A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 16: The Burden of… Moab?

A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 16: The Burden of… Moab?

Discussing Isaiah, before we move on from the prophecies of the destruction of Babylon and the fall of the king of Babylon which are found in Isaiah chapters 13 and 14, it should be noted that at the end of Isaiah chapter 14, in verse 25, there is a shift in focus from Babylon back to Assyria, the demise of which Isaiah had already prophesied in chapter 10. Then in verse 28 there is an odd break in the context where Isaiah mentioned that this burden, referring to the prophecy of doom of Babylon, had come to him in the year of the death of Ahaz king of Judah. Here it is unclear, as to whether the reference to the death of Ahaz was spoken in relation to the burden against Babylon which had preceded, or to that which would follow, beginning with four verses at the end of the chapter in which Isaiah had warned Palestine of its coming destruction. It is more likely to have been a parenthetical remark, since with all certainty the warning to Palestine here is contextually connected to the mention of Assyria a little earlier in the chapter. By itself, this also seems to suggest that the fate of Babylon is tied to the fate of Assyria, and that association is strengthened as the chapter proceeds.

So immediately following the mention of the death of Ahaz, there are four verses containing the warning for Palestine, and within them there is revealed one significant element of the nature of these empires, where it states in verse 29: “Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.” The “rod of him that smote thee” would be a reference to Assyria, which had reduced and subjected Palestine beginning with the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III, who listed Philistia among his tributaries in inscriptions from the 17th year of his reign. [1] As we have also discussed, that is very close to the time when Ahaz had died, and Tiglath-Pileser had met his own end after having ruled for eighteen years.

Here we must state that the later Greek use of the term Palestine to describe practically the entire region later known as Judaea is not what is meant by Isaiah here. As we have already explained, the word Palestine here is from the same Hebrew word translated as Philistia, or the land of the Philistines, elsewhere in Scripture. The Philistines continued to be distinguished in this manner as late as the time of the prophet Zechariah, who prophesied from about 520 BC, and in chapter 9 of his writings we read prophecies concerning Damascus and Hamath, and then: “3 … Tyrus did build herself a strong hold, and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold as the mire of the streets. 4 Behold, the Lord will cast her out, and he will smite her power in the sea; and she shall be devoured with fire. 5 Ashkelon shall see it, and fear; Gaza also shall see it, and be very sorrowful, and Ekron; for her expectation shall be ashamed; and the king shall perish from Gaza, and Ashkelon shall not be inhabited. 6 And a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.” So in Zechariah’s time, in the Persian period, it is apparent that the Philistines were still inhabiting the cities they held throughout much of the time of the Old Testament, even if he did not mention Gath.

That Philistia had also continued to be distinguished from the other nations in the region by the Assyrians is evident in an inscription of Sargon II where we read, in part:

To the kings of the lands of Piliste (Philistia), Iaudi (Judah), Edom, Moab, who dwell by the sea, payers of tribute [and] tax to Assur, my lord, (they sent) numberless inflammatory and disdainful (messages) to set them at enmity with me, to Pir'u, king of Egypt, a prince who could not save them, they sent their presents (bribes) and attempted to gain him as an ally. [2]

Much of that inscription is lost in the lines which both preceded and followed our citation, so the precise context is not clear. But it is clear that where Isaiah refers to Palestine here, using the ancient word for the Philistines his warning was meant for them, even if other nations in the region would also suffer in like manner, as Isaiah has seemed to warn in his other burdens in the chapters which follow.

The Assyrians did indeed smite Philistia, but not yet at the time when Isaiah had written this prophecy, so once again the prophet speaks of a future event as if it had already happened. Then not long after those words were written, in the inscriptions of Sargon II from a time which is about ten years after the fall of Samaria, we read:

Azuri, king of Ashdod, had schemed not to deliver tribute (any more) and sent messages (full) of hostilities against Assyria to the kings (living) in his neighborhood. On account of the misdeed which he (thus) committed, I abolished his rule over the inhabitants of his country and made Ahimiti, his younger brother, king over them. But the(se) Hittites, (always) planning treachery, hated his (i.e. Ahimiti's) reign and elevated to rule over them a Greek who, without claim to the throne, knew, just as they (themselves), no respect for authority. [In a sudden rage] I marched quickly—(even) in my state-chariot and (only) with my cavalry which never, even in friendly territory, leaves my side—against Ashdod, his royal residence, and I besieged and conquered the cities Ashdod, Gath (Gi-im-tu) (and) Asdudimmu. I declared the gods residing therein, himself, as well as the inhabitants of his country, the gold, silver (and) his personal possessions as booty. I reorganized (the administration of) these cities and placed an officer of mine as governor over them and declared them Assyrian citizens and they bore (as such) my yoke. [3]

