Category: Theologians

Pulverizing Sennacherib was a big deal? Turns out that it was just a warmup for a greater deliverance, that of Babylon being defeated but not before it had conquered and strutted around insufferably. So the Sennacherib experience would serve as faith strengthening groundwork for that other deliverance in store.

The one who did the conquering is pre-named in the Book of Isaiah. Chapter 44 ends that Jehovah is “the One saying of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd, And he will completely carry out all my will’; The One saying of Jerusalem, ‘She will be rebuilt,’ And of the temple, ‘Your foundation will be laid.’” (44:28)

45 expands upon his role:

“This is what Jehovah says to his anointed one, to Cyrus, Whose right hand I have taken hold of To subdue nations before him, To disarm kings, To open before him the double doors, So that the gates will not be shut: 2 “Before you I will go, And the hills I will level. The copper doors I will break in pieces, And the iron bars I will cut down. 3 I will give you the treasures in the darkness And the hidden treasures in the concealed places, So that you may know that I am Jehovah, The God of Israel, who is calling you by your name.” (45:1-3)

It’s not so much a violation of Cyrus’s free will as it is an object lesson in If you want to get a guy to do something, appeal to his vanity. First-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus relates that Cyrus was shown that prophesy after he conquered Babylon but before he freed any Jewish captives.

Says his Antiquities of the Jews (Book XI, Chapter 1, Section 2):

“This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophecies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision: ‘My will is, that Cyrus, whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send back my people to their own land, and build my temple.’ This was foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him to fulfill what was so written…”

He didn’t just free the Jewish captives and then someone said, ‘Hey, do you know that you just fulfilled prophesy?’ Rather, Josephus relates that he was shown the passage (maybe via Daniel, a high official in that Babylonian court) and seeing his name in lights, was inspired to fill the role.

Don’t think he didn’t read ahead. Don’t think his head didn’t swell when he came to 45:9

“Woe to the one who contends with his Maker, For he is just an earthenware fragment Among the other earthenware fragments lying on the ground! Should the clay say to the Potter: ‘What are you making?’ Or should your work say: ‘He has no hands’”?

I certainly won’t, he’d say, since the Potter made ME the most excellent of the excellent vessels and sealed the deal by giving me His most sacred assignment, to conquer the Babylonians! (which is right up my alley since I wanted to kick their rear ends anyway)

It’s sort of like the religious football players who conspicuously thank the Lord after every punishing play. It’s not as though they’re going out of their way to serve him. Pummeling other players is what they’d be doing anyway. One of these characters was known for wearing John 3:16 as his eyeblack, “For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.” True enough, but is the football field the best place for display, where they regularly haul players away to mend broken bones inflicted by other players? This prompted some atheist fans to suggest Matthew 6:5 for eyeblack: “5 “Also, when you pray, do not act like the hypocrites, for they like to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the main streets to be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full.” But for the fistfights that might break out between the two sides, I’d love to see it.

Whoa! Would Cyrus’s chest ever puff out at applying to himself the next chapter, 46:

“Remember the former things of long ago, That I am God, and there is no other. I am God, and there is no one like me. From the beginning I foretell the outcome, And from long ago the things that have not yet been done. I say, ‘My decision will stand, And I will do whatever I please.’ (46:9-10)

And what did he foretell from long ago? Cyrus would savor the answer: ME! and then keep reading:

“I am calling a bird of prey from the sunrise, From a distant land the man to carry out my decision.” (46:11) Who is that fearsome bird of prey? Ahem: ‘C’est moi! C’est moi, I’m forced to admit. ‘Tis I, I humbly reply. That mortal who these marvels can do, C’est moi, c’est moi, ’tis I.’

“Listen to me, you who are stubborn of heart, You who are far away from righteousness. I have brought my righteousness near; It is not far away, And my salvation will not delay. I will grant salvation in Zion, my splendor to Israel.” (46:12-13)

And he selected ME to do it! Who is more righteous than me? An excellent choice! “I’ve never lost In battle or game; I’m simply the best by far. When swords are crossed ‘Tis always the same: One blow and au revoir!”

