Demarcating Prophetic Oracles

Introduction

If we define a prophetic oracle “unit” to be any discrete amount of text, we can then define a prophetic oracle to be comprised of one or more such units collected together from the same circumstances of delivery. Such a definition is somewhat abstract, but its discussion can move forward the understanding of prophecy.

It is a definition that takes oral delivery of oracle units as a defining characteristic; moreover, it takes the recovery of the circumstances in which an oracle unit is delivered to be the basis for understanding prophecy. As a methodological choice, this definition relegates elements in and among prophetic oracles that originate at the point of writing to the position of facilitating the understanding of the oracles on the part of the reader.

Many prophetic oracles, if not all, show signs of oral delivery. One obvious pointer would be the direct address to an audience, such as “Assemble yourselves together and come” (Isa 45:20), or a direct exhortation to a specific group, “Listen, O isles unto me and hearken, ye people, from far” (Isa 49:1). There is stamped across the oracles of Isaiah 40-66 the marks of oral delivery in the form of first person address. This is one reason why the conservative commentary approach to these oracles is wrong because it regards the oracles as having been written in the first place in isolation from its intended audience of Babylonian exiles.

The issue for discussion in this article therefore concerns the demarcation and arrangement of prophetic oracles and units. Decisions here affect interpretation and mistakes are easy as is evidenced in the possibilities canvassed by commentaries; the Cyrus oracles are a case in point.

Isaiah 44:24-28

This is the first oracle. The marker “thus saith the Lord” signals the start of the unit, and this is a common indicator of a both new oracle units and new oracles. C. Westermann observes[1] after the “Thus saith the Lord” of v. 24 that there is a series of participle verbs without a main verb. This comes out in the KJV as a series of “that” clauses:

“I am the Lord that maketh…that stretcheth…that spreadeth…That frustrateth…and maketh…that turneth….and maketh…That confirmeth…and performeth…that saith to Jerusalem…That saith to the deep…That saith of Cyrus…” Isa 44:24-28 (KJV)

The oracle is easily demarcated because of the repetition of “Thus saith the Lord” in Isa 45:1 which is not a participle and repeats the common form of Isa 44:28. The effect of the series of participles is to create a preamble to the next oracle about Cyrus.

Isa 45:1-7

The beginning of the next oracle is easy enough to discern, but the end is less clear. Again, Westermann’s analysis is decisive. He notes[2] firstly that the closing declaration of Isa 44:28 that Cyrus “doeth all” (lk hf[, KJV “performeth all”) is matched by the closing declaration in Isa 45:7 that the Lord “doeth all” (lk hf[). Secondly, he notes that the address to the “heavens” in Isa 44:23 to “sing” is matched by an address to the heavens in Isa 45:8 to “rain down” righteousness, and these two commands are best seen as utterances that bookend the oracles of Isa 44:24-28/45:1:7.

We can therefore be confident that Isa 45:8 is not part of the Cyrus oracle, even if we still need to explain its current location; we can also be certain that the units Isa 45:9-10 and Isa 45:11-13 are not “part” of the Cyrus oracle, because of the closure implied by the features in Isa 45:7-8; again, the location of Isa 45:9-10 and 11-13 require explanation. Here, we will look at Isa 45:11-13

Isa 45:11-13

While this oracle is easy to demarcate, the difficulty lies in explaining its placement and its association. Scholars[3] have read it as a prediction of Cyrus and explained its association and placement on this basis. However, there are arguments against this reading, and the debate is illustrative of how forks in the road of interpretation lead to entire collections of wrong readings.

“Thus saith the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker, Ask me of things to come concerning my sons, and concerning the work of my hands command ye me. 12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. 13 I have raised him up in righteousness, and I will direct all his ways: he shall build my city, and he shall let go my captives, not for price nor reward, saith the Lord of hosts.” Isa 45:11-13 (KJV)

