Chapter 40
Per MSB outline, this chapter begins the third major section of Isaiah. Section 1 was 1.1 to 35.10, and was judgement. Section 2 was 36.1-39.8, and was an historical interlude. So it was a simple narration of history, inserted among the prophetic portions. Section 3 here begins, and goes through the end of the book. It is titled "salvation". This section has three divisions, 40.1-48.22 are about deliverance from captivity. I believe also, though MSB didn't say it right in the outline, that we have now switched from the fate of Israel to the fate of Judah. I guess since Israel fell to Assyria, and the decimation of the Assyrian army was consummated at Jerusalem, the story breaks there, and switches to Judah. It is interesting that the Assyrians were used to end the nation of Israel, but were so evil themselves that it was their final act. God had made them great and powerful in the world so that He could use them for His own purpose, and once that was done, the Assyrians received justice for the kind of idolatrous, arrogant people that they were.
So, on to chapter 40.
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins. [Isa 40:2 ESV]
There was an earlier verse where God said Israel would receive double for her sins. I was thinking that in that verse, I decided that had not been accomplished. This verse surely implies that by this time, she had.
Hmm...We know that we are looking at the future at this point. The next verse is about John the Baptist. The double punishment is finally accomplished in that future time, with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. But is that a "forced fit" with this verse because that's what I think the double punishment is, or is this chapter truly about that future time? The MSB note is phrased this way: "Cruel slaughter and captivity at the hands of the Babylonians were sufficient payment for past sins:..." So MSB sees the punishment accomplished as referring to the Babylonian conquest, which had not yet happened at this time. This was written after the Assyrians went home. MSB sees the point of view of this "prophecy" as still future, looking back on the first of the double punishments, I see it more future than that - all the way past the first advent, to the return of the Jews to Jerusalem and their finally recognized Messiah.
[[[[[[[2021 - A little more depth on the idea of double punishment. I have always seen the double as meaning twice, rather than meaning doubly awful. Is there a clue in the words that might indicate that? Here are some verses, though not as many as I thought there were:
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins. [Isa 40:2 ESV]
כֶּפֶל kephel, keh'-fel; from H3717; a duplicate:—double. This is the word in Isa 40:2. I guess if you really want it to mean twice, you would go with duplicate, then there would have to be two. Interestingly, though the English word "double" is used many times in the OT, this word kephel is used only three times. Only three. Here are the other two:
6 and that he would tell you the secrets of wisdom! For he is manifold in understanding. Know then that God exacts of you less than your guilt deserves. [Job 11:6 ESV] The word "manifold" in this verse is the translation of kephel. Here is the same verse in KJV:
6 And that he would shew thee the secrets of wisdom, that [they are] double to that which is! Know therefore that God exacteth of thee [less] than thine iniquity [deserveth]. [Job 11:6 KJV]
I think in this verse, double is an intensifier. It says there is a lot more to the secrets of wisdom than you think. It does not say there are twice as many secrets as you think. Maybe...but here is NASB95:
6 And show you the secrets of wisdom! For sound wisdom has two sides. Know then that God forgets a part of your iniquity. [Job 11:6 NASB95] In this translation, they are holding fast to the idea of two. One and another, not at all an intensifier. A number of other translations, less well known, also use "double" in translating this verse.
13 Who can strip off his outer garment? Who would come near him with a bridle? [Job 41:13 ESV]. ESV ignores the word kephel altogether. They just don't put it in.
Here is KJV. I don't know what a double bridle would be, especially back in the days of Job. This passage is about Leviathan, a sea creature of some sort, and I think it was previously mentioned in Isaiah, also. We obviously don't know to what it really refers.
13 Who can discover the face of his garment? [or] who can come [to him] with his double bridle? [Job 41:13 KJV]
Here is NASB95, again holding strongly to the idea that kephel means two (2).
