A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 20: The Valley of Vision

A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 20: The Valley of Vision 

Having left off in our last presentation with the burden of The Desert of the Sea in the middle of Isaiah chapter 21, we are coming to the end of a series of prophecies which had begun in Isaiah chapter 13 with the burden of Babylon, and, on the surface, the burdens seem to have been against all of the nations or places surrounding ancient Judah. Yet in the course of our discussion we hope to have demonstrated that even though they seem to be quite enigmatic, many of them are actually relevant to the children of Israel, and many of them are even more relevant to the far vision of the future of Israel, from Isaiah’s time, rather than to the immediate circumstances and events which had befallen them in ancient times. 

So for reasons which we have already explained, the burden of Babylon is apparently more relevant to the future world empires and the entity known as Mystery Babylon in the Revelation, than it was to the short-lived empire of Nebuchadnezzar, and the burden against the king of Babylon is relevant to all of the rulers of that same long line of empires which had been in Isaiah’s future. The burden of Moab was actually directed towards the Israelites who had dwelt east of the River Jordan, the burden of Damascus towards the Israelites who dwelt in Syria, and the oracle for “the land shadowing with wings” was meant for Israelites of the Assyrian captivity, while the burden of Egypt served as a warning to the remaining people of Judah, not to flee to Egypt for refuge from the coming Assyrians. The last of these burdens that we have already discussed is the “burden of the desert of the sea”, which we had described as having represented the general mass of the world’s peoples who, in the near vision, would face the coming rise of the empire of the Persians and the Medes. So in that sense, it was another prophecy against Babylon, and therefore the declaration that Babylon is fallen was made near its end. 

Now there are still several rather enigmatic burdens which remain, where we shall discuss the burdens which Isaiah had for Edom and Arabia, before the prophet visits the Valley of Vision in the chapter which follows. So now we shall commence with Isaiah chapter 21, from the point where we had left off in our last presentation: 

11 The burden of Dumah. He calleth to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the night? Watchman, what of the night? 

Here the Masoretic Text has the word דומה or Dumah (#’s 1745, 1746), which was at the first the name of one of the sons of Ishmael, listed in Genesis chapter 25. As a common word, Strong’s defines it as a verb to be dumb, and as a noun, as silence. It is most likely the original source of the English word dumb in that sense, describing a person who cannot speak. In Joshua chapter 15 (15:52) Dumah was described as having been a town within the inheritance of the tribe Judah, located in the south of Judah in the mountains, which are in the southeast portion of Judah. There it also happened to be near another town named Arab, but those two towns are certainly not the subjects of these burdens. 

These towns were near the land where Hagar had originally settled with her son Ishmael after they had been sent away by Abraham, and therefore this Dumah certainly seems to have been one of the towns settled, or even founded, by the sons of Ishmael as it is described in Genesis chapter 25. However there is very little evidence of Ishmaelites in Judah during the period of the Judges, or in the time of the Davidic kingdom. Dumah as a place name is mentioned in Scripture only in Joshua 15:52 and here in Isaiah. Likewise, the son of Ishmael bearing that name is only mentioned twice, in the genealogies of Abraham found in Genesis chapter 25 and repeated in 1 Chronicles chapter 1. [There is some confusion with the Hebrew letters Daleth and Resh in some of these occurrences of the name, which we shall ignore here. The reading of Rumah in 2 Kings 23:36 also seems to have been Dumah.]

The Septuagint, however, has the word Ἰδουμαία or Idumea here in Isaiah, where the translators must have read אדם or Edom rather than דומה or Dumah. The difference in spelling is even more significant in Hebrew than what may appear in English. However according to the editors of the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, while the majority of the various copies of the book of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls have Dumah, there is one scroll, known as 1QIsa^a, which has Edom instead. In their notes, the editors also indicate that at least some copies of the Masoretic Text also have Edom rather than Dumah. Of the other Greek versions which are noted in the Hexapla of Origen, the Septuagint copies which he had possessed had Edom, but the Greek translation of Aquila of Sinope had Dumah. [1] The Vulgate of Jerome as well as Origen’s own Hebrew copy also had Dumah. 

So the manuscript evidence seems to be in favor of reading Dumah. But the context of the short burden which is recorded in these two verses certainly favors the minority of manuscripts which have Edom. For that reason, some modern commentators suggest that Dumah was a figurative name for Edom, but we must reject that since this passage is the only place where such an association could possibly be made, and the name as it originally appeared in Isaiah is in question. In the context of this prophecy of Isaiah, which is about eight or nine years after the death of Ahaz, it cannot be said that either Edomites or Ishmaelites had been dwelling in Dumah at this time, and the historical records of the period, both in Scripture and in Assyrian inscriptions, seem to also contradict that possibility. 

