They were not only enslaving their brethren literally, but by placing heavy legalistic burdens upon, putting forth the finger in accusing them of spiritual inferiority (see on :4). This doing down of our brethren is the very opposite of the response to grace and restoration which we have received in Christ. It is called here"speaking wickedly". By treating our brethren like this, we place a barrier between God and ourselves, as John’s letters also state; and our prayer experience will reflect that barrier.</p>


text:
<p>And if you draw out your soul to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted soul: then your light shall rise in darkness, and your obscurity be as the noonday- As noted on :8, Zion’s light refers to the coming of Messiah. His coming was and is dependent upon the spirituality of the Jews and their repentance. And that shall only come in the last days as a result of a tribulation and holocaust like none other in their history."Darkness"and"obscurity"are used in Isaiah to refer to Judah’s sinfulness and also their judgment for that sin. Despite all that, if they had shown love and justice to the poor, then Messiah’s light would have broken in upon that darkness.</p>


text:
<p>And Yahweh will guide you continually and satisfy your soul in dry places, and make strong your bones- The allusion is to how Yahweh"guided"(s:w:) Israel in the desert and satisfied them with food and water (s:w. <a href='B:20 16:8'>Exo 16:8</a>; <a href='B:20 16:12'>Exo 16:12</a>"bread to the full"), strengthening their bones for the wilderness journey. This guidance is typical of our journey after baptism towards God’s Kingdom (<a href='B:530 10:1-3'>1Co 10:1-3</a>). But our experience of that guidance will in fact be eternal [the idea behind"continually"]. The kind of Divinely guided life we experience now shall eternally continue. If they satisfied the soul of others in need (:10 s:w:) then their soul would be eternally satisfied. There is an absolutely direct connection between what we do for others now, and what God shall do for us eternally. This is not to say that salvation itself is upon the basis of works- for it is by grace alone. Yet it is also true that how we live now shall be reflected eternally in the nature of our eternal existence. At the time of the restoration, the Jews were not satisfied (<a href='B:440 1:6'>Hag 1:6</a> s:w:) despite all their efforts to achieve self-satisfaction. And lack of satisfaction was part of the repeated experience of an Israel who put their own pleasure first (<a href='B:30 26:26'>Lev 26:26</a>; <a href='B:230 59:15'>Psa 59:15</a>; <a href='B:250 1:8'>Ecc 1:8</a>; <a href='B:250 4:8'>Ecc 4:8</a>; <a href='B:250 5:10'>Ecc 5:10</a>; <a href='B:250 6:3'>Ecc 6:3</a>; <a href='B:290 9:20'>Isa 9:20</a>; <a href='B:330 16:28'>Eze 16:28</a>; <a href='B:350 4:10'>Hos 4:10</a>; <a href='B:400 6:14'>Mic 6:14</a>). Yet the righteous are often described as being satisfied both in this life and in the restored Kingdom; David and the righteous died"full"or satisfied (s:w:) with their days (<a href='B:130 23:1'>1Ch 23:1</a>). We see evidence of this all around us; those who make their own satisfaction their priority live unsatisfied lives.</p><p>And you shall be like a watered garden- This is exactly the language of <a href='B:300 31:12'>Jer 31:12</a> about the restored Kingdom; it really was possible at the time of the restoration. Eden could have been restored.</p><p>And like a spring of water, whose waters don’t fail- If they did all these things of :6-13, there would be no drought; but Malachi records how there was drought, because they had not fulfilled these conditions. And so the promises were reapplied and rescheduled. Therefore the Lord promises believers even now this experience of being like an ever bubbling spring, through the experience of the Holy Spirit gift (<a href='B:500 4:14'>Joh 4:14</a>; <a href='B:500 7:38-39'>Joh 7:38-39</a>). It’s a case of now but not yet. We can begin to experience now the kind of life we shall eternally have in the Kingdom; in this sense, in the language of John’s Gospel, we have eternal life now.</p>


text:
<p>Those who shall be of you- These words are inserted by the translaters. Literally,"Of you..."; the reference could be to an individual, not the nation.</p><p>Shall build the old waste places; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations- This all alludes to <a href='B:160 13:22'>Neh 13:22</a>. The restoration under Ezra and Nehemiah could have been far more glorious. There was an external appearance of rebuilding, but actually the Kingdom of God was not restored in Israel because the people simply didn’t want it. This is why some rejoiced but others wept when the temple was dedicated; those who wept did so because they realized that this was not in fact the temple of the restoration prophecies.</p><p>And you shall be called The repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in- <a href='B:160 6:1'>Neh 6:1</a> says that there was no breach [s:w:] in the walls. But that was only external. The restoration prophets use this word to describe the breach between God and Israel which was not filled at that time because the potential Messiah figures didn’t or couldn’t do so (<a href='B:290 30:13'>Isa 30:13</a>; <a href='B:330 13:5'>Eze 13:5</a>; <a href='B:330 22:30'>Eze 22:30</a>), failing to be the prophet like unto Moses who did stand in that breach (<a href='B:230 106:23'>Psa 106:23</a> s:w:). <a href='B:370 9:11'>Amo 9:11</a> speaks of the possibility of reviving the tabernacle of David that had fallen, and closing up the breach at the same time as the ruins were revived. But this didn’t happen; for this prophecy was to have its fulfilment in the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:510 15:16'>Act 15:16</a>).</p><p><a href='B:290 58:13'>Isa 58:13</a> If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, and the holy day of Yahweh honourable; and shall honour it, not doing your own ways, nor finding your own pleasure, nor speaking your own words- Judah abused the Sabbath, as recorded in Ezra and Nehemiah, wishing to trade with the Gentiles on that day; <a href='B:370 8:5'>Amo 8:5</a> speaks of their longing for the Sabbath to end that they might get on with their trading. The Sabbath was intended to be a time when Israel would hear God’s words and not speak their own words; to stop talking, and listen. We too can in essence make that same mistake, going through the motions of religion when our hearts are set upon our next social or business meeting. We should"delight"in God’s ways; and if we do, then we shall eternally delight ourselves in them (:14). We can begin to live the Kingdom life now. For throughout our eternity, the ways and things of God shall be our eternal focus. And they ought to be now as far as possible. In this sense, we can live the eternal life now.</p>


text:
<p style='margin-left:1em'>If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, and the holy day of Yahweh honourable; and shall honour it, not doing your own ways, nor finding your own pleasure, nor speaking your own words- Judah abused the Sabbath, as recorded in Ezra and Nehemiah, wishing to trade with the Gentiles on that day; <a href='B:370 8:5'>Am. 8:5</a> speaks of their longing for the Sabbath to end that they might get on with their trading. The Sabbath was intended to be a time when Israel would hear God’s words and not speak their own words; to stop talking, and listen. We too can in essence make that same mistake, going through the motions of religion when our hearts are set upon our next social or business meeting. We should &quot;delight&quot; in God’s ways; and if we do, then we shall eternally delight ourselves in them (<a href='B:290 58:14'>:14</a>). We can begin to live the Kingdom life now. For throughout our eternity, the ways and things of God shall be our eternal focus. And they ought to be now as far as possible. In this sense, we can live the eternal life now.</p>
<p style='margin-left:1em'><a href='B:290 58:12-13'>Is. 58:12,13</a> prophesied that the acceptable rebuilding of Zion was dependent upon Judah keeping the Sabbath acceptably; and yet Nehemiah's record makes clear their tragic abuse of the Sabbath at the time of the restoration; and this therefore meant that the rebuilding of the temple and city were not going to fulfil the Messianic prophecies about them which existed.</p>
<p style='margin-left:1em'>Isaiah repeatedly stated that the surrounding nation would come to Zion and share in her joy. <a href='B:20 23:124'>Ex. 23:12</a> had commanded that the Gentile who lived with Israel must keep the Sabbath. If the Jews had not done their pleasure on the Sabbath, then the Messianic Kingdom could have come (<a href='B:290 58:13-14'>Is. 58:13,14</a>). But instead the Gentiles who lived around Jerusalem traded with the Jews on the Sabbath (<a href='B:160 13:16'>Neh. 13:16</a> RSV), they intermarried, and Israel / Zion was not a city set on a hill to enlighten the surrounding world; because they preferred to be influenced by the world around them, rather than vice versa.</p>
<p style='margin-left:1em'>The Sabbath was a release from the everyday things of life, the need to search for food (in the wilderness years), to work, from doing one's own pleasure and speaking words which relate to one's own earthly desires (<a href='B:290 58:13-14'>Is. 58:13,14</a>). It is therefore fitting that in our present experience of life, these necessary daily things will not obsess us; and if we may be made free from them, we will &quot; use it rather&quot; . Sodom was condemned for this revelling in the legitimate daily activities of life- attending and organizing weddings, eating, drinking... So let's drive away our nervousness at the idea of serious commitment; we are a priesthood, the centre of our lives is the service of God, His tabernacle is what we camp around by night and carry by day.</p>


text:
<p>Then you shall delight yourself in Yahweh- This describes how eternally, in the restored Kingdom of God, we will ’delight outselves’ in Yahweh; and yet we can do this now. For the same word is used of how He should be our delight now. <a href='B:230 37:4'>Psa 37:4</a>; <a href='B:230 37:11'>Psa 37:11</a> make the same point- we are to delight in Him now, so that we shall eternally do so. We are to live the Kingdom life now. If the things of God are to be our eternal delight, they should be now. The things of the Kingdom are not to be a mere hobby or occasional interest for a few hours / week, but the delight of our souls in every way, reflected in our attitudes to everything in our lives.</p><p>And I will make you to ride on the high places of the earth- To ride on high places could mean to bask in triumph and victory. The earth / eretz / land promised to Abraham [the common reference of eretz] was not fully under Jewish control when they returned from the captivity in Babylon. But it could have been. And the"high places"of the land of course recall the places of idolatry. They could have triumphed over all their historical sins and temptations.</p><p>And I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father-"Jacob"rather than the other patriarchs is repeatedly mentioned in the restoration prophecies because he was clearly the weakest in spiritual terms, and yet from that weakness was led to great heights, had righteousness imputed to him, and was restored to the land of promise by God’s grace. He therefore became an appropriate pattern for the returned exiles. The Hebrew translated"feed"also means"to eat"; this word is so commonly used about Jacob ’eating’ at various points in his life when covenant relationship was being celebrated and ratified. The list is impressive: <a href='B:10 25:34'>Gen 25:34</a>; <a href='B:10 27:19'>Gen 27:19</a>; <a href='B:10 28:20'>Gen 28:20</a>; Gen 3146; <a href='B:10 31:54'>Gen 31:54</a>. The idea would be that the covenant with the patriarchs could have come true to that generation, if they followed the path of Jacob. And as Jeremiah 31 emphasizes, the promises to the patriarchs were in fact the new covenant which we too share in.</p><p>For the mouth of Yahweh has spoken it- It was spoke just as that same mouth had stated that within 40 days, Nineveh would be destroyed. But God can change and adjust His stated purpose in accordance with human repentance and response, or lack thereof.</p>


text:
<p>Behold, Yahweh’s hand is not shortened that it can’t save; neither His ear heavy, that it can’t hear- The first eight verses are Yahweh's legal indictment of the exiles. In :9-14 we appear to have their confession; but as in Hosea, it could be that these are the words God would like them to say, recognizing especially that their failure was above all in their hearts. His answer to such a confession is then in :15-21, a prophecy of the work of the Lord Jesus and the eternal consequences of the gift of the Spirit. 
These words cut to the deep subconscious belief in their hearts, that God was too weak to save them. Even though the people probably didn't verbalize this belief in these actual words. To deny we will be saved is to say that God is unable to save. Yet Is. 58:2,3 says they fasted, bowing their heads like bulrushes, and prayed to God, apparently seeking Him, approaching Him and asking Him for His commands. LXX "they trust in vanities [idols], and speak empty words" (:4). But here we learn that they prayed without real faith that God heard them. Hollowness in prayer, words lacking meaning and a lack of any sense that our words are heard in Heaven... are the enemies of every spiritual man. They didn't believe He could save them, and yet God's response in :16 is that "His own arm brought salvation to Him". The salvation, the saving, was achieved. But the exiles didn't believe it or didn't want the psychological upheaval which it takes to believe this and claim it for oneself. 
The context is that although their ears were"heavy", God’s ears were not heavy to them, if they would pray in repentance (s:w. <a href='B:290 6:10'>Isa 6:10</a>). Again Isaiah is answering all the possible excuses given by the exiles for not repenting and returning to the land. In <a href='B:290 50:2'>Isa 50:2</a> the idea of Yahweh’s hand being shortened is used as an excuse not to respond to God’s call to quit Babylon for Zion: "Is My hand shortened at all, that it can’t redeem? Or have I no power to deliver?". The idea was that His ability to act, His hand, was somehow limited or ’reaped down’. They assumed the fact they had been reaped in the harvest of judgment meant that their God had been (<a href='B:290 17:5'>Isa 17:5</a>; <a href='B:300 9:22'>Jer 9:22</a>; <a href='B:350 8:7'>Hos 8:7</a>; <a href='B:350 10:13'>Hos 10:13</a>). They simply refused to accept the repeated prophetic message that it was the God of Israel who brought judgment upon Israel. They treated Him as the surrounding peoples treated their gods- always saving them in trouble, and if they didn’t, then the god had died with them.</p>


