The prophesier of the expatriate, Second Isaiah, saw God as the Lord of history employed in the political actions of the twenty-four hours. Furthermore, Isaiah viewed Cyrus male monarch of Persia, the military and political master, as God ‘s instrument through the returning of confined Israel to Jerusalem and Judah. This essay will reason the polar function of Cyrus in Second Isaiah exemplifying how his actions correlated with Israel ‘s developing apprehension of God.
The relevant facets addressed on Cyrus ‘ function sing Israel ‘s relationship with God are legion. They include the historical scene for the function of Cyrus in Second Isaiah, God ‘s portion in this state of affairs, the Jews reaction to the engagement of an foreigner ( such as Cyrus ) in their personal businesss, the rebuilding of the temple, and how God ‘s favouring of foreign powers expanded the Jews apprehension of God. Furthermore, elucidation of the term ‘anointed ‘ as applied to Cyrus is considered and a reassertion that Yahweh ‘s raising Cyrus leads to Israel ‘s gratuitous release will be addressed.[ 1 ]
There's a specialist from your university waiting to help you with that essay.
Tell us what you need to have done now!
order now
Cyrus, ‘Yahweh ‘s retainer, ‘ holds a alone topographic point in the history of Israel.[ 2 ]Cyrus appears destined to salvage Israel and to carry through Israel ‘s mission on behalf of the God of Israel. Importantly, Cyrus is besides seen as one whose edict and bid served as a foundation for the return to Zion and the hard-on of the destroyed temple.[ 3 ]It will be argued that Cyrus is God ‘s chosen instrument through which gracious intents are accomplished, particularly as through Cyrus God is revealed to the whole universe and non entirely to Israel. Hence, disclosure will be seen through the life of Cyrus male monarch of Persia, and Cyrus ‘ function as momentous in God ‘s enduring program for Israel.
The prophet refering Cyrus is polar to the text of Second Isaiah ( 44:24-45:25 ) . The cardinal contention of the prophet associating to Cyrus is that the autumn of Babylon and the rise of Persia are God ‘s work, because Yahweh is Godhead and accountant of all secular events. The prophesier Isaiah ‘s primary intent is non to convert the Gentiles of this fact, but the Jews. The prophesier commences by asseverating Yahweh as Israel ‘s Jesus and emphasizing the damages of Jerusalem and Judah ( vv. 44:24-28 ) . However, the originality of the transition rests in the embedded averment that the Jerusalem rebuilding edict will get through Cyrus male monarch of Persia, who appears as God ‘s anointed male monarch.[ 4 ]
Cyrus ‘ function in Second Isaiah comes in poetries 44:24-45:25, where a throne scene represents God ‘s regulation over the Earth. The subjects of the single lesser literary units are secondary to the basic thought of God ‘s sovereignty.[ 5 ]The gap of this compositional unit is marked by the closing of the predating description of graven images and the anthem in 44:23, with the ‘Hallelujah ‘ being announced at the terminal in the 45:2 poetry.[ 6 ]
Furthermore, much of the predating prognostication relates to the subject of the Judaic people returning to their fatherland, peculiarly Jerusalem. The transition ‘s chief concern is with how this will be achieved. It is shown to be realized though the political worlds of the twenty-four hours, specifically through the plants of the Persian male monarch Cyrus, who unusually is referred to here as Yahweh ‘s ‘anointed ‘ ( 45.1 ) .[ 7 ]Cyrus ‘ mention as ‘anointed ‘ is singular because by Judean tradition anointing occurred merely when a individual assumed a supreme Judean office. The term ‘the anointed ‘ is usually used in the Old Testament in mention to the male monarch ( e.g. PS. 2.2 ) and in ulterior Judaism refers to the coming of the Messiah. An of import consideration is that Cyrus ne’er became and Israelite male monarch, but there is a cogency in that he was the Lord ‘s vice-regent, supported by the fact he is termed ‘shepherd ‘ ( 44:28 ) .[ 8 ]
Hence, the function of Cyrus in 2nd Isaiah is polar and relates significantly to Israel ‘s developing apprehension of God. Leslie illustrates this in saying ‘The opening words of The Second Isaiah are a message of comfort and confidence. The fantastic new era that awaits the Judean expatriates is due to the policy of Cyrus, the great Iranian sovereign, twice mentioned by name in Second Isaiah ( 44:28 ; 45:1 ) . ‘[ 9 ]
