A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 28: Fugitives from Justice

A Commentary on Isaiah, Part 28: Fugitives from Justice 

Near the beginning of his long series of burdens on the nations, in Isaiah chapters 18 and 19 the prophet had announced the Burdens of Captivity, as we had described his burdens for Egypt and the land beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, or Kush. Then in Isaiah chapter 20 we read: “3 And the LORD said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia,” or Kush, and in Isaiah’s time kings of Kush had ruled over Egypt, something which they had done for approximately seventy-five years, or by some accounts, nearly as long as ninety years. Having discussed those burdens, we had posited that they had more than one aspect of meaning. The people of Judah at the time of Isaiah had indeed sought help from the Egyptians, in order to fend off the encroaching Assyrians, while many of them had also sought refuge in Egypt, having fled from the Assyrians. But Egypt is also used as an allegory for the Israelites, who had once been in captivity in Egypt, and in that manner also as a prophetic metaphor for Israel in captivity.

The twenty-fifth dynasty of Egypt is often called the dynasty of “Black Pharaohs”, but that concept is entirely laughable, and the archaeological evidence is contrary, as many ancient statues of Kushite rulers with fine European features have been discovered, and since the Kushites of Africa had several language dialects among them which were clearly derived from the Akkadian language of Mesopotamia, which had also once belonged to the empire of Kush in Mesopotamia. However it is evident that the Kushites in Egypt had been accompanied by Nubians, having had Nubians in their own armies. The ultimate union of Kush and Nubia is described perhaps a hundred years after Isaiah, in Jeremiah chapter 13 where the Word of Yahweh asks a rhetorical question and its says: “23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?” This is a Hebrew parallelism, where we see that by Jeremiah’s time the skin of Kush in Africa had become as that of a leopard, mixed with both black and white. (Isaiah chapter 43 also touches on this subject.)

According to the article on the twenty-fifth dynasty of Egypt which is found at Wikipedia, there were only five Kushite kings in this dynasty, and if the conventional chronologies of the Assyrian Empire are correct, the most likely king of Kush, who was also pharaoh of much of Egypt at this time, would have been Shebtiku, the successor of the first Kushite pharaoh, Piye, who is said to have ruled Egypt from 747 to 714 BC. Piye was succeeded by Shebtiku, who ruled until 705, and then Shabaka until 690, when Taharqa is said to have ascended and ruled until 664 BC. After him, the last king of the dynasty, Tantamani, is said to have ruled for about eight years, when he had lost control to the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal, and the native Egyptian twenty-sixth dynasty ruler Psamtik I, king of Sais in the Western Delta and an ally of the Assyrians, had become pharaoh of an Egypt which was once again unified, but which would never again be the same.

However as we had explained in part 20 of this commentary, where we had also discussed the burden of The Desert of the Sea, it is Taharqa, or Tirhakah, who is mentioned in both 2 Kings chapter 19 and Isaiah chapter 37 as the king of Ethiopia, or Kush, at the time of the Assyrian invasions of Judah, which are usually dated to about 701 BC. So there, as we had also noted, once again it is evident that the chronologies are off with one another by about ten years. Perhaps Tirhakah was also a general label, or epithet, by which the people of Judah, or the later Judaeans from the time of the return to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel, had labelled all of the Kushite kings of the period. We have seen other transliterated titles, such as Ahasuerus in Ezra chapter 4 and Daniel chapter 9, used of kings who are known by other names in both history and inscriptions, so that possibility cannot be readily dismissed, except that the Assyrian inscriptions also identify the king of Kush at the time of Hezekiah as Tirhakah.

So for that, we read in an article for Tirhakah found at Encyclopedia.com the following:

TIRHAKAH (Hebrew תרהקה), the ‘king of Cush’ who, according to the Bible (II Kings 19:9), took part in Hezekiah's revolt against Sennacherib. These references to Tirhakah (690/89–664 b.c.e.), the fourth pharaoh of the Twenty-Fifth (Ethiopian) Dynasty, appear to be an anachronism. According to a careful interpretation of the problematical biblical passages and Assyrian inscriptions, Hezekiah's uprising started in 703 b.c.e. Sennacherib undertook a successful punitive expedition against Judah's Philistine (ii Kings 18:13ff.) and Egyptian allies in 701, and then besieged all the fortified cities of Judah, ultimately forcing Hezekiah to pay a heavy indemnity. The appearance of ‘Tirhakah’ at the head of another Egyptian contingent only served to cause Jerusalem to be immediately besieged a second time.”