Because of the context here, I would actually lean towards the readings found in the minority of manuscripts, and I am persuaded to believe that Isaiah had addressed Edom here, rather than Dumah. The primary reason for that is the statement translated in the King James Version as “He calleth to me out of Seir”, where Dumah is not in Seir, the location of Edom, and neither is Isaiah’s watchman, so there is absolutely no reason to mention Dumah here, and it is completely out of context. 

The same clause is translated in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible to read “Someone is calling to me from Seir”, and in the New American Standard Bible as “One keeps calling to me from Seir”, and we also favor either of those translations. So we would prefer to read the beginning of verse 11 to say “The burden of Edom. One is calling to me out of Seir…” and the watchman to whom he calls is the same watchman which Isaiah had been instructed to set earlier in this chapter, in verse 6, where Yahweh had told him to “Go, set a watchman, let him declare what he seeth.” Then in verse 9 the watchman declared that “Babylon is fallen, is fallen”, and now two verses later, this is evidently that same watchman. 

So if we accept the alternate reading of Edom, which we should, then the burden of Edom is related to the burden of the desert of the sea, since both burdens had been observed by the same watchman in Isaiah’s vision, and immediately after the declaration that Babylon is fallen, Edom is portrayed as asking that same watchman “what of the night?” Then, just as the announcement that Babylon is fallen was repeated a second time, so is the question repeated in the mouth of Edom. 

The New American Standard Bible has the question to read “Watchman, how far gone is the night?” This is appropriate, and the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible makes the same interpretation. One duty of ancient watchmen seems to have been to keep the time, for which various methods were employed. During the day, time was kept with a sundial, and at this very time the Scripture mentions the “dial of Ahaz” which was used to measure the progression of the sun, in 2 Kings chapter 20 and Isaiah chapter 38. But during the night the time was kept with a water clock, which is a vessel dripping water at a tested rate of speed which could be measured according to the passing of time, or with certain candles of which the rate of burning had also been tested and was therefore capable of being estimated. The later Greeks and Romans divided the night into four watches, rather than twelve hours, and typically watchmen took turns in shifts, so they would had to have kept the time. 

Now the watchman responds: 

12 The watchman said, The morning cometh, and also the night: if ye will enquire, enquire ye: return, come. 

The watchman is not the prophet himself, and he does not speak for God, so no theological conclusions concerning Edom should be reached from the watchman’s statement, that if the voice from Seir need to inquire further, that he should return and inquire. The return would only be to the watchman, and not to God. 

The Septuagint has verses 11 and 12 to read “11 Call to me out of Seir; guard ye the bulwarks. 12 I watch in the morning and the night: if thou wouldest enquire, enquire, and dwell by me.” This seems to have been a novel interpretation of the Hebrew, which is evident quite often in Isaiah, especially since there is no word in the Hebrew text which may mean dwell. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible has the passage to read much more closely to the Masoretic Text: “11 … Someone is calling to me from Seir: Watchman, what (is left) of the night? Watchman, what (is left) of the night? 12 The watchman says, Morning is come but also the night. If you would inquire, then inquire; come back again.” 

This is the entire burden of Edom. Perhaps it represents Edom as having had anxiety related to the passing of night, and even as being fearful of the arrival of morning. It does not seem that Edom anticipates the morning in order to welcome its arrival. It seems that the night represents the fall of Babylon which had just been declared by the watchman in the preceding burden. The answer of the watchman is even more enigmatic, where he declares that “the morning comes, and also the night”, as if perhaps the light of day only heralds another period of darkness. So the voice from Seir seems to have been given a chance to inquire as to what he had meant, but apparently no further inquiry was made, as that is where the burden ends. 

This prophecy having come on the heels of the burden of the desert of the sea, which is another oracle against Babylon, we cannot help but to interpret it as having connected the fate of Edom and the inquiry which Edom is portrayed as having made here to the fate of Babylon, and especially the Mystery Babylon of the Revelation, a connection which Christ Himself makes manifest where He casts His enemies into the Lake of Fire after Babylon falls. So for the children of Esau, when Babylon falls and the morning comes, perhaps for them it is the arrival of night. 

Perhaps an analogy of day and night which was made by Paul of Tarsus in the closing chapter of his first epistle to the Thessalonians is fitting where he wrote to his Christian audience: “2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. 4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. 7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. 9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.” 

But this burden of Edom also precedes the burden of the Valley of Vision, which is a burden against Jerusalem, and elsewhere in Scripture we are informed that the Edomites had a hand in its destruction, so the coming of morning and night may signify Edom’s having looked forward to that. In the next burden, for Arabia, we shall see further indications to support that proposal. 

