Isaiah 26 - Introduction

Isaiah 26:1-19. The Nation's Prayer for a more complete Salvation

(1) Isaiah 26:1. The nation praises God for the strength and safety of Jerusalem, henceforth to be the dwelling place of a righteous, truth-keeping people (1, 2); for the steadfast faith which is now rewarded with peace (3, 4), and for the overthrow of a proud hostile city (5, 6).

(2) Isaiah 26:7. The enthusiasm of the opening verses here gives place to a more subdued and wistful mood. Israel still waits with ardent longing for the accomplishment of Jehovah's judgments (8, 9a), knowing well that only by the discipline of judgment will the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness (9 b, 10).

(3) Isaiah 26:11. Meditation passes into prayer, first for the destruction of enemies (11), then for peace to Israel (12 a); and this again into a retrospect of the past history of the nation, in which the writer thankfully recognises tokens of the Divine presence and help (12 b). Much has been achieved; foreign tyrants have been swept away (13, 14), the people has been increased and its territory extended (15).

(4) Isaiah 26:16. But the past has its failures also, and the effect of them is felt in the present. Israel has learned prayer through severe discipline (16); yet how vain and ineffectual have all its pain and effort been! (17, 18). And apparently the chief source of disappointment is the scantiness of the population that remains on the eve of the final glory.

(5) Isaiah 26:19. The last verse comes on us almost with a shock of surprise, so far does it seem to exceed the aspiration to which it is the answer. It is a promise of life from the dead in the most literal sense, a resurrection of those members of the community whom death had seemed to rob of their share in the hope of Israel.

It is difficult to interpret the situation which gave rise to this deeply interesting meditation. The nation has emerged from a season of great trouble and oppression, and gratefully acknowledges the mercies it now enjoys, but this feeling is accompanied by confession of failure and an eager longing for a fuller experience of the Divine blessing. Such a state of mind is in itself perfectly intelligible; the difficulty is that it is hardly appropriate to the ideal future standpoint to which the psalm is assigned by the heading. "In that day" the day of Jehovah's kingdom the praises of Israel must surely rise higher than the sombre and almost melancholy strains that appear in the latter part of this poem. Yet it seems impossible to regard the passage as other than a unity. The verse-connexion is as a rule very close, and just at those points where some critics have recognised a discontinuity in the thought (e.g. after Isaiah 26:7, or Isaiah 26:10 or Isaiah 26:16) the phraseology presents indications of a studied transition. The poem indeed is remarkable for its concatenatedstructure; that is to say, a word or idea is taken up from one verse and suggests a new thought for the next (Isaiah 26:2 f., Isaiah 26:3 f., Isaiah 26:7 f., Isaiah 26:8 f., Isaiah 26:9 f., Isaiah 26:10 f., Isaiah 26:17 f.). Partly from this peculiarity it is difficult to trace all the windings of the thought; and clearly denned sections do not exist.

Concluding Note on Ch. 24 27

The above exposition has left some general questions in suspense; and for the most part they are such as cannot be adequately discussed in this commentary. There are two, however, on which a few additional observations are necessary, viz., (1) the unity and (2) the date, of the prophecy.

(1) The question of unity, as raised by the recent criticisms of Duhm and Cheyne, relates principally to the lyrical passages already marked off in the notes (Isaiah 25:1-5; Isaiah 25:9-12; Isaiah 26:1-19; Isaiah 27:2-6), although it is acknowledged that the section Isaiah 27:7-11 presents difficulties almost as great. As has been hinted above, the commonly accepted view has been that the lyrics represent flights of the author's imagination, depicting the feelings of the redeemed community after the great judgment is past. The chief considerations urged against this view are as follows. (a) If we read consecutively 24, Isaiah 25:6-8; Isaiah 26:20 to Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 27:7-13, we have a series of conceptions which readily fit into a consistent picture of the future, and (at least up to Isaiah 27:1) a very natural sequence of thought. (b) the songs are distinguished from the main prophecy in poetic structure and rhythm, as well as in the point of view they represent. (c) They do not occur at places where their insertion would be natural if due to the literary plan of the composition, while one of them (Isaiah 25:1-5) appears to interrupt a close connexion of thought. (d) The most important of all (Isaiah 26:1-19) is written in a vein of mingled exultation and despondency inappropriate to the supposed situation. Although the reader is naturally averse to entertaining the idea of interpolation if it can possibly be avoided, it can hardly be denied that these arguments have a considerable cumulative force. (b) counts for little or nothing by itself, while the others may involve merely subjective differences of critical judgment. The crucial case is probably (d), where the -ideal standpoint" theory could only be maintained by assuming that the writer's imagination lacks the strength of wing needful to bear him triumphantly away from the discouraging outlook of his actual present. It must be pointed out, however, that the demarcation of the lyrics given in the notes is adopted from Duhm and Cheyne, and to discuss the question of unity on this basis necessarily does some injustice to the views of other critics, who might prefer a different division.