As we have already said in previous presentations of this commentary, the Assyrian chronology may also be off by about ten years. Something which I have just recently discovered, which I do not recall having seen in many books of Assyrian inscriptions, is that the popular Assyrian chronology is based on the supposition that a particular eclipse mentioned in an Assyrian inscription is believed to have most likely occurred in 763 BC, according to an extrapolation of Julian calendar dates back to that time. This was determined by Sir Henry Rawlinson in 1867, and it has apparently been followed by scholars ever since. According to the Wikipedia article titled Assyrian eclipse, “This record is one of the crucial pieces of evidence that anchor the absolute chronology of the ancient Near East for the Assyrian period.” But because of the inconsistencies of the resulting dates with many of the events in Scripture, I am persuaded that this issue needs to be studied once again.

Beginning on page 427 of volume 2 of D. D. Luckenbill's Ancient Records of Assyria, there is a lengthy collection of "Limmu or Eponym Lists" of which he wrote that “The following list of eponymous years is made up out of fragments from the British Museum collections”. So these lists are names of evidently notable figures, kings and governors, and some accompanying information related to them. While they begin before 1100 BC, there is also an list of Assyrian kings which begins in the middle of the 3rd millennium and continues down to about 648 BC, although Luckenbill provided consistent dates only for those kings who ruled from the 10th century. In the first portion of the Eponym Lists, on page 435, there is a line which states “763”, the assumed year of the described events, “Bur (Ishdi)-Sagale (governor) of Guzana ... revolt in city of Assur. In the month of Simânu an eclipse of the sun took place.” [1]

It is this eclipse which Henry Rawlinson had described as having occurred in 763 BC, and to which he and later scholars had evidently anchored all of Assyrian history. There is a NASA website which has a database of what they call Five Millennium Catalog of Solar Eclipses, which has resources for lists of eclipses from ancient times until the most recent eclipses. According to this database, there was a total eclipse of the sun affecting Mesopotamia on what we may consider to have been June 15th of 763 BC, but there were also annular eclipses of July 16th, 755 BC and September 7th, 749 BC which may also be viable candidates for the year of the revolt in Assur. An annular eclipse occurs when the moon is near its farthest point from the earth, so it does not quite hide the entire sun, leaving an outer ring. However it is still an eclipse, and it is still a notable astronomical event. Therefore given the obvious problems with the popular Assyrian chronology, in reconciling it with Biblical chronology and the chronology of Egypt, we should not so readily accept the Wikipedia statement that this eclipse of 763 BC is a reliable “anchor [for] the absolute chronology of the ancient Near East for the Assyrian period.” The scribe who had written of the governor of Guzana may have been referring to one of these other eclipses.

Therefore, as we hope to have explained in the very opening presentation of this commentary, there is an anomaly of about ten years between the chronology of the Assyrian kings and that of the kings of Israel in Samaria, and there is also a problem with the popular dates for the fall of Samaria and the Assyrian invasion of Judah, since the Assyrian chronology has twenty years between those events, but the Scripture only allows eight or nine years, from the sixth year of Hezekiah in 2 Kings chapter 18 (18:10) to the fourteenth year of his rule in Isaiah chapter 36 (36:1). If Assyrian history is adjusted for the 755 BC eclipse, that error very well disappears, but I would want to study the issue further before coming to an absolute conclusion on the matter.

For now, as we commence with Isaiah chapter 30, here and in chapter 31 there are further warnings which should have informed the people of Judah not to turn to Egypt for help against the Assyrians. But as the prophet describes in Isaiah chapter 37, it is evident in the messages which the Assyrians had sent to him that Hezekiah king of Judah ignored these warnings. Even later, in the time of Jeremiah, the fact that the people of Judah had ignored the Word of Yahweh presented here in these chapters of Isaiah is fully manifest. The context of this chapter is still the woe for Ariel, which is the oracle against Jerusalem which began in the opening verse of Isaiah chapter 29, and the context is not broken even though Isaiah chapter 30 now opens with yet another woe:

1 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin: 