  1. The oracle is not delivered to Israel/Judah; it invites a third party to “ask him concerning his sons” (v. 11). The identification of the third party is that of the “islands”, and this is shown by the links between v. 13 and Isa 41:2, 25 – both texts concern who is raised in righteousness.
  2. If Yahweh invites questions about his sons, it is likely that the statements that he goes onto make also concern “his sons”. Hence, the figure of a “man” created for the “earth” is likely to refer to “his sons”. The ambiguity of eretz for “earth/land” supports this reading, as Yahweh could well be asserting of the Promised Land that he had made it and placed “man” upon it. Similarly, the claim to have raised him up in righteousness would naturally refer to Israel/Judah or their king, as would the declaration to “direct all his ways”
  3. The intertextual links of Isa 45:13 are to be noted. The Hiphil form of the common verb “to raise” is here in the perfect aspect and it occurs elsewhere only in 2 Chron 36:22, Ezra 1:1, 5, Isa 41:2, 25, and Jer 51:11. This linkage is taken to prove that the individual of Isa 45:13 is Cyrus, since 2 Chron 36:22, Ezra 1:1, 5 and Jer 51:11 directly or indirectly refer to Cyrus. Similarly, Isa 41:2, 25 are taken to refer to Cyrus on the same grounds. However, an alternative possibility is that the individual of Isa 41:2, 25 and 45:13 is Hezekiah whom God raised up in righteousness, and that Cyrus is an ironic counterpart. This supposition equally explains the intertextual linkage via the verb “to raise”.
  4. Observations (1) and (2) above would support an interpretation of the one raised up in righteousness as Hezekiah. But so would the claim that the individual was raised up “in righteousness” as it is easier to apply this epithet to a Davidic king than a foreign potentate.
    1. The expression “in righteousness” occurs 4x in Isaiah (Isa 11:4, 42:6, 45:13 and 59:4). Critically, Isa 42:6 states of the Servant, “I the Lord have called thee in righteousness”. In a complimentary way, Yahweh declares that he had “called” the individual in Isa 41:2 “to his foot”.
    2. The individual is raised up “from the east” (Isa 41:2) and “from the north” (Isa 41:25), which might be taken to indicate that there are two different individuals. However, the one “from the north” comes “from the rising of the sun” which uses the same form xrzmm for “from the rising” as “from the east”—xrzmm. Clearly, the one from the north comes from the east. Since, Yahweh is addressing the islands in Isa 41:1, this places them in the “west” and “east” elsewhere in the OT is the local east—the other side of Jordan, Edom, Moab and Ammon. So the raising up of the Servant has taken place in the east according to this cluster of texts.
    3. The verb “to raise” in its various forms is not uncommon (70x). One of its uses is to describe the rousing up of men to battle (Isa 10:26, 13:17, 15:5, 42:13, 51:9, 51:17, 52:1). This is the most common sense in Isaiah, and this pattern of use establishes that the claim “I have raised him up in righteousness” is a claim that Yahweh has raised up his Davidic king for battle. The information in Isa 41:2, 25 is that he has been raised up in the east and come upon the islands in the west. This emphasis on battle is the means with which the Servant will release the captives—battle rather than ransom payments (price and reward).
    4. The further claim is made that Yahweh will “direct (make straight) his ways”. The expression “his ways” occurs in Isa 57:18 in relation to the ways of the nation, and the exhortation in Isa 40:3 is that the cities of Judah make straight the ways of the Lord. This description is the basis of the irony that God would “make straight” the crooked paths before Cyrus (Isa 45:2).
  5. The description of what the individual in Isa 45:13 will achieve is that he will “build my city” and “let go my captives”. It is in these details that the irony with Cyrus is struck. These were to be the achievements of Hezekiah, but because of his sin in the matter of the Babylonian envoys, the restoration of Judah was postponed along with its punishment. Cyrus is introduced as the one who will give the decree[4] to build Jerusalem, whereas Hezekiah had been the one about whom it was said that he would build Jerusalem.

Conclusion

It is important to demarcate oracles and have some explanation of their placement. Isaiah’s oracles do not always follow a chronological sequence although there is some chronological ordering. Even if there is some chronological arrangement his oracles are mainly thematically ordered. In particular, it is important to observe a major break at Isa 45:8. The oracles from Isa 40:12-45:7 represent a developing dialogue with Judah that culminates in the delay of the restoration; the oracles of Isa 45:9-48:22 take a read back to the circumstance of Isaiah 41 and are a thematic group that also culminates in the delay of God’s punishment (Isa 48:9). The two blocks are synoptic and parallel to one another in that they describe the argument in Judah and Jerusalem around the time of the visit of the Babylonian envoys after the campaign in Edom (Isaiah 34).

[1] C. Westermann, Isaiah 40-66 (London: SCM Press, 1969), 154.

[2] Westermann, 154.

[3] Westermann, 168.

[4] Cyrus will give a decree; it is not said that he would build Jerusalem. The irony is stuck but there is this significant variation.