Isaiah 16

SurfTheSite

Isaiah: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 

As noted in the previous chapter, an oracle about Mo-Av seems odd, for a Yisra-Eli text; but we have also seen Bil'am (Balaam), in Numbers 22-24, a Moabite pronouncing an oracle about the Beney Yisra-El, and Mo-Av was the land in which the tribes of Gad and Re'u-Ven chose to settle after the Joshuaic conquest. 

This chapter appears to be a continuation of the oracle in chapter 15, and again we need to read it in parallel with Jeremiah 48, for which click on the link.

16:1 SHILCHU-CHAR MOSHEL ERETS MI SEL'A MIDBARAH EL HAR BAT TSI'ON

שִׁלְחוּ-כַר מֹשֵׁל אֶרֶץ מִסֶּלַע מִדְבָּרָה אֶל הַר בַּת צִיּוֹן

KJ (King James translation): Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion.

BN (BibleNet translation): Send a lamb for the ruler of the land from the peak down into the wilderness, to the mount of the daughter of Tsi'on.

CHAR: The poetry grows still more dense and complex. The "lamb" here is KAR, where we are much more accustomed to KEVES (כבש), as on several occasions in Numbers 7, including denoting it as BENEY SHANAH, for a one-year-old. Probably the KAR is a three-year-old, which then ties in with the three-year heifer of the previous chapter - a different reason for the sacrifice if it is a one-year-old and therefore likely the propitiatory sacrifice of the firstborn, the paschal lamb, where a three-year-old has to do with personal or communal penitence. Numbers 6:14 confirms this, with both masculine KEVES and feminine KEVASAH denoted as first-years.

Then go to Deuteronomy 13:14, and you will see the other key difference, that the KAR is fattened and well-fed, so we can assume again that Y-Y's choice of words is also metaphorical.

Next: is "the lamb" singular or plural, definite or indefinite. The obvious interpretation of the KJ is that "the lamb" is somehow a prophecy of the Messiah, or a reminder of the Akeda, which in a sense is the same thing; but this is clearly false because the three-year-old is not the paschal lamb. There is no definite article, so it has to be singular, and any three-year-old well-fed lamb will therefore do.

And then, is sending it to the ruler of the land a good or a bad omen, a call for penitence, or a reward for redemptive actions? Is the sending "from Sel'a to the wilderness" a form of the Azaz-El? Where and what is Sel'a? Ibid "the mount of the daughter of Tsi'on". Just as the parts of the city were metaphored in the previous chapter, I am wondering if the names of places haven't been turned, equally metaphorically, into points of nature. Let us explore:

MOSHEL: Not MELECH, the usual word for a "ruler", and we would expect MELECH here, because Mo-Av's king was named in the previous chapter. And does MOSHEL even mean "ruler"? The Book of Proverbs is MESHALIM. A MASHAL is a very specific form of verse, as precise as a sonnet, used as a means of expressing an idea, a conclusion, even an allegory or a parable (the form is two hemistichs employing parallelisms): try Numbers 23:7, Job 27:1, Psalm 49:5, and especially Judges 8:22, which saves me repeating myself any further here.

SEL'A: A rock, at Judges 15:8, or any other high place in the mountains where a man might seek refuge, as in Psalms 18:3, 31:4 and 42:10. So we can discount the Azaz-El - this lamb is being brought down from the high mountains to the wilderness, not driven over a cliff at the edge of a city, or driven out of the city into the wilderness (MIDBARAH).

HAR BAT TSI'ON: Which can only mean Mount Mor-Yah, "the hill of the bitter tears of the full-moon goddess", where both the Yitschak and the Jesus versions of the Akeda took place (of David too, ostensibly, on two failed occasions - 2 Samuel 15 and 1 Kings 1), from which the name Mary is derived, and probably the other reason why KJ has assumed the lamb here to be a prophecy of her Beloved Son, the paschal lamb Jesus.

16:2 VE HAYAH CHE OPH NODED KEN MESHULACH TIHEYENAH BENOT MO-AV MA'BAROT LE ARNON

וְהָיָה כְעוֹף נוֹדֵד קֵן מְשֻׁלָּח תִּהְיֶינָה בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב מַעְבָּרֹת לְאַרְנוֹן

KJ: For it shall be, that, as a wandering bird cast out of the nest, so the daughters of Moab shall be at the fords of Arnon.

