   |
|
|
1 Moreover, the word of the Lord said unto me: Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen, concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
Without question, this text became written text at some point. It shares that written heritage with all other received Isaianic texts, even those that do not begin with the declaration that they be written on scroll. The comparison of this written text versus all other written texts suggests that this really is a metaphor. The metaphor stands first for the publication of the message, and secondly, through the connection to the relative value of a scroll, to the value of the text. With the cost of scrolls, the very use of one emphasized the text thereon. New scrolls were used for important things, with the things of lesser import being written on scraps or re-used portions of a scroll. Thus the writing of this prophecy on a presumably new scroll places it on an expensive stationary, one which by its own intrinsic value underlines the value of the text written thereon. Where the KJV translates "with a man’s pen," the NIV has "ordinary pen," and Gileadi has "common script." A possibility for the "man’s hand" translation comes from George Lamsa: "Take a large scroll and write on it plainly" is symbolic of the importance of the message. "With a man’s pen" is an Eastern idiom which means with large letters. At times, the term "man" signifies strength. There were no women scribes in those days. The writing was to be plain and large, so that it could be easily read and understood. King’s decrees and edicts were written plainly and with large letters so that they might be easily read and understood." (Lamsa, p. 633.) The correlation with the "strong hand" in verse 11 seems to suggest a poetic parallel, and I would therefore suggest the "man’s hand" as the translation best highlighting the parallel, as well as underscoring the importance of the message. Historical information: To use such a scroll with a large and extravagant (and therefore relatively expensive) hand highlights the idea is that the message is of great import, both by the boldness of the declaration, and the implied value of the physical space it occupied. To a modern society where paper is sufficiently inexpensive as to be thrown way after a single use, it is perhaps difficult to understand the relative value of the medium in the presentation of the message. Perhaps a small idea of relative value of a medium is to suppose that a message will be placed on television. One the message is to be made widely known, now there comes an association of value. If the message appears only after midnight on independent stations, it is still a televised message. If, however, the message is presented during half time of the Super Bowl, the message is deemed of much greater import for our understanding of the value of the time in which it was presented. We know that there is a significant difference in the value a company places on its message when it comes from those two alternate possibilities. Scriptural analysis: At the beginning of this prophecy, we have a name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz. Hebrew names are not only identifiers of a person, but also of some message about that person. Names have meanings. In this case, Maher-shalal-hash-baz means "quick to the plunder, swift to the spoil." This clearly becomes an identifying name in verse 3, but in the introduction to the prophecy, there is no specific connection to person. The message of the scroll will be about the thing which wil be "quick to the plunder swift to the spoil," or the coming invasion by Assyria. "Since Pul’s invasion of Syria and Israel took place in 732 B.C., this prophecy was probably given two years earlier. " (Ludlow, pl. 147).
2 And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.
3 And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived and bare a son. Then said the Lord to me: Call his name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
Literary analysis: Isaiah is consummate poet, and it would be folly to suppose that any word a important as "prophetess" would be accidental. What reason is there, then, for the word "prophetess" rather than "wife?" Isaiah is a prophet. He is issuing a prophetic proclamation from God. The union with a prophetess reinforces the prophetic meaning of the child. From both father and mother, the son will carry the message, and become the embodiment of prophecy. That the prophetess was Isaiah's wife is of lesser import than the symbolic force that the prophesied child of two prophets would have.
4 For behold, the child shall not have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, before the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.
Literary analysis: Having the timing of the prophecy tied to the child calling for his mother and father is a nice reinforcement of the parentage of the child in the previous verse. When this particular child calls, he calls not only as an infant, but as the bearer of prophecy.
