Chapter 28
2021 - I note that in the ESV, all of 28, and practically all of 29 are in what I've been calling "prose format". These are not block paragraphs, but look more like verse. I do not know the source of this formatting. 27 ended with the restoration of Jacob, with the atonement of the guilt of Jacob. There are those verses about "people without discernment". Didn't know who they were yesterday, today I wonder if they are the few remaining Jews who are not converted during t/gt? But if so, wouldn't they be judged in the sheep and goat judgment? Anyway, 27 ended with Jacob restored, and, I believe, the return of the Jews to Israel in massive numbers. So, moving on to 28.
Back to Isaiah - the backbone of the chronology at this point in the Bible - from Hosea, which focused mainly on the coming judgement of Israel in the north. So since starting Isaiah in the chronological Bible, I've also read Amos, some of 2Ch, Micah, some of 2Kgs, a Psalm, and Hosea. Obadiah and Jonah came just before. All these books are contemporary with each other. All these prophets delivering the same message at the same time...and no one listening.
Judgement is coming on Ephraim. Several references to the crown of Ephraim. Also several to the drunkards of Ephraim. Alcohol abuse may have been pervasive in Ephraim. Imagine a whole country where alcohol is the rule of the day, all day, every day. A nation always drunk. This section starts with this verse:
1 Ah, the proud crown of the drunkards of Ephraim, and the fading flower of its glorious beauty, which is on the head of the rich valley of those overcome with wine! [Isa 28:1 ESV]
MSB says that the walls of Samaria were the "crown" on a hill overlooking a valley that led down to the Mediterranean Sea. (2021 - I found quite a few pictures of the ancient city of Samaria. It is too far from the Med to actually see the water, but that long valley is apparent.) It says that by this time in Isaiah the Northern Kingdom had fallen to Assyria. Perhaps Ephraim was next on the list - next in line of march for Assyria. Wasn't it Ephraim that was going to be "great"? Wasn't Ephraim going to be synonymous with "all Israel, north and south"? So at this point is the name being used inclusively of what was left of the north and all of the south? Or does it literally mean just the land occupied by the tribe of Ephraim? The city of Samaria was only about 10 miles north of the border of Ephraim.
2021 - So if the northern kingdom had already fallen and been carried off, then the city of Samaria would have been abandoned more or less, and be falling into disrepair. That makes this phrasing a bit sarcastic. The place is not really proud at all. One still must wonder though if alcoholism had become rampant in Samaria leading up to the conquest by Assyria.
2021 - This verse:
[Isa 28:2 ESV] Behold, the Lord has one who is mighty and strong; like a storm of hail, a destroying tempest, like a storm of mighty, overflowing waters, he casts down to the earth with his hand. This is about Assyria, about its ruler, that is as unstoppable as a flood coming your way. Isaiah is warning Jerusalem of what is coming...though Assyria doesn't in fact conquer Jerusalem. But they do conquer most of the surrounding territory, and then Jerusalem is given a reprieve, which they squander, and are ultimately overrun by Babylon.
2021, Vss 1-4 sure seem to me to refer to Samaria before its fall. Why does MSB think this is after? Vs 3 says it "will be" trodden underfoot. Looked it up in the interlinear, and the word translated "will be" is an imperfect verb. Here is what that means:
Generally designates an action which is continuous, incomplete, or open-ended. Rather than depicting an action as a single event, the imperfect depicts it as a continuing process. It is therefore typically translated as a present “He is running” or a future “He will be running,” although it can sometimes be translated as a continuous past “He was running.” The meaning of the imperfect therefore has more to do with how an action took place than with when it took place. The imperfect is most often treated as a present or future because it is easier to think of present or future events as incomplete and open-ended than it is to think of past actions that way
So, in this case, it can very well mean that the trampling began in the past, is going on now, and will continue into the future. That would have been understood in Hebrew, but lacks a true counterpart in English. In vs 4, which continues this thought, the word translated "he swallows it" is also an imperfect verb. So somehow, from some other source perhaps, MSB knows when Isaiah 28 was written, OR, assumes that it was written after the fall of Samaria BECAUSE OF these imperfect verbs. In English, we would never see this or understand it.