Now the focus of Isaiah’s burdens turns to Arabia. But in ancient times, there was no such place as Arabia, and we really cannot imagine that all of what we now call Arabia had been called Arabia in the time of Isaiah. The word Arabia first appears in Scripture in 1 Kings chapter 10, at the time of Solomon, king of Israel, in a different account of the same events which are also recorded in 2 Chronicles chapter 9, and it appears three times later in Scripture, here in Isaiah, and once each in Jeremiah and in Ezekiel. The term Arabian had first appeared here in Isaiah chapter 13, and later it appears on three other occasions in Jeremiah and Nehemiah. The book of Nehemiah appears before Isaiah in most Bibles, but it is actually much later than Isaiah in time, just over two hundred years later. The plural form of the word Arabian appears four times in 2 Chronicles, and once again in Nehemiah. The short form, Arab, appears only as an unrelated place name along with Dumah in Joshua chapter 15 (15:52). 

So the term Arabia in reference to a land and its people seems not to have developed until the time of the Davidic Kingdom and the 10th century BC, and even from that time, it seems to have been little-used until much later in history. The word appears in translations of Assyrian inscriptions dated to the 9th and 8th centuries BC, however without a transcription of the original cuneiform tablets we cannot be certain that it was not merely translated from some other word. In the earlier books of Moses, Joshua and Judges, distinct lands in what is later called Arabia, such as Havilah, Midian, Cush, Zobah, Sheba and others had been identified in various places and at diverse times, but the word Arabia does not appear at all in those early books. 

The word ערב or arab (# 6153) from which Arabia is translated is a Hebrew term which means to braid or intermix (# 6148), to grow dusky at sundown (# 6150), to commingle or mix (# 6151), dusk (# 6153), or “the web (or transverse threads of cloth); also a mixture, (or mongrel race) (# 6148), as Strong’s defined the term in its different parts of speech and its usage in various different contexts. 

Because of these definitions, which seem to be unrelated but which are actually quite closely related, various modern commentators claim that the reason why Arabia is called after that name is because it is in the east, where the sky grows dark earlier than the west, since the west is where the sun sets. However the vast majority of the land which was known as Arabia was not in the east, relative to ancient Israel, but in the far south and southeast. Then again, Mesopotamia and Babylon, as well as Elam, had been almost directly east of Judah and Jerusalem, but they were never considered to have been in Arabia. Ancient Dedan, which is mentioned here along with Arabia, was near the Gulf of Aqaba, in a location which is directly south of Jerusalem. 

Rather, the first time in Scripture that the Hebrew term which is translated as Arabia had been used in reference to people is found in Exodus chapter 12, where we read of the Israelites in the Exodus that: “38 … a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.” There the word arab was translated as mixed, and in that context it evidently referred to people of different nations or races, and not merely to Egyptians who were mingled with Hebrews. It is evident in the Biblical history of the Old Testament, that the Canaanites and other tribes of what had become known as Arabia were wont to mingle with one another, and eventually they no longer became distinguishable according to their original tribes. They had been mixing in such a manner for many centuries, and both Ishmaelites and Edomites had become mingled together with them, which is also fully evident in Scripture. So the word is used in that sense, mingled, of the people of the region. 

When White people mix with other races, they also grow dark. However it is apparent in history that only later did these early Arabs begin to actually grow dark, as they had later imported negro slaves into the Arab world in large numbers, although some of them may have been mixed in that fashion at an earlier time. 

13 The burden upon Arabia. In the forest in Arabia shall ye lodge, O ye travelling companies of Dedanim. 14 The inhabitants of the land of Tema brought water to him that was thirsty, they prevented with their bread him that fled. 

The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible has scrub rather than forest in verse 13. I can understand the skepticism as to whether there were actually ever forests in Arabia, but ancient literature such as the Epic of Gilgamesh, as well as the river which compassed the land of Havilah in Genesis chapter 2, certainly indicates that there had been. 

The identity of this Dedan is ambiguous, since Dedan was a son of Cush, and also a grandson of Abraham with his later wife, Keturah. In the prophecy of Ezekiel concerning Tyre, which was an Israelite city famous for trade, we read in Ezekiel chapter 27 that “15 The men of Dedan were thy merchants; many isles were the merchandise of thine hand: they brought thee for a present horns of ivory and ebony.” Later in the same chapter we read “20 Dedan was thy merchant in precious clothes for chariots.” Even later, in Ezekiel chapter 38 we read: “ 13 Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil?…” The reference to Tarshish is to Tartessus, a Japhethite settlement in what is now southeastern Spain, which the Greek historian Herodotus had described as a famous trading town, which had not yet had such a status before the Trojan War. [2] In other places, Dedan is mentioned along with Tema, or Teman, in Jeremiah chapter 25 and Ezekiel chapter 25. In Jeremiah chapter 49, Dedan is described as suffering the same calamity which Esau, or Edom, shall suffer. 