text:
<p>But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hidden His face from you so that He will not hear- God’s apparent silence and inaction was not because His hand was shortened, i:e. He was unable to act or limited in possibility. The limitation of possibility was because of their sins. His ear was not intrinsically deaf (:1), instead He would not hear because of their sins at the same time as their prayers. Their prayers were "hindered" in the sense of <a href='B:670 3:7'>1Pe 3:7</a>. We note that the exiles were praying, at the same time as doing all their sins. They didn't totally give up on God. But God doesn't hear this kind of prayer, that seeks to use Him as a background insurance policy whilst man continues his sinful ways in the foreground.</p><p><a href='B:290 30:20'>Isa 30:20</a> describes the reestablished Kingdom as a time when Judah’s repentant eyes would"see"the God who had taught them through the sufferings of defeat and exile (see note there). Their eyes would no longer be blinded, they would see and perceive the ’hidden’ God who had tried to teach them through all their afflictions. Meaning will finally be attached to event, and the problem of evil resolved finally. God had as it were ’hidden’ Himself during the exile (<a href='B:290 45:15'>Isa 45:15</a>; <a href='B:400 3:4'>Mic 3:4</a>); but now He would be revealed to them. Just as Cain was exiled to the east of Eden (which I have suggested was the eretz promised to Abraham) and been hidden from God’s eyes in his exile (<a href='B:10 4:14'>Gen 4:14</a>; <a href='B:50 31:17-18'>Deu 31:17-18</a>; <a href='B:50 32:20'>Deu 32:20</a> s:w:), so with Judah. The hidden things belong to God and only some are now revealed to us, but in the day of exile’s end, all those things, the meaning attached to the events, will at last be revealed (<a href='B:50 29:29'>Deu 29:29</a> s:w:). Then there will be no need for Jeremiah’s Lamentations and struggles about the exile, all developed in the story of the suffering Job, who felt God hidden from him (s:w. <a href='B:220 3:23'>Job 3:23</a>; <a href='B:220 13:24'>Job 13:24</a>) just as God was to hide His face fromZion at the time of the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:300 33:5'>Jer 33:5</a>) and exile (<a href='B:330 39:23-24'>Eze 39:23-24</a>). Therefore all human attempts to see the hidden God were doomed to failure, as Job was finally taught (<a href='B:220 34:29'>Job 34:29</a> s:w:). But the glorious truth of <a href='B:290 30:20'>Isa 30:20</a> is that finally, the Divine teacher will not be hidden any more and our eyes shall see Him and His ways, as Job did at the end (<a href='B:220 42:5'>Job 42:5</a>). And yet Isaiah and his family / school of prophets did look or see the hand of the God who was hiding Himself from Judah (s:w. <a href='B:290 8:17'>Isa 8:17</a>). At the restoration, there was to be no need for Judah to feel that their way was"hid from Yahweh"(<a href='B:290 40:27'>Isa 40:27</a> s:w:) any more, as it had been during the exile"for a little moment"when God hid His face (<a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>). Their eyes would see / perceive. But tragically, the exiles didn’t; God reflected that"I hid me... and he went on proudly in the way of his heart"(<a href='B:290 57:17'>Isa 57:17</a>). Their sins continued to hide His face from them (<a href='B:290 59:2'>Isa 59:2</a>; <a href='B:290 64:7'>Isa 64:7</a>).</p><p>So this is describing how things had been during the exile. God had hidden His face during the exile (Jer. 33:5; Ez. 39:23,24) but only for a moment (Is. 54:8). That was now over; but the Jews spoke as if His face was still hidden. Like many religious people, they preferred to consider that although God exists, He is not available for intimate personal fellowship. They complained God had still hidden His face from them because of the sins of their ancestors (Is. 64:7). When that was not now how He saw it. Typical of all men, at the start of the exile they had put the blame on God rather than on themselves, considering that He had "covered Yourself with a cloud, that our prayers should not pass through" (Lam. 3:44). The years of exile hadn't reformed their thinking and feeling about God. Yet despite this self admitted sense of separation from Him, they were very zealous in their religious devotion to Yahweh, fasting and attempting to sacrifice. But one can do all the religious stuff with a self admitted lack of personal relationship with God. </p>


text:
<p>For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue mutters wickedness- The lies spoken may well have been to God, in dishonestly proclaiming they were His covenant people when instead they were involved in child sacrifice and perhaps other murders related to their idolatry. Their defilement with blood meant they were ritually unclean, and this unable to serve Him. In the same breath as they proclaimed His covenant, they were muttering words of wickedness.</p><p>The idea is of total defilement with blood in the heart, the hands, the fingers, the lips, the tongue and the feet (:7). They were guilty of murder, and Isaiah has previously alluded to their practice of child sacrifice; and quite likely the murder of Ezekiel and other prophets. The Hebrew for "defiled", ga'al, is effectively the same word as the common word for 'redeemer', go'el. In all this condemnation, there is the hint that they can be redeemed by blood from their defilement, even at their worst defilement [ga'al] they were not far from redemption [go'el]- and it is the blood of the suffering servant that is hinted at as the price paid for their redemption. Isaiah began by lamenting that their hands were defiled by blood (Is. 1:15). Again and again, we see that the exile had not at all refined or transformed them. "Mutters" is LXX "meditates". The mind meditates, the tongue speaks. But the tongue is put for the mind because our words reflect our thinking- ultimately, even if we may think we're clever enough to think one thing and say the opposite. Is. 59:3-7 quote the six or seven things which Yahweh hates and are an abomination to Him from Prov. 6:17-19: "proud eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood [LXX "the blood of the just"]; a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are swift in running to mischief, a false witness who utters lies, and he who sows discord among brothers" LXX "An unjust witness kindles falsehoods and brings on quarrels between brethren".</p>


text:
<p>None sues in righteousness, and none pleads in truth-  God is now legally arraigning His people, noting that they sued each other over untrue allegations and the pleas made in response were likewise untrue. They were characterized by untruth. And this theme continues in their idealized confession of sin, when they admit the same: "truth is fallen in the street... Yes, truth is lacking" (:14,15). By contrast, God is rightly accusing them of their untruth, and their intended confession in :10-13 is absolutely truthful. It is this utter truthfulness and transparency, before both God and man, that God so seeks. Thus David reflects in his repentance that God had made him know truth in his most inward parts (Ps. 51:6); he thus achieved the Divine requirement that the righteous speak truth within their hearts (Ps. 15:2). Repentance is in this sense knowing the truth: "we should turn from our iniquities, and accept Your truth" (Dan. 9:13). For to sin is to "wander from the truth" (James 5:19- which isn't talking about wandering from some intellectual point in a statement of faith). If we "walk in darkness" and are disobedient, we do not "do the truth" (1 Jn. 1:6; 2:4). He that does "the truth" comes to the light so that his deeds may be reproved (Jn. 3:21). This is what worship of God in spirit "and truth" looks like (Jn. 4:23, said in the context of the repentant Samaritan woman)- not so much intellectual doctrinal purity, but transparent confession of sin.</p><p>AV "None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth". The prophetic intention was that Zion would be ’called’ the city of"righteousness"(<a href='B:290 1:26'>Isa 1:26</a> s:w:). But the individual Jews were not interested in appealing for justice and truth. The day when the earth would be governed in"righteousness and... truth"was not going to come whilst Judah themselves didn’t love the things of the Kingdom and refused to live the Kingdom life themselves (s:w. <a href='B:230 96:13'>Psa 96:13</a>). It was Messiah who was to be girded with"righteousness and... truth"(s:w. <a href='B:290 11:5'>Isa 11:5</a>). But not one candidate of the various potentials had acted like this. The prophecies were therefore reapplied and deferred to the Lord Jesus.</p><p>They trust in vanity, and speak lies-"Vanity"is the usual term for idols. Idolatry is a worship of nothingness, and again this is the essence of so much in the empty, contentless world of today. This is the modern day idolatry. And it is manifest in ’speaking lies’. A lack of attention to truth and disinterest in truth and ultimate reality leads to personal dishonesty, a speaking of lies.</p><p>They conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity- There is a theme in Isaiah of conceiving, suffering pain in labour- but bringing forth in vain (<a href='B:290 26:18'>Isa 26:18</a>; <a href='B:290 33:11'>Isa 33:11</a>; <a href='B:290 59:4'>Isa 59:4</a>):&nbsp; And so did Hezekiah, in that he and his children turned away from true faith (<a href='B:290 39:7'>Isa 39:7</a>). In Isaiah’s immediate context, the application would have been to the sense that the remnant had come to the birth but there was not strength to bring forth (<a href='B:290 37:3'>Isa 37:3</a>); apart from a few individuals, there was no bringing forth of a significant repentant remnant who would be the basis for the restored Kingdom. It felt like they were still under the curse of bringing forth in pain but in vain. The pain in vain at the time of the Assyrian invasion led to Micah offering a reworked version of all this; they were to be in pain at the hands of the Babylonians, but would bring forth in Babylon in that they would there repent, and the spiritually reborn remnant would emerge and their captors therefore judged (<a href='B:400 4:10'>Mic 4:10</a>). But that possibility also didn’t work out:&nbsp; And so this idea of bringing forth but not in vain, but rather finding meaning in the resurrection of Messiah and all in Him, came to be reapplied to the birth of the Lord Jesus from the grave in resurrection; and it would characterize the establishment of the Kingdom age in Zion (<a href='B:290 65:24'>Isa 65:24</a>).</p><p>These words [and :7 LXX] are quoted in Romans 3. Eliphaz thought there were only a few very sinful people in the world (<a href='B:220 15:35'>Job 15:35</a>); but His words are quoted by the Spirit in <a href='B:290 59:4'>Isa 59:4</a> concerning the whole nation of Israel; and this whole passage in <a href='B:290 59:4-8'>Isa 59:4-8</a> in turn is quoted in <a href='B:520 3:15-17'>Rom 3:15-17</a> concerning the whole human race. This same path of progressive realization of our sinfulness must be trodden by each faithful individual, as well as on a communal level.</p><p>LXX "they trust in vanities, and speak empty words" would mean that they trusted in idols, and therefore their prayers to God were empty words. See on :1.</p>


text:
<p>They hatch adders’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he who eats of their eggs dies; and that which is crushed breaks out into a viper- GNB"The evil plots you make are as deadly as the eggs of a poisonous snake. Crush an egg, out comes a snake!". The people in view appear to be teachers or leaders, because they have people who as it were eat their eggs.</p>


text:
<p>Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands- GNB"But your plots will do you no good—they are as useless as clothing made of cobwebs!". Their acts of violence would not ultimately be covered before God by carefully spun webs of excuses and self justification. "Their works are works of iniquity" (:6) parallels "their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity" (;7). As discussed on :8, thoughts lead to works, to a path of life. </p>