In our last presentation, Instruction from God, where we had reflected on the Terms of Reconciliation which Israel had been offered here in Isaiah, we had already cited Proverbs chapter 28 where we read: “13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.” So it is evident, that when the judgment of Yahweh would come upon Judah for their sins, that their appeals for help from the Egyptians and their flights to Egypt were attempts to cover their sins. They would rather have been fugitives from justice by attempting to escape judgment rather than having confessed their sins and repenting. In the burden of Egypt in Isaiah chapter 19, the Word of Yahweh had underscored the folly of imagining that one may escape by turning to Egypt, however here it is apparent that although Isaiah had repeated his message continually, in spite of having travelled about as a naked spectacle to announce it for three years, the people still did not listen. But where Yahweh Himself had declared that they would be blind, in verse 10 of the previous chapter as well as in an earlier oracle against Jerusalem in Isaiah chapter 6, it seems that on account of the gravity of their sins they were given no other choice but judgment, and that it was far too late to repent. However even with that, the men themselves had made conscious decisions favoring disobedience, and therefore they cannot justly blame Yahweh God for the judgment which is inescapable.

Woe to the rebellious children: the Word of God is dealing exclusively with the children of Israel. Since no other people had His law, no other people could be considered rebellious. The Egyptians, as well as the Assyrians, were only agents in the Hand of Yahweh whom He had used to fulfill a role in the punishment of Israel, and as we shall see in Isaiah chapter 43 of Egypt and Kush, they are merely disposed of once the purpose of Yahweh for the children of Israel is fulfilled. The disposal of the Assyrian in that manner had been prophesied in Isaiah chapter 10, where, having spoken of the king of Assyria, the Word of Yahweh had said “17 And the light of Israel shall be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame: and it shall burn and devour his thorns and his briers [those of the Assyrians] in one day; 18 And shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body: and they shall be as when a standardbearer fainteth. 19 And the rest of the trees of his forest shall be few, that a child may write them.” So in spite of having these promises of ultimate victory over their enemies, the people would still rather remain fugitives from the justice of Yahweh and attempt to cover their sins.

As for they “that cover with a covering”: In Isaiah chapter 28, the people were portrayed as having admitted that “15 … we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves”, for which reason they would be afflicted with an “overflowing scourge” when it happens that “the waters shall overflow the hiding place” and they “shall be trodden down by it.” The Hebrew word for cover here in Isaiah chapter 30 is a verb, נסך or nacak (# 5258), which Strong’s defined as to pour out, as a libation, or to cast, as metal is poured into a mold. However in another entry with the same exact spelling (# 5259), Strong’s defined nacak as meaning “to interweave, i.e. (figuratively) to overspread.” In this last sense, the verb appears in Isaiah 25:7 where it is rendered “that is spread” in the clause describing “the vail that is spread over all nations”. The word for covering here is מסכה or macekah (# 4541) which is a noun defined by Strong’s as “properly a pouring over, i.e. fusion of metal (especially a cast image); by implication a libation, i.e. league; concrete a coverlet (as if poured out). But once again, an identically spelled noun in another entry (# 4540) is simply defined as a covering. 

This word is usually used of molten images where it appears in the Old Testament, in 25 of 29 verses. In Nahum 2:14 it is a molten image as distinguished from a graven image, so its use must describe the process by which the image was made. However in other contexts, it is simply a covering, which is apparent where, in the same passage of Isaiah chapter 25 which we have just cited for the verb, it is a covering in the clause which describes “the covering cast over all people” (25:7). Then in Isaiah chapter 28 it is “the covering narrower” than that in which a man can wrap himself. In Ezekiel chapter 28 it is a covering where it says of the prince of Tyre that “every precious stone was thy covering”. So we may imagine that these words were only used of libations as they may cover an altar, or of cast metal as it covered a mold, or the object which had been gilt with such a metal. 

