Introduction
Chapters 55-66 comprise what scholars call “Third Isaiah.” These chapters likely were composed in the late Persian period by an anonymous group of prophets in the tradition of Isaiah ben Amoz.
Recall from our previous discussions that the “Persian Period” began when King Cyrus of Persia allowed Jews to return to Jerusalem from exile in Babylon and to rebuild the Temple. This was a period of hope, when it seems that God’s promise of restoration after the exile is being fulfilled. Even at this time, however, Third Isaiah contains warnings and polemics about infidelity to Yahweh, including accusations of participation in Canaanite or Babylonian child sacrifice (57:5), temple prostitution (e.g., 57:7-10), necromancy (65:2-5), and mystery feasts (e.g., 66:17).
These continued polemics mixed in with statements of hope and rejoicing could serve as a reminder that God’s favor should not be taken for granted. They also may reflect social differences in the Judean people that may have arisen during the generation of the exile. The book of Daniel, for example, pictures Daniel and his friends as faithful Jews in exile who participate in Babylonian public life but who keep kosher, obey the Torah, and refuse to worship the Babylonian King, even when their lives are at stake. Psalm 137 gives us the line made famous by Reggae artists The Melodians “By the rivers of Babylon, we sat and wept.”
These images lead us to imagine the Jewish exiles in Babylon as uniformly persecuted and unhappy. No doubt that image is true for many of the exiles, particularly for those who were adults or close to adulthood when they were forcibly removed from Jerusalem.
But as the book of Daniel also suggests, Jews in Babylon could achieve substantial political and economic success, particularly if they adopted Babylonian ways. It’s likely that some, if not many, of the exiles, and their children born in exile, wondered whether returning to Jerusalem and living in a state governed by Torah was a good deal. You can note here a resonance with the story of the Exodus, when the children of Israel, delivered from Egypt and on their way to the Promised Land, complained that life in Egypt was better. (See Exodus 16:3: “If only we had died by the Lord’s hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death.”) Some of the polemics in Third Isaiah may reflect an effort to portray more accommodationist parts of the Judean community in a bad light.
As with other parts of Isaiah, much of the material in Third Isaiah resonates through the Second Temple period and into the New Testament. This is true of elements that are interpreted Christologically and eschatologically in the New Testament.
Focus: Chapter 55
In its original context, Chapter 55 celebrates the return from exile and invites the people to enjoy its blessings. The invitation includes even “the wicked” whose actions led to the predicament of exile, but who can now turn back to God.
There are many resonances of parts of Chapter 55 in the New Testament and in the Christian tradition. For example:
Compare 55:1 with Revelation 22:17:
| Isaiah 55:1 | Revelation 22:17 |
| Ho, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and you that have no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price. | The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life. |
Isaiah 55:6 is often quoted as a call to respond to the Gospel: “Seek the LORD while he may be found, call upon him while he is near.”
Isaiah 55:8-9 is often mentioned in connection with suffering and perplexity. In the context of Christian mission, this text can suggest that God is at work in the world even when he seems absent.
Isaiah 55:11 is frequently used as a call to preaching and mission.
Some questions on this section:
- The selections above suggest a way in which Isaiah 55 can be read “missionally” today. What do you think of this kind of reading?
- How do you understand verses 8-9? Does this make God unknowable? Does it suggest God is arbitrary and capricious? Consider this quotation from the great Patristic theologian Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335-295 CE): “All the words found in holy scripture to indicate God’s glory describe some feature of God, each providing its particular emphasis, whereby we learn that he is powerful, or not susceptible to evil, that he is without cause, or comes to no finite end, that he has control of the universe, or anything else about him. His being itself, however, scripture leaves uninvestigated, as beyond the reach of mind and inexpressible in word, decreeing that it should be honoured in silence by prohibiting enquiry into the deepest things and by saying that one ought not to ‘utter a word in the presence of God.”
