Criswell Theological
Review 6.2 (1993) 237-253
[Copyright © 1993 by
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
THE "EVERLASTING COVENANT"
AND THE "CITY OF
INTENTIONAL AMBIGUITY
AND IRONY IN ISAIAH 24
ROBERT B. CHISHOLM, JR.
Isaiah
24-27 often referred to as Isaiah's "Apocalypse,"1 brings
to cul-
mination the judgment oracles
against the nations recorded in chaps.
13-23.
In this Apocalypse the prophet describes God's
devastating
universal judgment which reverses creation and
reduces the world to
chaos. Ironically, he associates this judgment with
the subduing of
chaos and the establishment of God's kingdom on
Isaiah 24 describes this coming judgment in
particularly vivid de-
tail. According to v 5, the earth's inhabitants have
"disobeyed the laws,
violated the statutes, and broken the everlasting
covenant.”2 This "re-
bellion" (v 20) prompts
God to implement against them the covenantal
"curse" (v 6), which in typical fashion brings with it
widespread infer-
tility and sorrow (vv 4,
7-11).3 The judgment, which is accompanied by
a torrential downpour reminiscent of the Noahic flood and by an
earthquake which rocks the earth to its very core
(vv 18b-19), brings
1 Scholars have debated the precise genre
of these chapters, an issue which is be-
yond the scope of this study. For discussions of
this subject, see, among others, W. R
Millar,
Isaiah 24-27 and the Origin of Apocalyptic
(HSM 11; Missoula: Scholars, 1976)
1-9,114-15;
J. N. Oswalt, "Recent Studies in Old Testament
Eschatology and Apocalyp-
tic," JETS
24 (1981) 294-98; and R Youngblood, "A Holistic Typology of Prophecy and
Apocalyptic,"
2 Unless otherwise indicated, all biblical
quotations are from the New Interna-
tional Version.
3 Agricultural
infertility
appears in biblical covenantal curse lists (cf. Lev 26:20;
Deut
28:17-18, 22-23, 38-42) and in ancient Near Eastern treaty curses. Examples of
the
latter include paragraph 64 of the vassal treaties of Esarhaddon and stele IA of the Ara-
maic Sefire
treaty. See. J. Pritchard, ed., Ancient
Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old
Testament (3d ed.;
238
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
total (vv 1-3), inescapable (vv 17-18a), and final (v
20b) destruction. In
conjunction with this judgment the prophet
anticipates the downfall
of an unidentified city (vv 10-12), which is
contrasted with restored
creation by reducing the earth to a marred (vv 1,
19) and virtually un-
inhabited (v 6) state approximating the unformed
and unfilled condi-
tion which prevailed prior
to God's creative work (cf. Gen 1:2).4
Two difficult questions face the interpreter of
Isaiah 24: (1) What is
the referent of "the everlasting
covenant" mentioned in v 5? (2) What is
the identity of the "city of chaos" (v
10, NASB) referred to as the object
of God's judgment? This second question is
complicated by the context.
Each
of the following chapters (cf. 25:2; 26:5-6;27:10)
also mentions a city
which is brought to ruin by divine judgment. Is the
same city in view
throughout these chapters, or is more than one
referent to be understood?
Scholars
have offered a variety of answers to these questions. Re-
alizing that this lack of
unanimity might be a signal that the text is
hopelessly opaque to the modern interpreter, I will
nevertheless at-
tempt to offer a solution for each of these problems.
In the process I
will suggest that recognizing the text's very
ambiguity is the key to its
proper interpretation and that Isaiah has utilized the
literary devices
of intentional ambiguity and irony for rhetorical
purposes.
Proposed Answers to the Questions
The "Everlasting
Covenant"
In response to the first question, many
interpreters, pointing to
the text's cosmic flavor, identify the "everlasting
covenant" as the uni-
versal covenant supposedly
made between God and humankind at
creation,5 or as the Noahic covenant of Genesis 9.6 Emphasizing ele-
4 In this regard, it is noteworthy that
the city is called UhTo-tyar;qi [qiryat tohu]
(24:10), a phrase which may echo the description
of the primeval state of the earth (cf.
Gen
1:2 where the earth is said to be Uhbova
Uhto [tohu wabohu],
"unformed and unfilled").