Therefore, who was Cyrus The Great and why does he associate significantly to Israel ‘s developing apprehension of God? Cyrus was the grandson of Cyrus I and came to govern by throw outing his gramps, the male monarch of the Medes. Cyrus developed an imperium centred on Persia which included Lydia, Media, Mesopotamia, Ionia, Syria, and Palestine. Importantly, Cyrus conquered by diplomatic negotiations every bit good as by force going the focal point of a rich fable in Persia and Greece culminating in his being known as Father of the state. He appears in the Bible as the liberator of the Jews held confined in Babylon. Unfortunately, Cyrus ‘ ill-timed decease resulted from contending nomads in Central Asia, with his bequest to the universe being the initiation of a civilization, civilisation and imperium that continued after his decease and remained for two centuries.[ 10 ]
In reexamining Cyrus ‘s relationship with Israel, he appears in the Old Testament around 545 BCE as Judah and Jerusalem ‘s hope for Restoration. Second Isaiah calls him the ‘shepherd ‘ who will carry through Yahweh ‘s will ( Isaiah 44:28 ) and gives him the elevated rubric of the ‘anointed ‘ of Yahweh.[ 11 ]Clearly Cyrus ‘ conquerings are perceived as accomplished through the power of God with God enacting this in order that Cyrus may reconstruct God ‘s people Israel ( Isaiah 45:1 ff ) .[ 12 ]
This outlook was fulfilled in 538 BCE when Cyrus allowed the Jews home in Babylon to return to Jerusalem and reconstruct the metropolis and its temple ( 2 Chronicles 36:22f ; Ezra 1:1-4 ) . The text of Cyrus ‘ edict is quoted in Ezra 6:3-5. Cyrus ‘ handling of the Jews is in agreement with his policy of returning the images of captured Gods to their original temples, which he frequently rebuilt. The Jews, who had no godly image, received alternatively the sacred vass of the temple which had been looted by Nebuchadnezzar ( Ezra 1:7 ) at the clip of the expatriate to Babylon.[ 13 ]
Tenney notes:
Cyrus entered Babylon on October 29, 539BCE and presented himself in the function of the liberator of the people. He allowed the images of Gods to be transported back to their original metropoliss, and instituted a charitable policy of repatriation of confined peoples. His policies of moderateness of course extended to the Hebrews whom he encouraged to return to reconstruct their temple ( 2 Chronicles 36:22, 23 ; Ezra 1:1-6, Isaiah 44:27, 28 ; 45:1-5 ) .[ 14 ]
Sing the rebuilding of the temple, Cyrus ‘ dictum for the Restoration in Jerusalem heralded a important period in the record of the Judaic state ( 2 Chronicles 36:22,23 ; Ezra 1:1-4 ; 4:3 ; 5:13-17 ; 6:3-5 ) Therefore, Cyrus was to them as a ‘shepherd ‘ ( Isaiah 44:28 ; 45:1 ) with God using him in service to God ‘s chosen people. What is more, in BCE 536 Cyrus became king over Palestine, with it going portion of Cyrus ‘ Babylonian imperium.[ 15 ]
Therefore, as portion of Cyrus ‘ Babylonian imperium, what was the state of affairs of Israel at this clip? The place was such that the metropoliss of Judah were in ruins. Nothing had been spared in the desolation by Nebuchadnezzar, including the glorious symbol of the national cult, the Jerusalem temple. The Judean leaders, in concert with the chief sector of the public, now existed as expatriates under the Babylonian vanquishers and the winning Babylonian God, Marduk.[ 16 ]
Furthermore, how did the Judeans respond to this province of personal businesss? Many among the subjugated Judeans responded by switching their committedness from Yahweh to the Gods of the Babylonians. ( californium. Jer. 44:15-19 ; Ezekiel 8:7-18 ) . Therefore, in conformity with the predominating position of the clip in the antediluvian Near East that the licking of a province indicated the diminution of that province ‘s patronizing divinity in the assembly of the Gods, these Judeans merely adhered to the norm by reassigning their spiritual commitments.[ 17 ]
However, the religion of Israel sought a brave option to both nation-cult categorization and Gnostic extraction. That Yahweh was implicated in this incident of history was already a theological guess acknowledged by the Hebrews, through their exodus experience with Egypt[ 18 ]. Additionally, the tradition of analyzing human experience in relation to divine intent was cultivated by the Prophetss. Hence, the Gnosticism smear of the material universe failed to take root in the spiritual communities turning out of the Bible.
