Introduction
The purpose of this article is to answer the question: who or what is the holy Spirit mentioned in Isaiah 63? The proposals that can be found in the commentaries are as follows: the psyche of the Deity; the angel of the presence; the third person of the Trinity; and the spirit of God in Moses.
Oracle Units
A new oracle is recorded in Isa 63:7-14; it is from the watchmen on the city walls; one was inspired to utter the oracle and Isaiah has recorded it, or Isaiah may have seen it in vision and given it to the watchmen (Tg. Isa 63:7). We know this because it uses the verb “to mention” (rkz, v. 7) from Isaiah 62,
I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention (rkz) of the Lord, keep not silence… Isa 62:6 (KJV)
Once we see this intertextual link[1] and observe that a herald on the city walls would typically announce, “Who is this that is coming?”, we can see how and why the two oracle units of Isa 63:1-14 are positioned at this point: they are part of the chronological sequencing in Isaiah.
The second oracle (Isa 63:7-14) opens with a natural response of gratitude for the salvation of the Lord on behalf of Judah for victory over Edom (Isa 63:1-6); however, the remembrance is not all praise. The remembrancer is taking up the general command of Deut 32:7, and more particularly the command of Isa 47:9,
Remember (rkz) the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me… Isa 46:9 (KJV)
The verb translated “mention” in v. 7 is the common verb “to remember” and it also occurs in v. 11,
Then he remembered (rkz, mentioned) the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? Isa 63:11 (KJV)
The repetition of the verb “mention” in v. 11 helps to identify and distinguish the watchman’s words from those of the narrator (Isaiah) reporting upon the watchman.
The oracle unit opens in the first person, “I will mention” (v. 7), and the reader is expected to pick up the connection with Isa 62:6. The watchman speaks of Yahweh and what he has done for his people up until the end of v. 10. At this point the voice changes to Isaiah who is recording what the watchmen is remembering and mentioning: Isaiah says, “Then he [the watchman] remembered the days of old”. Isaiah is highlighting the function of the watchmen—to remember and mention the Lord.
What the watchman now remembers continues in v. 11b with questions,
Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? That led them by the right hand of Moses with his glorious arm, dividing the water before them, to make himself an everlasting name? That led them through the deep, as an horse in the wilderness, that they should not stumble? Isa 63:11b-13 (KJV)
This is a reminiscence of the exodus from Egypt, spoken, but rhetorically asking where Yahweh (‘he’) was in the present situation. The “answer” concludes the unit,
As a beast goeth down into the valley, the Spirit of the Lord caused him to rest: so didst thou lead thy people, to make thyself a glorious name. Isa 63:14 (KJV)
The answer here uses the common motif of giving a victorious leader rest from his enemy (e.g. Deut 12:10; 25:19; Josh 14:15; 2 Sam 7:11; 1 Chron 22:9; Est 9:16; Ps 94:13; Isa 14:3). The switch from the plural “them” in v. 13 to the singular “him” (v. 14) is a shift to talking about what the Spirit of the Lord did through Moses. The hope being expressed is that the answer to the question “Where is Yahweh?” is that “The Spirit of Yahweh is still in the Redeemer-Conqueror” of Isa 63:1-6. In the next oracle unit (Isa 63:15-16), the Conqueror will also ask the same question: Why is Yahweh’s mercy restrained?
Loving-kindness
The remembrancer begins with the mention of the lovingkindness of the Lord,
I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the Lord, and the praises of the Lord, according to all that the Lord hath bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies, and according to the multitude of his lovingkindnesses. Isa 63:7 (KJV)
The RSV renders the Hebrew “lovingkindness” as “steadfast love” and the idea is of faithfulness to the covenant (Ps 89:34). The use of “house of Israel” is rare in Isaiah (4x) and the echo here, in view of the wine motif of vv. 1-6, is “For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel” (Isa 5:7).