5 The Lord spake also unto me again, saying: 2 Ne. 18:6 6 Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son;
Syria and Israel that are conspiring against Judah will be devastated. Should not Judah rejoice over the destruction of her enemies? The prophecy will now turn to the subject of Judah. At the end of the verse, Isaiah states the obvious, that Judah will rejoice in the defeat of the kings of Syria and Israel. Even though he is not explicit in the phrase that it is the defeat in which the people rejoice, it is the clear referent, and easily understandable. Literary analysis: That leaves us with the opening phrase that is given as a reason for the coming woes of Judah; they "refuse... the waters of Shiloah that go softly." The image of the waters is critical, for it forms a paired set with the water symbolism in the next verse. "The gentle waters of Shiloah were the major water source for ancient Jerusalem. Located at the Gihon spring in the Kidron Valley east fo the fortified city, they ebb and flow continually throughout the year. During Isaiah’s life, the waters were brought into a fortified area of the city when King Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, built a tunnel through Mount Ophel, which still carries from eight to forty inches of running water. The cool, flowing spring supplied more than enough water for the city of Jerusalem." (Ludlow, p. 145). The waters of Shiloah become in this reference not simply a symbol for Jerusalem, but for the God who provides for and protects them. Isaiah uses the image of the refusal of the waters of Shiloah as a type of Judah's refusal of the protection of the Lord. Ahaz refused the sign of the Lord's protection in the prophecy in chapter 17. In this chapter, the people of Judah are said to follow the lead of their King in declining to trust in their Lord.
7 Now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria and all his glory; and he shall come up over all his channels, and go over all his banks.
Isaiah's poetic typology is a powerful statement in both literature and theology. Water is an essential element of life. The "gentle waters" of Shiloah provide water for the physical salvation of thirsty Jerusalem. The "strong and many" waters of the Assyrians are also life-givers or preservers. In that the Assyrians quell the belligerent intentions of Syria and Israel they also provide a measure of salvation. Isaiah's image is calculated to make a more important point, however. The contrast between the "gentle" and the "strong and many" is precisely one of beneficial versus destructive. Even though water is essential, in too great a quantity, it is also massively destructive. When Isaiah couches the coming of the Assyrians to water overflowing its banks, the image is one of the destruction of a flood. While water may be essential, the "gentle" water provides that critical element safely and reliably. The flood provides water, but carries with the water a tremendous devastation. So will the Assyrians, temporarily the heroes or delivering Jerusalem from Syria and Israel, will become a plague in and of themselves. They bring to Jerusalem not ultimate salvation, but imminent destruction.
8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.
The invocation "O Immanuel" is interesting in this verse. Remembering that Immanuel means "God with us," it should be see as a parallel marker to the "God is with us" that closes verse 10. Additionally, however, the reference as a name is also significant because it returns to the first prophecy of a child in chapter 17. Isaiah will refer without name to this son of the previously written prophecy in verse 18. The presence of the name in this text both invokes the entire previous prophecy as pertaining to the current text (and indeed, both prophecies refer to the same events and consequences) as well as create the literary parallelism with the meaning of the name and the declaration of God's presence in 10 (also Immanuel, though translated to meaning rather than name in most texts).
9 Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear all ye of far countries; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces. 2 Ne. 18:10 10 Take counsel together, and it shall come to naught; speak the word, and it shall not stand; for God is with us.
Literary analysis: These predictions are bracketed by the O Immanuel of verse 8 and the "God is with us" of verse 10. As is typical of Isaiah, he is dealing in contrasts, and here the contrast is between the God who is still with them, and their choice to believe in man rather than their God.
11 For the Lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying: Literary analysis: Isaiah uses a literary play on words here to tie this portion of the prophecy to the beginning. In verse one Isaiah is told to write with a "man's hand." In this verse, it is the Lord who is speaking "with a strong hand." The reference in both cases is to the power of the Lord's message. Scriptural analysis: Isaiah, in verses 9 and 10 has condemned the current thinking, the current path, of Judah. In verse 11 he notes that he is explicitly required of the Lord to walk a different path.