However with this it may be apparent, that the allusions found in the use of these terms which describe both libations and the making of idols also seems to suggest that the covering of sins is related to idolatry. To turn to an alien people one must also respect their false gods, which is suggested in Exodus chapter 23 where we read the warning concerning the peoples of Canaan, that “24 Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images.” Then later in the same chapter: “32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods. [Making covenants with people who worship idols is essentially the same as making covenants with the idols.] 33 They shall not dwell in thy land, lest they make thee sin against me: for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto thee.” In the ancient inscriptions recording covenants and treaties, the nations of Canaan, Anatolia and Mesopotamia had always invoked not only the names of their own idols, but also of all the idols of the surrounding nations, and those with whom they made covenants were compelled to agree. So one people could not accept another people without also accepting their idols, and in reality, especially in the eyes of God, the same is true even today. So here we read that the people of Judah were covering their sins, essentially by not confessing them and repenting, but also by seeking comfort in false gods of other nations who worshipped them, under which such sins were often not even condemned. So now, in reference to these fugitives from justice:

2 That walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt! 

In Isaiah chapter 37, and in 2 Kings chapter 19, it is evident that Hezekiah had asked the Kushite rulers of Egypt to come to his aid against the Assyrians, where we read that as the Assyrians are in the process of taking the fenced cities of Judah, and the Assyrian king had sent an officer to Jerusalem to confront the servants of Hezekiah, “8 So Rabshakeh returned, and found the king of Assyria warring against Libnah: for he had heard that he was departed from Lachish. 9 And he heard say concerning Tirhakah king of Ethiopia, He is come forth to make war with thee. And when he heard it, he sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying…” So when the Assyrians had seen the presence of Tirhakah in Judaea, they were confident that it was on account of Hezekiah. In this prophecy here in Isaiah chapter 30, it is affirmed that Hezekiah had such an intention, as the Word of Yahweh reveals it here without making an explicit mention of Hezekiah himself.

3 Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of Egypt your confusion. 4 For his princes were at Zoan, and his ambassadors came to Hanes. 

The Septuagint translators had rendered verses 2 and 3 in a more direct, literal manner which is not quite as poetic, as it was translated by Brenton: “2  even they that proceed to go down into Egypt, but they have not enquired of me, that they might be helped by Pharao, and protected by the Egyptians. 3  For the protection of Pharaoh shall be to you a disgrace, and there shall be a reproach to them that trust in Egypt. ” As for verse 4, Zoan is evidently another name for Tanis, which is on a branch of the Nile River and which had been the capital city of the earlier Hyksos, the Canaanite pharaohs of the 15th Dynasty who ruled the Delta region for about a hundred years before they were defeated by the pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty under pharaoh Ahmose I, which in turn was perhaps about a hundred years before the time of the Exodus.

So in the Septuagint here, Zoan is associated with Tanis as that is how the word was translated. As for Hanes, which is חנס or Chanes (# 2609), Strong’s merely defined it as “a place in Egypt”, whereas the Gesenius lexicon identified it as “a city of middle Egypt, situated on an island to the west of the Nile; called by the Greeks Heracleopolis” and stated that it was “formerly a royal city of Egypt”. [2] The Brown, Driver and Briggs lexicon differs slightly, and confidently places it “on [an] island in [the] Nile, South of Memphis”, although they repeat the association with Heracleopolis. [3] If the current king of Egypt was of Kush, and had assumed the office of pharaoh for himself, having conquered Egypt, then it might make sense that “his princes were at Zoan, and his ambassadors came to Hanes,” if Hanes was truly the name of a royal city since it is not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture.

Otherwise, the meaning of the passage is obscure unless we can find some significance of meaning in the names. The word for Zoan, צען or tsaan (# 6814), is the same as a verb (# 6813) which means to migrate and is sometimes defined as a place of departure. The name Hanes, the Hebrew word חנס or chanes (# 2609), is not defined by Strong’s, Brown, Driver and Briggs, or Gesenius. Strong’s only says that it is “of Egyptian derivation”, but neither does that seem certain. The Greeks did name the city after Heracles, however, who was a mythical figure known for his travels, or migrations. So perhaps since the people of Judah are chastised for having turned to Egypt, that act is portrayed here in this verse as just another assurance of their going into captivity. While the Septuagint has verse 4 to read only “4 For there are princes in Tanes, evil messengers”, where Tanes is from a feminine form of the Greek name for the city, Τάνις or Tanis, there is no mention of any place named Hanes or Chanes, but the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible reads similarly to the King James Version, supporting the Masoretic Text, and there is no easy reconciliation for the difference with the Septuagint.