This Tema is a son of Ishmael and the founder of one of the tribes of the Ishmaelites, as they were described in Genesis chapter 25. Tema is also mentioned along with Sheba in Job chapter 6 where we read “19 The troops of Tema looked, the companies of Sheba waited for them.” This association of all of these various tribes descended from Ham, Ishmael and the sons of Keturah helps to substantiate our interpretation of the original use of the terms Arab and Arabia, as referring to the people of the south who had all become mingled together. Edom would also fit into this category, since in Genesis chapter 36, in the genealogy of Esau, it is evident that the Edomites had intermingled with both the Horites and the Ishmaelites. Later in history, especially in the Geography of Strabo of Cappadocia, in Book 16, Edom is associated with Nabataean Arabs, who were also, at least in part, descended from Ishmael. 

The Ishmaelites also became known as travelers for trade from early times, and first appear in that context in Genesis chapter 37, where Joseph was thrown by his brethren into a pit near Dothan, and we read in Genesis chapter 37: “28 Then there passed by Midianites merchantmen; and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmeelites for twenty pieces of silver: and they brought Joseph into Egypt.” In turn, the Ishmaelites later sold Joseph into Egypt, which we read in Genesis chapter 39: “1 And Joseph was brought down to Egypt; and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him of the hands of the Ishmeelites, which had brought him down thither.” So the Ishmaelites must have had other cargo which they were bringing to Egypt from the northern parts of Canaan, and this was their regular occupation. 

Both the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible and the New American Standard Bible translate verse 14 to read: “Bring water for the thirsty, O inhabitants of the land of Tema, Meet the fugitive with bread.” With this translation we must agree. However the context refers to those same Judahites who would flee to the south, and to Egypt, in order to escape the coming Assyrians. So it seems that verse 15 is also referencing the same Judahites who would flee from Judah:

15 For they fled from the swords, from the drawn sword, and from the bent bow, and from the grievousness of war. 

Therefore, just as Egypt had suffered the destruction of several cities, as Yahweh had sought to have the Judahites who fled to Egypt punished, now we see a similar judgment come upon the cities of Arabia, where Kedar is mentioned explicitly:

16 For thus hath the Lord said unto me, Within a year, according to the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail: 17 And the residue of the number of archers, the mighty men of the children of Kedar, shall be diminished: for the LORD God of Israel hath spoken it. 

As it is also described in Genesis chapter 25, Kedar was yet another son of Ishmael, and one of the princes of the tribes of the Ishmaelites who had established a town in the south near the Gulf of Aqaba. The land of Qedar, as it was also commonly spelled with a Qoph or ‘q’ in Hebrew, was established as a notable district in Arabia, adjacent to the Red Sea, and persisted in one form or another for many centuries. But here, in the time of Isaiah, we have a prophecy that Kedar shall fall, and earlier, in verse 13, the people of Dedan were told that they would dwell in the forests, rather than in their city. 

Many inscriptions from the time of Tiglath-Pileser III show that Arabia was subject to the Assyrian empire in his time. In the annals of Sargon II, who was the Assyrian king at this point in the ministry of Isaiah, in the seventh year of his rule, we read:

18. From Pir'u, king of Egypt, Samsi, queen of Arabia, It'amra, the Sabean, the kings of the seacoast and the desert, I received gold, products of the mountain, precious stones, ivory, seed of the maple(?), all kinds of herbs, horses, and camels, as their tribute. I defeated Mita, king of Muski, in his province. The cities of Harrua and Ushnanis, fortresses of the land of Kue, which he had held by force since distant days I restored to their (former) status (lit., place). [3] 

In a later inscription of the time of Esarhaddon, who came to rule Assyria in 681 BC, there is another reference to Arabia:

518a. [Adumu, the fortress of Arabia, which Sennacherib, the father] who begot me, [had captured and destroyed, carrying off the gods of [the king] of Arabia and [bringing them to Assyria];—Hazael, king of the Arabs, [came] to Nineveh, my royal city, [with his rich gifts, and kissed my feet, imploring me [to give (back) his gods], I had mercy upon him and (the gods) Dai, Nuhai, Ebirillu, Atar-kurumai, [of these gods] I repaired the injuries and inscribed the might of Assur, my lord, [and the characters of my name] upon them and gave them back to him. [4]

So evidently, there were wars of conquest in Arabia conducted by both Sargon II and Sennacherib, his successor, however the records are incomplete so we cannot find an explicit statement indicating when Kedar may have fallen, or when or if Teman may have been destroyed. But the prophecy here does not necessitate Kedar’s having fallen in war. It may also describe plague or famine or some other calamity. Furthermore, where it says “within a year” it must be speaking prophetically, of the days when the people of Judah would seek to flee to Egypt and Arabia in the days of Sennacherib. Since Sennacherib returned to Assyria after the failed siege of Jerusalem, and spent his later years occupied in wars with Elam and Babylonia, he seems never to have returned to Palestine or Arabia, and therefore the inscription of Esarhaddon seems to refer events which may have occurred around the same time when Sennacherib was in Lachish, taking the fenced cities of Judah. 