13 "Who can strip off his outer armor? Who can come within his double mail? [Job 41:13 NASB95]
Again, as in Job 11:6, a number of translations translate this as "two layers" of armor or scales. But it is strictly two of them. The number. None use the idea of "doubly strong". Not an intensifier, a number.
There is one more use of this word, in reference to this same creature, though I am not sure what the underlying text might be. It is in the Strong's definition of the word kephel, and they put It in Job 41:5. In my ESV, it doesn't read anything close to that. Here is the definition:
† כֶּ֫פֶלnoun [masculine] the double: — כ׳ construct: בְּכ׳רִסְנוֺJob 41:5within the double of his jaw (i.e. his double jaws) who can come ? elsewhere dual כִּפְלַיִם (compare Arabic
), לְתוּשִׁיָּהJob 11:6double in sound wisdom (beyond what Job imagines), of retribution Isaiah 40:2.
So here is the verse in ESV:
5 Will you play with him as with a bird, or will you put him on a leash for your girls? [Job 41:5 ESV] The BLB interlinear does not show that word kephel anywhere near this verse. But...there is also this reference to Job 41:5, but it is an image in BLB Interlinear of Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon. It says that in Job 41:5 it talks about Leviathan's jaw, and says it has a double row of teeth. I wonder if this is some other non-biblical text , or a text that most translations do not depend on. Whatever it is, it is a very old translation, and again it shows the idea of "double", rather than "more intense". There is also a second place on the BLB Interlinear page for kephel that references Job 41:5. I don't understand this at all, since the BLB interlinear does not show this word in that verse, nor is that verse about Leviathan's teeth in any way.
I thought there was more than one verse in the Bible that talked about Israel's double punishment. Today I only found this one. I don't like basing a whole interpretation on just one verse, especially as many things as I hang on this one verse. I need to find those others...if I didn't imagine them. I also believe I have a whole note just on "double punishment". I am copying all these notes from today onto the bottom of that previous note.
Here are the other two places. See note below.
18 Let those be put to shame who persecute me, but let me not be put to shame; let them be dismayed, but let me not be dismayed; bring upon them the day of disaster; destroy them with double destruction! [Jer 17:18 ESV]
10 When I please, I will discipline them, and nations shall be gathered against them when they are bound up for their double iniquity. [Hos 10:10 ESV]
Have to put this here before I copy: 18 But first I will doubly repay their iniquity and their sin, because they have polluted my land with the carcasses of their detestable idols, and have filled my inheritance with their abominations." [Jer 16:18 ESV]
BLB says the word for double here is "mish-neh". Here is what it means in Strong's dictionary:
mishneh, mish-neh'; from H8138; properly, a repetition, i.e. a duplicate (copy of a document), or a double (in amount); by implication, a second (in order, rank, age, quality or location):—college, copy, double, fatlings, next, second (order), twice as much.
Yeah. I am not wrong about what is meant by the double punishment of Jerusalem. The first was Babylon in 586 BC, the second was Rome, in 70 AD. And now, during the age of the Gentiles, God's great wrath against His people is spending on out, dissipating, until full justice is done. Then, and only then will her warfare be ended and her iniquity pardoned. I have this right.
So here is my bottom line after this little study of the word kephel, used here in Isaiah in reference to what Jerusalem "has received" from God. I think I am on pretty reasonably safe ground in understanding this as two times instead of twice as much.]]]]]]]
2021-2, So when are we talking about in vss 1, 2? The time when Jerusalem's warfare is ended. That actually only happens at the END of the Millennial. Because Jerusalem gets surrounded again, at the end of the 1000 years, and Christ destroys all those enemies with his breath. No one has to fight. I think though, that I would make the case that the last participatory war that Israel is a part of is the pre-Millennial battle. After that, the 1000 years of peace is ushered in, with Zion in her place at the head of all nations.
