Isaiah 1:3–11

Footnotes

1. 8 Heb “and the donkey the feeding trough of its owner.” The verb in the first line does double duty in the parallelism.
2. 9 Although both verbs have no object, the parallelism suggests that Israel fails to recognize the Lord as the one who provides for their needs. In both clauses, the placement of “Israel” and “my people” at the head of the clause focuses the reader’s attention on the rebellious nation (C. van der Merwe, J. Naudé, J. Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, 346–47).
3. 10 Having summoned the witnesses and announced the Lord’s accusation against Israel, Isaiah mourns the nation’s impending doom. The third person references to the Lord in the second half of the verse suggest that the quotation from the Lord (cf. vv. 2–3) has concluded.
4. 11 Heb “Woe [to the] sinful nation.” The Hebrew term הוֹי, (hoy, “woe, ah”) was used in funeral laments (see 1 Kgs 13:30; Jer 22:18; 34:5) and carries the connotation of death. In highly dramatic fashion the prophet acts out Israel’s funeral in advance, emphasizing that their demise is inevitable if they do not repent soon.
5. 12 Or “sons” (). The prophet contrasts four terms of privilege—nation, people, offspring, children—with four terms that depict Israel’s sinful condition in Isaiah’s day—sinful, evil, wrong, wicked (see J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah, 43).
6. 13 Holy One of Israel is one of Isaiah’s favorite divine titles for God. It pictures the Lord as the sovereign king who rules over his covenant people and exercises moral authority over them.
7. 14 Heb “they are estranged backward.” The omits this statement, which presents syntactical problems and seems to be outside the synonymous parallelistic structure of the verse.
8. 15 In vv. 5–9 Isaiah addresses the battered nation (5–8) and speaks as their representative (9).
9. 16 Heb “Why are you still beaten? [Why] do you continue rebellion?” The rhetorical questions express the prophet’s disbelief over Israel’s apparent masochism and obsession with sin. The interrogative construction in the first line does double duty in the parallelism. H. Wildberger (Isaiah, 1:) offers another alternative by translating the two statements with one question: “Why do you still wish to be struck that you persist in revolt?”
10. 17 Heb “all the head is ill”; “the whole head is sick”; “Your head is badly bruised.”
11. 18 Heb “and all the heart is faint.” The “heart” here stands for bodily strength and energy, as suggested by the context and usage elsewhere (see Jer 8:18; Lam 1:22).
12. 19 Heb “there is not in it health”; “there is no sound spot.”
13. 20 Heb “pressed out.”
14. 21 Heb “softened” (so , ); “soothed.”
15. 22 This verse describes wounds like those one would receive in battle. These wounds are comprehensive and without remedy.
16. 23 Heb “As for your land, before you foreigners are devouring it.”
17. 24 Heb “and [there is] devastation like an overthrow by foreigners.” The comparative preposition ךְּ (ké, “like, as”) has here the rhetorical nuance, “in every way like.” The point is that the land has all the earmarks of a destructive foreign invasion because that is what has indeed happened. One could paraphrase, “it is desolate as it can only be when foreigners destroy.” On this use of the preposition in general, see §118.x. Many also prefer to emend “foreigners” here to “Sodom,” though there is no external attestation for such a reading in the or ancient versions. Such an emendation finds support from the following context (vv. 9–10) and usage of the preceding noun מַהְפֵּכָה (mahpekhah, “overthrow”). In its five other uses, this noun is associated with the destruction of Sodom. If one accepts the emendation, then one might translate, “the devastation resembles the destruction of Sodom.”
18. 25 Heb “daughter of Zion” (so , , ). The genitive is appositional, identifying precisely which daughter is in view. By picturing Zion as a daughter, the prophet emphasizes her helplessness and vulnerability before the enemy.
19. 26 Heb “like a city besieged.” Unlike the preceding two comparisons, which are purely metaphorical, this third one identifies the reality of Israel’s condition. In this case the comparative preposition, as in v. 7b, has the force, “in every way like,” indicating that all the earmarks of a siege are visible because that is indeed what is taking place. The verb form in is Qal passive participle of נָצַר (natsar, “guard”), but since this verb is not often used of a siege (see 666 I נָצַר), some prefer to repoint the form as a Niphal participle from II צוּר (tsur, “besiege”). However, the latter is not attested elsewhere in the Niphal (see 848 II צוּר).
20. 27 Traditionally, “the Lord of hosts.” The title pictures God as the sovereign king who has at his disposal a multitude of attendants, messengers, and warriors to do his bidding. In some contexts, like this one, the military dimension of his rulership is highlighted. In this case, the title pictures him as one who leads armies into battle against his enemies.
21. 28 The translation assumes that כִּמְעָט (kim’at, “quickly,” literally, “like a little”) goes with what follows, contrary to the accents, which take it with what precedes. In this case, one could translate the preceding line, “If the Lord who commands armies had not left us a few survivors.” If כִּמְעָט goes with the preceding line (following the accents), this expression highlights the idea that there would only be a few survivors (H. Wildberger, Isaiah, 1:; H. Zobel, 8:456). Israel would not be almost like Sodom but exactly like Sodom.
22. 29 Building on the simile of v. 9, the prophet sarcastically addresses the leaders and people of Jerusalem as if they were leaders and residents of ancient Sodom and Gomorrah. The sarcasm is appropriate, for if the judgment is comparable to Sodom’s, that must mean that the sin which prompted the judgment is comparable as well.
23. 30 Heb “to the instruction of our God.” In this context, which is highly accusatory and threatening, תּוֹרָה (torah, “law, instruction”) does not refer to mere teaching, but to corrective teaching and rebuke.
24. 31 Heb “Why to me the multitude of your sacrifices?” The sarcastic rhetorical question suggests that their many sacrifices are of no importance to the Lord. This phrase answers the possible objection that an Israelite could raise in response to God’s indictment: “But we are offering the sacrifices you commanded!” In this section the Lord refutes a potential objection that his sinful people might offer in their defense. He has charged them with rebellion (vv. 2–3), but they might respond that they have brought him many sacrifices. So he points out that he requires social justice first and foremost, not empty ritual.
25. 32 The verb שָׂבַע (sava’, “be satisfied, full”) is often used of eating and/or drinking one’s fill. See 959 שָׂבַע. Here sacrifices are viewed, in typical ancient Near Eastern fashion, as food for the deity. God here declares that he has eaten and drunk, as it were, his fill.
26. 33 In the chiastic structure of the verse, the verbs at the beginning and end highlight God’s displeasure, while the heaping up of references to animals, fat, and blood in the middle lines hints at why God wants no more of their sacrifices. They have, as it were, piled the food on his table and he needs no more.