It’s really not too hard to put hooks in the jaws and direct the mighty ones to your bidding. Just appeal to their ego. If even Hezekiah, from a culture in which humility was a thing, became full of himself at the thought that God would deliver the city while HE was in charge, just think of Cyrus, raised in a culture in which humility was for chumps. Hoo boy. He’s even called God’s “shepherd” and “anointed.”

God chose me to do his purpose? Good choice! How could he have chosen better? Guess I’ll hop to it.

Revisit the contention for a moment that the Book of Isaiah is divided into two sections at the chapter 40 mark, Isaiah and ‘Second Isaiah.’ Why do they say this, when the extant evidence indicates otherwise? (The two supposed sections immediately follow one another in the same column of the pertinent Dead Sea Scroll.) You assume they must have some good reason, but it is only that Isaiah 40 clearly tells the future beginning with chapter 40 and they think that’s not possible. it’s their historical-critical method they’ve adopted as the be-all and end-all!

“2nd Isaiah” (chapters 40-66) is the future deliverance from Babylon set as though it had already happened, they observe. Therefore, it DID already happen, and some liar of a scribe later tacked the chapters on to 39 to make it appear foretelling the future!

Well, isn’t that what prophets did? Wasn’t that one of the tricks up their sleeve? Weren’t they conduits for God who sometimes revealed future events? It’s a slam-dunk for believers, but the historical critical method assumes that they don’t. When they appear to, it’s the work of some dreamy and delusional God-apologist, in their eyes. I mean, you hope that when you’re tried in court, your own lawyer won’t join the side of the opposition, but in the case of the Book of Isaiah, that is too much to hope for. If your preacher is a graduate of the historical-critical seminary, watch out. “Okay, I have to repackage this pablum for the masses,” he or she is apt to say, “so as to extract the higher meaning.” The higher meaning they find is likely to be higher only in their eyes, as they reconfigure scripture as a tool to mend the present system of human self-rule.

The same sort of abhorrence for divine power is also at work in the dating of the gospels. Most contemporary theologians think the gospels were written much later than originally supposed, toward the end of the first century and into the second century. Do they have a good reason to think this? Well, it’s good in their eyes, if not those of the sort of humble people who would treasure the gospels. Jesus foretold the Roman destruction of the Jewish temple, which occurred in 70 CE. He couldn’t have foretold it, they say, such things don’t happen today. He must have written it after the fact and then slipped it in as though before. The same bias that creates 2nd Isaiah also creates the late writing dates for the gospels!

Moreover, this bias that foreknowledge of the future is impossible is so strong that they must overlook in the New Testament much of what is plainly their expertise in order to accommodate it. If the gospels were written after the temple destruction, it’s amazing that none of them mention it. It would have been a fantastic vindication of Jesus’ words, the irresistible climax of his tussling with the Jewish leaders. And Luke, the writer of Act of the Apostles, who “traced all things with accuracy,” (Acts 1:3) can’t trace his way to the bathroom if he neglects the most monumental Jewish event of the last 500 years! The far-simpler, Occam’s Razor explanation, unless you have a grudge against the divine, is that the gospels and Acts were written beforehand, as everyone of common sense used to say before those of the historical critical method came along to foul the water.

All this is not to condemn the historical-critical method, also known as higher criticism. It works just fine, provided one keeps in mind it is a limited tool. So long as one realizes it is not the sole means to unveil truth, one is okay. Some practitioners do. Some don’t. The two sides are reflection of the world of scientists. Some think science is a nifty tool that reveal a lot, but not all. Others think that if science doesn’t reveal it, it is bogus “pseudo-knowledge.”

******  The bookstore

The first thing we do upon arrival in the new system, apparently, is chow down. Finally, we have arrived and all the promised blessings being to flow. We have been breaking eggs for the first 23 chapters of Isaiah. Finally, an omelette is emerging. The broken eggs were not for nothing. 