text:
<p>Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; desolation and destruction are in their paths- See on :4. This is quoting <a href='B:240 1:16'>Pro 1:16</a>. Again we note the parallel between thoughts and paths; the path of a man’s life is a reflection of his thoughts. And our thought patterns are the absolutely essential core of all spirituality and relationship with God. There is clearly the accusation that the restored exiles were guilty of plotting murder, and they did shed innocent blood. The reference may not be solely to child sacrifices, and the sacrifice of other vulnerable individuals; but to actual plans to kill the prophets such as Isaiah.</p><p>Verses 7 and 8 are quoted from the LXX in Rom. 3:15-17: "their feet run to wickedness, swift to shed blood; their thoughts also are thoughts of murder; destruction and misery are in their ways; and the way of peace they know not, neither is there judgment in their ways; for their paths by which they go are crooked, and they know not peace". Here in Is. 59 these verses are part of a legal arraignment of the returned exiles. They are quoted in a similar legal context by Paul- but the arraignment is applied to every man: "For we before laid to the charge [legal language] both of Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin. As it is written..." (Rom. 3:9,10). Paul then goes on to quote Is. 59:7,8 as part of the arraignment against every man. The intended statement of repentance in :10-13 must therefore be ours, so that we in turn might receive the comfort of salvation in the Messiah through His work and the gift of the Spirit (in :14-21). It is part of the true Christian experience to have this conviction of sin, to as it were stand in court with God and be and feel condemned- and then receive the amazing pardon of grace. </p>


text:
<p>The way of peace they don’t know; there is no justice in their goings: they have made them crooked paths; whoever goes therein does not know peace- The context is of their thoughts, and thoughts are man's "ways" or "goings" and "paths"; just as in :7 their thoughts are their paths. It is the path of daily, hour by hour thought which is the key to spiritual life. And it is the highway, the mental path, from Babylon to Zion, which the Spirit prepares and offers to those who want to accept these offers in our age.  But we are to be those "who have set their hearts on a pilgrimage" (Ps. 84:5). "The way of peace" refers to that offered to all exiles and Gentiles who would accept the new covenant in Is. 57:19,21: "peace upon peace to them that are far off, and to them that are nigh... there is no peace to the wicked". These people were false teachers, because they had others who would walk in their ways; hence GNB"no one who walks that path will ever be safe". The leadership of the exiles was deeply corrupt, as we find implied between the lines of Ezra, Nehemiah and Malachi.</p>


text:
<p>Vindication remains far removed from us and deliverance does not reach us: we look for light, but behold, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in obscurity- The first eight verses have been Yahweh's legal indictment of the exiles. In :9-14 we appear to have their confession; but as in Hosea, it could be that these are the words God would like them to say, recognizing especially that their failure was above all in their hearts. His answer to such a confession is then in :15-21, a prophecy of the work of the Lord Jesus and the eternal consequences of the gift of the Spirit. The hope of Zion’s light and the brightness of her Kingdom morning was precluded by the behaviour of the Jews and their idolatry. The restored Kingdom could have come then, but it didn’t- because of them. So much potential was wasted; and :11 also laments this. But we can also read this as not just Isaiah’s lament that the window of deliverance had been removed from them; but also as the cynical words of the exiles. Passages like Ezekiel 18 imply a certain bitterness of Israel towards their God, considering that He had dealt with them unfairly, and inappropriately punished them for the sins of their fathers. Despite Yahweh having enabled their exit from Babylon, they complained: “Vindication remains far removed from us and deliverance does not reach us” (<a href='B:290 59:9'>Isa 59:9</a>). This was an awful spurning of the great salvation enabled for them. They remonstrated against God’s message of deliverance from captivity: “Can prey be taken from a warrior? Or can prisoners of a tyrant be rescued?” (<a href='B:290 49:24'>Isa 49:24</a>). They thought their salvation was too hard even for God. They made the same mistake as all who reason that their situation or personality is too far gone for God to redeem. For the ‘salvation’ of the exiles in Babylon is alluded to in the New Testament as a prototype of our salvation in Christ. The good news of potential deliverance from Babylon is quoted as the good news of salvation from sin (<a href='B:290 52:7-10'>Isa 52:7-10</a> = <a href='B:480 1:15'>Mar 1:15</a>; <a href='B:470 10:7-8'>Mat 10:7-8</a>; <a href='B:520 10:15'>Rom 10:15</a>; <a href='B:560 6:15'>Eph 6:15</a>; <a href='B:290 61:1-2'>Isa 61:1-2</a> = <a href='B:490 4:16-21'>Luk 4:16-21</a>). Time and again in the restoration prophecies we encounter statements intended to answer the skepticism felt by the exiles about the promises of redemption from Babylon (<a href='B:290 40:27-31'>Isa 40:27-31</a>; <a href='B:290 42:22'>Isa 42:22</a>; <a href='B:290 43:22'>Isa 43:22</a>; <a href='B:290 46:12'>Isa 46:12</a>; <a href='B:290 48:4'>Isa 48:4</a>; <a href='B:290 48:8'>Isa 48:8</a>; <a href='B:290 49:14'>Isa 49:14</a>).</p><p>This walking in darkness and obscurity, LXX "perplexity", must be compared with how at the same time they asked God to explain His laws to them (Is. 58:2 "they now ask of me righteous judgment, and desire to draw nigh to God"). But they were merely saying the words; in reality they were perplexed and stumbling in darkness. Because they didn't really want to understand, therefore "God" was perplexing to them. But Isaiah will go right on to prophecy the arising of Zion's glorious light out of darkness and obscurity: "Your light has come, and the glory of Yahweh is risen upon you. For behold, darkness shall cover the land, and gross darkness the peoples; but Yahweh will arise on you, and His glory shall be seen on you. Nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising" (Is. 60:1-3). The penitent people of God longed for this, but thought it was unattainable. The good news of Is. 60 is that it would come about for them. The Kingdom, salvation... appears unattainable to us if we mope in our sinfulness, but the good news of the Gospel of the Kingdom is that it is attainable. </p>


text:
<p>We grope for the wall like the blind; yes, we grope as those who have no eyes: we stumble at noonday as in the twilight; among those who are lusty we are as dead men- Darkness at noon was what happened at the crucifixion; this was the judgment upon Israel for their attitudes, because the killing of their own King and Messiah was the ultimate climax and final term of all their sinful behaviour. The apostate Jews have been condemned earlier in this chapter; the words we now are reading in :9-14 are now as it were spoken by them. Perhaps they are an imagination of the kinds of words these people would speak and the feelings they would feel in their day of final condemnation; recognizing in every detail their sins, but tragically too late. The time for such confession is now. All their human strength, appearing as"lusty", was now as death itself. Their stumbling at noonday was the curse for disobedience to the covenant (s:w. <a href='B:30 26:37'>Lev 26:37</a>).</p><p>The language of :10,11 clearly alludes to the curses for breaking the covenant in Dt. 28:29; groping at noon as the blind gropes in darkness with no one to save them: "You shall grope at noonday, as the blind gropes in darkness, and you shall not prosper in your ways... and there shall be none to save you". They were recognizing that the old covenant was broken, and that they were utterly helpless. And to those amongst the exiles who perceived this, God was offering a new covenant, as detailed in Ezekiel and Jeremiah; see on :12. We too have been offered that same new covenant, but we will only want it if firstly we recognize our condemnation under any other scheme of relationship with God. And our deep sense of helplessness.</p>


text:
<p>We roar all like bears, and moan bitterly like doves- Perhaps suggesting both men and women were in lamentation. This is the weeping and gnashing of teeth of the condemned, roaring like the waves who cannot pass over the bound set for them at the beach (s:w. <a href='B:300 5:22'>Jer 5:22</a>), unable to enter the kingdom. One moment they will be roaring, the next moaning quietly; the same word is used of how they had muttered or uttered false words (:13). By doing so, they were living out their own condemnation.</p><p>We look for justice, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far off from us- The salvaSalvation was near, but they felt it was near but so far. Therefore it was far, however potentially near it had come. They experienced the feelings of the rejected ahead of time in this confession, the sense of "O wretched man that I am". And then here and in Is. 60 are assured of salvation. tion and justice of the restored Kingdom was precluded by the behaviour of the Jews and their idolatry. The reestablished Kingdom could have come then, but it didn’t- because of them. So much potential was wasted; and :9 also laments this. But this is also the picture of the condemned Jews at the last day, desperately wanting salvation, but finding it now too far from them.</p>


text:
<p>For our transgressions are multiplied before You, and our sins testify against us; for our transgressions are with us, and as for our iniquities, we know them- The confession of sin in :12-15 was perhaps God’s fantasy about His people’s repentance, the kind of thing we see in Hosea’s fantasy about Gomer’s return to him. Or it could have been Isaiah’s pro forma expression of repentance which he intended Judah to make. Or as suggested previously on these verses, this is the recognition of sin by the condemned but all too late. They realize all too late that their sins have not been taken away from them, for they had refused the sin bearer. Their own sins testified at the day of judgment"before You"and called for their own condemnation.</p><p>The three Hebrew words for "transgressions", "sins" and "iniquities" occur together in the description of the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:21), over whom the unforgiven sins of Israel were confessed. Clearly the connection is deliberate. The exiles were to confess every aspect of sin, believing that although they could not be forgiven under the old covenant [which they had broken], they could all be dealt with through the blood of the day of atonement. And that looked ahead to the Lord's sacrifice. Their looking for a new covenant or way to salvation was going to be met by the offer of a new covenant later in this chapter.
"Our transgressions are with us" means that they were ever aware of them now- they were in touch with their own conscience. Which is what repentance looks like in practice- not forgetting that we have been purged from past sins, as Peter puts it. This is how David was in Ps. 51:3 (“my transgressions I know, and my sin is before me continually”). Even in this life, they had been called to judgment ahead of time- and confessed that they were witnesses against themselves asking for their own condemnation. This meeting of God in judgment is an essential part of true conversion and repentance. Those who won't really confess their sins and be convicted of condemnation have never really 'met' God. For all their supposedly true theology. This elicits true self knowledge; they confess in :13 that the problem was that they had conceived sin in their heart, and their self talk had been of "falsehood". Quite some introspection and confession. Realizing what God has been saying all along, as discussed on :8, that man's essential problem is his own untruthful thinking in his heart. This set them up as ideal, grateful recipients of the new covenant (see on :10)- for it offered the Spirit working in the heart, the laws which they could not and did not keep, now written in their hearts. At a time when Zion would be called the "city of truth" (Zech. 8:3). And this offer of this new covenant is therefore God's response to this penitence in :21: "As for Me, this is My covenant with them, says Yahweh. My Spirit which is on you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth". This clearly alludes to the new covenant.
</p>


text:
<p>transgressing and denying Yahweh, and turning away from following our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood- We see the common Biblical parallel between thoughts and words; hence GNB"Our thoughts are false; our words are lies"."Uttering"is the word used in :11 for how the condemned will mutter or moan in condemnation; but by muttering false words in their hearts, they were living out their own condemnation experience. "Uttering" is also the word God has used in His arraignment of them in :3. They were rightly accused of having uttered false words: "your tongue mutters [utters] wickedness" (:3). Here they absolutely accept that. This is the path of repentance, to repeat God's words about human sin and own them as true of us.</p>


text:
<p>Justice is turned away backward, and righteousness stands afar off- This contrasts with the frequent statements that Yahweh’s truth righteousness was"near"in the sense that His restored Kingdom could so soon have been established. But now it was far away, because the window of opportunity was now closed because of their impenitence. Thus GNB"Justice is driven away, and right cannot come near".</p><p>For truth is fallen in the street, and uprightness can’t enter- As just noted, the righteousness which was to enter Zion by the highway prepared in Isaiah 40 was not going to enter. There was an open, public, unashamed rejection of God’s"truth", His covenant. GNB"Truth stumbles in the public square, and honesty finds no place there". The street or square may refer to the place of judgment, the law court. The injustice there meant that the Kingdom prophecy of <a href='B:450 8:16'>Zec 8:16</a> was disallowed of fulfilment. </p><p>Righteousness as it were stood outside the city, unable to enter because of their perversions; and uprightness likewise wanted to enter the city but had been precluded by them. And yet Yahweh at this time had brought His righteousness and salvation very near to them: "I bring near My righteousness, it shall not be far off and My salvation shall not wait; and I will place salvation in Zion" (Is. 46:13). They realized indeed that it was a case of so near, but so far. Salvation, righteousness, uprightness... had come so near to them. But their behaviour meant it had not come, and so, it stood far off. So near, but so far. And that is the sad experience of so many who hear the Gospel of their salvation. Salvation comes very near to them, but if they persist in their ways- it is far from them. What joy, therefore, for those like us who realize salvation came near but we declined it... to repent, and find that we can after all have that great salvation! It's only by conviction of sin that we see the wonder of the Gospel. This is why those who have never done much 'sin' as the world wrongly perceives sin find it hard to be truly committed and zealous for God. Conviction of sin is utterly necessary for living relationship with God. Churches that began as convicted sinners in repentance... atrophy over the generations to middle class, bubble mentality religious people with no fire in their souls.</p>