2024 - Here is a look at all the verbs in Isa 40:2:
Speak - Piel imperative. We haven't seen Piel before. Here is how BLB describes it: Expresses simple, “intensive”, “resultative”, “causative”, or other kinds of verbal action depending on the context and the specific verb. I focused in on "other kinds of VERBAL action". Strange that they'd have a whole category of stems that are only used for verbal things - like speaking, calling, answering, and such. So it is a command from God to...someone, presumably Isaiah, to proclaim what follows.
call out - Qal imperative. Why different? It has to do with verbal action also. Qal is the most common form of a verb. "It expresses simple or causal action of the root in the active voice. The root has many many possible interpretation. It says "call out to her". The root can be to address a specific person, so in this case Jerusalem is addressed. So...speak aloud to Jerusalem might be a good way to understand these first two.
warfare has ended - Qal perfect. Qal means simple action. We have looked at the perfect before. It denotes a completed action or a situation viewed as a single event. In this case, completed action. The end of war for Jerusalem. Even though it says completed, we need to see that as God's view of a future time when peace will reign in Jerusalem. When it will be done with war forever. That is not a "permanent" condition until the Millennial. But the Qal perfect does not tell us how long something will last, just that it will be accomplished, finished, at an end. Seems to me that harvest ends every year when the tractor is put back in the barn. But it doesn't mean finished forever. So...we cannot say this is ONLY about the Millennial. It could be about Sennacherib going home. It could be about the return from Babylon. It could be about 70 AD. It is not true today, not in the church age. Jerusalem is constantly at war today. And it could again be true after Armageddon. Someday, Jerusalem will know peace.
iniquity has been removed - Niphal perfect. We have not seen Niphal before, but I was expecting something new because of the "has been" in the translation. Has been instead of was. Has been is the "present perfect", and means something that started in the past continues into the present moment. That is what the English means. Niphal is the “passive” of Qal. It sometimes expresses a “reflexive” action. That doesn't tell me much...or I am just dense. We already know that perfect means completed or looked at as a single event. Passive...In English, it is passive voice, which I don't think is what we're talking about here. Also, in English, it has to do with word placement only, as in the noun receiving the action comes before the verb. Ah...here is a description of "passive" that makes sense: denoting or relating to a voice of verbs in which the subject undergoes the action of the verb (e.g., they were killed as opposed to he killed them ). Kind of "not a direct action of the verb". But again, these Hebrew verbs are not telling us when at all. The perfect "should" tell us that it has already happened. But since it is God's word, it must be considered immutably decided, it must be considered as unchangeably complete, even if it has not happened yet. THAT is where the problem lies in trying to nail down the time when a prophecy was, is now being, or will one day be fulfilled. I am not sure it can be done.
has received double - Qal perfect, just like "warfare has ended" above. Not going through this one again. Remember the tractor in the barn thing. However, I do not see how you could interpret this to mean Jerusalem had already, in the past, received double. Not with Babylon and Rome still in the future. I am going to stand on my analysis of what "double" means in Hebrew as the defining interpretive key to this passage. Babylon was the first, Rome in 76 AD the second. And his wrath continues still, until it is spent and they have paid the price for rebellion. Then will come trib, great trib, the highways from Assyria and Egypt, Israel as world power for a thousand years. That's how I interpret the double, and for me that defines the time of this prophecy.
So that is a long look at a lot of verbs that are all in one verse.
2024 - And then, after all that, we switch to a prophecy of John the Baptist. There is no transitional phrase to tell us that this is not directly connected to the first 2 verses. A voice "is calling". This is a Qal Participle Active. Another brand new kind of verb. A verbal adjective. It should read "A calling voice". We should hear the voice calling "Clear the way...". You cannot say it this way in English, so they change calling from an adjective in "A calling voice..." to, in English, a participle. Doesn't really help us to know this.