It’s such a departure from what threatened to become same ‘ol, same ‘ol, that one theologian wrote a book about it, as though chapters 24-27 itself was a new book, a book within a book in Isaiah. This book is ‘Isaiah 24-27 and the Origin of Apocalyptic.’ by William R. Millar, published in 1976. The four chapters, he and his fellows maintain, find their origin in  post-exilic community conflicts, as though those later exiled Jews say: “We may be down but we’re not out! Just wait till next season! Just you wait, ‘enry ‘iggins, there will be payback! Not only will your cans be kicked to the curb, but the rewards to us faithful will be out ‘a sight!. It’s all for us and none for you. Nyah, nyah!” This is about as much as you can expect from higher critics who don’t necessarily believe what they are critiquing, nor is its truthfulness their main concern.

There are omelettes aplenty in the banquet of well oiled dishes, prepared by Jehovah for all the nations at his table. Being from Jehovah’s Mountain, that is Mount Zion, it is the place where the temple was located. It stands symbolically as representative of God‘s government. Today, we would call it God‘s kingdom. When it comes to power, then is served the omelettes. Omelette do not really appear in any of the verses discussed, but it is on the menu. You can order one if you like:

“In this mountain Jehovah of armies will make for all the peoples A banquet of rich dishes, A banquet of fine wine, Of rich dishes filled with marrow, Of fine, filtered wine.” (Isaiah 25:6)

“Squeet!” would grunt my supposed Native American friend, poking fun at himself with his own made-up supposed Native American word, which, when translated, means “Let’s go eat.” Throughout his life, he had told one and all that he was Native American. His Innuet appearance easily convinced non-savvy chums. He believed it himself. But, in his eighties, he took one of those ancestry tests and discovered he had not a drop of Indian blood in him. It was all Swedish. His father had taken off before he was born. Turned out that all his neighbors, perhaps dad himself, were know-nothings. He believed what he had always been told and had come to have a special sympathy for Native Americans.

As to chowing down, Jehovah prepares his feast on the aforementioned “mountain.”—Mt. Zion, where the temple stood. It comes to symbolize God’s presence, wherever he is. It is when his will has come to overshadow everything else, everything that would oppose. Furthermore, he spreads this feast “for all peoples,” not just his own Israel. Many mysteries have been unveiled for that to take place.  

Echoes and glimmers and even the exact same thing appear elsewhere in Scripture, both in the Old Testament, as prophetic parallels or echoes, and in the New Testament, as fulfilled in Jesus and the kingdom. Isaiah 55:1-2, for example, and Psalm 23:5, 36:8, Exodus 24:9-11. 

In the New Testament: “I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 8:11), in the parable of the wedding banquet (Matthew 22:1–14): A king prepares a magnificent wedding feast for his son. When the originally invited guests decline—they’re all busy— the invitation goes out to everyone—good and bad alike—until the hall is filled. This reflects the universal scope of Isaiah 25:6.

The promise to his eleven, after Judas has been dismissed: “You will eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones…”  Luke 22:29–30

The parable of the great banquet: A man prepares a great dinner and sends servants to compel people from the highways and hedges to come in, so his house may be full. Again, the emphasis is on abundant provision and inclusion of unexpected guests, echoing the “all peoples” of Isaiah. (Luke 14:15–24)

The foretaste of Matthew 26:29, with parallels at Mark 14:25 and Luke 22:18: “I tell you, I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”  

The Last Supper and the future Messianic Banquet: Jesus connects the Passover wine to a future joyful drinking of new/aged wine in the fulfilled kingdom—directly recalling the “finest of wines” and “aged wine” of Isaiah 25:6.

The Grand Finale itself in Revelation 19:6–9: “Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad… Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!”  

Really, every time Jesus fed the masses it was a precursor of the messianic feast.

So it is that meetings and publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses love to dramatize this scene. Take the 2021 Regional Convention, for example, which I wrote up in ‘In the Last of the Last Days: Faith in the Age of Dysfunction.’ All the trimmings are there, the participants are exchanging recipes, all of which are from the same recipe book, and there is contained even the extra-apocalyptic account of the guard who came into the faith because the guard of Acts 16 did. And then—knock me over with a feather!—a special guest of honor is there. It was the resurrected Joseph at the convention, though I made him the resurrected Mephibosheth in my book. Both are sure that the fellow guests will have many questions to ask. In my book, the first question is mine, and it is how did he ever get stuck with such an unpronounceable turkey of a name, to which he replied that it was just one of those things. Nonetheless, the great evening banquet scene was sort of a show-stopper at the convention, as it will be when the fulfillment of Jehovah’s promises in the kingdom of his son brings it about.