2024 - But look at vs 4: 4 ...will be like a first-ripe fig before the summer: when someone sees it, he swallows it as soon as it is in his hand. [Isa 28:4b ESV]. The sentence structure here is pretty complicated. Participles, sequential verbs, and imperfects. There are no "perfects" in this verse. We have to remember that "will be", while future to us in English, isn't even a word for word translation from Hebrew. But the analogy, if we can believe that at least, says that Samaria was summarily crushed by Assyria - or was going to be overrun in a heartbeat. These verbs don't tell us the "when" they tell us the "how". They went down like that first ripe fig of the summer - we get words to that effect - but this is also in the imperfect...so continuous, incomplete, or open-ended. So even though the conquest of Samaria will be...or was...a sudden thing, that conquest is open-ended. It is continuing, all day every day, and we do not know how long it will remain in this "suddenly conquered state". But we don't know from this verse whether it has already fallen, as MSB says, or it has not, as our English translations imply.
Then vs 5 starts with "In that day...", referring to the coming judgement. And the Lord of hosts will be a crown and a diadem to the remnant of the people. The Lord will also be a spirit of justice to judges, strength to those battling at the gate. But then it says "These also reel with wine and strong drink...". Not quite understanding what this is saying. In the outline of Isaiah in MSB, chapter 28 starts a new section, running through 35:10, warning against an alliance with Egypt. Chapter 28 is a warning to drunken politicians. Chapter 29 is a warning to religious formalists, and 30 is a warning to pro-Egyptians. Also says that "in that day" refers to the time when Christ will reign.
2021 - Again, the imperfect verbs, as described above, continue into verse 5. So the phrase "in that day" in this case, does not necessarily mean future. It can mean that this is something that happened in the past and still continues. If we look at it that way, then what Isaiah is doing is contrasting the crumbling walls of Samaria at the time of his writing with the glory it once was when at least some of its people still looked to Holy God for direction in judgment and prophesy, when their military was strong enough to discourage attackers.
But in vs 7, all the verbs are perfect tense, and here is what that means:
Generally designates a completed action or a situation that is viewed as a single event. Perfects are generally translated as simple pasts “He ran” or as past perfects “He has run”, but they may also be translated as presents or futures. The meaning of the perfect therefore has more to do with how an action took place than with when it took place. The perfect is most often treated as a past because it is easier to think of a past event as complete than it is to think of a present or future one as complete.
So both perfect and imperfect tenses are more about who than when. But perfect tells us that the action is complete, though we don't know if it was completed in the past or "completed in the future". In English, we would think of actions that are complete in the future as "a done deal". We could refer to the second coming of Christ in the perfect tense, because it is completed already in the plan of God, though still future for us. By contrast, the imperfect means the action is continuous (we might use this tense to say the "wind blows in Oklahoma" to indicate that it is continuous, ongoing, not complete).
So, with that in mind, vs 7 is saying that those who were drunkards drinking, intoxicated judges judging - are all done with doing those things. They are complete, but we don't know "what calendar day" they were done. I think the implication is that their drunken carousing and irresponsible actions as to justice are completed.
(2021 - Enclosing this interpretation from 2020 in parentheses, because it was entirely wrong and mistaken. Understanding the verb tenses makes things more clear. 2020 - So the transition from far future when Christ reigns to the drunken politicians making deals with Egypt of Isaiah's day is not a very smooth transition. Perhaps no transition is intended, but stark contrast between the coming justice and power of Christ with the weak, drunken, directionless leadership of the politicians of Isaiah's time. Yes...that seems to be a better way to look at this. I have complained before about how Isaiah seems to jump around so much in time with his prophesies. Maybe he doesn't. Maybe contrast is always his intent, and is a device he is using to show how far they are from the Millennial standard of justice and right. This really makes sense as a tool for studying this book....The next paragraph is from 2019.)
