Instrument – Isaiah, Ascension of

Instrument

For musical instruments see Music. The word Is also frequently used in AV (though only twice in NT, both times in Romans 6:13) for any utensil, implement, or weapon, and in Tobit 7:14, 1 Maccabees 13:42 for a legal document or deed.

Intercession

See Prayer.

Interest

See UstmY.

Intermediate State

See Eschatology, 3 (d), and Paradise, 3.

Interpretation

This word and its cognates are found throughout the Bible with a wide variety in their use. 1. In the earlier stages of the history of mankind dreams were looked upon as manifestations of Divine intervention in human affairs, and it was regarded as of the first importance that their mysterious revelations should be explained for those to whom they were vouchsafed. From the story of Joseph we learn that a special class at the court of the Pharaohs discharged the function of interpreters of dreams (cf. ‘magicians’ [RVm ‘sacred scribes’] and ‘wise men,’ Genesis 41:8). A similar body of wise or learned men is mentioned in the Book of Daniel, for the same object at the court of Babylon (Daniel 2:2 ff. 4:6 f.). The idea that dreams were a means of communication between the Deity and men was also current amongst the Hebrews from a very early date. In the NT we find that dreams occupy the place of direct visions or revelations from God, and no difficulty seems to have been experienced by the recipients as to their precise meaning (Matthew 1:20 2

2. Turning again to the history of Joseph, we find there an incidental remark which leads us to believe that there was an official interpreter, or a body of interpreters, whose work it was to translate foreign languages into the language of the court (cf. ‘the interpreter,’ Genesis 42:23). The quaUflcation to act as Interpreter seems to have been required of those who acted as ambassadors at foreign courts (cf. 2 Chronicles 32:31). That prominent politicians and statesmen had this means of international communication at their disposal is seen in the translation by the Persian nobles of their letter from their own language into Aramaic (Ezra 4:7). As the Hebrew tongue ceased to be that of the common people, interpreters were required at the sacred services to translate or explain the Law and the Prophets after the reading of the original (see W. R. Smith, OTJC’ 36, 64n, 154). In the NT, examples are frequent of the interpretation in Greek of a Hebrew or Aramaic phrase (Matthew 1:23 27:46, Mark 5:41 IS’^- ", John 1:38, 41 f.; Acts 4:36 9 13:8) and in this connexion it is interesting to recall the extract from the writings of Papias preserved by Eusebius, in which Mark is called ‘the interpreter of Peter’ (see HE ill. 39) — a tradition accepted by Jerome and Athanasius. The most natural explanation is that which makes St. Mark’s Gospel the outcome in Greek of St. Peter’s teaching in his native tongue.

3. The function of the prophets is described as that of interpreters or ambassadors explaining to Israel Jehovah’s messages in terms suited to their capacity (Isaiah 43:27, cf. Elihu’s reference to the intercessory or ambassadorial work of angels in interpreting to man what God requires of him in the way of conduct, as well as jBxplaining the mystery of His dealings with men [Job 33:23)).

4. Frequent reference is made by St. Paul to a peculiar phase in the life of the early Corinthian Church — speaking with tongues. Whatever may be the precise meaning attaching to this feature of Christian activity, and it is plain that in individual cases. the practice gave the Apostle considerable cause for anxiety, one of the special spiritual ‘gifts’ to believers was the power of interpreting these strange utterances. The speaker himself might possess the gift of interpretation and use it for the benefit of the congregation (see 1 Corinthians 14:5, 13), or, on the other hand, he might not. In the latter event his duty was to keep silence, unless an interpreter were at hand to make his message intelligible to the other assembled worshippers (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:26 ff. 12:10, 30).

5. A somewhat ambiguous use of the word ‘interpretation’ occurs in 2 Peter 1:20. where the writer refers to the expounding of ancient prophecies; ‘no prophecy of scripture is of private (RVm’ special ‘) interpretation.’ Two explanations of this passage are current: (1) the ‘interpretation’ is that of the prophet himself, who, because of his peculiar relation to the Spirit of God, uttered words the full meaning of which he did not comprehend; or (2) the word has a reference to the exegesis of the passage in question by individual readers. The present writer is of opinion that neither explanation does full justice to the author’s idea. If the word translated ‘private’ be confined solely in its meaning to the noun which it qualifies, we may understand by the phrase that no single event or result can be looked on as a complete fulfilment of the prophet’s message. It has a wider range or scope than the happening of any special occurrence, though that occurrence may be regarded as o fulfilment of the prophet’s announcement. J. R. Willis.

