Isaiah 13 - Introduction

Isaiah's Oracles Against The Nations (13-23).

Introduction.

In this series of oracles against the nations, interspersed with other prophecies, which are to be seen as in contrast with the glorious song of triumph in chapter 12, Isaiah reveals his awareness of God's sovereignty over the nations. He is revealing that while His people will finally triumph, the nations of the known world must also all finally bow before Him in one way or another. The future of all of them is in His hands. In the end every knee will bow to Him, and every tongue confess to God.

But the second lesson that is also continually prominent, is what folly it would be for Israel to rely on these nations for their security. It is made clear that they cannot even deliver themselves, how then can they be relied on to deliver others? For it will be noted that the specific ‘burdens' all concern peoples who in one way or another sought to influence Israel/Judah to rebel against Assyria. By seeking to influence God's people in ways not conducive to faith in Yahweh they came within God's notice.

Israel/Judah lived in an international world, with the constant to and fro of information and trade, and the constant attempts by some to enter into alliances with others to further their own aims. This was partly the cause of their downfall, for it regularly meant that they took their eyes off God, preferring to trust in others. Thus they forgot that they had been separated out to be a holy nation, to be God's own people, so that they could be a kingdom of priests to the people. And at this time nothing was more relevant.

The oracles outline a number of ‘burdens'. The word is expressive. It was not easy to be a prophet of Yahweh, and the burden of the judgment that Isaiah proclaimed was heavy on him, even though it was followed sometimes by promises of deliverance. These burdens are stated to be: of Babylon (Isaiah 13:1); of Philistia (Isaiah 14:28); of Moab (Isaiah 15:1); of Damascus, but including northern Israel (Isaiah 17:1); of Egypt (Isaiah 19:1); of the wilderness of the sea - to do with the fall of Babylon (Isaiah 21:1); of Dumah (Isaiah 21:11); on Arabia (Isaiah 21:13); of the valley of vision, concerning Judah (Isaiah 22:1); and of Tyre (Isaiah 23:1), ten in all, a number indicating completeness. Apart from Babylon, and, of course, themselves, these were the nations that surrounded Israel and Judah and all without exception, including Babylon, suffered at the hands of Assyria.

The ten can be divided into two sequences of five, each significantly headed by Babylon as the most ominous of them all. Note that northern Israel comes fourth in the first five (although humiliatingly being included under Damascus as the one on whom they relied, a judgment in itself) and Judah fourth in the second five. Egypt, the power to the south ends the first five, Tyre the maritime power to the north ends the second five. Thus the series is carefully patterned.

We note immediately that Assyria is not mentioned in the list, for the list is of those opposed to Assyria, and the resulting consequences for them. But its looming presence is made clear (Isaiah 20:1), and it is Assyria along with Egypt will enjoy the future blessing of God (Isaiah 19:23). Besides, Isaiah has already declared judgment on Assyria in Isaiah 10:12; Isaiah 10:33, and that is confirmed in Isaiah 14:24. But that was not a ‘burden' because they were the ones who afflicted the nations and would deserve all that they received. What came to them would be due to their behaviour towards the world and especially towards God's people. The burden was with regard to what would happen to these other nations in the future, mainly through Assyria. Assyria will briefly receive further mention in Isaiah 14:24, but having already received its sentence of judgment from Yahweh (Isaiah 10:12) it is no longer important from that point of view. Isaiah's thoughts have turned more towards the future of those who oppose Assyria and seek to influence Judah. But among all these nations engaged in conspiracy against Assyria one stands out, and that is Babylon whose destruction is mentioned twice. We will therefore now consider Babylon.

Babylon.

It should be noted that Babylon is mentioned twice, and is first in each group. That is because Isaiah sees it as above all others the great enemy of God. It looms large over all the others, and is depicted as the essence of evil. But it should be noted that it is numbered among the ten and is not described as though it was a large empire. Indeed Isaiah never mentions Babylon in such terms. Always he is speaking of the city and its immediate locality.