Since
Isaiah uses UhT
rather
frequently of things (such as idols) which are empty and
worthless (cf. BDB 1062), the word might
characterize the city as rebellious. However, it
is more likely in this context (which focuses on
the results of God's intervention, cf.
vv 7-13) that it refers to the devastated
condition which overtakes the city following
God's judgment (cf. the use of the word in Isa 34:11).
5 See, for example, E. J. Young, The Book of Isaiah (3 vols.;
mans, 1965-72) 2.158; W J. Dumbrell,
Covenant and Creation (
son, 1984) 74; and J. N. Oswalt,
The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1-39
(NICOT; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans,
1986) 446.
While acknowledging that the Noahic covenant may be
the specific referent here, Oswalt
notes that the "broader reference is to the implicit
covenant between Creator and creature, in which
the Creator promises abundant life in
return for the creature's living according to the norms
laid down at Creation.”
6 See, for example, G. B. Gray, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Book
of Isaiah (ICC; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1912) 411; O. Kaiser, Isaiah 13-39 (
Robert
B. Chisholm, Jr.: THE "EVERLASTING COVENANT” 239
ments in the text which seem
to point in direction of
see the Sinaitic covenant
between God and
Each of these proposals, while attractive in
some ways, faces seri-
ous difficulties. Though
one might naturally think of a universal cove-
nant between God and
humankind as originating at the time of
creation, there is no biblical record of such a
covenant.8 On the sur-
face, the Noahic covenant
is an attractive option because it is uni-
versal in scope and is
actually called a MlAOf
tyriB; (berit ‘olam),
everlasting covenant (Gen
Genesis
9 reveals that the covenant mentioned there is a seemingly
unconditional divine promise which
does not appear to be linked
formally to the mandate issued at the beginning
of the chapter
J.
Cabalda, 1977) 1.353;J. D. W
Watts, Isaiah 1-33 (Waco, TX: Word,
1985) 318;
God's Universal Covenant (2d ed;
Hayes and S. A
7 See, for example, W E. March, "A
Study of Two Prophetic Compositions in
Isaiah
24:1-27:1" (ThD. dissertation, Union Theological
Seminary, NY, 1966) 29-32;
D.
Gowan, Eschatology
in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 77; and
D.
C. Johnson, From Chaos to Restoration: An
Integrative
(JSOTSupp 61; Sheffield: JSOT, 1988) 27-29.
8 Note that Oswalt
refers to this covenant as "implicit" (Isaiah, 446). Dumbrell
(Covenant and Creation, 11- 46, see
especially 20-39) proposes that the first biblical ref-
erence to a covenant (Gen
and humankind which originated at creation. Some
have seen an allusion to this cove-
nant in Hos
6:7 (cf. NIY; "Like Adam, they have broken the covenant"), but MdAxA [‘adam]
can just as easily be taken as a generic reference
to humankind or, better yet, be under-
stood (with a slight emendation of the preposition
prefixed to the form in the Hebrew
text) as a place name (note Mw [sam],
"there,” in the parallel line). See E. W. Nicholson,
God and His People:
Covenant and Theology in the Old Testament (
1986) 180-81. Note also the
reservations expressed by Dumbrell, 45-46.
9 The phrase MlAOf
tyriB; has several referents in the OT, including: (1)
God's prom-
ise to Noah that the earth
would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen
promise to Abraham of numerous descendants and
of the
possession (Gen 17:7, 19; cf. l Chr
ual obligation placed upon
Abraham and his descendants to remind them of their rela-
tionship with God (Gen
upon
ligated to place before the
Lord on the Sabbath (Lev 24:8); (6) the priests' share of Is-
rael's offerings (Num
25:13);
(8) God's promise to David (2 Sam 23:5); and (9) God's eschatological covenant
with
the phrase can refer to a promise or an obligation.
This lexical range is consistent with
the conclusion of E. Kutsch,
who proposes that tyriB;, rather than meaning
"agreement"
("Bund"),
refers to an obligation ("Verpflichtung")
or obligations, whether taken upon
oneself (as in a pledge or oath), imposed on
another, bilaterally accepted, or imposed by
a third party. See Verheissurlg
und Gesetz (BZAW 131; Berlin: de Gruyter,
1973) 1-27,
and the helpful summary provided by Nicholson, God and His People, 89-93.