There is evidence of collusion between Hezekiah and the king of Kush who ruled Egypt, in an Assyrian inscription from the time of Sennacherib, which we had cited earlier in this commentary, in Part 19 discussing Isaiah chapter 20 (20:6), but which we shall cite again now, from D. D. Luckenbill’s Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia:

240. The officials, nobles and people of Ekron, who had thrown Padi, their king, bound by (treaty to) Assyria, into fetters of iron and had given him over to Hezekiah, the [Judahite] (Iaudai), — he kept him in confinement like an enemy, — they (lit., their heart) became afraid and called upon the Egyptian kings, the bowmen, chariots and horses of the king of Meluhha (Ethiopia), a countless host, and these came to their aid. In the neighborhood of the city of Altakû (Eltekeh), their ranks being drawn up before me, they offered battle. (Trusting) in the aid of Assur, my lord, I fought with them and brought about their defeat. The Egyptian charioteers and princes, together with the charioteers of the Ethiopian king, my hands took alive in the midst of the battle. Altakû (and) Tamna I besieged, I captured and took away their spoil. I drew near to Ekron and slew the governors and nobles who had committed sin (i.e., rebelled), and hung their bodies on stakes (or, pillars) around the city. The citizens who had sinned and treated (Assyria) lightly, I counted as spoil. The rest of them, who were not guilty of sin and contempt, who were without sin (blame), — I spoke their pardon. Padi, their king, I brought out of Jerusalem, I set him on the royal throne over them and imposed upon him my kingly tribute. As for Hezekiah, the [Judahite], who did not submit to my yoke, 46 of his strong, walled cities, as well as the small cities in their neighborhood, which were without number,—by escalade and by bringing up siege engines(?), by attacking and storming on foot, by mines, tunnels and breaches(?), I besieged and took (those cities). 200,150 people, great and small, male and female, horses, mules, asses, camels, cattle and sheep, without number, I brought away from them and counted as spoil. Himself, like a caged bird, I shut up in Jerusalem, his royal city. Earthworks I threw up against him, — the one coming out of his city gate I turned back to his misery. The cities of his, which I had despoiled, I cut off from his land and to Mitinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron, and Silli-bel, king of Gaza, I gave them…. [4]

Perhaps one of the reasons for Rabshakeh’s having visited Jerusalem at that time was to retrieve Padi, the king of Ekron, who Hezekiah had in prison. But of course that is not mentioned in the concise accounts of Scripture. There is more to the inscription, concerning the siege of Jerusalem, but we shall withhold that for an appropriate portion of Isaiah found in the chapters which follow. This inscription has established the fact that, as it is described in Scripture, the Kushite king had brought his army into Palestine at the behest of Palestinians, and that Hezekiah was complicit with the people of Ekron, where the Kushite king was encountered and repelled by the Assyrians. So this certainly may have been engineered by Hezekiah, who would have been much more influential than the minor nobles of one small city such as Ekron. This inscription also places events from the third year of the rule of Sennacherib, which is about 701 BC according to the popular chronologies, to have coincided with the king whom the Scripture calls Tirhakah, but whom this Assyrian inscription does not name, referring to him only as the “Ethiopian king”. In the surviving Assyrian inscriptions, the name Tirhakah, or Tirhakah, does not appear until the time of Esarhaddon, in the form of Tarkû. In the days of Esarhaddon, Tirhakah is recorded as having been an ally of the king of Tyre, who revolted from the Assyrians and who was also described as having put his trust in the Ethiopian, for which reason Esarhaddon had invaded Egypt. 

Now continuing with Isaiah chapter 30 in reference to the people of Judah:

5 They were all ashamed of a people that could not profit them, nor be an help nor profit, but a shame, and also a reproach. 

Here the editors of The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible made a note that while the Masoretic Text has a form of the verb meaning “they were all ashamed”, in their own text they followed the reading of 1QIsaiah^a, and translate the verse to say “Destruction is odious to a people that cannot profit them, that are not a help nor profit, but a shame and also a reproach.” The New American Standard Bible has the opening phrase of the verse to read “Everyone will be ashamed”, even if the form of the Hebrew verb is said to be in the perfect tense, in either one of the two forms in which it is found in the manuscripts of the Masoretic Text. So the contextual problem in the Hebrew manuscripts is noticed in the translation in the New American Standard Bible, and in this instance, perhaps it is resolved by the reading in the Dead Sea Scrolls. 

Now an obscure burden is uttered:

6 The burden of the beasts of the south: into the land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people that shall not profit them. 