text:
<p>Yes, truth is lacking; and he who departs from evil makes himself a prey- "Makes himself a prey" may mean the man has to submit to extortion. LXX "And truth has been taken away, and they have turned aside their mind from understanding". Those who ’don’t understand’ do so not simply because of intellectual failure, but because they do not want to understand."He who departs from evil"is the term used about Job (s:w. Job 18; <a href='B:220 2:3'>Job 2:3</a>); and he too became a"prey"to evil. Job represents not only the exiles, but the righteous remnant amongst them who departed from evil but suffered all the same.</p><p>Yahweh saw it, and it displeased Him that there was no justice- The lack of justice and honesty might seem relatively small issues compared to the murder and gross idolatry mentioned as going on at the time. But the prophets often make clear that it is attitudes to justice which reflect the essence of a person’s spirituality.</p><p>In the Lord Jesus we see a heart that more than bled for the salvation of others. He didn’t live out His perfect life in isolation from others, withdrawn from society, insulated from the world’s pain. <a href='B:290 59:15-20'>Isa 59:15-20</a> speaks of how He came to perceive that really there was nobody apart from Him who could bring about such great salvation to the world:"And the Lord saw it, and it displeased [s:w. grieved] him that there was no judgment. And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him. For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloke". So many of these phrases and ideas are picked up in the New Testament and applied to the Lord Jesus in His time of dying. It was His grief that inspired Him.</p><p>Scripture repeatedly speaks as if God notices things and is then hurt by what He sees (<a href='B:390 3:10'>Jon 3:10</a>; <a href='B:10 29:31'>Gen 29:31</a>; <a href='B:20 3:4'>Exo 3:4</a>; <a href='B:50 32:19'>Deu 32:19</a>; <a href='B:120 14:26'>2Ki 14:26</a>; <a href='B:140 12:7'>2Ch 12:7</a>; <a href='B:330 23:13'>Eze 23:13</a>; <a href='B:290 59:15'>Isa 59:15</a> cp. <a href='B:490 7:13'>Luk 7:13</a>). If He knew in advance what they were going to do, this language is hard for me to understand. But God is therefore hurt and ’surprised’ at sin- He saw Israel as the firstripe grapes, but they were worshipping Baal even then (<a href='B:350 9:9'>Hos 9:9</a>). Thus God can allow Himself to feel an element of surprise- and this was a shock to Jeremiah, who queried:"Why are You like a man who is caught by surprise…?"(<a href='B:300 14:9'>Jer 14:9</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor- This lack of a single righteous person has been mentioned in :4: "None speaks justly". The implication is that there was not even a righteous remnant, not a single man who was right with God. And so instead of giving up with His people, God raised up the Lord Jesus, His arm, His righteousness, Yahweh our righteousness. Truly, our salvation is all of grace. It is the Lord Jesus and the gift of the Spirit through Him (:21) that is the answer to the confession of moral helplessness in the preceding section. God's people considered His arm was too short to save (:1); but God here says that somehow His arm [in the Lord Jesus] will bring salvation. Somehow He will save at least some. The implication, thinking it all through, is that God considered that an acceptable level of faith and obedience was quite possible for at least some of His people, so that they might be saved there and then. He was amazed there was not one sufficiently righteous. This Divine 'amazement' is a window onto the question of whether God sees all human beings as inevitable sinners, structurally abhorrent to Him. He clearly doesn't. His 'amazement' that nobody made the grade, despite all His historical experience of human sin, would make no sense in this case. He had declared that His salvation had drawn "near" to that generation (Is. 56:1); it was absolutely attainable. It's not that God hates our guts as humans, but graciously made a way to save us through His Son. That is mere Calvinism. Salvation was attainable by the exiles, God was surprised not even one person 'made it'- and so He had to extend His grace, His plan to save, by His saving arm through His Son.</p><p>None of the potential Messiah figures worked out; and it seems about nobody responded to the prophetic call for the exiles to repent. God was ’desolated’ ["wondered"]about this, so great were His hopes for some response. And yet God wished to try to save them anyway by His dramatic intervention, which was to come to full term in the person and work of His own son. LXX suggests this was by His pure mercy and grace alone:"so he defended them with his arm, and stablished them with his mercy".</p><p>Therefore His own arm brought salvation to Him; and His righteousness, it upheld Him- see on <a href='B:20 2:11-12'>Exo 2:11-12</a>. The arm of Yahweh, the practical articulation of His power, is ultimately the Lord Jesus. &nbsp;God sent His prophets to appeal to Israel for repentance. They could have lead to repentance. But Israel would not. The marriage feast was totally ready and waiting for the Jewish people; they could have had it. But they didn’t want it, and so the course of human history was extended. Therefore finally God sent His Son. The Lord Jesus Himself was amazed that no other man had achieved the work which He had to; and therefore He clad Himself with zeal and performed it (<a href='B:290 41:28'>Isa 41:28</a>; <a href='B:290 50:2'>Isa 50:2</a>; <a href='B:290 59:16'>Isa 59:16</a> cp. <a href='B:730 5:3-4'>Rev 5:3-4</a>). God knew that salvation in the end would have to be through the death of His Son. But there were other possible scenarios for the repentance and salvation of mankind, which no man achieved. And so, as in the parable of the servants sent to get fruit from the vineyard, there was left no other way but the death of God’s only Son. There is a clear parallel between <a href='B:290 59:16'>Isa 59:16</a> and <a href='B:290 63:5'>Isa 63:5</a>. The same words are used, but there is one difference. In <a href='B:290 59:16'>Isa 59:16</a>,"His righteousness, it upheld Him", but in <a href='B:290 63:5'>Isa 63:5</a> it was God’s fury which upheld / sustained Him. The Messianic arm of Yahweh which brought salvation did so only because as Son of Man, the Lord Jesus is the only human who can rightly judge sin on behalf ofGod’s anger. His necessary anger / wrath in judging sin is therefore part of the wider nexus of the absolutely legitimate salvation He achieved through the Lord Jesus.</p><p>We may well enquire as to the sense in which Yahweh apparently saved Himself, for wriggle as we may, that is what the Hebrew demands: "His own arm brought salvation to Him; and His righteousness, it upheld Him". Possibly the idea is that His purpose with His people was failing, not one had responded. The gracious offer of the new covenant had been spurned. And so He worked out His purpose through the work of His Son to at least save some, and thus saved His entire project with man from failure. He upheld His saving purpose, His desire to have a people. His "arm" is the Lord Jesus; it cannot be that the idea is that the "arm" saved Himself. The arm saved Yahweh; and Is. 53 is clear that the arm of Yahweh is the Lord Jesus in His death on the cross. Likewise Is. 63:4,5: "the year of My redeemed has come [the 70 years had ended and salvation was now possible]. I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore My own arm brought salvation to Me". The idea of Yahweh using His hand and arm to save is in Dt. 32:36-41; He uses His own arm to save when His people are as it were finished, at the end, from their own sins: "Yahweh will judge His people and have compassion on His servants when He sees that their power is gone, that there is none remaining, shut up or left at large... See now that I, even I, am He... There is no one who can deliver out of My hand. For I lift up My hand to heaven and say, as surely as I live forever... My hand takes hold on judgment".</p>


text:
<p>He put on righteousness as a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on His head; and He put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a mantle- Yahweh’s arm which was to bring salvation (:16) required that the saviour referred to act as a high priest; hence the usage of priestly language here for the breastplate:; indeed all the items of clothing here are described with words which are found in the description of the high priestly clothing in Exodus 28. The"garments"are s:w. <a href='B:20 28:3-4'>Exo 28:3-4</a>. The"helmet"alludes therefore to the high priestly mitre; the"mantle"to the priestly"robe"(s:w:) of <a href='B:20 28:4'>Exo 28:4</a>; <a href='B:20 28:31'>Exo 28:31</a> etc. And yet the suffering servant had been named"Israel, he was representative of all God’s people. And so these words are applied to us, in that we are "in Christ" and all that is true of Him is true of us- even His High Priestly work for sinners. Thus Paul’s description of the warrior of the Gospel in Ephesians 6 composites together various descriptions of Messiah’s clothing in the servant songs (<a href='B:290 11:5'>Isa 11:5</a> = “loins girded with truth”; <a href='B:290 49:2'>Isa 49:2</a> “mouth like a sharp sword”; <a href='B:290 52:7'>Isa 52:7</a> “bring good tidings / publish salvation” = “the preparation of the Gospel of peace”; <a href='B:290 59:17'>Isa 59:17</a> “breastplate of righteousness”; <a href='B:290 59:17'>Isa 59:17</a> “helmet of salvation”). We are to be Christ to the world.</p>


text:
<p>According to their deeds, accordingly He will repay, wrath to His adversaries, recompense to His enemies; to the islands He will repay recompense- The adversaries and enemies of God’s people are the enemies of God Himself and His Son. The salvation to be achieved by Yahweh’s arm, His Son (:16,17) required the judgment of sin. Clothed as it were in high priestly clothing (:17), the priest-king-saviour will finally do justice- at the day of judgment. Their judgment will be according to what they did (<a href='B:290 59:18'>Isa 59:18</a>; <a href='B:290 65:6'>Isa 65:6</a>); although <a href='B:300 16:18'>Jer 16:18</a> says that some will be recompensed double. By contrast, the exiles were not receiving punishment according as their deeds deserved, but less (<a href='B:150 9:13'>Ezr 9:13</a>). These different degrees of recompense suggest that Divine judgment is far more complex than a simple ’measure for measure’. The greater complexity is because He weighs motives and inflexions of meaning attached to actions which all require different judgments. And then on top of that, there is the credit He gives for forgiveness, and for the prayers and faith of others influencing the final outcome of judgment in any given case.</p>


text:
<p>So shall they fear the name of Yahweh from the west, and His glory from the rising of the sun- The judgments upon the surrounding nations were intended to bring forth repentance and acceptance of Israel’s God, from east to west.</p><p>For He will come as a rushing stream, which the breath of Yahweh drives- AV "the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him". This elsewhere refers to the pole lifted up, the Lord Jesus, lifted up as crucified as the rallying point of faith in the midst of the stream of Divine judgments.</p>