Perhaps we must understand this as coinciding with "she has received double". If we go back and look at those Qal perfects as defining a situation that should all be viewed as a single event, then the coming of the Messiah, John the Baptist, and 70 AD are ALL the same situation. They all go together. If we look at it that way, we don't really need a transitional identifier, because these are all about essentially the same "period" in Bible history - the first century let's say - and THAT nails the time down. The end of warfare, the double punishment complete, and John the Baptist. Remember too that as an OT prophet, Isaiah would not really "see" the Church Age. So the current situation with Jerusalem, indeed all the "warfare" after 70 AD, would have been invisible to Isaiah. So again, as we put the pieces together, they still seem to work - to fit - as a useful interpretation of Isaiah 40.
And vvs 4-5 tell us what happens after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, IF AND ONLY IF you cannot see the church age. We go straight from 70 AD to the second advent. Makes perfect sense if looked at in that way.
2025 - So looking at the 2024 paragraphs above, and honoring the prophecy that punishment will be double, we see John the Baptist, Jesus, and 70AD all coming together at the same place in the future. 70 AD is where the hammer will fall...but there is a chance for Jerusalem if they follow the one sent before, and then turn to their King. Do I think 70 AD might have been avoided? No...I think God does what he says and the double punishment had been coming a long time. Perhaps we should see the rejection of Christ as the final justification, as the event that made it absolutely clear, that God's judgment that second time was necessary action by a just God. So not only was double punishment just, but there is also this marking of time for Jerusalem that we call the church age. During this time, many Jews are sent to hell, while the Gentiles reap what could have been theirs. Isaiah did not see the Gentiles, the church, the interval of waiting. A very long interval. So his prophecy skips over it, and goes from 70AD to second advent directly.
vs 3 is the one quoted in the NT as the prophecy of John the Baptist. A voice crying in the wilderness. As the prophecy goes on, it implies that Israel will understand this voice, and react properly to it, which they did not do in John's day. So the implication is that "this Elijah", that is John, prepared the way for the first advent, but there will be another "Elijah" to prepare the way for the second advent. Would this be before tribulation starts or after? Before or after the rapture? And if this is a prophecy of the end, when the Jews finally recognize Christ and come home to Jerusalem, then the double punishment of vs 2 could very easily be referring to 70 AD and Babylon as over and done with.
2021 -2, Why do we go from the beginning of the Millennial in vs 2 all the way "backwards" to John the Baptist in vs 3? Perhaps because BEFORE we have the Millennial, we have the first advent, the church/Gentile Age, and all of that. Perhaps here in Isaiah is the clue that BEFORE Israel is restored, you have this other advent, this other whole period of history where, as God's wrath on Israel plays out, Gentiles are saved right and left - INSTEAD OF THEM. That is part of the wrath.
2021-2, I note also this time that we usually quote vs 3 wrongly, as I did above. Now, how we know where the commas go I am not certain, but here is where the ESV puts them:
3 A voice cries: "In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God. [Isa 40:3 ESV]
I suspect that it is grammar that tells us it is not the voice that is in the wilderness, but the way of the Lord that is there. After all, most of Jesus' ministry ends up being in desolate places to avoid the crowds and the Jewish authorities. King James puts it this way, however:
3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. [Isa 40:3 KJV] The voice is in the wilderness.
I am not a linguist, but I don't see the clues in the interlinear that tell me which it should be. So perhaps there is some interpretation in ESV's version of this, but since there are no commas in Hebrew, it might be that either interpretation works, and it certainly doesn't change the underlying message.
2022 - Compare these verses to Isaiah 40:4,5:
17 The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple, from the throne, saying, "It is done!" 18 And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake. 19 The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath. 20 And every island fled away, and no mountains were to be found. [Rev 16:17-20 ESV].
Revelation says there will be no mountains. Isaiah says valleys lifted, mountains low, uneven ground becomes level. This is about the seventh bowl judgment. Then in Rev 17, 18 you get all the Babylon stuff, followed by the marriage supper, followed by the second advent. The connection between Isa 40 and Rev 16-18 is quite clear. Vss 6-11 seem to be about the appearance of Christ on earth, and his earthly reign during the Millennial. I think it is also quite clear that there will be a second prophet crying out to prepare the way. Perhaps the real Elijah - that is the original Elijah. He's not dead you know.