BN: For it shall be that, like wandering birds scattered from a nest, so shall the daughters of Mo-Av be at the fords of the Arnon.

OPH NODED: infers exile and lost homeland. The Land of Nod, where Kayin was sent to wander, really means the nomadic terrain of the world's Bedouin.

MA'BAROT: (is that where Kibbutz Maabarot now stands by any chance? Actually no, it's miles away, mid-Israel; but the reason for the kibbutz having that name is much the same - see the link).

The Arnon was the northern border of Mo-Av at the time of Rut (Ruth), but had extended further north, as far as the border of Amon, absorbing Re'u-Ven and Gad, by the time of Yesh'a-Yah. See my notes on this in the previous chapter.



16:3 HAVIY'U ETSAH ASU PHELIYLAH SHIYTI CHA LAYIL TSILECH BETOCH TSAHARAYIM SATRI NIDACHIM NODED AL TEGALI

הביאו עֵצָה עֲשׂוּ פְלִילָה שִׁיתִי כַלַּיִל צִלֵּךְ בְּתוֹךְ צָהֳרָיִם סַתְּרִי נִדָּחִים נֹדֵד אַל תְּגַלִּי

KJ: Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth.

BN: Take counsel, execute justice; make your shadow like darkness at noon; hide the outcasts; do not reveal ther escape-routes of those who are fleeing.


HAVIY'U ETSAH: "Take counsel" in some translations, "give counsel" in others; it can't be both. LEHAVI means "to bring".

HAVIY'U: Why does the Masoretic text choose to leave this unpointed? Some versions offer HAVIY'I (הָבִ֤יאִי), but that final Yud has to be an error. If it was "bring me" it would read HAVIY LI, not HAVIY'I.

HAVIY'U: The Deutsche text agrees, but Mechon-Mamre wants HAVIY'I, and I don't see why - "bring it to me so that I can share it with others"? This is an imperative, not a request; a give, not a receive. The only thing I can think of is a paralleling with SHIYTI in the second phrase and SATRI in the third; but likewise I don't understand why that is SHIYTI and not SHIYTU, or actually, SHIYTAH, because what follows is TSILECH, which is feminine, and I also don't understand why that suffix-pronoun is feminine. Which then leaves NODED, which should be NODEDU, or NODEDI, but is probably the one word in the verse that is correct, because NODED goes with the feminine suffix pronoun, if that is indeed correct. Is all this now clear?

How do you "make your shadow like the night in the middle of the day"? and is that where Arthur Koestler and Bob Dylan got the idea for "darkness at noon" and "darkness at the break of noon"? 

Who is being addressed here? Why "hide the outcasts" unless this is a different understanding of the term: not "the rejected ones", but "those who have been forced out of their legal homes".


16:4 YAGURU VACH NIDACHAI MO-AV HEVI SETER LAMO MI PENEY SHODED KI APHES HAMETS KALAH SHOD TAMU ROMES MIN HA ARETS

יָגוּרוּ בָךְ נִדָּחַי מוֹאָב הֱוִי סֵתֶר לָמוֹ מִפְּנֵי שׁוֹדֵד כִּי אָפֵס הַמֵּץ כָּלָה שֹׁד תַּמּוּ רֹמֵס מִן הָאָרֶץ

KJ: Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler: for the extortioner is at an end, the spoiler ceaseth, the oppressors are consumed out of the land.

BN: Let my outcasts carry on living with you; but Mo-Av, be a place of safe asylum for him from the face of the spoiler, until oppression is brought to nought, sacking and pillage comes to an end, until those creeping vermin are driven out of the land... {S}

Does this now allow us to understand that the victim here is the remnant of Yisra-El, and that help is being sought for them from Mo-Av, and within Mo-Av? But why, after chapter 15, would Mo-Av help? Is the text misplaced here? "Until spoliation and oppression are over" may clarify this - it depends who did the deed of desolation on Mo-Av and what position Yehudah took at the time. Not the traditional reading of this Prophet by a long way; Yirme-Yah yes, but not Yesha-Yah. Yet this verse seems to confirm it.