Intreat

Besides the mod. sense of ‘beseech,’ intreat (spelled also ‘entreat’) means ‘deal with,’ ‘handle,’ mod. ‘treat,’ always with an adverb ‘well,’ ‘ill,’ ‘shamefully,’ etc. Coverdale translates Isaiah 40:11 ‘He shal gather the lambes together with his arme, and carle them in his bosome, and shal kindly intreate those that beare yonge.’

It is even more important to notice that when the meaning seems to be as now, viz. ‘beseech,’ the word is often in reality much stronger, ‘prevail on by entreaty.’ Thus Genesis 25:21 ‘And Isaac intreated the Lord for his wife, . . . and the Lobd was intreated of him,’ i.e. yielded to the entreaty, as the Heb. means. Cf. Grafton, Chron. ii. 768, ‘Howbeit she could in no wise be intreated with her good wyll to delyver him.’

In Jeremiah 15:11 and its margin the two meanings of the word and the two spellings are used as alternative renderings, ‘I will cause the enemy to entreat thee well,’ marg. ‘I will intreat the enemy for thee’ (RV ‘I will cause the enemy to make supplication unto thee’).

Inwards, Inward Parts

1. The former of these expressions is frequently found in EV (Ex. and Lv.), meaning the entrails or bowels of the animals to be sacrificed according to the Levitical institutions (Exodus 29:13, 22. Leviticus 3 4:8, 11 7:3 S’s- a etc.). The same idea is found in Genesis 41:21. where EV has ‘had eaten them up,’ and LXX renders ‘came into their belly’ (see AVm which gives the alternative ‘had come to the inward parts of them’; cf. also 1 Kings 17:21 AVm). For the most part, however, the expression ‘inward parts’ is used in a metaphorical sense, to denote the contrast between the inward reality and the outward clothing of human character. Situated within the ‘inward parts’ is the capacity for wisdom (Job 38:36. see nevertheless EVm), truth (Psalms 51). ethical knowledge, and moral renovation (Jeremiah 31. where ‘inward parts’ is almost synonymous with ‘heart,’ cf. Pr. 20). Here, too, lie hidden the springs of active wickedness (Psalms 6:9). and deceitful language (Psalms 62:4 AVm). The power of deceiving as to character and motives comes from man’s inherent ability to secrete, within the profound depths of the ‘innermost parts,’ his daily thoughts (Proverbs 18:8; cf. Ps 64«). At the same time, these hidden designs are as an open book, beneath the bright light of a lamp, to the Lord (Proverbs 20:27; cf., for a similar thought, Psalms 26:2 7:9. Jeremiah 11, Revelation 2:23 etc.).

2. In the NT the expression is used only to denote the power of the hypocrites to deceive their fellow-men (Luke 11:39; cf. Matthew 7:15 23:28). The curious phrase ‘give for alms those things which are within’ (Lk 11) may be taken as an incidental reference by Jesus to the necessity and the possibility of man’s inmost life being renewed and restored to a right relationship with God and men (cf. Is. 58). At least it is permissible to take the word rendered ‘the things which are within’ as equivalent to ‘the inward man,’ or ‘the inward parts’ (see Plummer, ICC, in loc; cf. Mark 7:18 f.: Luke 16:9). It is not enough to give alms mechanically; the gift must be accompanied by the spontaneous bestowal of the giver’s self, as it were, to the receiver. J. R. Willis.

lOB.— See Jashdb, No. 1.

Iphdeiah

A Benjamite chief (1 Oh 8:25).

Iphtah

AtownintheShephelahof Judah, Joshua 16; site unknown.

IPHTAH -EL.— A ravine N.W. of Hannathon, on the north border of Zebulun (Joshua 19:1) ")• It is identifled by some with the Jotapata (mod. Jefat) of Josephus.

IR (1 Chronicles 7:12). A Benjamite (called in v. 7 Iri).

Ira

1. The Jairite who was kShen or priest to David (2 Samuel 20:26). His name is omitted from the original (7) passage in 2 Samuel 8:18. and from the passage in 1 Ch 18:17. ‘The jE^rite’ denotes that he was of the Gileadite clan of the Jairites. The name probably means ‘the watchful.’ 2. The Ithrite, one of David’s heroes (2 Samuel 23. where perhaps Ithrite should be Jatlirite). 3. The son of Ikkesh the Tekoite (2 Samuel 23), another of David’s heroes. W. F. Cobb.