text:
<p>A Redeemer- "A redeemer" [although the text is unclear] rather than "the redeemer" could suggest there were other potential redeemers which could have arisen before the Lord Jesus came. As Hosea ‘redeemed’ Gomer in His attempt to force through His fantasy for her (<a href='B:350 3:1'>Hos 3:1</a>), so Yahweh is repeatedly described in Isaiah as Israel’s go’el, redeemer (<a href='B:290 41:14'>Isa 41:14</a>; <a href='B:290 43:14'>Isa 43:14</a>; <a href='B:290 44:6'>Isa 44:6</a>; <a href='B:290 44:24'>Isa 44:24</a>; <a href='B:290 47:4'>Isa 47:4</a>; <a href='B:290 48:17'>Isa 48:17</a>; <a href='B:290 49:7'>Isa 49:7</a>; <a href='B:290 49:26'>Isa 49:26</a>; <a href='B:290 54:5'>Isa 54:5</a>; <a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>). The redeemer could redeem a close relative from slavery or repurchase property lost during hard times (<a href='B:30 25:25-26'>Lev 25:25-26</a>; <a href='B:30 25:47-55'>Lev 25:47-55</a>; <a href='B:80 2:20'>Rth 2:20</a>; <a href='B:80 3:9'>Rth 3:9</a>; <a href='B:80 3:12'>Rth 3:12</a>). The redeemer was also the avenger of blood (<a href='B:40 35:9-28'>Num 35:9-28</a>; <a href='B:60 20:3'>Jos 20:3</a>; <a href='B:60 20:9'>Jos 20:9</a>). All these ideas were relevant to Yahweh’s relationship to Judah in captivity. But the promised freedom didn’t come- even under Nehemiah, Judah was still a province within the Persian empire. And those who returned complained: “We are slaves this day in the land you gave…” (<a href='B:160 9:36'>Neh 9:36</a>). The wonderful prophecies of freedom and redemption from slavery weren’t realized in practice, because of the selfishness of the more wealthy Jews. And how often is it that the freedom potentially enabled for those redeemed in Christ is in practice denied them by their autocratic and abusive brethren</p><p>Will come to Zion- No redeemer came to Zion as planned because the Jewish lack of repentance precluded it. So under inspiration, Paul changes this to "the redeemer shall come out of Zion" (<a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a>), thereby combining the sense with that of <a href='B:230 14:7'>Psa 14:7</a>.</p><p>And to those who turn from disobedience in Jacob, says Yahweh- &nbsp;The LXX and <a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a> have "shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob". The ambiguity is because man’s turning away from sin is also a gift from God, in this case that requested in <a href='B:310 5:2'>Lam 5:2</a>. Repentance and not just forgiveness is given from God; this is His grace to the extreme. Those who turn from sin are turned from sin by the Lord. The blessing promised to Abraham was not only forgiveness of sins, but that the Lord Jesus would turn away Abraham’s seed from their iniquities (<a href='B:510 3:26'>Act 3:26</a>). Yet we only become Abraham’s seed by repentance and baptism. Our repentance and desire not to sin is therefore confirmed after our baptism. Paul’s citation of this is deliberately altered to teach the truth that the majority of Israel will not turn before He comes. To them He will come and turn ungodliness away from them (<a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a>). But Israelite repentance is a condition for the Lord’s return. LXX "the deliverer shall come for Sion's sake, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob" suggests that the work of the Lord Jesus was to come to Jerusalem and through His Spirit (:21), turn Israel away from their sins. Acts 3:25,26 shows Peter in Jerusalem claiming that the gift of the Spirit, promised in the new covenant promises to Abraham, would result in turning Israelites away from their iniquities. But that promise is to all in the new covenant. It is to "you... your seed... your seed's seed" (:21), and that is surely alluded to in Acts 2:38,39: "you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to him".</p>


text:
<p>As for Me, this is My covenant with them, says Yahweh. My Spirit which is on you, and My words which I have put in your mouth- The covenant- the new one- was to be "with them", and yet a singular individual is addressed, who was full of God's Spirit and spoke God's words. That individual is the Lord Jesus, and because of Him the covenant can be made with "them" plural, God's wayward people. GNB offers: "And I make a covenant with you: I have given you my power and my teachings to be yours forever, and from now on you are to obey me and teach your children and your descendants to obey me for all time to come". This is God's response to the repentance of the previous section. It's why Peter urges his audience to repent so that they might receive the Holy Spirit. And that receipt of the Holy Spirit is the ongoing experience of all who day by day experience "Godly repentance". The arrogant and spiritually self satisfied, living in a religious bubble, don't experience this.</p><p>In a restoration context, this seems to be the same idea as in Hag. 2:5: “The word which I covenanted with you, as well as My spirit, remains amongst you”. God was still seeking to propel forwards His Kingdom purpose, despite the weak commitment of His people. Just as He did at the Red Sea, and just as He does to this day.  God's spoken word of covenant was to save His people, and His Spirit would continually work to bring this about.</p><p>This would be achieved if they accepted the Spirit, part of the package offered in the new covenant. His words would be written in their hearts too. Having Divine words put in the mouth meant they were to be as Aaron and Moses before Pharaoh (s:w. <a href='B:20 4:15'>Exo 4:15</a>); for it was also Moses who was covered in the shadow of Yahweh’s hand as He passed by in the parallel passage in <a href='B:290 51:16'>Isa 51:16</a>. Remember that they were bidden flee Babylon before she fell to the Medes. The servant figure need not have feared the king of Babylon, he was intended to go to him and plead as Moses "let My people go". But the exiles feared men, perhaps one particular ruler of Persia or Babylon, whom they thought would not allow their restoration; see on <a href='B:290 51:12'>Isa 51:12</a>. They feared him rather than God, and so they didn’t flee Babylon as asked.</p><p>Shall not depart out of your mouth, nor out of the mouth of your seed, nor out of the mouth of your seed’s seed, says Yahweh- The promise of the new covenant and the associated gift of the Spirit was that if they said "yes" to it, then they would be preserved eternally faithful. For the Messianic Kingdom would then begin. A connection between Joshua and Israel is developed here, which describes the new covenant which God will make with Israel in the Messianic Kingdom in terms evidently reminiscent of Joshua- as if the new covenant was made with him, thereby enabling him potentially to be part of a Messianic Kingdom even in his day:&nbsp; “And as for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: my Spirit that is upon thee [“Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him” <a href='B:50 34:9'>Deu 34:9</a>; <a href='B:40 27:18-23'>Num 27:18-23</a>] , and my words which I have put in thy mouth [<a href='B:50 18:18'>Deu 18:18</a> - God’s words were put in Joshua’s mouth], shall not depart out of thy mouth [“this book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth”, <a href='B:60 1:8'>Jos 1:8</a>, s:w:], nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever”:&nbsp; See on <a href='B:60 1:6'>Jos 1:6</a>. But these things were to come true in the greater Joshua, the Lord Jesus.</p><p>From henceforth and forever- The Spirit would abide in them for ever. In other words, the sense of Spiritual strength from God which Israel will have will not just diminish into nothing, it will not just fade away. I think this is one of the saddest aspects of our present spiritual experience. You see a keen young brother emerge from the waters of baptism, entering the new covenant, throw himself into the study and preaching of the word, he grows spiritually... and then he slips, slips and slips, until he slides down the slippery path into the world. We go to a Bible study, a Bible conference, we read the word of the new covenant together in intense fellowship. And then it all slips away, we lose the reality of our calling, we’re strong for the next day, perhaps the day after, and then back to base level. But then we will spiritually run and not faint, walk in the new and living way and not be weary. This is surely one of the most wonderful aspects of the Kingdom life; constant growth, no regrets, no looking back over our shoulder, no sense of spiritual anti-climax. No more fading away spiritually, instead the energy of constant growth.</p>


text:
<p>Arise, shine; for your light has come, and the glory of Yahweh is risen upon you- This prophecy of the arising of Zion's light out of darkness follows right on from the confession of the penitent that they would so love this, but it seemed unattainable because of their sins. See on Is. 59:9 ("we look for light, but behold, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in obscurity"). "Is come" is rendered by the Jewish rabbi Ibn Ezra: "Your light has set", citing a similar construction in Gen. 28:11. This means the idea is that their natural light would disappear and be replaced by the light of God's glory. Hence :19 "The sun shall be no more your light by day". Is. 51:17; 52:2 had called upon the drunk, depressed Zion to awaken herself and arise: "shake yourself from the dust and arise". Now that call is repeated. To awaken and make arise such a hopeless case... is again the work of the Spirit. See on Is. 61:1, where again the psychologically incurable is cured.
LXX "Be enlightened, be enlightened, O Jerusalem, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee". We could read this as the exiles having to respond to the light that had come near them. They didn't, they refused to be enlightened, and so the light didn't arise within the rebuilt temple as intended.  The literal visible shekinah glory could have arisen upon Zion. But it was precluded by the Jews' refusal. And so it was applied to the arising of the Lord Jesus at His first coming. He was again the light that shone in gross darkness, but failed to dissipate that darkness for all Israel: "This light shines in the darkness, but the darkness cannot understand it" (Jn. 1:5). And so He will arise ultimately as the literal light of the world at His return. Zion’s light was reapplied to the Lord Jesus both in His ministry and His return to earth. He was the sunrise ["the dayspring from on high"] at His first coming (Lk. 1:78) and the arising sun of righteousness at His second coming (Mal. 4:2). He was "the light of the world", but in John's Gospel, the "world" is often the Jewish world.
The idea is that Zion's faces would be enlightened [LXX "be enlightened"] in reflection of the glorious light rising upon them. This is the picture of Is. 58:8,10 where if the exiles repented, "Then your light shall break forth as the morning... your light shall rise in darkness". The dawn of God's glory would be seen in them, they would be a reflection of how the light of God's glory would arise in the darkness of the Gentile world. This would be through the "Servant" being the light of the world, and those in Him likewise being that light (Is. 42:6; 49:6). The literal possibility of this was in the shekinah glory returning to Zion as spoken of in Ez. 40-48; particularly in Ez. 43:2,4 where the glory enters the temple gates and the whole earth shines from it, as if it is so bright and transformative that it makes even the dust of the earth [which man is made of] to shine in reflection of it: "and the earth shined with his glory". This was precluded by Judah's disbelief and disobedience. They looked for light but were still in the darkness (Is. 59:9 "we look for light, but behold, darkness; for brightness, but we walk in obscurity"). The possibility was and is that their faces shone with the shining light of God's glory: "Then you shall see and be radiant" (:5).  But it comes gloriously true in the dust of human believers today, in hearts of believers transformed by the spirit of the Lord Jesus: "But we, with an unveiled face and reflecting the glory of the Lord, are all transformed into his likeness from glory to glory by the Lord the Spirit... God that said: Light shall shine out of darkness, He shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 3:18; 4:6). And so :19,20 conclude that eternally, Zion's light is God's light, "Your sun shall no more go down... for Yahweh shall be your everlasting light". This is more than reflection; it is the light of God's glory being the personal light of Zion. They too become radiators of the light: "Then you shall see and be radiant" (:5). The light sources merge. Our lives now must be all about shining forth the light of God's glory, His characteristics, His Name, into the darkness. For this is what we shall eternally do. We "shine as lights in the [darkness of this] world" (Phil. 2:15), the only points of light.
Ezekiel's restoration prophecies in Ez. 40-48 had spoken of Yahweh's glory coming to Zion- if Israel were obedient and built. Is. 60 presents the picture of that glory having arrived, just as Is. 40 begins the prophecy with the picture of God's glory leaving Babylon and travelling to Zion. But that depended upon the way for that glory being prepared, and it was not, in that Israel didn't repent. Yet God was apparently prepared to send His glory to Zion anyway, despite the disobedience to the commands to rebuild the temple. Such was His enthusiasm to make it work. The same enthusiasm we see in His constant coaxing of men to leave Babylon and come to Zion.
Even before the exile, Israel and Judah had been invited to perceive that light, hence <a href='B:290 9:2'>Isa 9:2</a> LXX "O people walking in darkness, behold a great light". But they didn’t. And so the returned exiles, "Zion", are asked at a later stage to arise and shine because their light had come (<a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>). But again they didn’t, and so these prophecies of a light coming are reapplied to the Lord Jesus, who was perceived by a new Zion as the light of the world. I explained on <a href='B:290 30:26'>Isa 30:26</a> how the coming of Zion’s supernaturally bright light is to come therefore when Babylon falls; and this has therefore been deferred to the latter day fall of Babylon.</p><p>"Arise" is the word used often of the ’rising up’ of the exiles to rebuild Jerusalem (<a href='B:150 1:5'>Ezr 1:5</a>; <a href='B:150 3:2'>Ezr 3:2</a>; <a href='B:150 9:5'>Ezr 9:5</a>; <a href='B:160 2:18'>Neh 2:18</a>; <a href='B:160 3:1'>Neh 3:1</a>). This was a fulfilment of the command to "Arise... Jerusalem!" (<a href='B:290 51:17'>Isa 51:17</a>; <a href='B:290 52:2'>Isa 52:2</a>; <a href='B:290 61:4'>Isa 61:4</a>). But this ’arising’ was to be associated with the dawning of Zion’s light in the form ofYahweh’s glory literally dwelling over Zion (<a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>). This didn’t happen at the time, because the appearance of ’arising’ by the exiles was only external and wasn’t matched by a spiritual revival.</p><p>Zion’s light would certainly come and give light to the world- even though the fulfilment of the prophecy at the restoration from Babylon was actually conditional on Judah keeping the Sabbath and caring for their poor brethren: “Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee…&nbsp; And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising”. Nehemiah repaired the breaches, Ezra laid the foundations of the temple…the prophecy of Isaiah 58 was fulfilled on the surface, but not in its Kingdom sense, because they failed to keep the Sabbath etc. <a href='B:290 58:10'>Isa 58:10</a> says that if they drew out their soul to the hungry, if they allowed themselves to feel the hunger of others, then would their light rise and their darkness be as the noonday. And thus the prophecy of <a href='B:290 60:1-2'>Isa 60:1-2</a> that Zion’s light is going to dawn was conditional upon the Jews caring for their hungry amongst them- even though in that passage, the condition isn’t directly stated. The restoration was therefore only a sham of what was possible.</p><p>Let’s remember that the exiles were symbols of us. We in this life are passing through “the time of our exile” (<a href='B:670 1:17'>1Pe 1:17</a> RSV). The restoration command to the exiles in Babylon to arise and shine, as their light had come (<a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>) went unheeded by them; they preferred to stay in Babylon. And so this is reapplied to us as the new Israel in <a href='B:560 5:14'>Eph 5:14</a>.</p><p>The LXX suggests that the coming of this light of Zion depended upon their being willing to accept it: "Be enlightened, be enlightened, O Jerusalem, for thy light is come".</p>