But it also raises another interesting thought: if Mo-Av is indeed the area of land that was granted to Reu'ven and Gad by Mosheh and then Yehoshu'a, and  the tribes then became absorbed or assimilated, at least some of the Moabites must in fact have been Beney Yisrae-El not many generations ago, even perhaps still keeping the faith of Mosheh - and if so, does this give an entirely different edge to Rut's "conversion" and marriage?

HEVI: With a Vav, where HEVIY'I in the previous verse had a Vet; but this may be why some versions insist on HEVIY'I at verse 2. The root here is LEHIYOT, "to be", though it is a very rare vocative! In modern Ivrit it would be rendered as HEYEH - הייה = be (m.s.) היי = be (f.s.) הייו = be (pl.) - or more gently TIHEYEH (click here).

ROMES: need to refer back to Genesis 1:21 and the creation story, but there the ROMES were the "creeping things": reptiles and insects. Y-Y always chooses his vocabulary very precisely!


16:5 VE HUCHAN BA CHESED KIS'E VE YASHAV ALAV BE EMET BE OHEL DAVID SHOPHET VE DORESH MISHPAT U MEHIR TSEDEK

וְהוּכַן בַּחֶסֶד כִּסֵּא וְיָשַׁב עָלָיו בֶּאֱמֶת בְּאֹהֶל דָּוִד שֹׁפֵט וְדֹרֵשׁ מִשְׁפָּט וּמְהִר צֶדֶק

KJ: And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.

BN: ... and a throne is established through mercy, and there sits on it, in the tent of David, an honest judge, a seeker of justice, and a speedy bringer of righteousness.


The Mashiyach, not the Moshi'a, confirmed by the Davidic link. And here right now, not in some utopian future, bringing righteousness and justice and mercy.

The samech at the end of the previous verse indicates a section break, and that implies a change of subject; yet surely this verse is a continuation of the previous? That, anyway, is how I have translated it, and the reason for my three dots.

OHEL DAVID: Other than the makeshift canvas that he used during his bandit years, there is no "tent of David"; the allusion is to the tent in which the Mishkan was housed when he finally brought it to Yeru-Shala'im (2 Samuel 6:17), and where it lived for many years, until Shelomoh housed it in the Temple. The "tent" also suggests the Ohel Mo'ed, which is not the same thing; for an explanation of the difference, click here.

16:6 SHAM'ANU GE'ON MO-AV GE ME'OD GA'AVATO U GE'ONO VE EVRATO LO CHEN BADAV

שָׁמַעְנוּ גְאוֹן מוֹאָב גֵּא מְאֹד גַּאֲוָתוֹ וּגְאוֹנוֹ וְעֶבְרָתוֹ לֹא כֵן בַּדָּיו

KJ: We have heard of the pride of Moab; he is very proud: even of his haughtiness, and his pride, and his wrath: but his lies shall not be so.

BN: We have heard of the genius of Mo-Av; he is very proud of that genius, and it even applies to his skills at arrogance, and boasting, and conceit, and his capacity to tell lies.


GE'ON...GE...GA'AVATO: "Proud" and "haughty" and "a liar" are not adjectives obviously conducive to the request for help. So have the translators got this wrong? Jeremiah 48:49, our parallel text for Isaiah 15, has virtually this same phrase, and there, if you follow the link, you will see that I rendered GE'ON as "genius", and that is because this is how the word has been understood in the Jewish world for the last two thousand years - a GA'ON and an IL'UI being the two forms of it, one prodigious insight and ability to question, the other prodigious memory and the ability to absorb. I am thinking of people like Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna, known as the Vilna Ga'on; but even he is a thousand years later than Saadiah Ga'on of Babylon...

   But back to the topic, and ... which is it here? The root GA'AH, means "lifted up", or "exalted", which is similar to the YITGADAL of the Kaddish. My sense of the word-play is that Y-Y is being something of a hypocrite, showing off his own GE'ONUT in a manner that fits at least the first three of those four accusations. Perhaps he's role-modelling to make a point!

16:7 LACHEN YEYELIL MO-AV LE MO-AV KULOH YEYELIL LA ASHIYSHEI KIR CHARESET TEHGU ACH NECHA'IM

לָכֵן יְיֵלִיל מוֹאָב לְמוֹאָב כֻּלֹּה יְיֵלִיל לַאֲשִׁישֵׁי קִיר חֲרֶשֶׂת תֶּהְגּוּ אַךְ נְכָאִים

KJ: Therefore shall Moab howl for Moab, every one shall howl: for the foundations of Kirhareseth shall ye mourn; surely they are stricken.