Irad

Son of Enoch and grandson of Cain (Genesis 4:18).

Iram

A ‘duke’ of Edom (Genesis 36:43 = 1 Chronicles 1:54).

Ir-ha-heres

In Isaiah 19:18 the name to be given in the ideal future to one of the ‘five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan, and swear to Jehovah of hosts’ ; AV and RV ‘one shall be called, The city of destruction.’ The usually accepted explanation of the passage is that the name ‘city of heres, or destruction,’ — or, more exactly, ‘of tearing down’ (the verb haras being used of pulling or tearing down cities, altars, walls, etc., Judges 6:25, Isaiah 14:17. Ezekiel 13:14). — is chosen for the sake of a punning allusion to cheres, in Heb. a rare word for ‘sun’ (Job 9:7). the ‘city of cheres,’ or ‘the sun,’ being a designation which might have been given in Heb. to On, the Heliopolis of the Greeks, a city a few miles N.E. of the modern Cairo, in ancient times the chief centre of the sun-worship in Egypt, and full of obelisks dedicated to the sun-god Ra (‘Cleopatra’s needle,’ now on the Thames Embankment, was originally one of these obelisks, erected by Thothmes iii. in front of the temple of the sun-god at On); and the meaning of the passage being that the place which has hitherto been a ‘city of the sun’ will in the future be called the ‘city of destroying,’ i.e. a city devoted to destroying the temples and emblems of the sun (cf. Jeremiah 43:13). [The LXX have polis hasedek, i.e. ‘city of righteousness,’ a reading which is open to the suspicion of being an alteration based on 1.)

To some scholars, however, this explanation appears artificial; and the question is further complicated by historical considerations. The high priest Onias lu., after his deposition by Antiochus Epiphanes in B.C. 175 (2 Maccabees 4:7–9). despairing of better times in Judah, sought refuge in Egypt with Ptolemy Philometor; and conceived the idea of building there a temple dedicated to J", in which the ancient rites of his people might be carried on without molestation, and which might form a religious centre for the Jews settled in Egypt. Ptolemy granted him a site at Leontopolis, in the ‘nome,’ or district, of Heliopolis; and there Onias erected his temple (Jos. BJ. i. i. 1, Ant. xm. iii. 1-3, and elsewhere; Ewald, Hist. v. 355 f.), — not improbably at Tell el- Yahudiyeh, about 10 m. N. of Heliopolis, near which there are remains of a Jewish necropolis (Naville, The Mound of the Jew and the City of Onias, pp. 18-20). In support of his plan, Onias had pointed to Isaiah 19:18 and its context as a prediction that a temple to J" was to be built in Egypt (Jos. Ant. xiii. iii. 1 end). These facts have indeed no bearing on Isaiah 19:18, supposing the passage to be really Isaiah’s; but many modern scholars are of opinion that Is l9i6(i8)-26 are not Isaiah’s, and even those who do not go so far as this would be ready to grant that 19 (from ‘one shall be called’) might be a later addition to the original text of Isaiah.

The following are the chief views taken by those who hold that this clause (with orwithout its context) is not Isaiah’s, (l) Duhm and Marti render boldly ‘shall be called Lioncity (or Leontopolis),’ explaining Aeres from the Arab. Aarra, properly the bruiser, crusher, a poetical name for a lion. But that a very special and fig. application of an Arab, root, not occurringinHeb. even in its usual Arabicsense.should be found in Heb. is not probable. (2) Dillmann, while accepting the prophecy as a whole as Isaiah’s, threw out the suggestion that v. 185 was added after the temple of Onias was built, cheres, ‘sun’ {so Symm., Vulg., and some Heb. MSS), being the original reading, which was altered afterwards by the Jews of Palestine into heres, ‘destruction,’ in order to obtain a condemnation of the Egyptian temple, and by the Jews of Egypt into tsedek, ‘nghteo\isness (LXX), in order to make the prophecy more distinctly f avourabletoit. (3)Cheyne(/?i(rod. io/s. pp. 102-110)and Skinner, understanding V." C thereshall be five cities,’ etcj, not (as is done upon the ordinary view)of the conversion of Egyp. cities to the worship of J", but of Jewish colonies in Egyp. maintaining their national language and religion, suppose w."-^ to nave been written in the latter years of the first Ptolemy (Lagi), c. B.C. 290, when there were undoubtedly many Jewish settlements in Egypt: the original reading, these scholars suppose with Diilmann, was ‘city of the sun,’ the meaning being that one of these colonies, preserving loyally the faith of their fathers, should flourish even in Heliopolis, the city of the sun-god; the reading was altered afterwards, when the Jews of Palestine began to show hostility towards the Egyptian temple, by the Jews of Egypt into ‘city of righteousness’ (LXX) , and then further, by the Jews of Palestine, as a counter-blow, into ‘city of destruction’ (Heb. text).