text:
<p>For behold, darkness shall cover the land, and gross darkness the peoples; but Yahweh will arise on you, and His glory shall be seen on you- As always, the blessing of Judah is to be for the blessing of the nations. Their light was to impact the gross darkness of the Gentile world. We are called to mission, for our very experience of God's light is so that we may not just rejoice in it ourselves, but by its nature, light dissipates darkness. And the darkness is the state of the Gentile world. But light rises upon the new Zion, the true people of God. The Jewish exiles were still in darkness, because they were of the spirit of Babylon still. They had to repent and confess that they had been looking “for light, but all is darkness; for brightness, but we walk in deep shadows” (Is. 59:9).  If they had done this, then Yahweh's glory would have visibly been seen above Zion.</p><p>The darkness contrasts with the light which dawns mentally, internally, in minds which have desired to be enlightened (:1 LXX). Darkness covering the earth is the language of Genesis 1; we as the readers / audience are left in expectation of a new creation being spoken about. But we are also given the impression that Israel was being treated as Egypt whom they trusted in, suffering the plague of darkness. But ’covering with darkness’ is a phrase only used elsewhere of death (<a href='B:220 23:17'>Job 23:17</a>; <a href='B:250 6:4'>Ecc 6:4</a>). It was through death and judgment that the new life and creation could come forth. The land, of Israel, and "the peoples" (Gentiles) are paralleled here; for it was the Divine intention that the judgments upon the surrounding world would also be those upon Israel, and yet out of that was to emerge a repentant remnant of Jews and Gentiles who would merge into a new multiethnic people of God in the day when Yahweh would arise in glory. In a literal sense there was to be the light of God’s glory in Zion when He personally dwelt there.</p>


text:
<p>Nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising- <a href='B:290 60:1-3'>Isa 60:1-3</a> reasons that Zion’s light was soon to come, but Judah were to reflect that light as if it had already come; in the same way as God’s light was to rise, so Judah were to arise as if they were that light. The message is that they were to believe that the Messianic light of the world was to arise soon, and were to act as if that time had already come; they were called to live the Kingdom now life, to showcase God’s Kingdom to the world. In this sense, Zion’s sons are described as coming from all parts of their dispersion and being about to come to Zion; and yet they are described as having already "come" (<a href='B:290 60:4'>Isa 60:4</a>). The mixing of the tenses, present and future, is to suggest that they were to believe that this would happen and to act now as if it was already happening. "You shall see and be lightened" (<a href='B:290 60:5'>Isa 60:5</a> RV)- and yet they were to act as if their light had in fact already come (<a href='B:290 60:1'>Isa 60:1</a>). Yet Judah sadly didn’t believe that the restoration prophecies would come to pass, and so they didn’t act as if they would come true. Instead of being a light to the world, they accepted the Gentile darkness instead of God’s light. Mazdak, the Persian god of light, effectively became their god, instead of Yahweh.</p><p>The image is of Jerusalem as the sun ["your sunrising"], the centre of a solar system in which the other nations flowed to her, bringing tribute. This is all a deconstruction of how Persia saw herself, as shown in the uncovered reliefs. The problem was that the ease of life in Babylon had led the Jewish exiles to prefer to remain there, rather than giving it all up for life in the ruins of a peripheral, marginalized Jerusalem. The Persians had made Mizpeh and not Jerusalem the administrative capital of Yehud [their name for Judah]. Jerusalem was marginalized. But the exiles were being shown by these prophecies that Babylon or Persepolis in fact was not the sun at the centre of a solar system of Babylonian or Persian empire. A new order was to be established, with the once peripheral, marginalized Jerusalem at the centre, and the nations with their tribute flowing to her. The Gospel of the Kingdom of God is likewise a total, radical reversal of the 'gospel' of this world. Archaeological evidence, especially from Persepolis, reveals that the Persian kings portrayed themselves as sun disks, with nations and kings streaming to them bearing tribute. This image is in turn deconstructed by the Biblical prophecies of the nations willingly and eagerly submitting to the Messianic king, and eagerly bringing tribute offered from the heart and not simply because they have been defeated. Nations and kings would instead freely choose to flow to Jerusalem (:3).</p>


text:
<p>Lift up your eyes all around, and see: they all gather themselves together, they come to you- "Lift up your eyes" suggests a dejected Zion, looking at the ground, unwilling to see her great future potential. The ’coming / assembling’ and ’drawing near / gathering’ of the exiles (s:w. <a href='B:290 43:5'>Isa 43:5</a>) would have been primarily fulfilled at the restoration (same words in <a href='B:160 1:9'>Neh 1:9</a>). But most of the exiles remained in the lands of their captivity, just as people resist the Gospel’s call today. They had to themselves bring and gather themselves (<a href='B:290 45:20'>Isa 45:20</a>; <a href='B:290 49:18'>Isa 49:18</a>; <a href='B:290 60:4'>Isa 60:4</a>), so that God would confirm this by bringing and gathering them (<a href='B:290 43:5'>Isa 43:5</a>; <a href='B:300 31:8'>Jer 31:8</a>; <a href='B:330 34:13'>Eze 34:13</a>; <a href='B:330 36:24'>Eze 36:24</a>; <a href='B:330 37:21'>Eze 37:21</a>; <a href='B:450 10:10'>Zec 10:10</a>). See on <a href='B:290 56:8'>Isa 56:8</a>. And so today with all who wish to be in God’s Kingdom; our desire to be there and first moves towards it will be confirmed many times over by God’s work through His Spirit.</p><p>Your sons shall come from far, and your daughters shall be carried in the arms- Literally "shall be nursed on the side", i.e. carried on the hip, the Eastern way of carrying young children. See on :3:&nbsp; The LXX suggests it would be as a result of the children born in exile returning along with the repentant Gentiles of the lands of their captivities: "lift up thine eyes round about, and behold thy children gathered: all thy sons have come from far, and thy daughters shall be borne on men’s shoulders". This is a commonly expressed prophetic vision. It didn’t however come about, and the essence of it has therefore been delayed and reapplied. The later feeding miracle occurred on the other side of Galilee to Magdala (<a href='B:470 15:39'>Mat 15:39</a>), suggesting the miracle occurred in Gentile territory, with people present from "far off" (<a href='B:480 8:3'>Mar 8:3</a>; hence the guests "glorified the God of Israel", <a href='B:470 15:31'>Mat 15:31</a>). Surely there were Gentiles present at that meal, and the LXX uses this phrase to speak of how Gentiles from "far off" would come and sit down at the Messianic banquet of the last days (<a href='B:290 60:4'>Isa 60:4</a>; <a href='B:300 46:27'>Jer 46:27</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Then you shall see and be radiant, and your heart shall thrill and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea shall be turned to you, the wealth of the nations shall come to you- "You shall see and be lightened" (<a href='B:290 60:5'>Isa 60:5</a> RV). See on :3:&nbsp; "Turned" is AV "converted", suggesting there would be repentance amongst the nations of their captivity; see on :4. The nations around Israel were to repent and bring their presents to them. This began to happen after the destruction of the Assyrians in Hezekiah’s time, but he entered into covenant with the Gentiles rather than bringing them to the God of Israel, the light of Zion. Perhaps Nehemiah was some kind of potential Messiah- for in <a href='B:160 5:17'>Neh 5:17</a> the surrounding Gentiles ‘came up’ to him and shared in the luxurious temple meals (a common Kingdom prophecy- the same Hebrew words are used for the Gentiles ‘coming up’ to the temple in <a href='B:290 60:5'>Isa 60:5</a>; <a href='B:290 60:11'>Isa 60:11</a>; Jer 1619; <a href='B:440 2:7'>Hag 2:7</a>; <a href='B:450 8:22'>Zec 8:22</a>). Those meals could have been the Messianic banquets. But finally at the last day, all these prophecies shall be fulfilled in the coming of the Lord Jesus, despite all the previous failures in fulfilment.</p><p>"Shall thrill" is literally to throb. It is the same idea as in Jer. 33:9, where the new covenant would result in the same feeling for the Gentiles as they entered the covenant: "they shall fear and tremble [throb] for all the good and for all the peace that I procure". This was the possibility for the Jewish exiles had they accepted the new covenant. It is possible for us too if we accept it, and is a picture of that glorious day when these things shall become a reality for us, when faith shall be turned to sight. The new covenant offered God's law to be written in human hearts; it is about the transformation of the heart through the gift of the Spirit. The idea of the heart being "enlarged" is found in Ps. 119:32, where David asks for an enlarged heart in the sense of a heart big enough to keep God's commands; to be obedient to His law: "I will run the way of your commandments, for You enlarge my heart". Another way of saying that the law would be written in his heart. Our hearts / minds are now so narrow, we are all naturally small minded, tending to focus simply on the immediate; the gift of the Spirit changes our hearts to a far wider spiritual horizon. Paul has this image in view in 2 Cor. 6:11-13, where the Corinthians were being small minded and not seeing the bigger spiritual picture: "O Corinthians, our heart is enlarged. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your own affections. In return (I speak as to children) widen your hearts also". Spiritual maturity, not being children, involves having a wider heart and removing the limitations and restrictions that the flesh places upon us.</p>


text:
<p>The multitude of camels shall cover you, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; all they from Sheba shall come; they shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praises of Yahweh- The gold and frankincense brought from the east recalls the gifts of the wise men to the infant Jesus. The conversion of the Gentiles [proclaiming the praise of Yahweh] which was possible at the restoration didn’t happen, and so it was reapplied and reinterpreted. They would proclaim Yahweh’s praise just as the Israelites themselves would (<a href='B:290 63:7'>Isa 63:7</a>) because the Gentiles would now identify themselves with the Israelites in forming the new multiethnic people of God which was to be formed on the basis of repentance and acceptance of the new covenant.  This giving of tribute was not forced; it was not the subjugated having to give up all they had as spoil. They willingly give this as a proclamation of their praise of Yahweh; the flocks they bring are in order to offer freewill sacrifices to Yahweh (:7) because they have from the heart accepted Him as their God. This is a deconstruction of the common idea of tribute payments after a change of king.</p>