BN: Therefore shall Mo-Av wail for Mo-Av; every one shall wail; for the sweet-cakes of Kir Chareset shall you mourn, for they are sorely stricken.


KIR CHARESET: KIR CHARES at verse 11. Jeremiah 48 has KIR CHERES - and yes, our Y-Y text is indeed still paralleling the Yirme-Yah. Verse 31 on this occasion.

ASHIYSHEI: I am perfectly aware that my translation is incorrect to the point of silliness, but it is an unusual word, and it really does have these two meanings; and if you look them up in Gesenius you will find, under the first of them, a short essay on the paralleling by Jeremiah of the passage in Isaiah - that way around in his view. He also reckons, based on Jeremiah 48:31, that ASHIYSHEI should anyway be ANASHEY = "the people", which frankly is much more logical than either the foundations or the sweet-cakes.

ASHIYSHEI as "foundations", from the root ASHASH, which is used for two things that get "pressed together", such as two bricks or pieces of stone held by the mortar between them

ASHIYSHEI as "sweet-cakes", from the root ASHASH, which is used... such as two pieces of pastry held by the crushed fig or grape between them, and I guess a piece of folded toast in today's world, with strawberry jam or marmalade, would count as ASHIYSHEI by the same definition. Cf 2 Samuel 6:19, 1 Chronicles 16:3.

16:8 KI SHADMOT CHESHBON UMLAL GEPHEN SIVMAH BA'ALEY GOYIM HALMU SERUKEYHA AD YA'ZER NAGA'U TA'U MIDBAR SHELUCHOTEYHA NITSHU AVRU YAM

כִּי שַׁדְמוֹת חֶשְׁבּוֹן אֻמְלָל גֶּפֶן שִׂבְמָה בַּעֲלֵי גוֹיִם הָלְמוּ שְׂרוּקֶּיהָ עַד יַעְזֵר נָגָעוּ תָּעוּ מִדְבָּר שְׁלֻחוֹתֶיהָ נִטְּשׁוּ עָבְרוּ יָם

KJ: For the fields of Heshbon languish, and the vine of Sibmah: the lords of the heathen have broken down the principal plants thereof, they are come even unto Jazer, they wandered throughthe wilderness: her branches are stretched out, they are gone over the sea.

BN: For the fields of Cheshbon lie untended, and the vine of Sivmah, whose choice plants the lords of the nations have trampled; they reached even as far as Ya'zer; they wandered into the wilderness; her branches were left unpollarded when they spread theirs across the sea.


SHADMOT: Another word worth looking up in Gesenius: he reckons it was a word made-up from a scribal error - someone wrote down the Yesha-Yah original as SHADMOT when it should have been SHADPHOT, and the phrase started to be regularly quoted, to the point that the word entered the language, now correct. But no known root for it is findable, only its usage: try 2 Kings 19:26, Habbakuk 3:17, the first of which reckons it was corn, and has SHADPHOT, the second vines, and SHADMOT.

CHESHBON: See the link, and my note at Isaiah 15:4.

SIVMAH: Jeremiah 48:32. But also Numbers 32 and Joshua 13. For a map and further background, click here.

YAZER: Likewise in Jeremiah 48:32. For a map and further background, click here.

Note the "branches" again, and the "wasteland" again. But also a clever play on words with AVRU YAM: the invaders have spread out in a dozen directions, just like the branches of a fertile, active tree, even while they have left the trees behind them in a state of devastation.


16:9 AL KEN EVKEH BIVCHI YA'ZER GEPHEN SIVMAH ARAYAVECH DIM'ATI CHESHBON VE EL'ALEH KI AL KEYTSECH VE AL KETSIYRECH HEYDAD NAPHAL

עַל כֵּן אֶבְכֶּה בִּבְכִי יַעְזֵר גֶּפֶן שִׂבְמָה אֲרַיָּוֶךְ דִּמְעָתִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן וְאֶלְעָלֵה כִּי עַל קֵיצֵךְ וְעַל קְצִירֵךְ הֵידָד נָפָל

KJ: Therefore I will bewail with the weeping of Jazer the vine of Sibmah: I will water thee with my tears, O Heshbon, and Elealeh: for the shouting for thy summer fruits and for thy harvest is fallen.