******  The bookstore

While they were puking their guts out, there were a lot of underpinnings they were turning a blind eye to—this part was in the oral Bible reading: 

“Woe to those who join one house to another house and who annex one field to another field until there is no more room and you live by yourselves on the land.” (Isaiah 5:8)

It is a reference to the Mosaic Law that supposedly governed that long-ago agricultural society. Each extended family was allotted a certain amount of land. That land was inviolate. You could neither sell it nor expand it into an empire. If you did, say due to some temporary hardship, the land reverted back to its original ownership at the end of designated 50-year periods, called Jubilees. Thus, there could never arise a wealthy landowning class, pricing their poorer countrymen out of existence. 

That this is a good thing is obvious from contemplating current events. In the U.S, whereas a house could once be purchased for 2-3 times the average annual income, the figure is now 7 times. Whereas, the average age of first time ownership was once 30, it is now 37. All this within about a 30 period. Large firms now buy up homes and would seek to turn the entire nation into renters. (All this according to Charlie Kirk, heard in interview, who was later shot and killed.) It is the most recent manifestation of a very old problem. At our mid-week meeting, one brother related how long ago, well before Kirk was born, his mother had returned home to find all of her belongings on the street. The family had fallen behind in rent and had been evicted. The experience traumatized her for life, the brother said, himself now up in years.

The Mosaic Law, when observed, would have prevented such things. That is why, to those who would ignore it—the majority of the nation, as it turned out, Isaiah pronounced “woe.” It was among the reasons (there are six “woes” in the chapter) that God would “raise up a signal to a distant nation [and] “whistle for them to come from the ends of the earth; And look! they are coming very swiftly.” (Verse 26)

This spelled bad news to the nations of miscreants: “None among them are tired or stumbling. No one is drowsy or sleeps. The belt around their waist is not loosened, Nor are their sandal laces broken. All their arrows are sharp, And all their bows are bent.  The hooves of their horses are like flint, And their wheels like a storm wind.  Their roaring is like that of a lion; They roar like young lions.  They will growl and seize the prey And carry it off with no one to rescue it.” Such a “distant land” did invade subsequently: first, the nation of Assyria, later, that of Babylon. (27-29)

As though alarmed that wrong conduct might be dissuaded by seeing things this way, higher critics regards verses such as these as a “gnomos,” a way of looking at the world. A long-standing gnomos (that God will fight for his people) is set upon its head after the invasion. Emergency repair is needed. Wait—isn’t there some fine print somewhere to the effect that Israel must behave to enjoy such protection? Yes, there is! Gnomos restored. God could have fought for his people, but he chose not to.

Save us from the world of higher critics. It is as I wrote in ‘Workman’s Theodicy:’

“It is as though someone runs a stop sign and a horrific accident results. Thereafter, survivors are desperate to impart meaning to the event, to understand how such a horrible thing could happen. Whereupon, one of them recalls a long-ago contract to the effect that you are supposed to stop when you see one of those things, as though no one had ever imagined such a connection before.”

In other words, per the higher critics, the warning of 26-29 is not advance prophecy, but after-the-fact damage control. The enormous benefit to those who adopt this scholarly view is that, with it, they may act unjustly if they want to. Nobody’s going to call them out on it. Nobody’s going to forbid them from (verse 20) “say[ing] that good is bad and bad is good [or] who “substitute darkness for light and light for darkness.” One man’s light is another man’s darkness. Who are you to impose your standards of good and bad on us, trying to control us that way. We’ll do what we want. It is a mainstay theme of the entire Bible, that first couples departing from God’s dictating “good and bad”to “know” matters on their own.

With such an enlightened view, If calamity happens, it happens. It was meant to be. Don’t embarrass yourself claiming it way punishment from some higher source. We’re wise in our own eyes and discreet in our own sight! (verse 21) We’ll keep on keeping on, until buying a house costs 20 times the average salary and the age of first-time ownership is 50! Should that course trigger upheaval, we’ll deal with it when the time comes.

******  The bookstore