This completes our commentary for Isaiah chapter 21, and now we shall discuss another enigmatic prophesy, the burden of the Valley of Vision, in Isaiah chapter 22. At a glance, it seems that this burden has Babylon for a subject, since we read of “the spoiling of the daughter of my people” in verse 4, and of Elam once again in verse 6. But Babylon is not in view here, except perhaps for the circumstances since Babylon was instrumental in the fulfillment of the closing verses of this burden. Rather, as we continue reading this burden, it becomes evident that Jerusalem itself is the subject, and that most of it is related to the siege of Jerusalem in the time of the Assyrians. Therefore, commencing with Isaiah chapter 22:

1 The burden of the valley of vision. What aileth thee now, that thou art wholly gone up to the housetops? 

The Septuagint has Sion rather than Vision. The Hebrew word for vision is חזון or chazown (# 2377) while the Hebrew spelling of Zion is typically ציון or tsiown (# 6726). While the letters Zayin or ‘z’ and Tsadi or ‘ts’ are usually transliterated into Greek as a Sigma or ‘s’, they should not be confused in Hebrew except perhaps by their sound. Here that seems to be the error which was made in the Septuagint, where perhaps חזון was read in error as a spelling of Zion with a definite article. The Hexapla of Origen has the reading as vision in Hebrew, in Old Latin, and in the Greek translations of both Aquila of Sinope and Symmachus. [5] The Latin Vulgate also has vision, and so does the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. 

Where the people are described as having ailed, or in other translations as having been troubled, and as having gone up to the housetops, it seems to be that when calamity had struck a city, the people had customarily taken to the housetops as a last place of refuge. This is seen elsewhere in Jeremiah chapter 48 where we read: “38 There shall be lamentation generally upon all the housetops of Moab, and in the streets thereof: for I have broken Moab like a vessel wherein is no pleasure, saith the LORD.” 

2 Thou that art full of stirs, a tumultuous city, a joyous city: thy slain men are not slain with the sword, nor dead in battle. 

While the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible also reflects as much, the translation of the New American Standard Bible better portrays the reasons why the city is being chastised, where we read: “2 You who were full of noise, You boisterous town, you exultant city; Your slain were not slain with the sword, Nor did they die in battle.” This seems to be stating that if the people are slain, it is on account of their own obstinate profligacy that they are being slain. This becomes fully evident later in the chapter, and especially in verses 12 and 13 where Yahweh attests to having called for the people to mourn, and instead they had feasted and celebrated. 

3 All thy rulers are fled together, they are bound by the archers: all that are found in thee are bound together, which have fled from far. 

All thy rulers have fled: these are the people of Judah in the burdens of Egypt and Arabia who had sought refuge in those places, but who would be pursued and punished by Yahweh. The second clause here is better read as it is in the New American Standard Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, to state that “they were captured without the bow”, just as the slain were slain without sword or battle. They were captured by their profligacy, or in sin. For that, Yahweh God Himself is now portrayed as having lamented:

4 Therefore said I, Look away from me; I will weep bitterly, labour not to comfort me, because of the spoiling of the daughter of my people. 

The “spoiling of the daughter of my people” evidently refers to the sins of Jerusalem, as well as the punishments which the people are about to face for those sins:

5 For it is a day of trouble, and of treading down, and of perplexity by the Lord GOD of hosts in the valley of vision, breaking down the walls, and of crying to the mountains. 

Now there are explicit mentions of Elam and Kir. The word Kir is ambiguous. There was a Kir in Moab, mentioned in Isaiah chapter 15. But there was also a Kir to which the people of Syria, ostensibly both Israelites and Aramaeans, would go into captivity, which is mentioned in Amos chapter 1 and 2 Kings chapter 16. Later, in Amos chapter 9, there is mention of “Syrians from Kir”, where it is apparent that perhaps this Kir was located in the lands of Aram in the far north, which included the ancient land of Abraham in Padanaram. 

6 And Elam bare the quiver with chariots of men and horsemen, and Kir uncovered the shield. 

In the days of the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem under Sennacherib, both of these countries, Elam and Padanaram, which at the time was part of the land called Urartu, had been subject states of the Assyrians. While we do not know why they are singled out here, they, along with all of the other subject states, such as Arabia and Edom, would have contributed armies to the Assyrian hosts which had conducted the siege of Jerusalem, as well as the taking of all the fenced cities of Judah. 