(2) The question of the dateof the prophecy is of course influenced by the view held as to its unity, although to a less extent than might be imagined, since both the critics named agree in regarding the whole series of compositions as belonging to the literature of a single general period. Duhm assigns them to the reign of John Hyrcanus, and finds allusions to the Parthian campaign of Antiochus Sidetes (b.c. 129) and the destruction of Samaria (c.107). But there is really nothing to warrant these precise determinations, and the theory is negatived by well-established conclusions as to the close of the O.T. Canon. Cheyne's view is free from this objection and is in itself very attractive. The historical background of the prophecy is found in the events which preceded the dissolution of the Persian Empire (say 350 330). The gloomy survey of ch. 24 is explained by the "desolating and protracted wars" of the period, in which the Jews are known to have suffered severely and during which Jerusalem was not improbably laid waste by Persian armies. The premature songs of triumph referred to in ch. Isaiah 24:16 are supposed to have been called forth by rumours of the expedition of Alexander the Great, whilst the interspersed lyrical passages celebrate the Jewish deliverance achieved by the Macedonian victories. Perhaps the least convincing part of the hypothesis is the identification of the conquered city of Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 26:5, with Tyre or Gaza, destroyed by Alexander; but in spite of that Cheyne's view is probably the one which best harmonises the varied indications of the prophecy (see his Introduction, pp. 155 ff., and the refs. there).

Of rival theories there is perhaps but one that deserves careful examination, that, viz., which seeks the occasion of the prophecy in the age immediately succeeding the Exile, particularly the Babylonian troubles under Darius Hystaspis. There is, indeed, a surprising number of coincidences between the phenomena of this prophecy and the circumstances of that time or the contemporary literature. The expectation of a great overturning of existing political conditions occurs in the writings of Haggai (Isaiah 2:6-7; Isaiah 2:21-22) and Zechariah (Isaiah 1:11 ff.); the idea of a world-judgment in Isaiah 13:6 ff.; the universalism of Isaiah 25:6-8 finds nowhere a more sympathetic response than in Isaiah 40-55; and even the -songs of the righteous" (Isaiah 24:16) have a certain resemblance to Isaiah 45:10. The allusion to recent idolatry in Isaiah 27:9 is amply accounted for; and the "city" (although too much has been made of this point) of Isaiah 24:10 ff., Isaiah 27:10 f., Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 26:5 might be Babylon, the "world-city," now humbled and soon to be utterly destroyed.

The ultimate decision probably turns on certain general features of the prophecy, which are thought to point to a very late age. These are (a) its apocalyptic colouring and imagery (see, however, the caveaton p. 179 above), (b) the advanced form in which it presents the doctrines of immortality (Isaiah 25:8) and the resurrection (Isaiah 26:19); and (possibly) (c) the belief in tutelary genii of the nations. With regard to these phenomena many will agree with Cheyne that they "become the more intelligible the later we place this composition in the Persian period."

Ch. Isaiah 26:20 to Isaiah 27:13. The Conclusion of the Prophecy

Isaiah 26:20 resumes the connexion of the prophetic discourse, interrupted since Isaiah 25:8; and this continues to the end, broken only by the lyrical passage, Isaiah 27:2-6. The contents, however, are of a somewhat mixed character, and the divisions are clearly marked.

(1) vv.Isaiah 26:20-21. A call to the people of God to hide themselves till the indignation be overpast.

(2) v.Isaiah 27:1. Announcement of judgment on the great World-powers.

(3) Isaiah 27:2. A song of Jehovah concerning His vineyard.

(4) Isaiah 27:7. The moderation displayed in Jehovah's chastisement of Israel, and the lesson to be learned from it.

(5) Isaiah 27:12. A prophecy of the restoration of the dispersed of Israel.

Concluding Note on Ch. 24 27

The above exposition has left some general questions in suspense; and for the most part they are such as cannot be adequately discussed in this commentary. There are two, however, on which a few additional observations are necessary, viz., (1) the unity and (2) the date, of the prophecy.