12 Say ye not, A confederacy, to all to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. 2 Ne. 18:13 13 Sanctify the Lord of Hosts himself, and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
14 And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
15 And many among them shall stumble and fall, and be broken, and be snared, and be taken.
16 Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. Redaction analysis: This verse ends the specific prophecy. At this point, the "scroll" is signed, and the prophecy is assured. At the beginning were the witnesses of respected men, the end is the seal of their God. Both Gileadi and the NIV link verse 17 with 16 as part of the prophetic poem (they scan verses 16 and 17 as poetry, and scan verse 18 as text). I suggest that it is more appropriate to make the shift between 16 and 17. In each of the two prophetic sections scanned in poetic lines (18:6-10; 18:12-17) the text introduction announces that the following will be the word of the Lord. Thus we have: 2 Ne. 18:5 5 The Lord spake also unto me again, saying: and 2 Ne. 18:11 11 For the Lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying: Both of these introductions clearly announce the locutor of the text as the Lord. Each of the sections also proceeds in the first person as commands from the Lord. The section 18: 12-16 continues with the Lord as the speaker, but the locutor shifts in verse 17 to Isaiah (who is also the locutor in 18). This shift in speaker, is, I suggest, the marker for the shift in the text, and this sealing of the prophetic text marks the end not only to the word of the Lord in this section, but to the conceptual "scroll" announced in the first verse. Can one be so bold as to suggest such a recutting, even though minor? The translation committee for the NIV notes: "This poetry is normally characterized by parallelism in balanced lines. Most of the poetry in the Bible is in the Old testament, and scholars differ regarding the scansion of Hebrew lines. The translators determined the stanza divisions for the most part by analysis of the subject matter. The stanzas therefore serve as poetic paragraphs." (Preface to the New International Version, p. xi). The recutting I am suggesting follows such thematic divisions. If there is an underlying scansion in the Hebrew, however, the analysis would be invalid.
17 And I will wait upon the Lord, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him. 2 Ne. 18:18 18 Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of Hosts, which dwelleth in Mount Zion.
Of course God is not hiding himself from Judah, but rather that Judah does not find him because they will not look. Isaiah, on the other hand, does look. Isaiah's evidence that he has looked to God is his own mission, and the signs from God represented in his children. This is a clear reference to the dual "child" prophecies, the first for Immanuel and the second for Maher-shalal-hash-baz.
19 And when they shall say unto you: Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep and mutter—should not a people seek unto their God for the living to hear from the dead? It almost appears that Isaiah is venting frustration in this verse. He notes that when Judah seeks to understand the future they turn to the soothsayers. Isaiah’s opinion of them is clear, and clearly derogatory. He calls them people who "peep and mutter." They make sounds, but have not sense. One can almost hear the despair in his voice when he asks if they should not rather seek their God. Why should they consult fortune tellers when their God is willing to speak to them? Of course the answer for Judah is the same as it is for us. We seek counsel at the hands of all kinds of modern soothsayers rather than our God, because the soothsayers are more likely to tell us what we want to hear. The Lord tells us what we need to know.
20 To the law and to the testimony; and if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
21 And they shall pass through it hardly bestead and hungry; and it shall come to pass that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king and their God, and look upward. 2 Ne. 18:22 22 And they shall look unto the earth and behold trouble, and darkness, dimness of anguish, and shall be driven to darkness.
21 They roam about embittered by hunger; and when they are hungry, they become enraged and, gazing upward, curse their king and their God. 22They will look to the land, but there shall be a depressing scene of anguish and gloom; and thus are they banished into outer darkness. For verse 22, the NIV has: 22 then they will look toward the earth and see only distress and darkness and fearful gloom, and they will be thrust into utter darkness. The idea of the darkness at the end of verse 22 is clear, but the special meaning of "outer darkness" for most Latter-Day Saints suggests that "utter darkness" would be the better translation, as these are not a people that would fit the LDS category of those thrust into "outer darkness." When the Assyrian invasion comes, it will be hard on the people of Judah. Isaiah speaks here of hunger, a theme of the previous prophecy. There will be such hunger and trouble that the people will curse their King (with some justification) and their God (with no justification). Verse 22 lets us know that when the people look upward, they do it not in hope but in anger. It is their cursings that are directed upward, not their repentance. While looking upward could be a sign of repentance, the following verse makes it clear that these are yet unrepentant, as they also look to the world, and see only darkness and despair. |
||
| by Brant Gardner. Copyright 1998 |
2
Ne. 18:1
|
|
 |