As you read on through vs 5, you get the "highway to Jerusalem" language again, very recognizable at this point. This is about the return of Jesus as King. The point of view is Millennial looking back, not between Babylon and 70 AD.
2023 - We might also consider a connection here in the Isaiah 40/Rev 16-18 verses with the assignment of land to the 12 tribes in Ezekiel 48. Much is made of the fact that the dimensions of these parcels does not fit physically into modern day Israel's borders. But if you get rid of valleys, and mountains, and shake things up with the mightiest earthquake that there has ever been, as seen here, it may make a little more room!
2023 - I also note this year that if we count vss 3-5 as all one prophecy, which it seems to be, then nothing in vss 4-5 came true during the appearance of John the Baptist. So at some future point, these must be filled in.
2021-2, I am just reading on through from here. Been over two hours on this now.
10 Behold, the Lord GOD comes with might, and his arm rules for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him. 11 He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young. [Isa 40:10-11 ESV]
This is a big change from what has gone before. This is telling Israel to look forward to the day when God Himself will make His power known. He brings his reward with Him - the Millennial perhaps, or is this about final judgement? - and His recompense before Him. Does "before" mean before in time, such that it means rewards will come after trib and great trib, or is "before" geographical, in that God will see and observe, even oversee, the just recompense on all mankind? In 2020 I think the reward is the setting up of the Millennial kingdom under Christ, and the recompense is Trib and Great Trib. All this is still about the Millennial. There is no break at vs 10. Point of view is Millennial.
2024 - Or this is about the second advent, and the Pre-Millennial judgment of the living. Not sure why I would not have made that connection previously. Could also be a bit of an oblique reference to the Bema Seat judgment in heaven, and then Christ appearance with his army - in white robes and fresh from judgment, from receiving their rewards - for Armageddon prequel to the Millennial.
12-17 are about the greatness of God, who created everything, and who therefore understands the measure of everything. His understanding is perfect and complete so He need ask no one for advice or counsel. God does not ask what is best!
2021-2, These verses parallel Pro 8.
2022 - 12-17, in context, are about the one who will appear in 6-11. I think we can see clearly that 6-11 are about the second advent. Jesus is in view. And then all the creation questions are asked ABOUT him. This would seem to be a pretty good proof text of Jesus as creator in the OT. It is indirect, to be sure, but I think it is certainly there!
18-20, God's "aliveness" contrasted with silver and wooden idols. The greatness of God is describe on through vs 26. This verse kind of summarizes the language:
25 To whom then will you compare me, that I should be like him? says the Holy One. [Isa 40:25 ESV]
Only one God. Nothing like him, nothing even to put on the balance with him. It is not a competition for "which" god to worship because the answer is obvious. There is only One.
Beginning in 27, there are still more attributes of God that make Him unique. Chapter ends this way:
31 but they who wait for the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; they shall walk and not faint. [Isa 40:31 ESV]
This verse is quoted and sung as being about us, if we wait. In fact, this verse is about the mighty power of God, and about His place above all things.
2024 - So after the vss about John, and based on our interpretation that we are looking past 70 AD to the second advent, then we get this very long, very intense description of God and his power. This too "fits" in this spot because as Jesus is seated on the Millennial throne, all the world will understand, without a shadow of a doubt, that there IS GOD, that he has ALWAYS BEEN GOD, and now - in the Millennial, He will assert His great power over all the earth. He will rule with a rod of iron. There will be no debate about whether Darwin or the Bible story of creation is correct. There will be no debate about LGBT and so on. These things will be unarguable on the planet, because the Creator will be seated on the throne for all the world to see. And you better not be contradicting him in that time!