No one who reads Chapter s 13-23 can fail to notice the difference between the first burden, and the remaining nine burdens. All the others (including the second one on Babylon) speak of devastation by the enemy who is coming with no thought of it being permanent. But the first burden is clearly pronounced in apocalyptic terms (Isaiah 13:9) and results in eternal destruction (Isaiah 13:19). In none of the others is their king mentioned, but in the first the king of Babylon is described in supernatural terms (Isaiah 14:12). It can be seen as parallel with the similar picture of world destruction in chapter 24.

Babylon is thus mentioned initially because he saw it as the epitome of evil. It alone faces a future without hope (Isaiah 13:20). This was possibly accentuated for Isaiah because he saw that it was largely Babylon who would seek to influence God's people against Assyria (Isaiah 39:1), and foresaw that it would be a great threat to Israel/Judah in the future (Isaiah 39:6). But in the final analysis it is important to him because behind that threat he sees the Babylon which is the great earthly rival of God (Once he begins to deal with the question of Babylon he recognises that he is dealing with something which is not just of the ordinary. That is why Babylon is dealt with twice, firstly as the primeval enemy (13-14), and then secondly as one of the rebels (Isaiah 21:1).

To Isaiah Babylon expressed all that opposed God. It was the Babel of old which from the beginning had sought to conquer and establish an empire under Nimrod (Genesis 10:9). It was the dreaded Babel that had sought to build a tower up to Heaven and had caused the nations to be scattered, the primeval enemy (Genesis 11:1). It was the leader of the enemies of Abraham who had invaded Canaan and had carried Lot off captive (as Shinar - Genesis 14:1). It was the great centre of the occult with its huge quantities of magicians and soothsayers (chapter 47). It was the Babylon whose great traditions of the past and whose impact on history were well known through extant literary works. It was the great city Babylon that was known throughout the world, and had been known for centuries past, for its corrupt splendour, and for its mysterious and mystical knowledge off the gods. It was the city that lorded itself, through its king, above the stars, even to heaven itself (Isaiah 14:12). It was the city that called itself ‘the Beauty', ‘the glory of the kingdoms' (Isaiah 13:19; compare 2 Samuel 1:19 and the use of the word in Deuteronomy 26:19; Psalms 96:6; Isaiah 62:3). It was the ultimate enemy of God (Isaiah 14:13).

To see this as a prophecy of the later defeat of the Babylonian empire would be to miss the point. Isaiah is not concerned with that (he nowhere suggests that he knows of it). He is concerned with Babylon because of what it is. It is a symbol. For to him Babylon was no ordinary nation. This is demonstrated by the way in which the description of the judgment he pronounces on them is given in very general, even apocalyptic, terms, demonstrating how he views them. In the end he sees Babylon as the great apocalyptic threat to the world, and to Yahwism, a threat that must be destroyed, an idea taken up in Revelation.

A glance at chapter 13 brings out that the description of the judgment on Babylon is seen as specifically orchestrated by God, and is because of their overweening pride and grandiose, universal claims, and it is mainly anonymous. It is only in Isaiah 13:17 that the passage becomes more specific, and in that verse there is reference to attack by the Medes. But that is not because the Medes are seen as the sole attackers, for they are only one among many gathered nations, mainly anonymous (Isaiah 13:4). Indeed in Isaiah 21:2 they are paralleled with Elam in the attack on Babylon. It is because the Medes are seen as particularly voracious opponents. And we immediately gain from the passage the firm impression that Babylon is to be seen as the enemy of the whole world, and as doomed by God. It is the Great Enemy. There is therefore no morsel of hope for Babylon. This is in contrast with all the other nations mentioned. (Although it will also later be true of Edom in chapter 34, who are seen as the great Betrayer).

Note that Babylon is said to be attacked by ‘the nations', and the point is made that Babylon is doomed because of its overweening pride (Isaiah 13:11) and because of what it is, not because of its treatment of Judah and Jerusalem, or because of any empire it may gain. It is God's enemy waiting to be destroyed. For it is the great subversive. And the passage then leads on to describe Babylon's final and ultimate doom. So Isaiah foresees the attacks of the anonymous nations on Babylon as because they are God's ultimate enemy who must be destroyed.