In the KJV, RSV and NASB, the remembrancer appears to give a reason for Yahweh’s lovingkindness,
For he said, surely they are my people,[2] children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour. Isa 63:8 (KJV)
However, the Hebrew has a conjunction (w rather than yk) and we can equally read, “And he said” (following the LXX), which can then be taken as a comment by the narrator on what the remembrancer is saying. This ties in with the syntax of v. 8 and we can see that the narrator’s comments are part of the structure of the oracle: “And he said…then he remembered” (vv. 8, 11).[3]
The actual words of the remembrancer in v. 8 begin with the recollection of the story of the exodus:
Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour. In all their affliction he was afflicted,[4] and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. Isa 63:8-9 (KJV)
God expresses the hope while the people are still in Egypt and as he goes about being their saviour that they will not lie in the future. The idea of lying is that of dealing falsely according to the terms of a covenant (Gen 21:23; Lev 19:11; Ps 44:17), and so God is expressing the hope that the people will not “lie” against the covenant that he intends to make at Sinai. However, as the remembrancer then states, the people did rebel: “they rebelled and vexed his holy Spirit” (v. 10). The contrast between “will not lie” and “they rebelled” is anticipated in the earlier lament, “This is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the Lord” (Isa 30:9).
The remembrancer is mentioning the covenant faithfulness of Yahweh as he has seen this demonstrated in the victory in Edom (vv. 1, 7; cf. Ps 89:34), but by implication, he is also mentioning the tendency for Judah to be unfaithful and deal falsely (v. 8; cf. Ps 44:17) in respect of the covenant. This is the implication of the overtone in “Surely they are my people” which quotes the covenant formula, “You will be my people and I will be your God” (Deut 29:13). The implied doubt is expressed in the addition of “surely” ($a).
Angel of the Presence
The remembrancer affirms that Yahweh was their saviour (v. 8, [Xy) and with the same common verb then states that the “angel of his presence saved ( [Xy) them” (v. 9). This echoes the definitive event of the Red Sea crossing, “the Lord saved ( [Xy) Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians” (Exod 14:30). This was an event in which an angel was pivotally involved (Exod 14:19).[5]
The definite description “the angel of his presence” is constructed from Exod 33:14-15 (“presence”) and Exod 23:20-23 (“my angel”). Isaiah is recording an interpretation of Exod 33:14-15 that suggests Yahweh’s presence among the people was mediated by an angel. Moses had invited Yahweh to make his presence “go” with them (Exod 33:14-15; cf. Deut 4:37), and this echoes the tradition in which Yahweh had said that his angel would “go” (Exod 23:20) before the people. Thus, the Isaianic text is picking up this echo and formulating it in terms of the expression, “the angel of his presence”.
The action of leading the nation from Egypt to the land is attributed both to Yahweh and to the angel of his presence (Exod 33:14-15; Num 20:16; Deut 4:37; Jud 2:1). These Scriptural texts do not present such co-involvement as occasional and episodic; rather they imply that actions and events could be attributed to either party insofar as the angel of the Lord manifested Yahweh.
Holy Spirit
An equation between “the angel of his presence” and “his holy Spirit” is often supported with an appeal to the flow of the statements in vv. 9-10,
In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried[6] them all the days of old. But they[7] rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them. Isa 63:9-10 (KJV)
These statements seemingly focus on two persons: first, Yahweh and the angel of his presence and then, secondly, Yahweh and his holy Spirit. The stress carried from v. 9 to v. 10 is on “his”—his presence and his holy Spirit.
However, there are alternative suppositions to consider: “his holy Spirit” is a reference to,
- the psyche of the deity;
- God’s spirit as it is in an individual.
Psalm 51 (v. 11) makes a connection between ‘presence’ and God’s holy Spirit that directly affects David, but there is no mention of the angel of the presence. The mention of ‘presence’ in Isaiah 63 trades on this linkage in Psalm 51 and we should look for an understanding of ‘his holy Spirit’ that relates to an individual.
This question can be decided through a study of the verb translated “to vex” (bc[, Isa 63:10, (KJV)) and the word “within” (vdq, Isa 63:11 (KJV)).