The people of Judah will carry their riches to Egypt, burdening the beasts, but the Egyptians will not profit them. Here the term for beasts does not seem to have been employed as a pejorative for people, even if that reading is plausible in this historical context, speaking of either Arabs or Nubians, and even Adamic men alienated from God can be beasts in that sense. But rather, it seems that here the common beasts are portrayed as being troubled by the flight of the Judaeans to the South. The Hebrew word is בהמת or behemah (# 929) and that is the common term for beasts of burden, or cattle, so here in the Septuagint it was translated with the plural form of τετράπους or tetrapous, which is a four-footed animal. It is quite certain that Yahweh God has more concern for His creatures than He has for bastards. Now the reference to “a people that shall not profit them” is clarified: 

7 For the Egyptians shall help in vain, and to no purpose: therefore have I cried concerning this, Their strength is to sit still. 

Here we are informed that the strength of the Egyptians would have been to sit still, which is, not to get involved in the troubles which the people of Judah were facing. The Egyptians, from their own perspective, would not have known that the people of Judah were actually fugitives from the justice of Yahweh their God, and that for that reason, they were doomed to failure if they helped them. Likewise, we do not know, when we help a brother, if his troubles are on account of some judgment from God, and especially if he is covering some sin of which we are unaware. However Christ himself has encouraged us to help our brethren. Here, we cannot take it for granted that Isaiah would warn the Egyptians, but he certainly had warned the people of Judah.

The word for strength here is רהב or rahab (# 7293), which Strong’s defined as bluster, and which is often translated as pride or strength in the King James Version. However in other adjacent entries in the dictionary, Strong’s defined the verb as to urge or embolden or act insolently, among other things, the adjective as proud, another entry as a noun as pride, and then as a proper name, as Rahab. The word appears in several different forms in only 12 verses of Scripture. So in the King James Version it is proud in Job chapters 9 and 26 (9:13, 26:12), and in Psalm 40 (40:5), and it is proudly in Isaiah chapter 3 (3:5). It is strength in Psalm 90 (90:10) and as a verb, strengthen in Psalm 138 (138:3) and make sure in Proverbs chapter 6 (6:3), but in a adverse sense, overcome in the Song of Songs, chapter 6 (6:5). However the word is translated as a proper name, as Rahab, in Psalms 87 and 89 (87:4, 89:11) and in Isaiah chapter 51 (51:9).

So here in Isaiah 30:7, in both The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible and the New American Standard Bible, the noun is rendered not as strength, but as Rahab, as if it referred to the dragon of Isaiah chapter 51 where we read in part: “9 … Art thou not it that hath cut Rahab, and wounded the dragon?” Therefore here in Isaiah we read in the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible “… I have called her ‘Rahab who sits still’” and then in the New American Standard Bible, “… I have called her ‘Rahab who has been exterminated.’”

However wherever the word Rahab appears in the King James Version and even in Isaiah chapter 51, it may have been translated literally as “the proud”, in the same manner in which it had been translated in Job chapters 9 and 26. The New American Standard Bible translated it as Rahab in those verses, but as “the proud” in Psalm 40, which seems quite arbitrary because it is arbitrary. In the Septuagint, the word was translated as whales in Job chapters 9 and 26 but as vanities in Psalm 40. There it is Rahab as a proper name in Psalms 87 and 89, but there is an entirely different reading in Psalm 90 where rather than strength, Brenton has “the greater part”. 

Then in Psalm 138 where the King James Version has strengthen, the Septuagint translated rahab with a verb that Brenton rendered as “abundantly provide”, and which is a far cry from any meaning of the Hebrew word. Then in Proverbs chapter 6 where the King James Version has “make sure” the Septuagint has “become surety”. Where it has overcome in Song chapter 6, the Septuagint has ravished. Where it has “the child shall behave himself proudly” in Isaiah chapter 3 the Septuagint has “the child shall insult”. But in Isaiah chapter 51 where the King James Version has Rahab, the Septuagint has another entirely different reading and rather than seeing any reference to Rahab or the dragon, it says only “… awake as in the early time, as the ancient generation. ”

In any event, the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew word רהב or rahab is just as inconsistent and just as arbitrary as it is in the King James Version and these others. So even here in this verse, the last clause is read by Brenton in his Septuagint translation as “This your consolation is vain”, and rahab was for one reason or another translated as consolation, unless they had some other word in their copies of the manuscripts. In Origen’s Hexapla it is evident that they may have had a different reading, as Aquila of Sinope and Symmachus each evidently had different Greek words which mean troubles, rather than consolation. [5]

