Wednesday, August 24, 2022

Jacob Nelson (LDS) on Isaiah 44:28: "Cyrus" is a Compound Figure, not a Simply the Historical Figure

  

The idea of the shepherd of the Lord’s people, in the context of the deep becoming dry, has a parallel in Isaiah, in chapter sixty-three, verses eleven through thirteen, which are cross referenced there in the margin. There, it is Moses who is called the Lord’s shepherd. And there, it also mentions the deep becoming dry. “Then his people recalled, as in the days of Moses of old—Where is he who brought them up of the Sea, like a shepherd of his flock? Where is he who put into him his Holy Spirit? Who made his glorious arm proceed at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them, making an everlasting name for himself when he led them through the deep?” Here, Isaiah is drawing on a Moses typology. And he’s linking that typology with the shepherd and the deep becoming dry, to Cyrus, or to the name Cyrus. Why is Cyrus mentioned by name, here? Because whenever anyone is mentioned by name, it means that person has set some kind of precedent in Israel’s history. And what did Cyrus set a precedent for, in Israel’s history? It answers that in the next line.

 

“He will say of Jerusalem that is must be rebuilt, its temple foundations relaid.”

 

Cyrus, the Persian anciently—after the Jews had gone captive into Babylon—allowed the Jews to come back to Palestine, and to rebuild the cities and the temple. Cyrus made a decree that the Jews could do that, and that all nations which had been held captive by the Assyrians and Babylonians could go back to their lands of origins, if they chose to do so, at that time. Co Cyrus becomes a type, here, for what the Servant is going to do, because the Servant is going to say to all nations that they can go back to the Promised Land. All the nations of the Lord’s people can go back to the Promised Land and rebuild it and build the temple. And that will be the time that they can do so, at the time of the Servant’s mission.

 

So he’s like a new Cyrus, in that respect. And he follows the ancient type of Cyrus. Because whatever anyone did, that et some kind of precedent in Israel’s history, also became a type for the future. Isaiah drew upon those types, to predict the future. He predicted new versions of old events, and so he had to draw upon Cyrus, as of what will happen again. But it’s not a purely-Cyrus figure, is it? It is a Cyrus figure mixed with a Moses figure. The two are fused, here.

 

The shepherd, in the context of the deep becoming dry, is a Moses typology, and the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple is a Cyrus typology, and here they are made into a compound, or fused. This has tripped up scholars because they say, “Oh, Cyrus.” So they pounce upon the name of Cyrus, and say, “Well, Isaiah was predicting Cyrus, but he couldn’t really predict it because prophets don’t really prophesy the future. They can’t name people a hundred years in the future. So this must have been written by somebody in the days of Cyrus, somebody called Second Isaiah, and he was the one who wrote this.” So scholars totally miss the message of what is being said here. This is not a pure Cyrus figure. If Isaiah could prophesy of the latter days, he certainly could prophesy a hundred years from his own time. And he certainly could name people if he saw things in vision and heard things, and he claims he did. Why did he have to mention Cyrus, at all? He had to mention his name because Cyrus set a precedent, as a figure a hundred years from Isaiah’s time would set that precedent. And that precedent would become a type for the end time.

 

Cyrus is a compound figure, not a pure, historical Cyrus. The Moses typology is what I call an “a” historical element—it’s not an historical element—that is linked to the historical type of Cyrus. The point is, when the Servant comes along, he will be like Cyrus, and he’ll be like a Moses—at one and the same time. Both will be his types. Even that, in itself, is only half of the equation, because, earlier, we saw a Spirit-endowed Servant who led, or caused Israel to wander through the wilderness. We saw the “blind” coming through the wilderness, and they became acquainted with his law, and repented of their transgressions, and they were taught his laws in the wilderness and became illustrious—or they could become so. And that is all the spiritual part of the equation. And here, we have the physical part of the equation—the idea that when they do that then they can physically come out on the exodus. And they are spiritually and tutored by the Servant, then they can come on the exodus. So we have a division here, in chapter forty-two, and in succeeding chapters we have more the spiritual aspect, and here, we have more the temporal aspect of God’s deliverance. They come and actually restore ruins. That’s physical. They restore the temple. They lay the temple’s foundation, that’s physical or temporal. (Jacob Nelson, Book of Isaiah Of the Old Testament [Lulu Books, n.d.], 444-46)