Vexing/Grieving
The verb “to grieve/vex” (bc[) is a Piel form. There are only three occurrences of the Piel form (Job 10:8; Ps 56:6; Isa 63:10). The psalm uses it in the sense of ‘distorting’ words (NASB) but ‘distort’ could also be the sense in Job if we translate the verse as,
Thy hands have distorted me and made me altogether, and wouldst thou destroy me? Job 10:8 (NASB revised)
Job is affirming that God had not only made him but had also distorted him in his physical affliction. Such a negative physical sense for the Piel in the psalm and in Job is not unrelated to an emotional use of the verb meaning ‘vex/grieve’ since vexing and grieve can indeed lead to bodily and facial distortion.
The Qal form of bc[ has three occurrences and these appear to imply an emotional effect (1 Kgs 1:6; 1 Chron 4:10; Isa 54:6). The Hiphil form occurs twice (Ps 78:40; Jer 44:19), and of these Ps 78:40 is the best indicator to the meaning of bc[ in Isa 63:10 as this psalm recounts the same episode as Isaiah but with the Hiphil form:
How oft did they provoke (hrm) him in the wilderness, and grieve (bc[) him in the desert! Ps 78:40 (KJV)
This connection would straightforwardly support the interpretation that ‘his holy Spirit’ was the psyche of the Deity were it not for the question as to why Isaiah has ‘grieved his holy Spirit’ instead of just ‘grieved him’ like the Psalm. A simple equation between ‘his holy Spirit’ and God’s psyche does not explain the variation from ‘grieved him’ to ‘grieved his holy Spirit’. Alongside this point, we should also factor in NT interpretation from the quotation[8] of Isaiah in Eph 4:30,
And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Eph 4:30 (KJV)
Here, Paul takes the semantic value of possession in ‘his’ and converts its representation to ‘of God’ to give ‘grieve not the holy Spirit of God’. The question reasserts itself as to why Paul has not written ‘grieve not God’, and thereby picked up Ps 78:40 as his background text rather than Isaiah 63. What we clearly need is an explanation for the use of ‘his holy Spirit’ as the object of ‘grieve/vex’ that allows us to see a reference to the psyche of God but explains why we do not simply have ‘grieved/vexed him’. The clue lies in v. 11 which identifies the reference of ‘his holy Spirit’ as something shared between God and Moses.
In v. 11 we read that “his holy Spirit” was either “among them” (RSV, NASB) or “within him” (KJV). If we follow the KJV, the holy Spirit is within Moses and this means that the holy Spirit in Moses is grieved. Is this an explanation of why Isaiah takes Ps 78:40 and ‘grieve him’, transforming this into ‘grieve his holy Spirit’—because he wants to say that both Moses and Yahweh were grieved?
Within
The RSV and NASB render v. 11 differently to the KJV:
Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him (wbrqb)? Isa 63:11 (KJV)
Then his people remembered the days of old, of Moses. Where is he who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of his flock? Where is he who put his holy Spirit in the midst of them (wbrqb)… Isa 63:11 (NASB)
Then he remembered the days of old, of Moses his servant. Where is he who brought up out of the sea the shepherds of his flock? Where is he who put in the midst of them (wbrqb) his holy Spirit… Isa 63:11 (RSV)
The KJV has “put his holy Spirit within him”, whereas the RSV has “put in the midst of them his holy Spirit” and the NASB varies this trivially with “put his holy Spirit in the midst of them”. The argument in favour of the NASB and RSV is that the singular suffix of wbrqb has a plural sense following the pattern of usage in Num 14:11, Deut 31:16, and Josh 24:5, where “the people” are in focus. It is said that the people are in focus from Isa 63:8 onwards. Thus, this language echoes the presence of Yahweh among the people (wbrqb, Exod 34:10), albeit a presence mediated by an angel.