There is only one place where the grammar seems to necessitate that the word be translated as a name, and in all the other places where the King James Version has Rahab, it could easily and more appropriately have been translated as “the proud”. However even in Psalm 87 where we read “"I shall mention Rahab and Babylon among those who know Me”, the clause may be translated as “I shall mention the proud, even Babylon, among those who know Me”, where other renderings are also possible. [i.e. “I shall mention proudly even Babylon among those who know me.”] So in conclusion, it is our assertion that Rahab as a name had been invented by the translators of Scripture for their own mythical version of the entity which is known from Scripture as the dragon, among other things, and that this had begun from the time of the Septuagint, but in this context the name does not actually belong in any verse of Scripture. 

Continuing with Isaiah, the Word of Yahweh continues to speak of those who would flee to Egypt, and now he tells the prophet:

8 Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: 

The text of verse 8 is rather consistent in all of the sources which we are accustomed to citing here. This once again elucidates the prescience of Yahweh God, and helps serve to prove that His Word is true, since His prophet Isaiah had written these things, and now here we are studying them from a book, over twenty-seven hundred years after these things were written. There are no other books of prophecy which survive to us intact, which are that old and which have withstood the test of all that time, except for those of the other Biblical prophets. By that, and in many other ways, we can be absolutely certain that Yahweh God is true. Now what follows is what Yahweh wanted us to read, for which He had explicitly told Isaiah to write these things in a book:

9 That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD: 10 Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits: 

In Jeremiah chapter 14 we see that there were indeed such false prophets among the people where we read “14 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. ” Such prophets are referred to on several other occasions in Jeremiah chapter 23. After Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had taken Jehoiakim in fetters to Babylon, we read in 2 Chronicles chapter 36: “11 Zedekiah was one and twenty years old when he began to reign, and reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. 12 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD his God, and humbled not himself before Jeremiah the prophet speaking from the mouth of the LORD.”

Then some time later, in Jeremiah chapter 32, we read: “1 The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD in the tenth year of Zedekiah king of Judah, which was the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar. 2 For then the king of Babylon's army besieged Jerusalem: and Jeremiah the prophet was shut up in the court of the prison, which was in the king of Judah's house. 3 For Zedekiah king of Judah had shut him up, saying, Wherefore dost thou prophesy, and say, Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will give this city into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall take it; 4 And Zedekiah king of Judah shall not escape out of the hand of the Chaldeans, but shall surely be delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon, and shall speak with him mouth to mouth, and his eyes shall behold his eyes; 5 And he shall lead Zedekiah to Babylon, and there shall he be until I visit him, saith the LORD: though ye fight with the Chaldeans, ye shall not prosper.” The words were quite harsh, but Zedekiah did not want to hear the prophet of Yahweh, and he must have also thought that he could hide from his judgment, even by putting the prophet of God in prison.

This was not new in Israel, however. As far back as the days of Ahab, over a hundred and fifty years before the time of Hezekiah, Ahab the king of Israel had rejected the prophet Micaiah, who had suffered at the hands of one of his servants, which was also named Zedekiah, where we read in part in 2 Chronicles chapter 18: “23 Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near, and smote Micaiah upon the cheek, and said, Which way went the Spirit of the LORD from me to speak unto thee? 24 And Micaiah said, Behold, thou shalt see on that day when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself. [Ostensibly to hide from judgment for his sins.] 25 Then the king of Israel said, Take ye Micaiah, and carry him back to Amon the governor of the city, and to Joash the king's son; 26 And say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, until I return in peace. 27 And Micaiah said, If thou certainly return in peace, then hath not the LORD spoken by me. And he said, Hearken, all ye people.” On that same day, Ahab had disguised himself in battle so that the enemy would not perceive him, and he ended up being killed by some random arrow. He literally hid himself in his attempt to escape the judgment of Yahweh where we read, a little further on in the chapter: “29 And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat [king of Judah], I will disguise myself, and will go to the battle; but put thou on thy robes. So the king of Israel disguised himself; and they went to the battle.”