240
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
(Gen
9:1-7).10 Furthermore, Isa 54:9 refers to
this promise as a uni-
lateral divine oath which God will not violate.
Thus the Noahic cove-
nant appears to be different
in nature from the "everlasting covenant"
of Isaiah 24, which is clearly an arrangement that
can be broken by
humankind and has a curse attached. Finally, the language of v 5 (cf.
troOt [torot], "laws," and qHo [hoq],
"statute") might suggest the Sinaitic
covenant is in view here.11 However,
this covenant is never specifi-
cally referred to as a MlAOf tyriB;.12
Furthermore, a reference to this
covenant, which was an arrangement strictly
between God and
fits awkwardly in chap. 24, with its cosmic tone and
language.13 Even
10 Gen 9:1-17 can be divided into two
units. In vv 1-7, which are marked off by an
inclusio (cf. the verbal
similarities between vv 1 and 7), God delivers a mandate to Noah
and his sons (and indirectly to their descendants)
to reproduce themselves and populate
the earth. He prohibits murder because it runs
counter to the mandate to be fruitful and
multiply and, worse yet, is a violation of the
divine image present in all men. In vv 8-17
the Lord makes a perpetual covenant with Noah and
his descendants. This "covenant"
takes the form of a promise that God will never again
destroy the earth by a flood. God
establishes the rainbow as a sign, or guarantee, of
the promise.
11 See Johnson, From Chaos to Restoration, 27. The plural troOT almost always re-
fers to the stipulations of
the Mosaic Law (cf. Exod
Ezek
43:11; 44:5, 24; Dan 9:10). One apparent exception is Gen 26:5, where the Lord
states: "Abraham obeyed me and kept my
requirements, my commands, my decrees and
my laws.” In the context of the Abrahamic narrative, the Lord's laws would be the various
commands and obligations which he gave to the
patriarch (cf. Gen 12:1; 17:1, 9-14; 22:2).
Rhetorically
speaking, it seems as if the author is trying to portray Abraham as a model
for
times referring to the Mosaic Law (see, for example,
Ezra
range of usage, being used of various human and divine
decrees (see, for example, Gen
47:22,26; Exod 15:25; 1 Sam 30:25; Ps
2:7).
12 In response to this objection Johnson
(ibid.). points to four texts (Judg
2:1; Ps 111:5,
9; Exod 31:16) where,
in his opinion, MlAOf is associated with the
Mosaic covenant.
How-
ever, it is not certain if Judg
2:1 and Psalm 111 are referring to the Mosaic covenant or
to the Abrahamic promise
of the land. In Judg 2:1, just prior to the statement
"I will never
break my covenant with you," the Lord recalls
that he led his people into the land
promised to the patriarchs. While the reference
to the Lord's "precepts" in Ps 111:7
would seem to point in the direction of the Mosaic
covenant, v 6, with its mention of the
gift of the land, suggests that vv 5 and 9 may be
alluding to the Abrahamic promise.
Exod 31:16 specifically refers to the Sabbath as a
perpetually binding "covenant" (or "ob-
ligation") which, as
Johnson notes, seems to be a sign of God's relationship with
via the Mosaic covenant Cf. also F. J. Helfmeyer, "tOx," TDOT 1:181-83.
13 Though Cr,x, [‘eres] can sometimes refer to the
more cosmic and universal sense of "earth"
or "world; as the parallelism of vv 4 (where
Cr,x, is parallel to lbeTe [tebel]),
13 (// Mym.ifa [‘ammim], "peoples,
nations"), and 18 (//MOrmA,
"heaven") indicates. The word pair Cr,x,/lbeTe clearly designates the
earth/world in several
texts (cf. 1 Sam 2:8; 1 Chr
Prov 8:26,
31; Isa 14:16-17; 34:1; Jer
10:12; 51:15; Lam
obviously universal in the other passages where
this word pair appears, such an interpre-
tation still makes adequate,
if not excellent, sense in all these texts (cf. Job
Pss 77:18; 97:4; Isa
14:21; 18:3; 26:9, 18; Nah 1:5). Apart from its use with Cr,x,, lbeTe also
Robert
B. Chisholm, Jr.: THE "EVERLASTING COVENANT" 241
though
judgment (cf. Micah 1), the nations are not
related to God through the
Sinaitic covenant and cannot be judged on its
basis.