text:
<p>All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together to you, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister to you- Kedar and Nebaioth were sons of Ishmael. The idea may be that finally the Jew - Arab conflict within the family of Abraham is resolved, and they too come to offer sacrifice to Israel’s God.</p><p>They shall come up with acceptance on My altar; and I will glorify the house of My glory- <a href='B:290 60:7'>Isa 60:7</a> prophesied that God would “glorify the house of my glory”, LXX "my house of prayer shall be glorified". But this was in fact a conditional prophecy, capable of fulfilment through the freewill efforts of the returning exiles. For they were empowered by Artaxerxes “to beautify [s:w. “glorify”] the house of the Lord” (<a href='B:150 7:27'>Ezr 7:27</a>). All their efforts to glorify / beautify the house, therefore, would have had God’s special and powerful blessing behind them. But was the house ultimately glorified? No- for Israel would not. They got sidetracked by beautifying their own homes, building “cieled houses” for themselves (<a href='B:440 1:4'>Hag 1:4</a>). The word for “cieled” occurs in <a href='B:110 6:9'>1Ki 6:9</a>; <a href='B:110 7:3'>1Ki 7:3</a>; <a href='B:110 7:7'>1Ki 7:7</a> to describe the roofing of the first temple- which they were to be rebuilding, rather than building their own houses. The glory would have entered the house of God’s glory as it did at the inauguration of the first temple (<a href='B:140 7:1-3'>2Ch 7:1-3</a>). Ezekiel prophesied that ultimately the glory would fill the temple as it had done then (<a href='B:330 43:4-5'>Eze 43:4-5</a>). But God’s prophesy of this in <a href='B:290 60:7'>Isa 60:7</a>, that He would glorify His house, meant that He was prepared to work through men to glorify it. The fulfilment of Ezekiel’s vision of the cloud of glory entering the temple again could have been fulfilled if the exiles had done what Artaxerxes empowered them to do- to glorify the house of glory. And so the fulfilment was delayed. The glory of the temple the exiles built was tragically less than the glory of the first temple; and so it would only be in the last day of Messiah’s second coming that the house shall truly be filled with glory (<a href='B:440 2:3'>Hag 2:3</a>; <a href='B:440 2:7'>Hag 2:7</a>; <a href='B:440 2:9'>Hag 2:9</a>). And the lesson ought to be clear for us, in the various projects and callings of our lives: it becomes crucial for us to discern God’s specific purposes for us, and insofar as we follow His leading, we will feel a blessing and power which is clearly Divine:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p>Who are these who fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their windows?- This may be descriptive of the sails of the ships bringing Zion's children home. The reference is to the exiles returning to Judah along with the repentant Gentiles. LXX "Who are these that fly as clouds, and as doves with young ones to me?"; GNB "What are these ships that skim along like clouds, Like doves returning home?". Perhaps in view is the dove returning to Noah’s window once the flood of Divine judgment receded.</p>


text:
<p>Surely the islands shall wait for Me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring your sons from far- No specific location may be in view, as "ships of Tarshish" was a phrase used like "an Indiaman" was once used to refer to a long distance trading vessel. Thus GNB "They are ships coming from distant lands, bringing God’s people home". The text can also read "the ships of Tarshish as at the first", referring to how they brought gold and silver in the days of Solomon and the earlier kingdom of God which was now to be restored. There is another such allusion to Solomon’s times in :13.</p><p>Their silver and their gold with them, for the name of Yahweh your God, and for the Holy One of Israel, because He has glorified you- The Gentiles will be converted because of how God had saved and glorified His sinful people; for these Gentiles had been host nations for the Jewish exiles and were well aware of their sins. It is God’s grace to sinners which is observed by others and causes them to turn to Him- and this is always the most powerful tool in the work of conversion, rather than advertising theological, abstract truths and expecting the general public to fall down in amazement before them. It is this grace to Israel which is at the core of Yahweh's Name. The nations will be deeply impressed by God's amazing grace to Israel and will come to their wonderful God. This verse isn't saying that they will come to as it were congratulate the Jews and the state of Israel.</p>


text:
<p>Foreigners shall build up your walls, and their kings shall minister to you- It could be that their refusal of Gentile help to build the temple, insisting that only Jews work in it (<a href='B:150 4:3'>Ezr 4:3</a> cp. <a href='B:160 2:20'>Neh 2:20</a>), was actually going too far; by being so exclusive, they were disallowing the fulfilment of the prophecies both in Zechariah 6 and in Isaiah, that Gentiles would help in the final rebuilding of Zion. As with some of us, their quite correct refusal to allow “the adversaries of Judah” (<a href='B:150 4:1'>Ezr 4:1</a>) to fellowship with us in the work can lead us to an exclusive approach to fellowship, that actually disallows the essentially outgoing and inclusive spirit of the God we serve. The Jews returned from Babylonian having swung to the opposite extreme from their earlier worldliness; they returned proud and refusing contact with the Gentile world, considering themselves saved by their own strength. And this is perhaps reflected in the way they refused on principle to allow any Gentiles to help them in the building work. <a href='B:290 60:10-11'>Isa 60:10-11</a> had foretold: “And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee [as in the decree of Cyrus]…Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night”; and them as Ezekiel 43 had also described, “I will glorify the house of my glory” (<a href='B:290 60:7'>Isa 60:7</a>).</p><p>The reality was that the walls were built from a motive not of glorifying Zion in fulfilment of prophecy, but for defence against the Gentiles:&nbsp; But the gates had to be shut to keep the Gentiles out (<a href='B:160 13:19'>Neh 13:19</a>), lest they yet further corrupted the Jews who were eager to trade with them on the Sabbath rather than convert them to the God of Israel. Instead of bringing their goods through the gates to lay before Yahweh, they brought in their goods to sell to His people in trade. But returned Judah didn’t act as a nation of priests, the food the Gentiles brought in to Zion was to be sold for profit to the Jews. They failed to be a missionary nation, and rather were mere trading / economic partners on an equal footing [cp. the church today?]. The prophecy that the gates would be always open will now only come true in the future Kingdom of God on earth (<a href='B:730 21:25-26'>Rev 21:25-26</a>).</p><p>For in My wrath I struck you, but in My grace have I had mercy on you- As explained on :9, the Gentiles will be converted because ["for in My wrath..."] of how God had saved and glorified His sinful, condemned people by grace; for these Gentiles had been host nations for the Jewish exiles and were well aware of their sins. It is God’s grace to sinners which is observed by others and causes them to turn to Him- and this is always the most powerful tool in the work of conversion, rather than advertising theological, abstract truths and expecting the general public to fall down in amazement before them.</p><p>God had struck them, they had not repented as planned- and so by grace He has mercy on them. That's the idea. Earlier in Isaiah there has been the lament that "the people turn not unto Him that strikes / smote them [s.w.], they do not seek Yahweh" (Is. 9:13). The implication is that they have not turned to Yahweh and experience His grace. The intention of the striking / smiting was that the people repented: "Come let us return unto Yahweh... for He has smitten, and He will bind up" (Hos. 6:1). But the people didn't return / repent. "I have smitten you... yet you have not returned / repented unto Me" (Am. 4:9). This is specifically stated as true of the exiles who returned to Judah: "I smote / struck you with blasting and mildew... yet you turned / repented not to me" (Hag. 2:17). What was God to do? It's not simply that the Divine smiting of His people ceased if they repented. That hadn't worked: "In vain have I smitten your children [s.w.], but they received no correction" (Jer. 2:30); "You have stricken them, but they have not grieved" (Jer. 5:3). Because of this, the prophecies came true that said Yahweh would smite His people without pity (Ez. 7:9; 9:5,7). When Ezekiel saw this in vision, he begged God to somehow cease from this, lest God's people cease to exist (Ez. 9:8). That prayer was answered, in that Yahweh still sought a way to end the smiting and to save them. We may therefore reflect how this word for "struck" is used of the suffering servant, who "gave my back to the smiters" (s.w., Is. 50:6), "they shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek" (Mic. 5:1), so that He was considered "smitten / struck by God" (Is. 53:4). His suffering servant, the Lord Jesus on the cross, took that striking / smiting for them. So that by simple identification with Him, they might be saved from that Divine punishment. For He had taken it. This all explains God says here in :9 that God has struck them, but by grace will have mercy upon them. The grace was in the fact that they had not repented at the 'striking' as intended; but He did not strike them His people to total destruction as He had planned. By grace He saved them, through the work of His Son. </p>


text:
<p>Your gates also shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring to you the wealth of the nations, and their kings led captive- AV "Therefore your gates...". The “therefore” connects with the preceding verse, as if the gates would always be open in order to constantly welcome repentant Gentiles:&nbsp;&nbsp;When the city and temple was rebuilt, Gentiles would come and feed Israel’s flocks and name them all “the priests of the Lord” and bring them food to eat in tribute (<a href='B:290 61:4-6'>Isa 61:4-6</a>). And yet Nehemiah had to close the gates of Jerusalem to stop Sabbath trading, thereby precluding the fulfilment of this prophecy at the time. The prophecy will therefore come to final fulfilment in the new Jerusalem to be established at the Lord’s return (<a href='B:730 21:25'>Rev 21:25</a>). Although clearly the fulfilment may not be strictly literal, but will be a reinterpretation and reapplication of these words which initially could have had a literal fulfilment at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>For that nation and kingdom that will not serve you shall perish; yes, those nations shall be utterlywasted- Connecting with :11 ["for..."], the nations of the land would either perish, or enter into the open gates of Zion in covenant relationship with Yahweh. Thus a situation would come about whereby the earth was only populated by those in covenant relationship with God. This again is a reversal of how things were under the "light" of the Babylonian and Persian sun god Mazda. For under that empire, the very same words are used of how "that nation and kingdom that will not serve you [Babylon] shall perish" (Jer. 27:8,10). Now Zion was to replace Babylon. </p>


text:
<p>The glory of Lebanon shall come to you, the fir tree, the pine, and the box tree together, to beautify the place of My sanctuary; and I will make the place of My feet glorious- But Haggai lamented that instead, Judah dwelt in “cieled houses”, they used the exotic trees of the land for their own homes, whilst the house of Yahweh lay desolate. Thereby the prophecy of <a href='B:330 43:7'>Eze 43:7</a> was precluded from fulfilment: "the place of His throne, the place of the soles of His feet, where He will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever". The intention was that the ark would no longer be His footstool (<a href='B:300 3:16'>Jer 3:16</a>; <a href='B:230 99:5'>Psa 99:5</a>; <a href='B:230 132:7'>Psa 132:7</a>; <a href='B:130 28:2'>1Ch 28:2</a>), but He Himself would be dwelling in the temple. The idea was that as cedars had been sent from Lebanon for the building of the first temple, so they would again; the impression is of a restored Kingdom of God in Israel as it previously was, but to an even greater extent. See on :9. The place of Yahweh's feet is His footstool, and that is the place of worship (Ps. 99:5; 132:7; 1 Chron. 28:2). In that worship will be God's glory.</p>


text:
<p>The sons of those who afflicted you shall come bending to you; and all those who despised you shall bow themselves down at the soles of your feet; and they shall call you The city of Yahweh, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel- This prophecy started to come true after Haman’s demise: “the sons of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet”. But Judah didn’t do their part in fulfilling the rest of the prophecy, which speaks of a rebuilt Zion. The promise that Judah’s persecutors would bow before them was only partially fulfilled in Haman’s destruction; the main fulfilment now awaits the Kingdom, although in a reinterpreted form (<a href='B:730 3:9'>Rev 3:9</a>). The renaming of the city is like that of <a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a> "Yahweh is there", because the idea was that He would literally come and dwell in Zion; the kingdom of heaven was to be transferred to earth. This wonderful possibility didn’t come about at the restoration because the returned exiles didn’t rebuild the temple and operate it according to the commandments of Ezekiel 40-48.</p>


text:
<p>Whereas you have been forsaken and hated, so that no man passed through you, I will make you an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations- The hatred was by God as well as man: “I hated them” (<a href='B:350 9:15'>Hos 9:15</a>). This was the wrath of love unrequited and spurned. God is emotional and speaks in anger, and truly had these feelings; but the pole of His love is greater than that of His judgment. We note how God as it were takes the blame for Israel being "forsaken"; they had forsaken Him (s:w. <a href='B:290 1:28'>Isa 1:28</a>), but He expresses it in terms of Him having forsaken them.</p>