Thus it is also described of the people of Judah here, that they wanted to hear the lies of false prophets, while they rejected the Word of Yahweh and his proven prophets. Isaiah was already proven in many ways by this time, but notably where he had correctly prophesied the deaths of Rezin and Pekah, the kings of Damascus and Samaria. Yet the people still could not accept the fact that they cannot possibly escape the judgment of Yahweh even as fugitives from justice.

Rather, they are now portrayed as having thought that perhaps the false prophets could ward off such a judgment:

11 Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us. 

Both the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible and the Septuagint translation have done better to represent verse 11 as a continuation of the statement in verse 10, where after the people are portrayed as having asked the false prophets to “prophesy deceits” we read, from the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: “11 get out of the way, turn aside from the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.” The Septuagint, as Brenton has it, has the last clause to read “… and remove from us the oracle of Israel.”

The people of Judah thought that they could hide themselves from the judgment of God, and even seem to have thought that if they did not hear it, that it would not befall them. So they evidently did not learn from the judgment of Ahab, or of any of those before them who had died on account of their sins. So now they are chastised once again:

12 Wherefore thus saith the Holy One of Israel, Because ye despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and stay thereon: 13 Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant. 

Often it seems that the Septuagint translations were not meant to be precisely literal, but for good or bad, they were only interpretations which tried to capture the sense of what was said rather than convey the original meanings of the words. Sometimes they are more pleasing for that reason, such as where Brenton had translated the Greek of verse 13 to say: “13  therefore shall this sin be to you as a wall suddenly falling when a strong city has been taken, of which the fall is very near at hand.” The oracle of judgment continues:

14 And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters' vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not spare: so that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of the pit. 

Here it seems that the Septuagint interpretation of verse 13 is valid, even if it is apparently not literal, and that the “it” in “he shall break it” refers to Jerusalem. While the people have been addressed throughout this chapter, Jerusalem remains to be the principal subject of the prophecy since the woe to Ariel began in Isaiah chapter 29. Therefore this is a prophecy parallel to that of Jeremiah chapter 19, where Yahweh had spoken to the prophet and said: “1 Thus saith the LORD, Go and get a potter's earthen bottle, and take of the ancients of the people, and of the ancients of the priests; 2 And go forth unto the valley of the son of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the east gate, and proclaim there the words that I shall tell thee, 3 And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. 4 Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; 5 They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind: 6 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter. 7 And I will make void the counsel of Judah and Jerusalem in this place; and I will cause them to fall by the sword before their enemies, and by the hands of them that seek their lives: and their carcases will I give to be meat for the fowls of the heaven, and for the beasts of the earth. 8 And I will make this city desolate, and an hissing; every one that passeth thereby shall be astonished and hiss because of all the plagues thereof. 9 And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend in the siege and straitness, wherewith their enemies, and they that seek their lives, shall straiten them. 10 Then shalt thou break the bottle in the sight of the men that go with thee, 11 And shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Even so will I break this people and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again: and they shall bury them in Tophet, till there be no place to bury.”

The analogy is strengthened in the final verse of this chapter, where there is another reference to Tophet, the only reference to Tophet which is found outside of the prophecy of Jeremiah.

15 For thus saith the Lord GOD, the Holy One of Israel; In returning and rest shall ye be saved; in quietness and in confidence shall be your strength: and ye would not. 

Here, it seems to be better to quietly accept ones judgment and punishment for sin than to attempt to evade or avoid judgment. This is evident once again much later, in Jeremiah chapter 29 where we read: “4 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon; 5 Build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them; 6 Take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased there, and not diminished. 7 And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace. 8 For thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, deceive you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed. 9 For they prophesy falsely unto you in my name: I have not sent them, saith the LORD. 10 For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.”

There is no escaping the judgment of God. There is no success for a fugitive from the justice of Yahweh. However obedience many be found in quiet and in repentance, and that is the lesson there in Jeremiah, a lesson which this chapter in Isaiah beckons the children of Israel to consider.

But we cannot finish this chapter this evening, so we hope to return to it in the near future.

1 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. 435.

2 Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, translated by Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Baker Books, 1979, p. 293.

3 The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 2021, p. 337.

4 Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, Volume II, pp. 119-120.

5 Origenis Hexaplorum, Fridericus Field, AA.M., E Typographeo Clarendoniano (The Clarendon Press), 1875, Volume 1 p. 487.