7 And it shall come to pass, that thy choicest valleys shall be full of chariots, and the horsemen shall set themselves in array at the gate. 

This describes the state of Jerusalem under siege. There were valleys both within and outside of the ancient city of Jerusalem. Two significant valleys which were close to the city are the Kidron Valley, on the east side of the city where the fields and brook of Kidron which are mentioned in 2 Kings chapter 23 were located, and also the Valley of the son of Hinnom which was where the children of Israel sacrificed their infants to Moloch, and which is mentioned in Jeremiah chapters 7, 19 and 32 as well as in the historical books of Scripture. Here the valleys outside of the city are filled with armies, which would have been anticipating an entrance into the city once the siege would successfully breach the walls.

8 And he discovered the covering of Judah, and thou didst look in that day to the armour of the house of the forest. 9 Ye have seen also the breaches of the city of David, that they are many: and ye gathered together the waters of the lower pool. 

The “house of the forest of Lebanon”, or simply “house of the forest” here, was evidently a building of cedars brought from Lebanon, which was constructed in Jerusalem in the time of Solomon and used for his armory and for others of his treasures. This is evident in 1 Kings chapters 7 and 10. Then in 2 Chronicles chapter 9 we read: “15 And king Solomon made two hundred targets of beaten gold: six hundred shekels of beaten gold went to one target. 16 And three hundred shields made he of beaten gold: three hundred shekels of gold went to one shield. And the king put them in the house of the forest of Lebanon.”

The word translated as discover in verse 8, גלה or galah (# 1540) actually means to denude, or figuratively, to reveal. The gathering together of the waters of the pool is a reference to something which Hezekiah would do in preparation for the siege of Jerusalem. In 2 Chronicles chapter 32, it is described how Hezekiah was able to build a concealed conduit, and diverted the waters of Gihon into the city so that Jerusalem would have water sufficient to withstand a siege. The water was brought up into the city through a shaft, which today is called Warren’s Shaft after the archaeologist who had recently discovered it. 

So the description here is related to the events which later transpired during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians. Where verse 8 reads “and he discovered the covering of Judah”, since verse 5 Yahweh God Himself has been the primary subject, and we would translate the clause to read “And He revealed the covering of Judah”, since Yahweh himself had promised to defend Jerusalem, that it would not fall to the Assyrians, for example in 2 Kings chapter 20, but also later here in Isaiah, so He is the covering of Jerusalem. 

In 2 Chronicles chapter 32 we read, in part: “1 After these things, and the establishment thereof, Sennacherib king of Assyria came, and entered into Judah, and encamped against the fenced cities, and thought to win them for himself. 2 And when Hezekiah saw that Sennacherib was come, and that he was purposed to fight against Jerusalem, 3 He took counsel with his princes and his mighty men to stop the waters of the fountains which were without the city: and they did help him. 4 So there was gathered much people together, who stopped all the fountains, and the brook that ran through the midst of the land, saying, Why should the kings of Assyria come, and find much water? 5 Also he strengthened himself, and built up all the wall that was broken, and raised it up to the towers, and another wall without, and repaired Millo in the city of David, and made darts and shields in abundance.” Then a little further on, in reference to the water supply Hezekiah had assured for the city, in retrospect we read: “30 This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper watercourse of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side of the city of David….”

Now here in Isaiah, these very acts which took place over five years later are being prophesied, and there are further references to the preparations of the people for the coming siege of the Assyrians:

10 And ye have numbered the houses of Jerusalem, and the houses have ye broken down to fortify the wall. 11 Ye made also a ditch between the two walls for the water of the old pool: but ye have not looked unto the maker thereof, neither had respect unto him that fashioned it long ago. 

Evidently, at least large portions of the tunnel through which Hezekiah had water taken into the city, if not all of it. were a natural part of the creation of the mountains atop which Jerusalem was situated. The tunnel existed in ancient times, as we read in the conquest of Jerusalem recorded in 2 Samuel chapter 5, since Jerusalem had been held by the Jebusites until the time of King David: “7 Nevertheless David took the strong hold of Zion: the same is the city of David. 8 And David said on that day, Whosoever getteth up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind, that are hated of David's soul, he shall be chief and captain. Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house. 9 So David dwelt in the fort, and called it the city of David. And David built round about from Millo and inward.” The gutter, as the King James Version has it, is the same conduit which Hezekiah had used to bring water up into Jerusalem during the siege. Apparently, Hezekiah and the people of Jerusalem did not imagine that Yahweh Himself had made that conduit for their use. 

Now the subject turns back to the sins of the people:

12 And in that day did the Lord GOD of hosts call to weeping, and to mourning, and to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth: 13 And behold joy and gladness, slaying oxen, and killing sheep, eating flesh, and drinking wine: let us eat and drink; for to morrow we shall die. 