It may be doubted whether there are sufficient reasons for departing from the ordinary explanation of the passage. S. R. Driver.

Iri

See Ir.

Irijah

A captain who arrested Jeremiah on the charge of intending to desert to the Chaldseans (Jer 37"- ").

Ib-nahash

A city of Judah (1 Chronicles 4:12). The site is uncertain.

Iron

1. A city of Naphtali, in the mountains, Joshua 19:38. It is probably the modern YarUn. 2. See Mining and Metals.

Irpeel

A city of Benjamin (Joshua 18:27) possibly the ruin Rafat, N. of d-Jib (Gibeon).

Irrigation

Owing to the lack of a sufficient rainfall, Babylonia and Egypt have to be supplied with water from their respective rivers. This is conveyed over the country by canals. The water is conducted along these canals by various mechanical devices, and at a cost of great labour. In Palestine the need for artificial Irrigation is not so great, as is indicated by the contrast with Egypt in Deuteronomy 11:10. As a rule the winter rainfall is sufficient for the ordinary cereal crops, and no special irrigation is necessary. The case is different, however, in vegetable and fruit-gardens, which would be destroyed by the long summer droughts. They are always established near natural supplies of water, which is made to flow from the source (either directly, or raised, when necessary, by a sakiyeh or endless chain of buckets worked by a horse, ox, or donkey) into little channels ramifying through the garden. When the channels are, as often, simply dug in the earth, they can be stopped or diverted with the foot, as in the passage quoted. Artificial water-pools for gardens are referred to in Ecclesiastes 2:6. A storage-pool is an almost universal feature in such gardens. R. A. S. Macalister.

Ir-shemesh

See Beth-Shemesh, No. 1.

Iru

The eldest son of Caleb (1 Chronicles 4:15). The correct name is probably Ir, the -u being simply the conjunction’ and ‘coupling it with the^oUowing name Elah.