In considering this we must recognise the purpose of prophecy. Prophecy was not primarily in order that people might later say, ‘look, the prophecy has been fulfilled. How marvellous!' (although that often followed and is regularly called on as evidence later in Isaiah). It was in order to declare what God was going to do, and in some way bring it about. So the point in these two Chapter s is not to ‘foretell the future' about Babylon in specific terms, it is to bring out what Babylon essentially is and to emphasise the fact that Babylon's fate will be at the hands of God and to render it inevitable.

But why should Babylon be so important, and why should it become so prominent in Isaiah's thinking at this time?

The answer to the first question lies in the very nature of Babylon. From its very foundation it was the enemy of the world (Genesis 10:9), and within a short time it had tried to invade Heaven itself (Genesis 11:1). Furthermore when invaders arrived in Abraham's Canaan, Shinar (Babylon) was prominent among them (Genesis 14:1), while in contemporary history Babylon was renowned throughout the world for its splendour and its interest in the occult.

The answer to the second question may lie in chapter 39. Merodach Baladan, king of Babylon, which had also at this time been under Assyria's domination, and had broken free, or was considering doing so, had sent ambassadors to Hezekiah, king of Judah, seeking to arouse him to take part in a conspiracy against Assyria. Hezekiah had responded with willingness, and had shown all his resources and treasures to the ambassadors. But when Isaiah learned of it his heart grew cold. He was wise enough to know that such powerful nations, and especially Babylon the primeval empire builder, were not safe allies for smaller nations, and God showed to Isaiah the dreadful significance of this willingness to trust in Babylon rather than in Yahweh. Just as Israel had been smitten and taken into exile because it had trusted in Rezin and Syria (Isaiah 5:13; Isaiah 8:5) so would Judah be smitten, and the sons of David be taken into exile, because it had trusted in the king of Babylon and had revealed to him its riches (Isaiah 39:6 compare Isaiah 6:11). Thus did Babylon come to his immediate attention, bringing back to him all that he knew about Babylon..

That is no doubt why, at the news of appeals from and possible association with Babylon, Isaiah was so horrified. Other treaties were bad enough, but a treaty with Babylon by the people of God? It could not be condoned. For as we have seen his dread reached back further in time. Did Hezekiah not realise what Babylon was? Did he not know that it was from ancient times the rabid empire builder? That it was the Babel of old which from the beginning had sought to conquer and establish an empire under Nimrod (Genesis 10:9)? That it was Babel who had sought to build a tower up to Heaven and had caused the nations to be scattered, the primeval enemy (Genesis 11:1)? That it was the prime enemy of Abraham, an enemy which had invaded Canaan and had carried Lot off captive (as Shinar - Genesis 14)? That it was the great centre of the occult with its great quantities of magicians and soothsayers (chapter 47)? That it was the city that lorded itself, through its king, above the stars, even to heaven itself (Isaiah 14:12)? That it was the city that called itself ‘the Beauty', ‘the glory of the kingdoms' (Isaiah 13:19; compare 2 Samuel 1:19 and the use of the word in Deuteronomy 26:19; Psalms 96:6; Isaiah 62:3)? That it was the ultimate enemy of God (Isaiah 14:13).

And that is why this prophecy against Babylon is given in universal terms. The picture is of the whole of the known world round about raised up against Babylon. Here Babylon was not part of a conspiracy. It was not an empire controlling many nations. It was itself the enemy of the nations. For Isaiah wanted it recognised that Babylon was doomed of God at the hands of the world because of what it represented, ultimate rebellion against God (this picture is again brought out in Revelation 17-18). Let Judah take note. Babylon was no safe refuge, for it was the enemy of all men.