Apparently, Sargon II had used the term Hittite as a pejorative to describe the rebellious kings of the Philistines in a derogatory fashion. In many much earlier inscriptions the appellation cursed Hittite is found, and it must have become an adage. Just a few years later, Sennacherib the king of Assyria wrote that in his third campaign, which was about the third year of his reign, he forced Tyre and Sidon under tribute, while all the kings of the Amorites as well as those of Moab and Edom had submitted to his rule willingly. But then, speaking of the Philistines, an inscription recording his campaign says, in part:

Sidqia, however, king of Ashkelon, who did not bow to my yoke, I deported and sent to Assyria, his family-gods, himself, his wife, his children, his brothers, all the male descendants of his family. I set Sharruludari, son of Rukibtu, their former king, over the inhabitants of Ashkelon and imposed upon him the payment of tribute (and of) katrii-presents (due) to me (as) overlord — and he (now) pulls the straps (of my yoke)!

In the continuation of my campaign I besieged Beth-Dagon, Joppa, Banai-Barqa, Azuru, cities belonging to Sidqia who did not bow to my feet quickly (enough); I conquered (them) and carried their spoils away. The officials, the patricians and the (common) people of Ekron — who had thrown Padi, their king, into fetters (because he was) loyal to (his) solemn oath (sworn) by the god Ashur, and had handed him over to Hezekiah, the Jew [sic. Judahite] (Ha-za-qi-(i)a-u Ia-ú-da-ai) — (and) he (Hezekiah) held him in prison, unlawfully, as if he (Padi) be an enemy… [4]

So the people of Ekron had evidently revolted against Padi, their king, because he remained loyal to Assyria, and therefore they had seized him and turned him over to Hezekiah, who locked him in prison. Then a little later in the inscription we read:

I assaulted Ekron and killed the officials and patricians who had committed the crime and hung their bodies on poles surrounding the city. The (common) citizens who were guilty of minor crimes, I considered prisoners of war. The rest of them, those who were not accused of crimes and misbehavior, I released. I made Padi, their king, come from Jerusalem (Ur-sa-li-im-mu) and set him as their lord on the throne, imposing upon him the tribute (due) to me (as) overlord. [5]

The inscription never explained how Sennacherib got Hezekiah to release Padi, since Hezekiah was also hostile to Assyria at the time, and as that same inscription continues, Sennacherib invaded Judah and took captive 46 of its fenced cities, and had thereafter placed Jerusalem under siege. Even though the siege of Jerusalem had failed, later in the same inscription Sennacherib attests that:

His towns which I had plundered, I took away from his country and gave them (over) to Mitinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron, and Sillibel, king of Gaza. [5]

So the Assyrians had indeed smitten the Philistines, although once they subdued Philistia, the kings who were loyal to the Assyrians would reap rewards for their loyalty from of the spoils of Judah. However the people themselves had evidently seen the kings who were loyal to Assyria as oppressors, which is apparent in the treatment of Padi by people of Ekron. So once Assyria had fallen, they would rejoice, but here Isaiah had warned them not to do so, because “out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a fiery flying serpent.” In other words, Babylon would be worse than Assyria.

Reflecting on the words of that verse, in that clause it is revealed by Yahweh that the Babylonian empire had originated from out of the root of the Assyrian empire. So both empires essentially had the same origin, and kind begetting kind, their power was derived from the serpent who had engendered them. As we had also mentioned, this is in the same manner where we read of the beast, in Revelation chapter 13, that “2 … the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” This concept is mentioned three times in that chapter of the Revelation, so it must be a significantly important phenomenon, and here we also see it in Isaiah.