The "City of
Many scholars prefer to see the "city of
chaos" in v 10 as symbolic,
typical, or representative of world power, human
society, or ancient
city-state culture.14 Others attempt to
identify it with an historical
city,15 such as
A Typical or Symbolic City. Several factors favor identifying the
"city of chaos" as a type or symbol of all proud cities
which oppose
God's
authority and become objects of his judgment. This unnamed city
is described in general, even stereotypical,
fashion (24:11-12). It con-
tains houses, streets, and a
gate and is characterized by revelry.17 The
city's downfall is closely associated with the
universal judgment that re-
verses the creative order (cf. 24:4-13). In fact, the
world's inhabitants
seem to be the city's residents. In vv 10-12 the bicolon "all joy turns to
gloom" // "all gaiety is banished from the
earth" (v 11bc) appears be-
tween references to the
city's demise (cf. vv 10-11a, 12). After the de-
scription of the city's fall, v
13 observes: "So it will be on the earth and
among the nations:" Finally, following the
oracles of chaps. 13-23,
which anticipate the downfall of various specific
cities, a reference to a
typical or representative city would be
appropriate here.
A Specific Foreign City. Despite this rather vague and general
description of the city, certain features of chap.
24 and the following
refers to the world (Pss
9:8;
L.
Stadelmann, lbeTe, though used
synonymously with Cr,x,, more particularly
designates
"the habitable part of the world.” See The Hebrew Conception of the World (AnBib
39;
14 See, for example, Young, Isaiah, 2:163-64; Kaiser, Isaiah 13-39, 181, 197; R. E.
Clements,
Isaiah 1-39 (NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980) 202;
319;
Oswalt, Isaiah,
448; and M. G. Kline, "Death, Leviathan, and the Martyrs: Isaiah
24:1-27:1"
(FS G. L Archer; Chicago: Moody, 1986) 240.
15 For surveys of the various views see
Millar, Isaiah 24-27, 15-21; and Vermeylin,
Isaie, 351. As Millar observes,
three of the proposals involving an historical city (a
abite city,
study which follows.
16 In addition to the sources listed by
Millar, see also W. H. Elder, “A Theological-
Historical
Study of Isaiah 24-27” (Ph.D. dissertation, Baylor University, 1974) 107-21;
and Johnson (From
Chaos to Restoration, 29-35, 59-61, 89-91, 98-99), who identifies the
ruined city of 24:10-12 as
the desolate city of 27:10 as Israel/Samaria and
Judah/Jerusalem. Recently Hayes and Ir-
vine (Isaiah,
296) have proposed that the “city" is actually the Assyrian citadel in Jeru-
17 In similar fashion the city is described
somewhat generally and stereotypically
in chaps. 25-27. It is fortified (25:2; 27:10) and
lofty (26:5) and is characterized by oppres-
sion (26:6).
242
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
context suggest that a foreign power or city,
such as
is in view.
Primarily on the basis of 25:10-12, some have
suggested that
abite pride and power are the
reality behind the imagery. Employing
terminology used elsewhere in chaps. 25-26 of the
devastated city, v 12
speaks of
25:12]
with hrAUcb; [besura; 25:2] and hbAGW;ni [nisgaba; 26:5]) being
brought down to the dust of the ground (cf. rpAfA-dfa Cr,xAlA cyaG;hi lyPiw;hi Hwahe
[hesah hispil higgia’ la’ares
‘ad-‘ad-‘apar; 25:12] with hn.Al,yPiw;ya
... HwaHe
rpAfA-dfa
hn.Af,yGiya Cr,x,-dfa h.lAyPiw;ya [hesah. . . yaspilenna yaspila ‘ad-‘eres
yaggi’enna ‘ad-‘apar; 26:5]). There are also numerous
verbal and the-
matic parallels between
24:7-12 and the earlier Moabite oracle (cf.
16:8-10),
both of which describe the cessation of agricultural fertility
and joy.