That end would not in fact come immediately, although Isaiah would not have known it. Time was not his to determine. What he was called on to do was reveal God's final intentions regardless of time. He nowhere speaks of it as a world empire. We have no reason to think that he thought of it in that way. Assyria was the world empire, seeking to control the world. But Babylon was worse than that. It stood out stark and alone. It was the primeval enemy of God. It was all that was worst in the idea of ‘the City' in its opposition to God (compare Isaiah 24:10; Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 26:5).

Babylon and Babylonia were in fact invaded by the nations any number of times before the final cessation of Babylon as a city. It had been constantly in the past, for it was constantly seeking to rid itself of the Assyrian yoke. Indeed it often enjoyed periods of full independence (and succeeded in the end) and Isaiah himself was witness of the time when Sargon II of Assyria, having for a time lost control of Babylonia, finally invaded and sacked Babylon, accompanied by the Medes over whom he had established his authority. And Sargon actually described its demise in Assyrian annals in similar terms to here. Some of its inhabitants were transported to Samaria, while Israelites were transported to Media (2 Kings 17:6), which confirms the prominent participation of the Medes in the general events. So this ‘burden' may very well come on Isaiah around that time.

Babylon rebelled again when Sargon died, only again to be defeated, but in a later rebellion a decade later they were more successful and did at one stage defeat Sennacherib's army. But only for Sennacherib to return and exact his revenge. It was at that stage that he removed the gods of Babylon and took them back to Assyria as described in Isaiah 46:1. Some think that it was because he was aware that Sennacherib would return with an even larger army that the overtures to Hezekiah by Merodach Baladan of Babylon (Isaiah 39:1), which Isaiah condemned (Isaiah 39:4), occurred around this time, although most relate these overtures to Hezekiah to the first rebellion. Either way the overtures were certainly connected with one of the Babylonian rebellions against Assyria.

However, in spite of Isaiah's warning Hezekiah appears to have joined wholeheartedly in revolt in response to Babylon's approach. Assyrian inscriptions tell us that he imprisoned Padi, king of Ekron in Jerusalem because Padi wanted to remain loyal to Sennacherib. This may well be when Babylon first especially imprinted itself in Isaiah's mind. Sennacherib of Assyria then moved against Babylon and sacked it, assisted by Medan bowmen as mercenaries (Isaiah 21:2). The Medes were a fierce people and coveted as mercenaries. In the later sacking he removed from it its sacred statues (Isaiah 46:1). Meanwhile he supplemented the attack by also attacking Judah and Jerusalem.

But the magnetism of Babylon continued. It was restored by Esarhaddon of Assyria, who gave it prime importance, and, after further rebellion, taken once more by Ashurbanipal when it was severely damaged by fire. After that it rose to glory, defeating the Assyrians with the help of the Medes, and established a great empire (although there is no reference to such in Isaiah). But then it was later taken by the Medo-Persian empire in the time of Cyrus II, who also made it a capital city. And it was even later destroyed by Xerxes of Persia, inevitably accompanied by the ever present Medes, and then partly restored again, until ultimately it fell into final disrepair and ruin. All these attacks would have been accompanied by widespread devastation of the surrounding area. All contributed to its final end. And in most, if not all, the feared Medes were involved.

Thus the ‘day of Yahweh' on Babylon may be seen as including any or all of these sackings. It is depicting all the future enmity of the nations against Babylon. They are all the result of Yahweh's assault, and possibly chapter 13 is to be seen simply as describing all attacks which would take place on Babylon until it finally ceased to exist. It is Babylon's fate, and how it is brought about, that is Isaiah's concern, not the detail of how it would happen. His message was that Babylon must be destroyed.

Yahweh's ‘day' is not to be seen as necessarily limited in time. It is a set purpose not a time limit. It symbolises God's activity against Babylon once He has determined its final end, however long it takes, His day will go on until that end is finalised. If this oracle followed Isaiah's warning to Hezekiah, then the sacking by Sennacherib must be favoured as one initial fulfilment of it, but it may equally have been given earlier and have included reference to the previous sacking by Sargon with his Medan allies, whom Isaiah may have mentioned specifically because of their effective bow work. However, it also included the whole of Babylon's future, for it would not be finally fulfilled until Babylon was no more.