As for the prophecy here in Isaiah, which seems to indicate that Babylon would be much harsher on Palestine than Assyria had been, there are few surviving inscriptions from the rule of Nebuchadnezzar I or his successors, and the Babylonian empire lasted for not even seventy years. However while some of the Philistine cities have rather inconsequential mentions among them, there is no record of any battles with them. This tends to lend support for the fact that Isaiah’s prophecy against Babylon is more relevant to the far vision and the entire series of empires which had followed after Babylon, as they had been prophesied in Daniel chapters 2 and 7.

While the cities of the Philistines endured through the Persian period, today the site of ancient Ekron is believed to be Tel Miqneh, a buried archaeological site, however the location has been contested over the past few centuries. The site of Ashdod, known as Tel Ashdod, has been in ruins for many centuries. Ancient Gath has an uncertain location, but is identified with an archaeological site known as Tell es-Safi, which is also only a ruin. Alexander the Great was said to have destroyed Gaza around 330 BC, after a siege of several months [6]. Being a significant port, Gaza has been destroyed and rebuilt on more than one occasion since. Ancient Ashkelon survived all the other cities of the Philistines, until it was destroyed by muslims in the 13th century AD, at the end of what is now known as the 1st Crusade. The ethnic identity of the Philistines had disappeared many centuries before that, and apparently even long before the beginning of the Roman period.

Now to begin our discussion of Isaiah chapter 15, here and in chapter 16 there is a burden for Moab, and after this, for what seems like several of the other surrounding nations: Damascus, Egypt, and even for a strange land described only in an enigmatic manner as “the land shadowing with wings, which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia”. Having this discussion, we must ask whether these burdens against Palestine, Moab, Damascus and “the land shadowing with wings” are for people of other nations, or if they are actually for remnants of Israel who had either taken refuge in these places, or had been scattered among them. So we shall proceed as if either possibility is true, although we are certainly biased towards the later interpretation. Later, it shall become apparent that these warnings of Isaiah are not for Philistines, or Moabites, or any other nation. These warnings were actually meant for Israel, and for those of Israel who would seek refuge in those nations when the time would come that the judgments which had already been announced would fall upon Israel and Judah.

Evidently, Moab was first mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions in a building inscription of Tiglath-Pileser III which had apparently described a collection of tribute [7], and later in similar contexts in the annals of Sargon II, Sennacherib [8], Esarhaddon [9] and Ashurbanipal [10]. So throughout the late 8th and early 7th centuries BC, Moab seems to have been an obedient subject of the Assyrians, as there is no sign of rebellion in the surviving inscriptions. But that situation seems to have changed, temporarily, during the time of Ashurbanipal, as we read in an inscription recording his ninth campaign that during a general revolt of the people of Arabia:

At the command of Assur and Ishtar, my armies (I mustered). In the girâ of the cities of Arzailu (and) Hiratâkasai, in Udume (Edom), in the pass of Iabrud, in Bît-Ammani, in the district of Haurina, in Moab, in Sa'arri, in Hargê, in the district of Subiti, I slew many of his warriors, a decisive (lit., not measurable) defeat I inflicted upon him. All the people of Arabia who had gone forth with him I cut down with the sword…. [11]

A little later in his inscription, Ashurbanipal records that a king of Moab named Kamashaltâ had been loyal to him, and defeated some of the Arab opposition to Assyria in military battle on his behalf. [12] The ancient land of Moab can be roughly identified with the modern Karak Governorate of modern Jordan, which has a population of not quite 250,000 arabs in a land which is quite barren and desolate. The northern border of the governorate is about three miles south of the Wadi Mujib, the current name of the ancient River Arnon which was the former border of Moab. Examining the land on satellite maps reveals that it has certainly become a dry and barren desolation.

With that, we shall commence with Isaiah chapter 15:

1 The burden of Moab. Because in the night Ar of Moab is laid waste, and brought to silence; because in the night Kir of Moab is laid waste, and brought to silence; 