Through Isaiah and the other prophets of his time, Amos, Hosea and Micah, Yahweh had been warning the people to repent of their sins, and repentance is represented by weeping, mourning, sackcloth and baldness. But the people evidently saw no profit for themselves in repentance, and would rather just enjoy their revelry and their sin for as long as possible. For tomorrow we shall die.

The last clause of verse 13 was cited by Paul of Tarsus in 1 Corinthians 15:32. Paul had used it of his struggle to announce the gospel in Ephesus, and the resistance he met with in his endeavor to do that. So Paul exclaimed that “if the dead rise not” then there is no use in that struggle, and he may as well just “eat and drink; for to morrow we die”, as it is in the King James Version. This is the attitude which is portrayed of the people in Isaiah’s Jerusalem, that there is no point in obeying Yahweh their God, and that they may as well just “eat and drink; for to morrow we shall die”, not believing that Yahweh their God could spare them for their obedience. 

So on account of their disobedience, we read:

14 And it was revealed in mine ears by the LORD of hosts, Surely this iniquity shall not be purged from you till ye die, saith the Lord GOD of hosts. 

Up to this point in Isaiah, there are no explicit prophecies that Jerusalem would be destroyed by the Babylonians, but there are circumstantial indications of that in the prophecy of the destruction of Assyria in Isaiah chapter 10, and of Babylon in chapter 13. But later, in 2 Kings chapter 20, as well as in later chapters of Isaiah, Yahweh does promise explicitly to protect Jerusalem from the Assyrians, but that Hezekiah’s sons, or descendants, would be taken into captivity in Babylon. That certainly does suggest that Jerusalem would be conquered by the Babylonians. 

Here is the patience of God: that the people of Jerusalem were such sinners that they could not possibly be cleansed of their sins until they died, yet they are spared from the Assyrians and the city would survive for about a hundred and twenty years longer, until it was finally destroyed by the Babylonians. 

Now, in the balance of this burden of the Valley of Vision, there is a much more explicit prophesy concerning certain of the officers of the court of Hezekiah, and the events in which they would be involved. However from this point, it may be as long as five years before the ultimate culmination of these things, although perhaps they shall need that much time to unfold. 

As we read in 2 Kings 18:3 and in Isaiah 36:1, Sennacherib had taken the fenced cities of Judah beginning in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah. As we discussed in relation to recent chapters here in Isaiah, the death of Ahaz is mentioned as he had received the burdens of Babylon and the king of Babylon, and then it is apparent that as the events recorded in Isaiah chapter 20 had occurred, that Samaria had fallen in that year, whereupon it would be about the sixth year of Hezekiah. Then Isaiah spent three years declaring the burden of Egypt to the people of Judah, which is stated in Isaiah chapter 20, so now it is at least the ninth year of Hezekiah here in Isaiah chapter 22. So there are only five years left before the time when the siege of Jerusalem would begin. 

So Yahweh seems to be addressing Isaiah directly here, where he tells him:

15 Thus saith the Lord GOD of hosts, Go, get thee unto this treasurer, even unto Shebna, which is over the house, and say, 16 What hast thou here? and whom hast thou here, that thou hast hewed thee out a sepulchre here, as he that heweth him out a sepulchre on high, and that graveth an habitation for himself in a rock? 17 Behold, the LORD will carry thee away with a mighty captivity, and will surely cover thee. 18 He will surely violently turn and toss thee like a ball into a large country: there shalt thou die, and there the chariots of thy glory shall be the shame of thy lord's house. 19 And I will drive thee from thy station, and from thy state shall he pull thee down. 

Some of these verses, especially verse 17, read quite differently in the other translations which we frequently consult here. In the New American Standard Bible that verse along with verse 18 read: “17 'Behold, the LORD is about to hurl you headlong, O man. And He is about to grasp you firmly, 18 And roll you tightly like a ball, To be cast into a vast country; There you will die, And there your splendid chariots will be, You shame of your master's house.'” In the end, because we cannot determine precisely how these things were fulfilled, the differences in the translation are relatively insignificant. 

In all of the historical passages which mention Shebna the scribe, in 2 Kings chapters 18 and 19 and in Isaiah chapters 36 and 37, he is always accompanied by Eliakim the son of Hilkiah and the elders of the priests, or others, and the actions which he takes are taken by them all, so that they are all portrayed as having acted equally in all of the interactions between them and the Assyrians, or Hezekiah, or even Isaiah. So there is nothing their for which Shebna could be accused, at least on the surface, and we are not provided any further details for why he may have been condemned here. 