Focus: 56:6-8
We focus on this section because part of Isaiah 56:7 — “my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples” — is quoted by Jesus in the famous “cleansing of the Temple” incident as depicted in Matthew 21.
The traditional reading of the “cleansing of the Temple” incident is that it was, in fact, a “cleansing.” Jesus was upset at corruption involving the improper exchange of money in the Temple courtyard and tried to eradicate it.
In his groundbreaking book Jesus and Judaism, however, EP Sanders argued that this interpretation makes little sense. It was not against Torah and subsequent Rabbinic interpretations of the Torah to buy and sell animals for sacrifice — indeed, that trade was a necessary part of the Temple system. Further, Jesus’ action appears to have been limited and mostly symbolic, since Jesus was not assaulted or arrested on the spot and the trade continued apace. Sanders argued that the Gospels depict Jesus acting performatively in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets to signify the coming destruction of the Temple. This was part of a broader project by Sanders to demonstrate the inherent Jewishness of Jesus.
As we have discussed, the Second Temple, rebuilt during the time of Second and Third Isaiah and later lavishly refurbished by Herod, was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE. There are other places in the Gospels where Jesus is depicted predicting the Temple’s destruction. (E.g., Matthew 24:1-2.)
Not all contemporary scholars agree with Sanders’ interpretation, although many agree that the act was meant to be symbolic. Some contemporary scholars observe that the money changing system for the purchase of sacrificial animals required transferring common Roman currency into special Temple currency, purchased at a mark-up or tax, which fell most heavily on the poor. Others further note that these funds, along with other taxes, were held in the Temple treasury. They suggest that Jesus was protesting the economic injustice fostered by the religious authorities rather than signaling the Temple’s destruction.
Some questions on this section:
A big theme of our study is the use of Isaiah in the New Testament. Another big theme of our study is the question of the relationship between God’s chosen people — the Jews — and the Church. The nature of the Temple in Isaiah and in the Gospels is crucial to how we think about these questions.
- How do you see the connection between this text in Isaiah and the “cleansing of the Temple” incident in the Gospels?
- How does this inform your understanding of Jesus and his mission and the Church and its mission?
Focus: 61:1-4
We focus on this section because in Luke 4:13-30, Jesus reads this text in the Synagogue, and states “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.” The initial response to Jesus is positive, but the Synagogue turns hostile when he suggests that the people are rejecting God’s prophet and that God will favor the Gentiles.
The reference to “the year of the Lord’s favor” invokes the “Jubilee,” which the Torah prescribed to be observed every fifty years. (See Lev. 25:8-17.) During the Jubilee year, debts were supposed to be canceled and people were supposed to return to their ancestral lands.
Remember that in the time of Jesus the Second Temple had not yet been destroyed by the Romans. The “Synagogues” therefore played a somewhat different role in Jewish religion and society than what developed in later periods and what we see today. A Synagogue was a local Jewish gathering where the Hebrew scriptures and Rabbinic commentary were read, discussed, and debated. It was not uncommon for a distinguished visitor to perform a reading and commentary./1/ The Apostle Paul also frequently read, commented, and argued in the local Synagogues along his travels.
Some questions on this section:
- Notice some of the “action” words in this text: bind up, proclaim liberty, release, proclaim favor, vengeance, comfort, gladness, praise, build up, raise up, repair. Which of these words do you need to hear today?
- How did Jesus “fulfill” this text? Think about this carefully in light of Jesus’ rejection by those who heard him in the Synagogue and in light of our earlier discussion of the “cleansing” of the Temple. Does Jesus “fulfill” this text today?
A Final Thought…
We’ve now read through the entire book of Isaiah. I’m sure you’ll agree that we’ve only scratched the surface of the complex riches this text offers to us. What is one significant thing you’ve learned from this study?
Notes
/1/That is also the case today, but after the destruction of the Temple the Synagogues took on a more formal role in the functions of holy days and festivals. Synagogues cannot, however, perform the sacrificial rites that can only happen at the Temple, and as a result there is no more Priestly class.