The word ער or ar (# 6144) has several variations in Hebrew (i.e. # 5892) and simply only means city. Likewise, the word קיר, qir or kir (# 7024) is simply a wall, or for that reason, a fortress. Variations of these elements exist in the names of British towns today, which had been settled by ancient Phoenicians and Celts, especially in the many cities of Britain whose names begin with the letters cair, caer, kair or keir. Names which end in the letters -caster, -cester or -chester are also related. In Welsh and other Gaelic languages, the word is actually said to mean forts, just as it may in Hebrew [13]. The ancient city of Carthage is another example. It is evident, and interesting, that the Moabites may never have had proper names for their cities, but may have only called them “city” and “fort”. A longer name for Kir, Kirharesh in Isaiah chapter 16, or Kirheres in Jeremiah chapter 48, means wall of potsherds, which are pieces of broken pottery, and the name seems to be a pejorative, rather than the proper name of the city. Both of these cities certainly were made waste, as the location of Ar today is not known with any certainty, and Kir is identified with the location of a modern desert town of perhaps about 32,000 arab inhabitants which is now known as Al-Karak. 

2 He is gone up to Bajith, and to Dibon, the high places, to weep: Moab shall howl over Nebo, and over Medeba: on all their heads shall be baldness, and every beard cut off. 

The Septuagint has the first phrase of this verse to read “grieve for yourselves”, as Brenton has it, where the word בית or bayith was evidently mistaken for another Hebrew word, בכית or bekiyth (# 1068), which is a weeping. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible supports the reading found in the Masoretic Text. This verse was not included in Field’s edition of Origen’s Hexapla [14]. 

The word בית or bayith (#’s 1004-1006) simply means house or family, but it is translated as a place name here and in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible. However the Latin translation of the Vulgate has a phrase which means “the house is gone up” so in the Douay-Rheims translation we read “The house is gone up, and Dibon to the high places to mourn…” Likewise, although they strangely translate the word for house as temple, the New American Standard Bible has “They have gone up to the temple and to Dibon, even to the high places to weep.”

The word for Dibon, דיבן or dibon (# 1769) literally means pining, according to Strong’s, who had attributed its derivation from a word which means to mope or sorrow (# 1727). While Dibon was indeed an actual city in Moab, it was in the portion of Moab taken by the children of Israel, and rebuilt by the tribe of Gad, which is explained in Numbers chapter 32 (32:34). They seem to have shared the town as a border town with Reuben (cf. Joshua 13:9, 17). 

But in spite of that, perhaps here the word should be translated with its common meaning, and Bajith, a Hebrew word which simply means house, is not even an identifiable place. So we may translate the same clause to read “The house has gone up to Dibon to weep” or even better, “the house has gone up sorrowing to weep”. The Septuagint as Brenton had translated it has this clause to read “2 Grieve for yourselves; for even Debon, where your altar is, shall be destroyed: thither shall ye go up to weep…” and there the Hebrew word which means high place was interpreted as altar. But there is no word in the Hebrew text for the phrase “shall be destroyed”. 

Nebo was a town belonging to Reuben, which is mentioned in Numbers chapter 32. Medeba was also a town in Moab which was located within the inheritance of Reuben. This we read in Joshua chapter 13:

15 And Moses gave unto the tribe of the children of Reuben inheritance according to their families. 16 And their coast was from Aroer, that is on the bank of the river Arnon, and the city that is in the midst of the river, and all the plain by Medeba; 17 Heshbon, and all her cities that are in the plain; Dibon, and Bamothbaal, and Bethbaalmeon,1 18 And Jahazah, and Kedemoth, and Mephaath, 19 And Kirjathaim, and Sibmah, and Zarethshahar in the mount of the valley, 20 And Bethpeor, and Ashdothpisgah, and Bethjeshimoth,1 21 And all the cities of the plain, and all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites, which reigned in Heshbon, whom Moses smote with the princes of Midian, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, which were dukes of Sihon, dwelling in the country. 22 Balaam also the son of Beor, the soothsayer, did the children of Israel slay with the sword among them that were slain by them. 23 And the border of the children of Reuben was Jordan, and the border thereof. This was the inheritance of the children of Reuben after their families, the cities and the villages thereof.

The Moabites descended from Lot would not grieve over the fate of these cities while they were being inhabited by Israel in the time of Isaiah. Here it becomes apparent, that the name of Moab is being used as a sort of pejorative for the Israelites who had dwelt in the land of Moab, which the territory settled by Reuben and Gad had continued to be called long after it had become their own. While Kir and Ar seem to have been actual cities of the Moabites, if Ar is not Aroer, in the territory retained by the tribe of Moab south of the River Arnon, these other cities all belonged to the Israelites of the tribes of Gad and Reuben. Throughout this period, the Moabites had remained loyal to Assyria, but it was Israel which would be destroyed and taken into captivity.