However, if we instead respect the singularity of the pronominal suffix in the Hebrew (“him”), which is its overwhelming usage in the MT, the KJV would be correct because the narrator has also mentioned a singular figure—Moses. On the KJV reading, ‘his holy Spirit’ is within Moses: it is the holy Spirit in Moses that is also vexed/grieved. This would make the language a personifying use of “holy Spirit” for what Moses and Yahweh have in common.
Moses
The remembrancer on the city walls is referring to the history of Israel: “Then he remembered the days of old: Moses, his people”—Isaiah specifies “days of old” to be about “Moses, his people”. The two choices for understanding what he is referring to are the rebellion at the entry to the land (Numbers 14) and the rebellion at the second “waters of Meribah” incident (Numbers 20).
The rebellion of the Israelites at the entry to the land is against the Lord, causing the glory of the Lord to appear in the tabernacle (Num 14:9). The Lord speaks to Moses, “How long will this people provoke me?” (Num 14:11). Moses’ appeal is to God’s reputation and to the fact that he was “among” (brq) the people (Num 14:14-16). The focus of the episode is the provocation of Yahweh rather than any hurt caused to Moses. Further, it is Yahweh who is said to be among the people rather than Moses. Some commentators have proposed that Isaiah picks up on this use of “among” from Num 14:14-16 in his phrase “put in the midst of them his holy Spirit”. However, the weakness of this choice for the remembrancer’s words lies in the paucity of lexical echoes to the whole episode. A better choice is the rebellion at the second “waters of Meribah” incident where Moses is to the foreground.
Psalms 78 and 106
Isaiah 63 gives prominence to Moses and makes the point that the holy Spirit was put within him. It picks up the verb ‘to grieve/vex’ from Ps 78:40 which relates to Yahweh but varies its use by stating that ‘they vexed/grieved his holy Spirit’ and thereby includes Moses. But we also find further explanation for this variation in Isaiah’s use of Ps 106:32-33 which refers to Moses’ own spirit. This text is a relevant connection because references to Moses in connection with ‘spirit’—any ‘spirit’—are rare and consist of Numbers 11, Psalm 106 and Isaiah 63. Isaiah is making a point about the holy Spirit within Moses in contrast to Moses’ own spirit:
They angered him also at the waters of strife, so that it went ill with Moses for their sakes: Because they provoked (hrm) his spirit, so that he spake unadvisedly with his lips. Ps 106:32-33 (KJV)
The rebels at Kadesh, the second “waters of Meribah” incident, were “provokers” to Moses (Num 20:10, 24). The contrasting connection to be made here is between “provoked his spirit” and “vexed his holy Spirit”. The use of ‘his holy Spirit’ in Isaiah is a contrasting observation to that in Psalm 106.
In Psalm 106, Moses’ spirit was provoked and he spoke unadvisedly. His being provoked is comparable to Yahweh being provoked of which we read in Ps 78:40 but the reaction is different. Yahweh was provoked but only Moses spoke unadvisedly—Yahweh was, instead, grieved. We might say that Moses’ human nature got the better of him.[9]
This is not to say that Moses did not have the holy Spirit nor that it was not grieved. Moses had the Spirit (Num 11:17, 25)[10] in addition to his own spirit. Rather, Yahweh being grieved by the rebelliousness of the people is matched by Moses being grieved. Isaiah takes what happened with Moses and ‘his spirit’ and associates grieving with ‘holy’ spirit in Moses.
Such a holy Spirit contrasts with the rebellious Israelites who did not have the right ‘spirit’ but a ‘provoking’ or rebellious one (hrm, Ps 78:8). There was such a holy spirit within Moses but his own spirit was provoked into striking the rock (i.e. made rebellious like the Israelites). The failure in the episode was about holiness because Moses did not sanctify or ‘make holy’ (vdq) the Lord before the Israelites (Num 27:14), even though he had the holy (vdq) Spirit. The remembrancer is therefore striking an ironic recollection of the Waters of Meribah.
The rebellion at Kadesh is noted in other Israelite traditions (Num 27:14; Deut 33:8) and would be a likely recollection for a remembrancer juxtaposing rebellion against redemption. After the rebellion, the Lord fought against Israel in their battle with Arad (Num 21:1), and this is recollected by the remembrancer in the words, “therefore he was turned to be their enemy” (Isa 63:10).