(1) The question of unity, as raised by the recent criticisms of Duhm and Cheyne, relates principally to the lyrical passages already marked off in the notes (Isaiah 25:1-5; Isaiah 25:9-12; Isaiah 26:1-19; Isaiah 27:2-6), although it is acknowledged that the section Isaiah 27:7-11 presents difficulties almost as great. As has been hinted above, the commonly accepted view has been that the lyrics represent flights of the author's imagination, depicting the feelings of the redeemed community after the great judgment is past. The chief considerations urged against this view are as follows. (a) If we read consecutively 24, Isaiah 25:6-8; Isaiah 26:20 to Isaiah 27:1; Isaiah 27:7-13, we have a series of conceptions which readily fit into a consistent picture of the future, and (at least up to Isaiah 27:1) a very natural sequence of thought. (b) the songs are distinguished from the main prophecy in poetic structure and rhythm, as well as in the point of view they represent. (c) They do not occur at places where their insertion would be natural if due to the literary plan of the composition, while one of them (Isaiah 25:1-5) appears to interrupt a close connexion of thought. (d) The most important of all (Isaiah 26:1-19) is written in a vein of mingled exultation and despondency inappropriate to the supposed situation. Although the reader is naturally averse to entertaining the idea of interpolation if it can possibly be avoided, it can hardly be denied that these arguments have a considerable cumulative force. (b) counts for little or nothing by itself, while the others may involve merely subjective differences of critical judgment. The crucial case is probably (d), where the -ideal standpoint" theory could only be maintained by assuming that the writer's imagination lacks the strength of wing needful to bear him triumphantly away from the discouraging outlook of his actual present. It must be pointed out, however, that the demarcation of the lyrics given in the notes is adopted from Duhm and Cheyne, and to discuss the question of unity on this basis necessarily does some injustice to the views of other critics, who might prefer a different division.

(2) The question of the dateof the prophecy is of course influenced by the view held as to its unity, although to a less extent than might be imagined, since both the critics named agree in regarding the whole series of compositions as belonging to the literature of a single general period. Duhm assigns them to the reign of John Hyrcanus, and finds allusions to the Parthian campaign of Antiochus Sidetes (b.c. 129) and the destruction of Samaria (c.107). But there is really nothing to warrant these precise determinations, and the theory is negatived by well-established conclusions as to the close of the O.T. Canon. Cheyne's view is free from this objection and is in itself very attractive. The historical background of the prophecy is found in the events which preceded the dissolution of the Persian Empire (say 350 330). The gloomy survey of ch. 24 is explained by the "desolating and protracted wars" of the period, in which the Jews are known to have suffered severely and during which Jerusalem was not improbably laid waste by Persian armies. The premature songs of triumph referred to in ch. Isaiah 24:16 are supposed to have been called forth by rumours of the expedition of Alexander the Great, whilst the interspersed lyrical passages celebrate the Jewish deliverance achieved by the Macedonian victories. Perhaps the least convincing part of the hypothesis is the identification of the conquered city of Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 26:5, with Tyre or Gaza, destroyed by Alexander; but in spite of that Cheyne's view is probably the one which best harmonises the varied indications of the prophecy (see his Introduction, pp. 155 ff., and the refs. there).

Of rival theories there is perhaps but one that deserves careful examination, that, viz., which seeks the occasion of the prophecy in the age immediately succeeding the Exile, particularly the Babylonian troubles under Darius Hystaspis. There is, indeed, a surprising number of coincidences between the phenomena of this prophecy and the circumstances of that time or the contemporary literature. The expectation of a great overturning of existing political conditions occurs in the writings of Haggai (Isaiah 2:6-7; Isaiah 2:21-22) and Zechariah (Isaiah 1:11 ff.); the idea of a world-judgment in Isaiah 13:6 ff.; the universalism of Isaiah 25:6-8 finds nowhere a more sympathetic response than in Isaiah 40-55; and even the -songs of the righteous" (Isaiah 24:16) have a certain resemblance to Isaiah 45:10. The allusion to recent idolatry in Isaiah 27:9 is amply accounted for; and the "city" (although too much has been made of this point) of Isaiah 24:10 ff., Isaiah 27:10 f., Isaiah 25:2; Isaiah 26:5 might be Babylon, the "world-city," now humbled and soon to be utterly destroyed.

The ultimate decision probably turns on certain general features of the prophecy, which are thought to point to a very late age. These are (a) its apocalyptic colouring and imagery (see, however, the caveaton p. 179 above), (b) the advanced form in which it presents the doctrines of immortality (Isaiah 25:8) and the resurrection (Isaiah 26:19); and (possibly) (c) the belief in tutelary genii of the nations. With regard to these phenomena many will agree with Cheyne that they "become the more intelligible the later we place this composition in the Persian period."