While the language does not explicitly indicate whether this had happened during the time of Tiglath-Pileser III, or during the time of one of his successors, we read in 1 Chronicles chapter 5: “26 And the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of Tilgathpilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day.” These are some of the same places to which the inhabitants of Samaria had been deported in the time of Sargon II, as it is recorded in 2 Kings chapters 17 and 18, so it is possible that it had not happened until that time. 

3 In their streets they shall gird themselves with sackcloth: on the tops of their houses, and in their streets, every one shall howl, weeping abundantly. 4 And Heshbon shall cry, and Elealeh: their voice shall be heard even unto Jahaz: therefore the armed soldiers of Moab shall cry out; his life shall be grievous unto him. 

In the citation from Joshua chapter 13 which we have just provided, it is evident that Heshbon is also a city of Reuben. So was Elealeh, which was apparently nearby, as we read in Numbers chapter 32: “37 And the children of Reuben built Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Kirjathaim, 38 And Nebo, and Baalmeon, (their names being changed,) and Shibmah: and gave other names unto the cities which they builded.” Here it is also evident, that the name of Nebo was once changed, but it is still called Nebo. The name Nebo, or also Nabu, belonged to an idol of the Assyrians and Babylonians and is evident in the names of the Babylonian kings, Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonidus.

The location of the Jahaz mentioned here is not entirely certain, but it was apparently in the wilderness to the east, which is evident in Numbers chapter 21: “23 And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel. 24 And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong.”

So Jahaz had never belonged to Moab, but to Ammon, and the Moabites had lost their land to the Amorites at a time much earlier than when Israel had taken it for themselves. While some of the territory of Reuben and Gad had once belonged to Moab, some of it had also once belonged to Ammon. Jahaz having once belonged to Ammon, this serves to strengthen our assertion that this entire prophecy does not actually concern the Moabites, but the Israelites who had been dwelling in Moab.

The text of verse 4 does not necessarily reference Moab personally, as it appears to do in the translation of the King James Version. In the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible we read: “4 Hesbon and Elealeh are crying out, their voice is heard as far as Jahaz; this is why the armed men of Moab cry aloud, each man’s soul trembles within him.” [The words in italics indicate a variation in the readings in the manuscripts of Isaiah found among the scrolls, which is trivial here.]

5 My heart shall cry out for Moab; his fugitives shall flee unto Zoar, an heifer of three years old: for by the mounting up of Luhith with weeping shall they go it up; for in the way of Horonaim they shall raise up a cry of destruction. 6 For the waters of Nimrim shall be desolate: for the hay is withered away, the grass faileth, there is no green thing. 

Once again, where the Word of Yahweh professes to cry out for Moab, it refers to the Israelites who had dwelt in the lands which formerly belonged to Moab. Some of those Israelites would apparently avoid captivity by fleeing into these surrounding countries. So Zoar was the ancient town near the southern portion of the Dead Sea, to which Lot had fled after the destruction of Sodom, which is described in Genesis chapter 19 (19:22-23). Zoar is described as being in the south, where Moses ascended Mount Nebo and Yahweh had showed him the land which Israel would inherit. In Deuteronomy chapter 34.

The locations of Luhith, Horonaim, a word which means two caves, and Nimrim are all obscure, since they are only mentioned here and in Jeremiah chapter 48. There is a prophecy against Moab in that chapter of Jeremiah which contains much of the same language which is found here. However the circumstances of Israel in Jeremiah are far different than those here in the time of Isaiah. By the time of Jeremiah, most of Israel is in captivity, while the people of the Moabites south of the River Arnon had remained as loyal subjects of the Assyrians. It is plausible that they, with or without some remnant of Israelites, had spread back into their ancient land after at least most of Israel had either fled, been killed or had been taken captive. In any event, Moab had not been destroyed by the Assyrians, but Reuben and Gad had been destroyed by them.

7 Therefore the abundance they have gotten, and that which they have laid up, shall they carry away to the brook of the willows. 8 For the cry is gone round about the borders of Moab; the howling thereof unto Eglaim, and the howling thereof unto Beerelim. 