BN: So shall I weep with the weeping of Yazer for the vine of Sivmah. I will water you with my tears, O Cheshbon, and El-Aleh; for on your summer fruits, and on your harvest, has the shout of battle fallen.


BIVCHI: Is really BI VECHI, but as we have seen so often the prepositional prefix causes an elision.

EL-ALEH: again see Jeremiah 48, this time verse 34. And also Isaiah 15:4. Both prophets also play word games in the ensuing verses with the name El-Aleh and the verb conjugated as MA'ALEH, "to ascend".


16:10 VE NE'ESAPH SIMCHAH VE GIYL MIN HA KARMEL U VA KERAMIM LO YERUNAN LO YERO'A YAYIN BA YEKAVIM LO YIDROCH HADORECH HEYDAD HISHBATI

וְנֶאֱסַף שִׂמְחָה וָגִיל מִן הַכַּרְמֶל וּבַכְּרָמִים לֹא יְרֻנָּן לֹא יְרֹעָע יַיִן בַּיְקָבִים לֹא יִדְרֹךְ הַדֹּרֵךְ הֵידָד הִשְׁבַּתִּי

KJ: And gladness is taken away, and joy out of the plentiful field; and in the vineyards there shall be no singing, neither shall there be shouting: the treaders shall tread out no wine in their presses; I have made their vintage shouting to cease.

BN: And gladness and joy are taken away out of the fruitful field; and in the vineyards there shall be no singing, nor shall there be shouting; no treader shall tread out wine in the presses; I have caused the traditional calling out to cease.


NE'ESAPH: "Taken away", as in "plundered", whether by stealing the crop or simply destroying it. But the verb used for this is deeply ironic, because the process of collecting the harvest comes from the same root: ASAPH, like the name of the man who made the anthology of the Psalms: as if to say, the only thing that will be harvested this year is sorrow and desolation.

GIYL: One more play on the letters Gimmel and Lamed - see my notes on this in isaiah 15. David's queen at Chevron, the mother of his second child Chil-Yav, was named Avi-Gayil.

16:11 AL KEN ME'AI LE MO-AV KA KINOR YEHEMO VE KIRBI LE KIR CHARES

עַל כֵּן מֵעַי לְמוֹאָב כַּכִּנּוֹר יֶהֱמוּ וְקִרְבִּי לְקִיר חָרֶשׂ

KJ: Wherefore my bowels shall sound like an harp for Moab, and mine inward parts for Kirharesh.

BN: Which is why my heart is plucked like a harp for Mo-Av, and my guts for Kir Cheres.

ME'AI...KIRBI: The "innards" and the "belly" respectively, so choose for yourself which English equivalents. 

KINNOR: The harp, which is the instrument that David played, and which is also the nickname of the Sea of Galilee (Kinneret), so-called because of its shape; Galilee also picks up Y-Y's Gimmel-Lamed word-play (even though Mo-Av is on the east bank of the Dead Sea, and even in Y-Y's time its northern border - see verse 2 - was a long way south of the Sea of Galilee).

KIR: see my note on this at Isaiah 15:1.

16:12 VE HAYAH CHI NIR'AH KI NIL'AH MO-AV AL HA BAMAH U VA EL MIKDASHO LEHITPALEL VE LO YUCHAL

וְהָיָה כִי נִרְאָה כִּי נִלְאָה מוֹאָב עַל הַבָּמָה וּבָא אֶל מִקְדָּשׁוֹ לְהִתְפַּלֵּל וְלֹא יוּכָל

KJ: And it shall come to pass, when it is seen that Moab is weary on the high place, that he shall come to his sanctuary to pray; but he shall not prevail.

BN: And it shall come to pass, when it is seen that Mo-Av has prayed himself to exhaustion in the high place, that he shall come to his Sanctuary to pray; but it will not do him any good. {S}


At the nadir, Mo-Av will pray, but it won't help, because he prays to the wrong deity. And once again we have to ask, why is Y-Y so concerned with Mo-Av? It is a foreign country, after all, and he a Prophet of Yisra-El. Unless these are politically motivated oracles, issued against Mo-Av as a threat, on behalf of his king. Is that a possibility even? (see my note about Bil'am at the top of the page). More likely, as discussed previously, iot is the remnant of Gad and Re'u-Ven that are Y-Y's concern.