Others see the "city of chaos" as an
allusion to
wider Isaianic context,
which emphasizes the fall of
junction with worldwide divine judgment, suggests
in the background.18 In fact, this
section of the prophecy begins with
an oracle against
universal judgment (13:9-13).
This proposal finds further support if one
identifies the "city of
chaos" with the hostile city described in chaps.
25-26 (called in 25:2
"the foreigners' stronghold" (MyrizA
NOmr;xa [‘armon zarim]. Johnson
points out that the hostile city of 25:1-5 is
"bitterly hated by the
prophet," embodies "all the anti-godly
powers which must be de-
stroyed before the new age
could dawn; and has worldwide influ-
ence. He concludes:
"From Jewish perspective there was only one city
which would fit this description:
Finally, chap. 24 may contain echoes of the
which would point one in the direction of
warns that God will "scatter" (Cypihe [hepis]) the earth's inhabitants, just
as he did the residents of
verbs describing the earth's downfall contain
"b" and "l" sounds in se-
quence (cf. h.qAlObU [uboleqah] "devastate" [v 1], hlAb;xA [‘abela] "dries up"
[v
4], and hlAb;nA [nabela] "withers"
[twice in v 4]), echoing the judgment
of
[Gen
11:9], and llaBA [balal] "confused" [Gen
11:9]). The reference in
Isa 24:21 to a coalition between heavenly powers
and earthly kings
18 See B. Otzen,
"Traditions and Structures of Isaiah XXIV-XXVII," VT 24 (1974)
206.
19 From
Chaos to Restoration, 59. On Johnson's view of the city in these chapters,
see n. 16 above.
20 See Vermeylin,
Isaie, 355.
Robert
B. Chisholm, Jr.: THE "EVERLASTING COVENANT" 243
may also reflect the
tried to build a tower reaching into the heavens (Gen
11:4). For the
third time in Genesis 1-11, God was forced to thwart
an unauthorized
attempt to link earth and heaven.21
If the "everlasting covenant" refers
to the Noahic mandate
(as will be argued below), this would also favor
seeing the
epitomized humankind's attempt to disobey the
mandate. God instruc-
ted humankind to multiply
and fill the earth as his vice-regents. Instead
they built a city and attempted to construct a tower
reaching into the
heavens so that they "might make a
name" for themselves "and not be
scattered over the face of the earth" (Gen
11:4).22
the city is typical and/or foreign, other elements
in the text seem to
point toward an Israelite city, such as
argues that the city of 24:10-12, rather than being
the hostile city of
chaps. 25-26, is
arguments.23 According to Johnson,
the lament form of 24:7-12 makes
better sense if the destruction of
is in view. In chaps.
25-26 the downfall of the hostile city elicits praise,
not lamentation, from the prophet and the covenant
community (cf.
25:1-5;
26:1-6). Likewise, the prophet's statement in 24:16b, which in-
dicates that the immediately
preceding song of praise (cf. vv 14-16a)
is inappropriate, is best understood if the
surrounding context de-
scribes the fall of
matic elements which appear
to favor his position. There are several
verbal parallels between 24:8-9, which describes the
cessation of the
earth's revelry, and 5:11-14, which denounces
the carousing of
wealthy class. Several terms used in chap. 24
are typically or exclu-
sively used in Isaiah 1-39 or
prophetic literature of Israel/Judah, in-
cluding lbx, llmx, lbn, Hnx, hmw, and Mvrm. Johnson also suggests
that
the phrases Cr,xAhA
WOWm; [mesos ha’ares],
"gaiety of the earth" (24:11,
NASB),
and Cr,xAhA
br,q,B; [beqereb ha’ares], "in the midst of the earth"
(24:13,
NASB), are examples of double entendre. In the parallel struc-
ture of v 11 (cf. hHAm;Wi [simha], "joy," in the parallel line), WOWm; hlAGA
Cr,xAhA [gala mesos ha’ares], "The
gaiety of the earth is banished"
(NASB),
appears to refer to the cessation of the earth's joy, but Johnson
21 In Gen 3:5-6 the woman eats the
forbidden fruit in an effort to become "like
God,”
while Gen 6:1-3 tells how the "sons of God” takes wives from the
"daughters of
men.”
22 This is the second time in Genesis 1-11
where the building of a city runs
counter to a divine decree. Gen