The names Eglaim and Beerelim are otherwise unknown, since they are only mentioned here. The word translated as willows is a plural form of ערב or arab (# 6155) and in some translations it is the “Brook of the Arabs”, as it is in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible and in the Septuagint. Strong’s defined this use of the term as willow, and the Brown, Driver Briggs lexicon as poplar, specifically the variety known as the poplar Euphratica (called Populus euphratica today), where they also state that the identification of this particular brook is dubious. [15] 

The Septuagint, as Brenton has it in a fair representation of the Greek, has verse 7 to read: “Shall Moab even thus be delivered? for I will bring the Arabians upon the valley, and they shall take it.” This would also be true of the fate of Gad and Reuben, since the Amorite and other mixed “Arabian” tribes of the east had also been subject to the Assyrians, and conscripted into their armies. 

9 For the waters of Dimon shall be full of blood: for I will bring more upon Dimon, lions upon him that escapeth of Moab, and upon the remnant of the land. 

Here it is evident that perhaps the name Dimon should be understood as a reference to the place name, rather than literally to weeping, but perhaps it should be interpreted both ways, since there were many other cities in Reuben, and this one was apparently singled out here on account of the meaning of the name.

The Septuagint reads this verse, as Brenton has it: “9 And the water of Dimon shall be filled with blood: for I will bring Arabians upon Dimon, and I will take away the seed of Moab, and Ariel, and the remnant of Adama.” Although it would strengthen our assertions, there seems to be an error where the reading of the Septuagint is Ariel, or “lion of God” rather than the common word for lion, which is אריה or arieh. Furthermore, the word אדמה or adamah is reddish dirt, or land, but it was rendered in the Septuagint here as a place name. Origen’s Hexapla notes that other Greek translations rendered the word by its plain meaning, but in Field’s edition there are no notes concerning Ariel. [16] In both places, the reading in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible supports that reading which is found in the King James Version. 

We should repeat our assertion here: “him that escapeth of Moab” is a reference to Israelites who would flee from the Assyrians, rather than be taken into captivity by them. All of the places which may be identified here in this prophecy had belonged to the Israelites who dwelt in Moab, and not to the actual Moabites. We will remain confident in this assertion, and see that it’s veracity is even more apparent in chapter 16:

16:1 Send ye the lamb to the ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. 

Here, rather than lamb, the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible has lambs, in the plural, where the word is also apparently singular in the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text. The Latin Vulgate has lamb, in the singular. In any event, this is no special lamb, however the same word was often used to describe a ram, and even a battering-ram, which makes much more sense here in the overall context. The children of Israel were about to be pushed out of their land by Yahweh their God, at the hands of the Assyrians. Yet even with that, the term “ruler of the land” is ambiguous, however we would translate the clause to say “send the ram who has dominion of the land” and interpret that as a reference to the Assyrians.

However in the Septuagint there is a greater difference, where Brenton has this verse to read “I will send as it were reptiles on the land: is not the mount of the daughter of Sion a desolate rock?” On this verse, except for a note regarding the phrase “daughter of Sion” the Hexapla is silent, however since only fragments from the original work have survived, a determination cannot be made as to why.

The word translated as Sela here, סלע or sela (# 5554), means rock, and it is usually spelled Selah in the Old Testament, as it was also the name of a city in Edom called Petra, after the later Greek translation of its meaning. The editors of the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible refuted the Septuagint translation of the word, and they seem to be correct, that this is a reference to Selah. Evidently, as the Israelites up to this point had both Moab and Edom as subjects from the time of David, perhaps they had spread themselves out that far in their settlements.

The reference to the “mount of the daughter of Zion”, in this particular context, could refer to any settlement of Israel in the mountains east of the Jordan, as references to Zion are sometimes describing the hill in Jerusalem, but often the phrase is an allegory for the children of Israel collectively. The word daughter is often used to describe colonies or settlements of a people, as in the phrase “daughter of Tyre” in the 45th Psalm, or both “daughter of Zion” and “daughter of Jerusalem” in Micah chapter 4 where there is a prophetic assurance that while Israel would be cast far off, “ 8 … thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.”