MIKDASHO: But the Temple isn't "his sanctuary"; that's why he goes to the high places. So, Y-Y suggests, his attempts to propitiate his own deities having failed, he will finally see sense and adopt YHVH. But also, too late.

YUCHAL: "prevail" is wrong; he simply "won't be able to".


16:13 ZEH HA DAVAR ASHER DIBER YHVH EL MO-AV ME'AZ

זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהוָה אֶל מוֹאָב מֵאָז

KJ: This is the word that the LORD hath spoken concerning Moab since that time.

BN: This is the word that YHVH spoke concerning Mo-Av in time past.

DAVAR: The "it won't help" phrase comes from the deity, through the mouth of Y-Y. 

Interesting to note the use of DAVAR here, and in the next verse, accompanied by DIBER, but also accompanied by LEMOR. The "word of God" as Christians call it, is the DAVAR, either of YHVH or the ELOHIM, and it is always an explanation of neqative events that take place in the world: earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, thunder-and-lightning, epidemics and plagues etc, and all of these are the elementals of the cosmos, the LEHIYOT, and they are always the male deity; when Nature proves fertile, that is always the female deity, the LECHIYOT which is Chavah (Eve), and always rendered as OMER = "to say" rather than DAVAR = "to speak". And when infertility takes over, the dead bodies are buried in bee-hive tombs beneath the ground, usually in tumuli, sometimes in caves; the name of the bee-goddess who guards them also comes from DAVAR, but now in its feminine form because the biodegraded corpse nourishes new fertility, DEVORAH.

ME'AZ: "since that time", and "in time past" are very different concepts. The suggestion, reinforced by the following verse, is that these were ancient oracles that Y-Y is simply repeating as a reminder; and what matters, his predictions for the future, are only now going to be made. Which leads me to ask, once again:
   Is this verse the one we have been looking for throughout our studies of Isaiah 15 and 16, and of Jeremiah 48? That Yesha-Yah is using an older precedent for his pronouncement, and that in fact that ancient pronouncement was Yirme-Yah's? It makes sense, because Yesha-Yah did not preach to the remnants of the tribes outside Yisra-El, but Yirme-Yah was sent precisely for that purpose Except for one problem: that this would then have to be an even later Yesha-Yah, during or even post-Babylonian exile, because Yirme-Yah does not get to be ME'AZ until... he was stoned to death somewhere around 570 BCE, after the Yehudim had been taken into captivity in Bavel, and himself, already rejected by his people, exiled to Mitspeh.

16:14 VE ATAH DIBER YHVH LEMOR BE SHALOSH SHANIM KI SHENEY SACHIR VE NIKLAH KEVOD MO-AV BE CHOL HE HAMON HA RAV U SE'AR ME'AT MIZ'AR LO CHABIR

וְעַתָּה דִּבֶּר יְהוָה לֵאמֹר בְּשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים כִּשְׁנֵי שָׂכִיר וְנִקְלָה כְּבוֹד מוֹאָב בְּכֹל הֶהָמוֹן הָרָב וּשְׁאָר מְעַט מִזְעָר לוֹא כַבִּיר

KJ: But now the LORD hath spoken, saying, Within three years, as the years of an hireling, and the glory of Moab shall be contemned, with all that great multitude; and the remnant shall be very small and feeble.

BN: But now YHVH has spoken, saying: "Within three years, like the years of a hireling, the glory of Mo-Av shall grow contemptible despite his vast numbers; and the remnant shall be very small and powerless." {P}

So has all the above been a threat, formulated as oracle and poetry? Mo-Av is given just three years – which again seems to indicate a political threat from Yisra-El rather than a religious one out of the heavens. Or perhaps a religious war is being threatened; and if this latter, can we date the piece by the known religiosity of the kings? See the coloured chart in the intro, which notes the righteousness or otherwise of all the kings.

SurfTheSite

Isaiah: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 

Copyright © 2022 David Prashker

All rights reserved

The Argaman Press