We can see that one of the “shepherds of his flock” was Moses:
Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds[11] of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him? Isa 63:11 (KJV revised)
Yahweh brought the people up out of the Red Sea with the shepherds of his flock (cf. Num 27:17-18; Pss 77:20; 78:52), one of whom was Moses in whom there was his holy Spirit.
Our conclusion therefore is that the holy Spirit should not be equated with the Angel of the Presence.[12] It should be equated with what was put within Moses, what was shared with God, and what was grieved in both; what we have here is a personification of the Spirit (rather than a hypostasis or a being).
The text is introducing information about Moses and the Spirit of God in him that aligns him with Ps 78:40 and gives a contrasting point to the failure of his own spirit noted in Ps 106:32-33. It secures the contrast by using the word ‘holy’ for the spirit, because the failure of Moses’ own spirit according to Num 27:14 is a failure “to make [Yahweh] holy”. There is therefore no basis here in Isaiah 63 for any doctrine of the Holy Spirit that is Trinitarian or which attempts to explain the personal language in the NT in relation to the Holy Spirit as angelic. Instead, both Isaiah 63 and Psalm 51 use the expression ‘holy Spirit’ when referring to what is shared between individuals and God.
Spirit of the Lord
A linkage between the Angel of the Lord and the Spirit of the Lord could be made for Isa 63:9-14, but scholars have disagreed as to whether the oracle identifies the “holy Spirit” and/or the “Spirit of the Lord” as the “Angel of the Lord”. In the light of these opposite opinions, some discussion is necessary.
The close proximity of “Spirit of the Lord” in Isa 63:14 to “holy Spirit” in Isa 63:10-11 has suggested identity of reference. The contextual reference implied by the pronominal suffix “his” in “his holy Spirit” implies “of the Lord” and supports such an identity claim. However, the text offers Moses as the one in whom the Spirit dwells.
The key idea here is “leading”,
That led them by the right hand of Moses…That led them through the deep[13]…As a beast goeth down into the valley, the Spirit of the Lord caused him to rest: so didst thou lead thy people, to make thyself a glorious name. Isa 63:11-14 (KJV)
The RSV and NASB more accurately reflect the Hebrew and give,
Who caused his glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them to make for himself an everlasting name… Isa 63:12 (NASB)
But the clause is better as,
Who caused his splendid arm to walk in relation to Moses’ right hand…the Spirit of the Lord caused him to rest… (v. 14)[14]
This hypostatization of the Arm of the Lord identifies Moses as the Arm of the Lord that delivered the people. The preposition “at” here (l) means “in respect of” or “in relation to”: God caused his glorious arm to walk in relation to the right hand of Moses. This was pre-eminently seen in the dividing of the Red Sea as Moses lifted up his hand; the people then “walked” across on dry land.
The use of the motif of the Arm of the Lord in relation to Moses is all about deliverance and presenting Moses as a deliverer. It connects with the use of the motif in relation to the Anonymous Conqueror (Isa 51:9; 52:10; 53:159:16; 62:8; 63:5). The motif has been present in Isaiah 40-66 when deliverance has been promised (Isa 40:10; 48:14[15]).
There is a parallelism here to note:
| Who | caused to walk | the Arm of the Lord | |
| Spirit of the | Lord | caused to rest | the people |
The Spirit of the Lord is not the Arm of the Lord. Instead, the use of the expression “Spirit of the Lord” alludes to its use in relation to the judges who (like Moses) delivered the people (e.g. Jud 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6). The Spirit of the Lord in Moses caused the people to rest, and it was in this way (“so”, !k) that Yahweh led the people. This rest was the Promised Land to which they had been led (Ps 95:11). The simile offered is that the Spirit of the Lord (in Moses, the shepherd) led the people as the domestic beast (cattle) is led down into the valley to drink of the river and graze in richer pasture. The emphasis on Moses’ leadership is poignant if there was a crisis of leadership in Judah with regard to the Anonymous Conqueror (this is implied in the following oracle unit, Isa 63:15-64:12).