It may, however, be asked, if the reference has in mind sackings by the Assyrians, why is the credit given to the Medes (Isaiah 13:17)? The answer is that it is not. The credit is given to a huge gathering of the nations under an unnamed leader who establishes his tent on the bare mountain (Isaiah 13:2). It is deliberately anonymous. It covers all the anger of the nations against Babylon. The specific mention of the Medes is to strike terror into men's hearts. They above all nations were feared because of their warlike ferocity and their wildness. To have the Medes stirred up against them was the one thing all nations feared. (It was the ancient equivalent of having the dogs set on them). And it may also have been because of the major part the Medes always played in attacks with their superb bowmanship. But it is the awed fear in which they were held which is the reason why their part in it is singled out. The invasion will not only be by the nations of the known world, it will include the dreaded Medes in particular, stirred up by God. When you looked from your city walls and saw the Medes, you were filled with terror. Their bows could strike you down even where you stood. Nothing escaped the Medan bowmen.

Indeed if the Medes were at the time seen as acting as mercenaries, or in promise of reward, it would certainly explain why an attempt was made to buy the Medes off (Isaiah 13:17), an attempt which they refused. They liked warfare, and knew that they could do better from the booty. Thus they could not be bought off. The ‘kingdoms of the nations' (Isaiah 13:4) could well initially signify the Assyrian confederacy, composed of many nations, and the little mention of Assyria in the oracles seems to be a deliberate ploy. Isaiah appears to be mainly ignoring them. He had declared their fate in Isaiah 10:12 and would do so again in Isaiah 14:24, but as far as he was concerned their doom had been pronounced. They were no longer important to him. It was the world of nations that was against Babylon.

Babylon was an enigma. Every sacking of Babylon might have seemed to be the last, but it would not die. It kept rising again. Thus further attacks became necessary. But of one thing Isaiah was certain. One day the nations of the world would ensure the completion of what they had begun. All the humiliation that it suffered from Babylon's claims would only hasten that final end.

In fact the later capture of Babylon by the Medes and Persians in 539 BC does not fit into the picture outlined here. For it did not result in the sacking of the city, nor in the taking away of their gods (Isaiah 46:1). At that time it was taken by surprise with little fighting and the priests of Marduk may well have welcomed the invaders in view of the ‘apostasy' of Nabonidus and Belshazzar, who had turned to strange gods. On the other hand it would certainly have resulted in the devastation of Babylonia, which is probably to be seen as included in the term ‘Babylon'. All that is described here would to some extent have been experienced by Babylonia at that time, as it would be before and since. That therefore may also be seen as part of the picture, but it is not primarily in view in the prophecy, any more than is its later capture by Xerxes the Persian.

So to Isaiah Babylon represented all that was evil, all that opposed God, and it had to be wiped out. Assyria might be the rod of God's anger, and very powerful, but Babylon was nothing other than the primeval enemy. Thus we can understand why the appearance of their ambassadors and Hezekiah's willingness to listen to them (chapter 39) would have come as the most unpleasant of shocks to him. He could not believe his ears. How could the son of David listen to a nation which had such a past, which had made such great and blasphemous claims and which by its own claims denied Yahweh's very power?

But in chapter 13 he is looking both before that and beyond that, and even beyond the return of the world-wide exiles. He is looking at the whole future of Babylon until its final eclipse. However, while he is certainly concerned with the certain judgment of God on Babylon here, in 15-23 he is concerned with God's judgment on all the nations who have afflicted and sought to embroil His people, of whom Babylon is one. And thus, as a result of his prophecies, in all their tribulations His people will be able to comfort themselves in this, that things have not got out of God's control. All those mentioned are seen as suffering in ways of which God was already aware, and which He had declared beforehand. However, it should be noted that while for these nations hope for the future is not excluded, and is even emphasised for Egypt and Assyria, none is posited for Babylon, for it symbolised all that was against God. It would share the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 13:19).