It seems there should be a break between vs 6 and 7, which moves from the prophecy of Christ coming reign of justice and strength back to the present of Isaiah's time. Thus, vs 7 refers again to the drunkards in Ephraim. The imagery is of ugliness and filth. Reference here is to priest and prophet being drunk also, not just politicians. Then this verse:
8 For all tables are full of filthy vomit, with no space left. [Isa 28:8 ESV]
The injustice must have been rampant with leaders like these. It can be so much worse than we have it right now. There is still some hope of justice, and the good news is that we are not beyond help - not to the point that these were - so prayer can still do much to preserve our country.
2024 - We get "in that day" again. I think it takes us back to the Millennial - which is where we left it last time. All these "in that day" phrases seem to take us along a more or less chronological prophecy that has now led us into the Millennial. Vss 5-6 set up a contrast between the Millennial reign and the current/previous state of affairs in Samaria. And what a contrast it is. Beautiful, glorious, justice, and strength as opposed to staggering, reeling, confused, tottering, and vomit. Imagine living under a government where the judges and the priests are characterized by their constant drunkenness.
vss 9,10, per MSB, are the drunkards response to Isaiah's admonitions. They are making fun of him and his prophecy. In the Hebrew, their words are a sort of monosyllabic chant. It can be found in the MSB footnote to these verses. They are making Isaiah's words sound like the babbling of a child.
Isaiah responds in kind beginning in vs 11, telling them that their new taskmasters, the Assyrians, will give them instructions also, in a language they cannot understand. Isaiah uses the same "gibberish" as the drunkards used about him to tell them they won't understand God's words to them.
2021 - Through vs 10 at least, we are still looking at what has already happened or is currently in progress. The inhabitants of Samaria made fun of the warning they received, and have been conquered. This chapter is really more of an "I told you so" chapter, at least to vs 10 than it is a prophecy of any kind! YES! This is the way to look at this chapter!
2021 - Verse 14 begins with "Therefore hear". It is an imperative, a command. So I believe in vs 14 we are done with the object lesson of the first 13 verses relating the fate of Samaria, and Isaiah is turning to a stern warning to Jerusalem that the same is coming their way if they do not make some changes. 2024 - In the NASB95, vs 14 makes it clear that Isaiah now addresses the rulers of Jerusalem - who are scoffing at the idea that they may share Samaria's fate.
The next long paragraph is written kind of as a speech - or sermon - from Isaiah. He says that the rulers/judges/priests have made themselves a new covenant with death and Sheol, and a hiding place in the lies they tell, (2023 - What a phrase this is! They are hiding from what they know is right by hiding in the lies they construct!) and expect to be protected by this. This refers to them making a covenant for protection with Egypt (per MSB), instead of relying on God, and then they lie to themselves about their security. They deceive themselves with the lies they tell themselves.
2024 - They are relying on their own efforts, their own deal-making, to protect them from the Assyrians, while Isaiah tells them it will not be enough, and they need to realize they are in "de-Nile".
As I read further (2020) I believe "Ephraim" is being used to refer to Jerusalem now, and not to any part of the Northern Kingdom. MSB notes repeatedly indicate that Samaria had already fallen by this time, and Isaiah's warnings are now to Jerusalem - under the name Ephraim.
But God has laid a stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation. Jesus is predicted as overcoming this refuge built of lies, and showing it for what it is. And when those who have trusted the covenant of Sheol realize that they have made a huge mistake, then they will be in terror. (It is no wonder I couldn't understand this the first time. Really need some MSB help. I wonder how much I've already missed in this book by not recognizing that Isaiah writes in dialogue, rather than just in prose? Maybe I'll catch more of that next time...) The only real, true, final refuge for anyone is the cornerstone that is Jesus Christ. He was still to come, but God's plan was moving things in that direction.