ISAAO, — Son of Abraham and Sarah. The meaning of the name is ‘he laugheth,’ and several reasons for bestowing it are suggested (Genesis 17:17 IS’* 21:6). The narrative as it occurs in Scripture was derived from three principal sources. J supplied Genesis 18:9–15 21:1–7 24 25:5, 11 26 and the bulk of 27; to E may be attributed 22:1–14 with 27’"- ‘"• 20-22; while P was responsible for 25m. 27:46 SS"-‘". Apparent discrepancies in the story, such as that Isaac, on his deathbed (27:1, 41). blessed Jacob, and yet did not die until many years afterwards (35:27). are evidently due to original differences of tradition, which later editors were not careful to remove. Viewed as coming from independent witnesses, they present no serious difficulty, and do not destroy the verisimilitude of the story. In outline the narrative describes Isaac as circumcised when eight days old (21:4). and as spending his early youth with his father at Beersheba. ‘Thence he was taken to’ the land of Moriah,’ to be offered up as a burnt-offering at the bidding of God; and if Abraham’s unquestioning faith is the primary lesson taught (22:12 26:5. Hebrews 11), Isaac’s child-like confidence in his father is yet conspicuous, with the associated sense of security. His mother died when he was thirty-six years of age; and Abraham sent a servant to fetch a wife for Isaac from amongst his kindred in Mesopotamia, according to Genesis 24, where the religious spirit is as noticeable as the idyllic tone. For many years the couple were childless; but at length Isaac’s prayers were heard, and Rebekah I gave birth to the twins, Esau and Jacob. Famine and drought made it necessary for Isaac to shift his encampment to Gerar (26:1). where a story similar to that of Abraham’s repudiation of Sarah is told of him (ch. 20; cf. 12:10–20). The tradition was evidently a popular one, and may have found currency in several versions, though there is no actual impossibility in the imitation by the son of the father’s device. Isaac’s prosperity aroused the envy of the Philistine herdsmen (26) amongst whom he dwelt, and eventually he withdrew again to Beersheba (26:23). Hebrews 9 next as a decrepit and dying man (27). whose blessing, intended for Esau (25 27). was diverted by Rebekah upon Jacob. When the old man discovered the mistake, he was agitated at the deception practised upon him, but was unable to do more than predict for Esau a wild and independent career. To protect Jacob from his brother’s resentment Isaac sent him away to obtain a wife from his mother’s kindred in Paddan-aram (28). and repeated the benediction. The next record belongs to a period twenty-one years later, unless the paragraph (35) relates to a visit Jacob made to his home in the interval. It states that Isaac died at Hebron at the age of 180. He was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah (49). Isaac is a less striking personality than his father. Deficient in the heroic qualities, he suffered in disposition from an excess of mildness and the love of quiet. His passion for ‘savoury meat’ (25 27) was probably a tribal failing. He was rather shifty and timid in his relations with Abimelech (26). too easily imposed upon, and not a good ruler of his household, — a gracious and kindly but not a strong man. In 26 he is subordinated to Abraham, and blessed for his sake; but the two are more frequently classed together (Exodus 2:24 3:6. Matthew 8:11 22:32. Acts 3:13 et al.), and in Amos 7:9, 16 ‘Isaac’ is used as a synonym for Israel. If therefore the glory of Isaac was partly derived from the memory of his greater father, the impression made upon posterity by his almost instinctive trust in God (Genesis 22:7, 8) and by the prevailing strength of his devotion {252’) was deep and abiding. Jacob considered piety and reverent awe as specially characteristic of his father (31, where ‘the Fear of Isaac’ means the God tremblingly adored by him). The submission of Isaac plays a part, although a less important one than the faith of Abraham, in the NT references (Hebrews 11:17 f.; James 2:21). R. W. Mobs.

Isaiah

Of the four prophets of the 8th cent, e.g., some of whose prophecies are preserved in the OT, Isaiah appeared third in the order of time — some twenty years after Amos preached at Bethel, and a few years after Hosea had begun, but before he had ceased, to prophesy. Isaiah’s prophetic career apparently began before, but closed after, that of Micah. Hosea was a native of the Northern Kingdom, and addressed himself mainly, if not exclusively, to his own people. Amos was a native of Judah, but prophesied in and to Israel; and thus Isaiah is the earliest of these four prophets who addressed himself primarily to Judah, and even he in his earlier years, like his fellow-countryman Amos, prophesied also against Israel (see Isaiah 9:7 S""-‘" 17:1–11).

Our knowledge of the life and teaching of Isaiah rests on the book that bears his name, which, however, is not a book compiled by him, but one containing, together with other matter, such of his prophecies as have been preserved, and narratives relating to him; see, in detail, next article.

Isaiah received the call to be a prophet ‘in the year that king Uzziah (or Azariah) died’ (Isaiah 6:1). The year is not quite certain. If Azariah king of Judah and the Azriau king of Jaudi mentioned in Tiglath-pileser’s annals of the year 738 be identical, Isaiah’s call cannot be placed earlier than 738. But if the identification be not admitted, and it is by no means certain, his call may with more probability be placed a few years earlier. His activity extended at least down to the invasion of Sennacherib in 701, and some years later, if the theory be correct that chs. 36-39 refer to two invasions of Sennacherib, of which that in 701 was the first. In any case Isaiah’s public career covered at the least close on forty years, whence we may infer that, like Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1). he became a prophet in early life. Unlike his contemporary Micah, his life, so far as we can trace it, was spent in Jerusalem. Not improbably he was a man of rank, at least he had easy access to the king (Isaiah 7:1 ff.), and was on terms of intimacy with persons of high position (8:2). His father’s name, Amoz, has in Hebrew no resemblance to that of the prophet Amos. Isaiah was married, and his wife is termed the prophetess (8:3). Like Hosea, he gave to his children, Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3), names which briefly stated characteristic elements in his teaching; his own name, though of a normal and frequent Hebrew type, also happened to have a significance (‘help of Jahweh’ or ‘Jahweh helps’) of which he could have made use; that he actually did so we may perhaps infer from 8:18, if we do not rather interpret that statement, so far as Isaiah himself is concerned, of such symbolic conduct as that which he pursued when he went ‘halfclad and barefoot’ (ch. 20).

