Tuesday, December 19, 2023

Gary V. Smith on the Implications of the References to Cyrus in Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1

  

What Do the References to Cyrus Imply?

 

The references to Cyrus (Koresh) in Isa 44:28 and 45:1 indicate that God was determined to rebuild and restore the ruins of Jerusalem and that he would use a strong military ruler who did not know him to make a decree to rebuild Jerusalem (44:26; 45:1). This section has to primarily with what God will do and only secondarily with what Cyrus/Koresh will accomplish because of God’s help.

 

This prophecy presents a conundrum for many interpreters because (1) it gives such a specific prophecy, including the name of the king who will fulfill it, and (2) if it came form the prophet Isaiah, it was given more than 150 years before it was fulfilled. There is only one similar biblical example: in 1 Kgs 13:2, a prophet announced more than a century in advance that a man named Josiah would destroy the altar built by Jeroboam I at Bethel. According to 2 Kgs 23:15-17, this prophecy were made, the prophets and their audiences had no idea how long it would be before these words would be fulfilled. Therefore, the only unusual feature about both was the advance naming of an individual who was not then known. If prophets can predict eschatological events that will be fulfilled in the distant future, prophets should also be able to predict events that will happen only 15- years later—though this was not their usual practice. Charles Torrey, Klaus Baltzer, and R. K. Harrison sought to eliminate this problem by suggesting that the name Cyrus (Koresh) was a later scribal addition to Isa 44:28 and 45:1 after the prophecy was fulfilled. In my opinion, this solution is unnecessary Isaiah 40-55 cannot be dated on the basis of the prophecy about Cyrus (whether or not his mentioned by name is original or a later scribal addition) simply because it predicts an event that took place during the late exilic period.

 

The prophecy about Cyrus in isa 44:24-45:7 should not be interpreted as the key to placing chapters 40-55 in an exilic setting. As both Brevard Childs and Hugh Williamson conclude, the central issue in determining a date for Isa 40-55 is the claim that the prophet’s audience could verify that the first stage of Cyrus’s work had been completed (implying a later date after 550 BCE) and that the second stage lay in the near future (implying the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE). Childs says,

 

On the basis of his former prophecies concerning Cyrus, which have been realized and can readily be confirmed by all, the prophet then makes a future prediction in 44;24ff. and 45:1ff. The logic of the prophetic argument demands that the audience of the prophet’s words stands at a point in the sixth century when the former prediction is viewed as part of history. (Childs, Isaiah, 290)

 

The former predictions that were already accomplished are usually connected to the prophecy in which God “stirs up” and “calls” a strong “one from the east” and “delivers up nations to him, and subdues kings before him” (41:2-3; cf. v. 25). Many commentators believe that these verses describe Cyrus’ early victories as he rose to power. The Hiphil perfect ‎הֵעִיר (hē’ir), “he aroused, stirred up, awakened,” in 41:12 (cf. הַעִיר֤וֹתִי, ha’irôtî, “I stirred up,” in v. 25) points to a past event. The same verbal form is used to describe God’s “awakening, arousing” of Cyrus in 2 Chr 36:22 and Ezra 1:1, and a similar form of the same verb is used in Isa 45:13, which many relate to Cyrus’ work. Although the presence of the same verb in all of these passages might argue for connecting them, an initial caution is raised when one notes that the same verb (ע-ו-ר, ‘-w-r) is used for God’s “stirring up” of the Assyrian king Jehoram (2 Chr 21:16); and his promise to “stir up” (Polel of ע-ו-ר, ‘-w-r) a scourge who was “aroused, stirred up” in 41:2-3, 25 must be the military conqueror Cyrus. But what evidence is there so support this view, and how can the events described in these events described in these verses be firmly related to Cyrus’ victories in 550 BCE? It is clear that the strong ruler will do God’s work, but it is not clear from 41:2-3, 25 how this conquering king will deal with Israel. While it is possible that the one God calls and uses to subdue nations in 41:2 and Cyrus, who is described similarly in 45:1, 4, are the same person, the similar descriptions in these two texts may point to parallels between two different kings rather than to the same person.

 

Problems with identifying the king in 41:2-3, 25 with Cyrus arise when one tries to develop a holistic picture of the military issues mentioned in 41:2-3, 10-13, 25. All of these verses describe a military conflict. Verses 2-3 and 25 emphasize God’s use of a strong military commander from the east, while verses 10-13 focus on God’s strengthening those who were being attacked. Since the army that attacks God’s people in 41:10-13 will “become nothing,” this army cannot be a Babylonian army since it was successful) or a Persian army (since they never attacked Jerusalem or the Judeans in exile). Therefore, it can only refer to the Assyrian army that was very successful in conquering forty-six walled cities in Judah but was later reduced to nothing when an angel from God killed 185,000 soldiers (Isa 37;36). Thus, if Isa 41 describes a single military event, Sennacherib must be the one from the east whom YHWH arouses to defeat various nations in order to accomplish his will (cf. 10:5, 36-37). Another reason for not viewing the king in 41:2-3, 25 as Cyrus is the statement that this king “will call on my name” (41:25), which conflicts with God’s claim that Cyrus “did not know me” (45:4, 5).

 

Consequently, if Cyrus is not the king referred to in 41:2-3, 10-13, 25, then it seems unwarranted to date the composition of isa 4-55 to the period between Cyrus’ victories in 550 BCE and his victory over Babylon in 539 BCE. Instead, the prophet appears to argue that the Judeans should trust YHWH because of his overwhelming power over the Assyrians, as described in chapters 36-37. The oracles in chapters 40-55 argue that, since YHWH has raised up a strong king like Sennacherib (41:2-3, 25) and will redeem his people from the power of this great king (41:10-13; cf. chs. 36-37), certainly his people should be able to trust in God’s ability to use the known king Cyrus to restore the people of Jerusalem in the future. (44:24-45:7). (Gary V. Smith, “Cyrus or Sennacherib? Historical Issues Involved in the Interpretation of Isaiah 40-55,” in Bind Up the Testimony: Explorations in the Genesis of the Book of Isaiah, ed. Daniel I. Block and Richard L. Schultz [Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2015], 189-91)