2021 - Not sure I understood it last time either! Reading the MSB notes again, I think the point of vs 16 is that God is the one with the plan, that God is the only one who can save, that Israel is the foundation of His plan, and that only in God is there any help for these people. In the long view, the cornerstone of God's plan is the Messiah, is Jesus Christ, who is coming as savior. Appealing to Egypt for defense against Assyrian (or Babylon) is a very distant second to appealing to the God who is bringing salvation through Christ to all the world. They aren't even really barking up the wrong tree, but their efforts are so misdirected that they are only barking at the air!
This verse:
18 Then your covenant with death will be annulled, and your agreement with Sheol will not stand; when the overwhelming scourge passes through, you will be beaten down by it. [Isa 28:18 ESV]
This covenant with death is about the treaty with Egypt in one sense, but is also about the Mosaic Law in another. Paul calls the Law the law of sin and death in his members. That covenant - the Mosaic - is going to be annulled when Christ appears. That old Law can never save - because it depends on bulls and goats. This leads only to Sheol. Sheol was both hell and a "waiting place". Hell for those before Christ's resurrection who died in sin, and a "waiting place" which was the "good place" of that day, where souls awaited the completion of Christ's work before going into the very presence of God, their sins covered by Jesus' blood. Jesus destroyed the religious infrastructure built on the Mosaic Law. He was the overwhelming scourge, and the double punishment, and the end of the Mosaic Law. He destroyed all that. And Isaiah foretells it here.
2021 - Vss 20-22 seem to be saying that the efforts of these people to protect themselves by alliance with Egypt are going to be too little too late, and that repeatedly. God is in charge, and if they continue in relying on men, their "bonds will be made strong", that is, their captivity will last still longer. Perhaps it might even mean that Jesus' arrival will be delayed?
2024 - This year, it seems like a non-sequitur to put this prophecy of the costly cornerstone in here right after warning Jerusalem that their alliance- their defense pact - with Egypt is not going to get it done. Perhaps we are still hearing the prophecy that began back in vs 5 with in that day. What if we make the laying of the cornerstone the key verse of this passage. That cornerstone is the gospel. It is redemption through Christ, it is vicarious substitution. It is the cornerstone of a new covenant in the church that God is bringing about that will include both Jew and Gentile. And what is this covenant with death? Well that would be the Law, as clearly stated here: 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. [Rom 8:2 ESV]. Perhaps what is being said here is that Jerusalem has turned - and will keep turning - to the letter of the Mosaic Law for their salvation. They tell themselves they can keep it perfectly. But this passage tells us that something new, better, costly - the Son of God must die for it - is coming to replace that old law that deceives them into believing it can redeem them. In the new Covenant, there won't be any Laws, only justice and righteousness and conscience, with the Spirit living within us to show us the true way. This passage seems to work a lot better that way. Looked at this way, this is not about Assyria at all...which makes good sense in that it was Babylon, not Assyria, that took out Jerusalem anyway. Look back at vs 2, where we see hail and overflowing waters against Samaria, and now that same image in vs 17. In 2 it is the covenant with Jereboam that is swept away, but in 17 it is the Law that goes. 18 confirms - "your covenant with death will be CANCELED". The Law is no more after that cornerstone! It goes on through 22, and the fear referenced here is the realization that the Law can never save, that even though they are Jews, when the Law is canceled they will be terrified as to how to go on. They will never be comfortable in the old way...OR they will be partially blinded and deaf to the New Covenant because they reject Christ. And they will wake up in the night terrified because they have nothing to comfort them.
Isaiah talks about farming, and how the farmer prepares the ground, sows, and harvests appropriately. He doesn't treat dill as he treats cumin, or as wheat. They are harvested differently, and this is how God ordains that things should be, and this is understood by those who farm. They see and understand and respond appropriately to the way that God has ordained things to work. Why then can the leaders of Jerusalem not see that God ordains the proper course for them also? To each what is appropriate. MSB confirms that this is a parable showing that God works according to what is best for the crop.
2024 - I think it says there is a different plan for Gentiles than there has been for Jews. God will change his "dispensation" with the laying of that costly cornerstone, and apply a different method of "farming" when the gospel goes out to the Gentiles. Wow. This one makes sense too!