Isaiah 2
Introduction:
The millennial kingdom - Future condition
the mountain where he lives, typifies therefore a supernatural triumph of the Lord over all gods.
To judge means to ‘make authoritative pronouncements’, and to settle disputes means to ‘arbitrate’. The means of war (beat their swords), the practice of war (take up sword) and the mentality of war (train for/‘learn’ war) all alike disappear. The choice of agricultural implements (ploughshares and pruning hooks) is symbolic of the return to Eden (cf. 11:6–9): people right with God again; the curse removed; the end of the serpent’s dominion; an ideal environment.
Judah’s trust
These promises must not be “spiritualized” and applied to the church, for they describe a literal kingdom of righteousness and peace. The Jewish temple will be rebuilt, and the Word of God will go forth from Jerusalem to govern the nations of the world.
In the light of the future glory of God’s temple, Isaiah appealed to the people to “walk in the light of the Lord” (v. 5). Christians today have a similar motivation as we await the return of Christ for His church (1 John 2:28–3:3).
He makes five contrasts between the ideal and the actual: (i) the world is drawn to Zion (2); God’s people choose to conform to the world (6); (ii) the world seeks spiritual benefit (3); Zion heaps up material wealth (7a); (iii) the consequence of coming to Zion is world peace (4); Zion is full of armaments (7b); (iv) the world seeks to know the true God and commits itself beforehand to obey him (3); God’s people are busy inventing their own gods (8); (v) the world is received before the Lord’s tribunal (4); God’s people are abandoned and denied forgiveness (6, 9).
In do not forgive them this idiom is used negatively. Isaiah is not commanding the Lord not to forgive but saying that forgiveness is unthinkable: ‘and for sure you will not forgive them’.
The LORD’s Day
People’s proudest achievement is to dispense with the living God and to become god-makers.
The positive call for commitment to the Lord (5) is balanced by its negative counterpart to cease relying on man and what he can do. Such reliance has been the connecting thread of verses 6–21: reliance on the validity of human insights (6b), human resources (7), human ability to manipulate the divine (8) and human achievement (15–16). It is not man, however, that has to be faced but God and not man’s future but the day of the Lord. Against this neither man nor his gods have any substance. Therefore they should stop trusting in man. Who has but a breath in his nostrils is ‘in whose nostrils is breath’. Breath is not a metaphor for transience but points to human life as derived (cf. Gn. 2:7; Is. 42:5; 57:15). Of what account is he? is not questioning intrinsic human worth but asking what value man has as an object of trust. He has neither an independent right to live nor a sure stake in life. But the gift of breath implies a giver and points to the wisdom of trusting, rather, the one who is the source of life.