It is impossible either to construct a complete biography of the prophet or to trace with any elaboration developments in his thought and teaching. His prophecies have obviously not come down to us in chronological order, and many are without any clear indication of the date when they were delivered; any attempt to date accurately much of the material must therefore be exceedingly imcertain, and the numerous attempts that have been made naturally differ widely in their results. But there are four periods at which we can clearly trace the prophet and his thought or teaching: these are the time of his call, about B.C. 740 (ch. 6); of the Syro-Ephraimitish War (b.c. 736-734: 7:1 8:18) of the siege of Ashdod in b.c. 711 (ch. 20); and of the invasion of Sennacherib in b.c. 701 (chs. 36-39). The last-mentioned narratives are, however, of a later age than that of Isaiah, and require to be carefully used.

At the time of his call Isaiah became conscious that he was to be a teacher whose primary task was to warn his people of judgment to come, of judgment which was to issue in the extermination of his nation (e"-" — the last clause is absent from the LXX, and probably not original). This judgment of Jahweh on His people was to be executed by means of Assyria, which, since the accession of Tiglath-pileser in 745, had entered on a course of conquest, and, as early as 740, had achieved marked success in Northern Syria. The causes of this coming judgment, Isaiah, like Amos before him, and not improbably in part owing to the influence on him of the teaching of Amos, found in the prevalent social and moral disorder (see e.g. 2:6 S’-‘* for the kind of offences which he denounced), in the ingratitude (e.g. 1 6:1–7) of the people to Jahweh, and in their failure to trust Him or to understand that what He required was not sacrifice, which was offered by the people in wearisome abundance, but justice and humanity (cf. e.g. 1). In this teaching, as in his lofty conception of God, Isaiah did not fundamentally advance beyond the already lofty moral and religious standpoint of Amos and Hosea, though there are naturally enough differences in the details of the presentation. But, so far as we can see, he exercised a more direct, immediate, and decisive influence, owing to the fact that over a long period of years he was able to apply this teaching to the changing political conditions, insisting, for example, at the several political crises mentioned above, that the duty of Jahweh’s people was to trust in Jahweh, and not in political alliances, whether with Assyria, Egypt, or Ethiopia (cf. e.g. 7:4–9 20, and [in b.c. 701] 30:1–5, 15 31) and to the fact that from the first he set about the creation of a society of disciples who were to perpetuate his teaching (cf . 8:16). .

Although judgment to come was the fundamental note of Isaiah’s teaching, there was another note that marked it from the outset: Israel-Judah was to perish, but a remnant was to survive. This at least seems to be the significance of the name of Shear -jasbub, who must have been born very shortly after the call, since in 735 he was old enough to accompany his father on his visit to Ahaz (7:3). . Beyond the judgment, moreover, he looked forward to a new Jerusalem, righteous and faithful (1). How much further was Isaiah’s doctrine of the future developed? Was he the creator of those ideas more particularly summed up in the term ‘Messianic,’ which exercised so powerful an influence in the later periods of Judaism, and which are doubtless among those most intimately connected with the prophet in the minds of the majority of students of the Bible? In particular, was the vision (9:1–6) of the Prince of Peace with world-wide dominion his? Or, to take another detail, did he hold that Zion itself was invincible, even though hostile hosts should approach it? These are questions that have been raised and have not yet received a decisive answer. On the one hand, it is exceedingly probable that in the several collections of the ancient prophecies later passages of promise have in some instances been added to earlier prophecies of judgment; that later prophecy in general is fuller than the earlier of promises; and that several of the Messianic passages, in particular, in the Book of Isaiah, stand isolated and disconnected from passages which bear unmistakably the impress of Isaiah or his age. On the other hand, Isaiah’s belief in a remnant, which seems secured (apart from individual and perhaps doubtful passages) by the name of his son, forms a certain and perhaps a sufficient basis for the more elaborate details of the future. Further, from the very fact that they deal with the future, the passages in question, even if they were by Isaiah, might naturally bear less unmistakable evidence of their age than those which deal with the social and political conditions of his own time. And again, had Isaiah prophesied exclusively of judgment and destruction, we might have expected to find his name coupled with Micah’s in Jeremiah 26:18 f.: G. B. Gray.

Isaiah, Ascension of

See Apocalyptic Lit- EKATURE, No. 6.