Therefore all we can know about him is what the Word of Yahweh informs us here, that Shebna was evidently a proud man, and perhaps pretentious or even ostentatious, since he purposed to make great monuments to himself. Neither is anything known of his fate beyond those official acts in which he had a part, along with Eliakim and the others, as the envoy between the Assyrians and Hezekiah king of Judah. We must imagine that these words were somehow fulfilled, but we may never know how or when they had been fulfilled. 

But now Shebna is contrasted to his colleague, Eliakim:

20 And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah: 21 And I will clothe him with thy robe, and strengthen him with thy girdle, and I will commit thy government into his hand: and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah. 

So Eliakim would become the chief servant of Hezekiah, but in the first historical passage where he is mentioned in Isaiah, in chapter 36, where Eliakim, Shebna and Joah go forth to meet the officer of the Assyrians, we read: “3 Then came forth unto him Eliakim, Hilkiah's son, which was over the house, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, Asaph's son, the recorder.” Likewise, wherever Eliakim is mentioned in 2 Kings, he is described as having been “over the household”, and he is always mentioned first in precedence before Shebna. 

So perhaps here at this point in Isaiah, Eliakim was not yet over the household, and it is still about five years before the historical events which these men were recorded as having taken part in would actually occur. It is at least five years from this point, to the beginning of Isaiah chapter 36 or 2 Kings chapter 18. But by the time that those events do take place, Eliakim is somehow already placed over the household, and Shebna is only a scribe. Otherwise, there is no way for us to understand this prophecy in the manner which it is written, in view of the very concise nature of the surviving records. Perhaps since Isaiah had announced this fate to Shebna personally, he was humbled by the warnings until the time had come when he suffered this punishment. 

As for the significance of the office of Eliakim, we can only compare Genesis chapter 41 and the position which Joseph had acquired in Egypt, once he found favor in the eyes of Pharaoh: “ 39 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath shewed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art: 40 Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou. 41 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt. 42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck; 43 And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee: and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt. 44 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.” So Joseph, having been over the house of the Pharaoh, was the second most powerful man in Egypt, and it is safe to assume that Eliakim had a similar position here, in the house of Hezekiah. 

Now there is another seemingly enigmatic prophesy:

22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. 23 And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place; and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father's house. 24 And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father's house, the offspring and the issue, all vessels of small quantity, from the vessels of cups, even to all the vessels of flagons. 

So Eliakim would be glorified with all of the responsibility for the house of the king. In that manner, this Eliakim serves as a prophetic type for Yahshua Christ Himself. In Hebrews chapter 3, Paul of Tarsus had described Christ as a steward over His Own household, where he wrote: “1 From which, holy brethren, partners of the heavenly calling, you should consider Yahshua, the Ambassador and high priest of our profession, 2 being faithful to He who has ordained Him [meaning Yahweh], even as Moses, among His household. 3 For He has been deemed worthy of more honor than Moses, just as so much more honor than the house has He who built it. 4 For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is Yahweh. 5 And indeed Moses was faithful among His entire household as an attendant, for a testimony of the things being spoken, 6 but Christ as a Son over His household, whose household we are, if indeed we possess that liberty and the boast of the expectation.” Being over His own household, Christ had also attested to possessing the Key of David. 

However until that would come to pass, Eliakim having been a mere man would eventually die, and in death he would not keep his station, so we read of a time foreboding:

25 In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed, and be cut down, and fall; and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off: for the LORD hath spoken it. 

This is indeed a reference to the Babylonian captivity and destruction of Jerusalem, after which the office which Eliakim had held would be abolished forever. In Jeremiah chapter 22 we read of Jeconiah, king of Judah: “28 Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? 29 O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD. 30 Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.” Jeconiah was also called Jehoiachin, the father of Jehoiakim, of whom we read in Jeremiah chapter 36: “30 Therefore thus saith the LORD of Jehoiakim king of Judah; He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost.” When the king of Babylon removed Jehoiakim, he made Zedekiah his uncle king in his stead, and when Zedekiah was removed, all of his sons were slain before his eyes. So there would be no more earthly kings in Judah, and therefore no need for a steward in the house of a king. The Key of David which rested on the shoulders of Eliakim had fallen.

However Yahshua Christ, the rightful heir to the throne of Judah, according to the genealogies, and who is also Yahweh God incarnate, who alone could be the rightful King of Israel, had declared in His Revelation, in chapter 3: “7 … These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth.” Christ, being the King of Israel, has now possessed the Key of David these past two thousand years. 

Footnotes

1 Origenis Hexaplorum, Fridericus Field, AA. M., Volume II, Clarendon Press, 1875, p. 465.

2 Herodotus, The Histories, 4.152.

3 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Volume II: Historical Records of Assyria from Sargon to the End, Daniel David Luckenbill, Ph.D., University of Chicago Press, 1926, pp. 7-8.

4 ibid., pp. 207-208.

5 Origenis Hexaplorum, p. 466.