There is a record in 2 Kings chapter 14 that the Selah in Edom was indeed taken by Judah and renamed in the days of Amaziah the king of Judah, where we read: “7 He slew of Edom in the valley of salt ten thousand, and took Selah by war, and called the name of it Joktheel unto this day.” Amaziah had ruled Judah for 29 years, from about a hundred and ten years before the death of Ahaz. So it is likely that Selah had probably been occupied by Israel since that time, as it was a strategic location in Edom. With that understanding, it is likely that the phrase “from Sela to the wilderness, unto the mount of the daughter of Zion” was meant to describe all of the lands which Israel had occupied east of the River Jordan, so it would all be battered by the ram of the Assyrians. 

2 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. 

Here the women of Israel are called “the daughters of Moab” as a pejorative, because the lands of Gad and especially of Reuben were the primary subject of this prophecy.

3 Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. 4 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. 

Ostensibly, some Israelites would seek refuge among the Moabites and elsewhere, which is also indicated where it spoke of “him that escapeth of Moab” in the preceding chapter. However it may also be, that Israelites of the land of Galilee and other points in the north have tried to hide here in the lands of Reuben and Gad, since many of them have already suffered a great captivity at the hands of Tiglath-Pileser III. In any event, the outcasts here are the outcasts of Israel, as Yahweh had already assured both Israel and Judah that they would be destroyed for their sins, and taken into captivity by the Assyrians.

Perhaps Israel was first warned in relation to this in Numbers chapter 33, where they had been told to drive out all the Canaanites and we read: “55 But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell. 56 Moreover it shall come to pass, that I shall do unto you, as I thought to do unto them.”

But the first prophet to proclaim this in Israel was not Isaiah, or even Hosea or Amos. Rather, in the days of Jeroboam II, as many as seventy-five years before the death of Ahaz, a prophet named Ahijah had announced this to Jeroboam, who was then king of Israel, as it is recorded in 2 Kings chapter 14 where we read, in part: “15 For the LORD shall smite Israel, as a reed is shaken in the water, and he shall root up Israel out of this good land, which he gave to their fathers, and shall scatter them beyond the river, because they have made their groves, provoking the LORD to anger. 16 And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin.”

Comparing the sins of Israel as they were presented in Isaiah chapter 1, and also in the other prophets of the time, Amos and Hosea, it seems that the reference to the extortioner and the oppressors describe certain of the children of Israel, and the spoiler describes the Assyrians who had been enlisted to take them into captivity. In Isaiah chapter 1, where the prophet first recounted their sins, we read a plea from Yahweh instructing them to “16 Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; 17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.” Not having done these things, they are justly called extortioners and oppressors, evidently having oppressed the poor of their own people. Yet in spite of their sins, there is still a promise of hope:

5 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. 

This is a Messianic prophecy, of Christ Himself establishing His promised mercy upon the children of Israel. Long after Israel was taken into captivity, in Jeremiah chapter 31, just before the promise of the New Covenant, we read: “1 At the same time, saith the LORD, will I be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be my people. 2 Thus saith the LORD, The people which were left of the sword found grace in the wilderness; even Israel, when I went to cause him to rest. 3 The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee.” This prophecy refers to the very people here who would either be slain, or who would go off into Assyrian captivity.

6 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. 7 Therefore shall Moab howl for Moab, every one shall howl: for the foundations of Kirhareseth shall ye mourn; surely they are stricken. 

As we have already explained, Kirhareseth seems to be a pejorative description of Kir, which was a city in Moab. But perhaps the reference is not to Kir at all, and simply describes the efforts by which Israel may resist Assyria as a “wall of potsherds”, a wall being an allegory for a defense. Of course, a wall built out of pieces of broken pottery would not be a good defense, and it would not stand against the enemy.

While on the surface the pride of Moab could refer to the actual Moabites, who would naturally seek to elevate themselves after the demise of Israel, by whom they had been ruled for several hundred years, it more likely refers to the pride of the Israelites who dwelt in the land of Moab, and now there is mention once again of some of the cities of Reuben in connection with that pride:

8 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 through the wilderness: her branches are stretched out, they are gone over the sea. 