text:
<p>You shall also drink the milk of the nations, and shall nurse from royal breasts- At first blush, this seems a strange change of image; Zion likened to a baby being nursed by foreigners. The implication is that she has been reborn, which may be connected with the idea elsewhere that she is given  new names (Is. 61:6; 62:4,11,12). This continues the figure of <a href='B:290 49:21'>Isa 49:21</a>: "Then you will say in your heart, ‘Who has conceived these for me, since I have been bereaved of my children, and am solitary, an exile, and wandering back and forth? Who has brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; these, where were they?’". Children born through another were still reckoned as the wife’s children (<a href='B:10 16:1'>Gen 16:1</a>; <a href='B:10 30:1'>Gen 30:1</a>). The children of Zion were therefore suckled by the Gentiles (<a href='B:290 60:16'>Isa 60:16</a>).</p><p>And you shall know that I, Yahweh, am your Saviour and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob-&nbsp;As Hosea ‘redeemed’ Gomer in His attempt to force through His fantasy for her (<a href='B:350 3:1'>Hos 3:1</a>), so Yahweh is repeatedly described in Isaiah as Israel’s go’el, redeemer (<a href='B:290 41:14'>Isa 41:14</a>; <a href='B:290 43:14'>Isa 43:14</a>; <a href='B:290 44:6'>Isa 44:6</a>; <a href='B:290 44:24'>Isa 44:24</a>; <a href='B:290 47:4'>Isa 47:4</a>; <a href='B:290 48:17'>Isa 48:17</a>; <a href='B:290 49:7'>Isa 49:7</a>; <a href='B:290 49:26'>Isa 49:26</a>; <a href='B:290 54:5'>Isa 54:5</a>; <a href='B:290 54:8'>Isa 54:8</a>). The redeemer could redeem a close relative from slavery or repurchase property lost during hard times (<a href='B:30 25:25-26'>Lev 25:25-26</a>; <a href='B:30 25:47-55'>Lev 25:47-55</a>; <a href='B:80 2:20'>Rth 2:20</a>; <a href='B:80 3:9'>Rth 3:9</a>; <a href='B:80 3:12'>Rth 3:12</a>). The redeemer was also the avenger of blood (<a href='B:40 35:9-28'>Num 35:9-28</a>; <a href='B:60 20:3'>Jos 20:3</a>; <a href='B:60 20:9'>Jos 20:9</a>). All these ideas were relevant to Yahweh’s relationship to Judah in captivity. But the promised freedom didn’t come- even under Nehemiah, Judah was still a province within the Persian empire. And those who returned complained: “We are slaves this day in the land you gave…” (<a href='B:160 9:36'>Neh 9:36</a>). The wonderful prophecies of freedom and redemption from slavery weren’t realized in practice, because of the selfishness of the more wealthy Jews. And how often is it that the freedom potentially enabled for those redeemed in Christ is in practice denied them by their autocratic and abusive brethren.</p>


text:
<p>For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron- Possibly the idea is that for the brass taken away from the temple, the Jews would be repaid as if it had been gold. The generous provisions of Cyrus may have been an initial fulfilment of this. The language of Israel’s return from captivity as found in Isaiah and Ezekiel all has evident reference to the second coming and the final establishment of the Kingdom. It isn’t just that Israel’s return under Ezra and Zerubbabel was a type of that final homecoming. It could have been the Kingdom- had they obeyed the prophecies. It was all about a potential Kingdom of God. But they were too caught up with their own self-interest, with building their own houses rather than God’s; and so it was all deferred. Using the prophetic perfect, God had prophesied that at the time of the restoration, He would come and dwell in rebuilt Zion (<a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a>)- just as Ezekiel’s prophecy had concluded: “The name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there” (<a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a>). Clearly, Ezekiel’s prophecies could have been fulfilled at the restoration; God was willing that they should be. But human apathy and self-interest stopped it from happening as it could have done. When the foundation stone of the temple was laid, there should have been excited acclamation: “Grace, grace unto it” (<a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). But instead the old men wept when the foundation was laid, knowing that the temple was nothing compared to what it ought to be (<a href='B:150 3:12'>Ezr 3:12</a>). The glory of the restored temple was prophesied as being far greater than that of the former (<a href='B:440 2:9'>Hag 2:9</a>); <a href='B:290 60:17'>Isa 60:17</a> alluded to this in prophesying that “For brass [in Solomon’s temple] I will bring gold, and for iron [that was in Solomon’s fixtures] I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron”. But it simply didn’t happen, because God’s people were satisfied with a small, inglorious temple so that they could get on with building their own “cieled houses” (the same word is used in describing how the temple of Solomon was “covered”, or cieled, with cedar). And the old men wept at the fact that the glory of the new house was less than that of the earlier one.</p><p>I will also make your officers peace, and righteousness your ruler- "Officers" is the word commonly used for "visitation", in the sense of the enemies of Judah judging and dominating her in the day of her visitation. "Ruler" or AV "exactor" is the word for "taskmaster" and has been used by Isaiah of Judah’s dominators and abusers (<a href='B:290 9:4'>Isa 9:4</a>; <a href='B:290 14:2'>Isa 14:2</a>; <a href='B:290 14:4'>Isa 14:4</a>); the reference is to the repentance of Israel’s historical abusers and their being given peace with God and imputed righteousness, so that they might also enter covenant with Yahweh along with a repentant Judah. All this was due to the way the Lord Jesus was "oppressed" as Israel’s representative (<a href='B:290 53:7'>Isa 53:7</a>) and thus became the basis for righteousness to be imputed to all who had been oppressed and had oppressed others. Or the idea may be that instead of a taskmaster or "exactor" forcing tribute and taxation from subject peoples, the Gentiles instead would be motivated by "righteousness" to give all they have freely for God. The experience of peace with God, which usually refers to the peace of sin forgiven, would be instead of "officers", of men enforcing submission and tribute. </p>


text:
<p>Violence shall no more be heard in your land, desolation nor destruction within your borders; but you shall call your walls Salvation, and your gates Praise- "Salvation" is literally "Jesus". But Nehemiah records how the walls and gates were given very mundane names, connected to what merchandise was traded there [e.g. fish]. And so they chose not to make ’Jesus’ their wall- and so His coming was deferred or re-interpreted. Yet Nehemiah encouraged the singing of praise on the walls of Zion (<a href='B:160 9:5'>Neh 9:5</a>; <a href='B:160 12:46'>Neh 12:46</a>), surely in a conscious effort to fulfill the words of <a href='B:290 60:18'>Isa 60:18</a> - that Zion’s gates in Messiah’s Kingdom would be praise. The "violence" in view was not only that of foreign invaders, but the violence done by the Jews to each other (s:w. <a href='B:290 59:6'>Isa 59:6</a>; <a href='B:300 6:7'>Jer 6:7</a>). We note that the promise of peace is limited to "within your borders". The initial intention was that the Kingdom would be reestablished within the eretz promised to Abraham:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p>The sun shall be no more your light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light to you: but Yahweh will be to you an everlasting light, and your God your glory- It seems that Yahweh Himself would have dwelt in Zion, the "brightness" of the cherubim would have returned there (s:w. <a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a>; <a href='B:330 1:13'>Eze 1:13</a>) resulting in a visible light which would have eclipsed the need for light from the sun and moon (<a href='B:290 4:5-6'>Isa 4:5-6</a>, "shining" is s:w. "brightness"). Such great potentials were wasted. But these things will come true in the last days and are alluded to in <a href='B:730 21:4'>Rev 21:4</a> as having literal truth when the Lord Jesus returns. This would be the fulfilment of the promise to David, that his glorified kingdom would be as the "brightness" after the rain of judgment (<a href='B:100 23:4'>2Sa 23:4</a> s:w:). But until then these things are reapplied in a spiritual sense to the way the Lord Jesus, who is the light of God’s glory, is to be the light of our world in which we live, move and understand life. He who has no light can find "brightness" in Him (s:w. <a href='B:290 50:10'>Isa 50:10</a>). This was hinted at even in <a href='B:240 4:18'>Pro 4:18</a>, where the path of the just is as the "brightness" (s:w:) shining more and more unto the perfect day:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p>Your sun shall no more go down, neither shall your moon withdraw itself; for Yahweh will be your everlasting light, and the days of your mourning shall be ended- "The sun" and "the moon" of :19 were to be replaced in importance by "your sun... your moon". Their relationship with God would never again go down or be withdrawn. Constancy in relationship with God is one great joy of our eternal state. This will be what eternity is all about; the sun and moon may still exist, but such physical things will have no significance compared to the wonder of constant relationship with God. We need to remember this when constructing pictures of the future "Kingdom of God" in purely literal, physical terms. See on :19. Sun and moon were not to be destroyed, but to be replaced in function by the light of Yahweh. Hence LXX "nor shall the moon be eclipsed". The sun and moon, as in Joseph’s dreams, may refer to the leadership of Israel. They would no longer be eclipsed by captivity and exile, although they would be replaced in function. "Withdraw" is the word for "gather", used of the gathering of Judah into captivity (<a href='B:290 16:10'>Isa 16:10</a>; <a href='B:290 17:5'>Isa 17:5</a>; <a href='B:290 24:22'>Isa 24:22</a>; <a href='B:290 33:4'>Isa 33:4</a>). These words are quoted as being true of God’s future Kingdom on earth (<a href='B:730 21:4'>Rev 21:4</a>); they were reapplied to a later fulfilment rather than coming true at the restoration. The days of mourning refer to the days of exile, as demonstrated by the mourning of the book of Lamentations and <a href='B:230 137:1'>Psa 137:1</a>. But the exiles preferred to stay in exile; and thus precluded the possibility of these words having any primary fulfilment. "Days of mourning" is a phrase used several times for funeral mourning. There would be final comfort over the loss brought about by death- ultimately, through the resurrection of the dead. "The days of mourning" refer to the ritual of mourning for a set number of days. God is saying that the mourning period has now ended. And yet they refused that good news, and continued to mope and deny themselves the joy of relationship with God.</p>


text:
<p>Your people also shall be all righteous; they shall inherit the land forever, the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, that I may be glorified- "Your people" means the people of Zion. Zion is now interpreted as God's people, seeing that God's offer to re-create literal Zion as His dwelling place had been spurned by the Jewish exiles and those few who had returned to the land. Literal Zion was the place God had chosen to dwell in (2 Sam. 7:10,11; Ps 132:13; 68:16; 87:2,3). But now His "chosen" place for dwelling was the hearts of His people. Zion was His people. Is. 60:21; 62:11,12 is clear: "Your [Zion's] people shall be all righteous; they shall inherit the land forever... Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your salvation comes...'. They shall call them The holy people, The redeemed of Yahweh: and you shall be called Sought out, A city not [any longer] forsaken". Is. 60:14 LXX likewise: "And the sons of them that afflicted thee, and of them that provoked thee, shall come to thee in fear; and thou shalt be called Sion, the city of the Holy One of Israel". The parallel between Zion and His people had always been there: "He chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion which He loved" (Ps. 78:68).
"All righteous" again shows that the salvation of God's people is through being declared totally spotless, through their association with "Yahweh our righteousness". The earlier "servant" of Isaiah's prophecies is now all those in Him. In our day, this requires baptism "into" Him and a life lived in Him, moved by the same Spirit which is in Him, as His body.
Their salvation would be on account of their identity with the Messianic "branch", the Lord Jesus; they would be "in Christ" and thereby saved. Inheritance of the land forever is the language of the Abrahamic covenant; this would come true because of righteousness being imputed to them. And the end result of that system of salvation, as Paul brings out in Romans, would be glory to God.</p><p>LXX suggests that what we plant in this life will be eternally preserved: "they shall inherit the land for ever, preserving that which they have planted". There is some continuity between life and personality now, and how we shall eternally be. The seeds we sow now, if sown to the Spirit, will grow into eternal things.</p>


text:
<p>The little one shall become a thousand, and the small one a strong nation; I, Yahweh, will hasten it in its time- The spirit of this is fulfilled in the Lord's teaching that from a tiny beginning, like a grain of mustard seed, the Kingdom would grow. Also clearly in view is the promise to Abraham, the foundation of the new covenant now being offered to the exiles: "And I shall make you a great nation" (Gen. 12:2).
Hastening in its time could mean that when the time comes, the establishment of the Kingdom will be sudden ['hastened']; a nation born in a day, as Isaiah says elsewhere: "Who has seen such things? Shall a land be born in one day? Shall a nation be brought forth at once? For as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children" (Is. 66:8). But the idea of hastening of itself shows that God's plans are open to change and speeding up or slowing down. He doesn't have a hard and fast chronological timetable. Despite LXX "I the Lord will gather them in due time", this connects back to <a href='B:290 5:19'>Isa 5:19</a>, where we read that the Jews mocked Isaiah and his God, saying "Let Him make speed, let Him hasten His work, that we may see it". There was clearly opposition to Isaiah’s prophecies. The idea of judgment coming would have been mocked in these kinds of words. But we wonder whether this is really a verbatim quotation from these people; or whether God read their thoughts as effectively saying this, and as being the real implication of their positions. For there is no evidence that Judah abandoned Yahweh; rather did they claim obedience and loyalty to Him, although they claimed the same about their idols whom they worshipped in His Name. But God was not deaf to their words, or the implications of their thoughts and actions. He in fact heard their mocking ’prayer’, because He here says that He will "hasten His work" (s:w:).</p>