The remembrancer is declaring that the Lord caused his arm to walk in relation to Moses, and the Spirit of the Lord in Moses caused the people (the beast in the simile) to rest. Isaiah’s argument and that of the remembrancer is that the rest the people should have been seeking after 701 was the rest that God had given them when they first occupied the land (Exod 33:14; Deut 12:9; Ps 95:11). If they were to gain this rest, the army at Jerusalem could not remain inactive—it needed to go out and wreak vengeance on God’s enemies with the Anonymous Conqueror. (The reference to the Spirit of the Lord is made precisely because it was claimed by the Anonymous Conqueror in Isa 61:1.)
The mention of rest could be a puzzle until we set it against the problem of the absence of Yahweh. The people were ostensibly at rest in Jerusalem; the army was not going out to carry out Yahweh’s vengeance, but this policy was not from the Spirit. Hence, the watchman’s argument is that this “rest” was false thinking and rebellious. The raising up of the Anonymous Conqueror was proof of a spiritual malaise in Jerusalem.
Conclusion
We have examined the oracle of Isa 63:7-14. This has been a straightforward recollection of the exodus. The remembrancer recollects two historical facts: first, Yahweh’s gracious and faithful acts of redemption and leadership set against the rebelliousness of the people; secondly, Moses’ leadership of the people with the holy Spirit in him. The second recollection is wholly positive whereas the first recollection has the negative note of the people’s rebelliousness.
Set against the backdrop of recent events in Jerusalem, the first recollection resonates with Yahweh’s deliverance of Jerusalem from the Assyrian army. The rebelliousness of the people since that victory has been illustrated in their pursuit of policies of appeasement and political treaties. The second recollection resonates with the leadership of the Anonymous Conqueror who has also been endowed by the Spirit.
[1] This kind of link between contiguous oracles in Isaiah is common and noted by commentators.
[2] H. A. Whittaker, Isaiah (Cannock: Biblia, 1988), 532, notes an echo and reversal of Hosea and the meaning of Lo-Ammi—”not my people”; this is part of the intertextual weave of the eighth century prophets.
[3] Failure to see this is why the NASB translates v. 11 as “Then his people remembered” which is more a paraphrase than a rendering of the Hebrew. The MT and ancient versions have a singular verb which makes perfect sense on our interpretation. The context requires the verb to refer to the remembrancer.
[4] The Hebrew kethib reading is “In all their straits he was not straightened”, i.e. he was able to save them even though they were in bondage. The KJV follows the qere reading, “in all their affliction, to him there was affliction”. Either sense is natural in the context.
[5] The LXX does not represent the MT; it reads “not an ambassador, nor an angel, but he himself saved them”.
[6] The motif of “being carried” resonates with Isa 40:11 and contrasts with Isa 46:7.
[7] There is an emphatic pronoun in the text. “they, they rebelled”.
[8] There are four lexical and semantic elements in common which makes the intertextual connection a quotation rather than an allusion.
[9] I owe this point to D. Smith.
[10] We may think of the Spirit in Numbers 11 as about ‘power’ rather than the sensitivities of Moses; but this does not mean that Isaiah 63 is about ‘power’—rather, Ps 51:11 associates the holy Spirit with the spiritual sensitivities in a person.
[11] The Hebrew is plural which some commentators read as singular; this is not necessary as it could equally refer to Moses and Aaron.
[12] Contra Whittaker, Isaiah, 533.
[13] This may be a reference to the crossing of the Red Sea or of Jordan, but Ps 106:9 would suggest the Red Sea.
[14] The LXX misdirects the reader by suggesting that a spirit from the Lord descended and led the people to Canaan (kate,bh pneu/ma para. kuri,ou).
[15] The deliverance of the deportees from Babylon was brought about during Sennacherib’s campaign in 700 against the Chaldeans.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One