The “lords of the heathen” are the rulers of the Assyrian armies. Here we have already seen that Heshbon was a city of Reuben, and in the same passage of Joshua chapter 13 which we had cited in relation to Isaiah 15:2, Sibmah is also a city of Reuben in the lands which had once belonged to Moab. But while Jazer was nearby, that was a city of Gad, as we read in Joshua chapter 13, from where we had left off in our earlier citation, and where it is also evident that Heshbon was a border town between Gad and Reuben:

24 And Moses gave inheritance unto the tribe of Gad, even unto the children of Gad according to their families. 25 And their coast was Jazer, and all the cities of Gilead, and half the land of the children of Ammon, unto Aroer that is before Rabbah; 26 And from Heshbon unto Ramathmizpeh, and Betonim; and from Mahanaim unto the border of Debir; 27 And in the valley, Betharam, and Bethnimrah, and Succoth, and Zaphon, the rest of the kingdom of Sihon king of Heshbon, Jordan and his border, even unto the edge of the sea of Chinnereth on the other side Jordan eastward.

Therefore, it is evident that here Yahweh has continued to use the name of Moab as a pejorative for the Israelites who had dwelt in the land of Moab, as the lands which were taken from the Moabites were still called, long after they had become part of the kingdom of Israel.

9 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. 

As we have explained, all of these places had belonged to Israel, from the time of Moses to the time when they were taken captive by the Assyrians, which is a period of nearly 700 years. Moses had passed around 1410 BC, whereupon Joshua became judge of Israel, and now it is some time around 727 BC, around the time that Ahaz had died according to the popular chronologies.

Where the Word of Yahweh had said “I will bewail with the weeping of…” it is evident that the Father does not relish in the punishment of his children, and even Yahweh has that same empathy for Israel as He must punish them for their iniquity. As it continues, He expresses that once again:

10 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. 11 Wherefore my bowels shall sound like an harp for Moab, and mine inward parts for Kirharesh. 

The bowels sounding like a harp, they groan on account of the necessity for which He had to punish His children.

12 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. 

The reference to the high place could describe an altar or grove, or simply a mountaintop, however throughout Scripture the children of Israel were chastised for worshipping idols in the high places. Here too, this seems to depict the Israelites of Gad and Reuben as beseeching their idols as they are attacked by the Assyrians, rather than turning to Yahweh their God. However even if they had prayed to Him, they would still be taken into captivity for their sins, as He had already assured by the mouths of his prophets, at least from the time of Ahijah in the days of Jeroboam II.

So now there is a conclusion:

13 This is the word that the LORD hath spoken concerning Moab since that time. 14 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. 

The Assyrian records show that Moab, the kingdom of the Moabites south of the River Arnon, had remained an obedient subject throughout this entire period, and it was never destroyed at this time. But soon after this time, as the text here states explicitly, Reuben, Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh were taken into Assyrian captivity, as we have read in 1 Chronicles chapter 5.

The burden of Moab is the burden of the Israelites who had dwelt in Moab, and the Moabites themselves had never been considered as candidates for the mercy of Yahweh, the God of Israel. As Christ Himself had said, as it is recorded in Matthew chapter 12: “Hear, O Israel; The Lord [Yahweh] our God is one Lord”. Hear, O Israel … Yahweh our God … Hear, O ISRAEL… Yahweh OUR God … when are Christians ever going to understand those simple words?

This concludes our commentary on Isaiah through chapter 16.

Footnotes:

1 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Volume I: Historical Records of Assyria from the Earliest Times to Sargon, Daniel David Luckenbill, Ph.D., University of Chicago Press, 1926, p. 287.

2 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, p. 105.

3 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd edition, James Pritchard, editor, 1969, Harvard University Press, p. 286.

4 ibid., p. 287.

5 ibid., p. 288.

6 Library of History, 17.48.7, Diodorus Siculus, translated by C. H. Oldfather, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, 1953, Jeffrey Henderson, editor, Volume 8, p. 257.

7 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, p. 282.

8 ibid., p. 287.

9 ibid., p. 291.

10 ibid., p. 294.

11 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Volume II: Historical Records of Assyria from Sargon to the End, p. 314.

12 ibid., p. 338.

13 Caer, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caer, accessed December 19th, 2024. 

14 Origenis Hexaplorum, Fridericus Field, AA. M., Volume II, Clarendon Press, 1875, p. 458.

15 The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, F. Brown, S. Driver and C. Briggs, 1906, reprinted in 2021, Hendrickson Publishers, p. 788.

16 Origenis Hexaplorum, p. 458.