The recognized stance of civilizations bordering Israel in believing that the involvements of a God corresponded with the involvements of the state was non supported by the Prophetss in this case. It was viewed by the Hebrewss that while God acted on behalf of Israel ‘s ascendants in Egypt and continued to be active in the events of Israel ‘s history, the Godhead intent was guided by a cosmopolitan program of justness instead than a chauvinistic docket. Hence, meaning important growing and nutriment in Israel ‘s intensifying grasp of God ‘s ways.[ 19 ]
The mentality that guided Second Isaiah as he faced the uncertainties of a people sing the evident triumph, foremost of the imperium of Marduk and so of Ahura Mazda, was the same moral apprehension of Godhead intent that led Amos and after him Isaiah and Jeremiah to show God ‘s program of cosmopolitan justness to king and people.[ 20 ]
Mindful of the aforesaid mentality, what portion was at that place for Yahweh, the God of Israel, to play in this state of affairs? Hanson answers this inquiry by saying:
For Second Isaiah that inquiry was addressed by seeking to spot how those events were functioning God ‘s cosmopolitan program of justness and God ‘s grim resistance to subjugation. The statement that the Babylonian conquering of Judah had cast uncertainty on Yahweh ‘s sovereignty was an statement taken from the pagan religion of the nation-cults and was invalid with a prophetic foreign power to penalize a state that had broken the footings of its compact with God by disowning justness and clemency. What the Prophetss had done in every other historical context Second Isaiah would make now: He would construe the events that were blossoming in the universe in relation to the cosmopolitan moral intents of the one true God.[ 21 ]
However, an grasp of the function of Cyrus in Second Isaiah and how it relates to Israel ‘s developing apprehension of God can be better appreciated in the visible radiation of the ‘second voice ‘ of the text. Get downing in chapter 40 it can be seen that a 2nd voice of Isaiah starts to talk in the text. This Isaiah ( called Second Isaiah or Deutero-Isaiah ) extends from the clip of the expatriate, instead than the eight-seventh centuries BCE.[ 22 ]This subdivision opens with a call to talk words of ‘comfort ‘ to God ‘s people, a significance that was non perceptibly in the manner of First Isaiah. The prophesier speaks when the expatriate is about to stop, motivating the people to believe about returning to Judah and Jerusalem.[ 23 ]
The most dramatic feature of this displacement in Israel ‘s fate is the realisation that God ‘s people have been crushed and exiled. Once, this would hold been testimony that the God of Israel was a failure and unworthy of the people ‘s fear. Through let go ofing them from their 2nd period of imprisonment ( the prophesier compares the expatriate to the Egyptian incident, 43.3 ; 45.14 ; 52.4 ) , Yahweh now proves to the Hebrewss and to all the so known universe that there is no God but Yahweh. This event, unparalleled by other Gods, marked Yahweh as absolute and becomes foundational for the development of the Jewish monotheistic belief.[ 24 ]
Relative to the monotheistic belief of the Jews, how did the Jews react to an foreigner such as Cyrus the male monarch of Persia being involved in their personal businesss? If Isaiah ‘s audiences were surprised at Cyrus ‘s being named God ‘s ‘shepherd ‘ ( 44:28 ) so there are broader deductions in hearing Cyrus now being called his ‘anointed. ‘[ 25 ]Priests, Prophetss and male monarchs of Israel had antecedently been the exclusive receivers of such a rubric. It can be hypothesised that God merely used those from God ‘s chosen to accomplish God ‘s intents. This is the stance that Isaiah is corroborating, that God is for the full universe and non for Israel entirely. Israel ‘s election is non for itself, and neither is its redemption needfully to be effected by itself.
Additionally, Oswald notes ‘It is this sense in which ‘anoints ‘ is used here. Cyrus has been particularly chosen and empowered to transport out the intents of God. In this sense Cyrus typifies the Messiah. ‘[ 26 ]Clearly, Cyrus is God ‘s selected vas through whom God ‘s glorious intents will be realized, particularly as through Cyrus God is revealed to the universe. Hence, ‘every metropolis will be powerless to close Cyrus out since it is God who will travel before Cyrus and fix the manner for him. ‘[ 27 ]On geting at the metropolis gate by the soft route God has prepared, Cyrus will happen broken open the mightiest of defense mechanisms.
Therefore, there are three chief grounds for God ‘s favouring and authorising Cyrus. They include foremost, that God wants Cyrus to admit who favours him, in a similar manner as Pharaoh came to admit the God of Israel without coming to faith in Israel ‘s God ( Ezra1:2-4 ) . Second, that God ‘s favouring Israel is for the interest of the Lord ‘s chosen, the chosen people, as antecedently illustrated by Moses ‘ clear apprehension of this ( Exodus 32:11-13 ) . Likewise, God may name Cyrus by name, merely as God called Jacob ( 43:1 ) but Cyrus ‘s naming is in order that God may maintain God ‘s salvaging promises to Israel, and Third, that God ‘s choosing and authorising Cyrus is done so that the whole universe might cognize The Lord, is the 1 and merely God of Israel.[ 28 ]
Consequently, there is a conspicuous sequence in these grounds for God choosing and authorising Cyrus in Israel ‘s developing apprehension of God. This includes ( a ) that Cyrus might cognize God ( v.3 ) , ( B ) that Israel might cognize God ( v.4 ) , and ( degree Celsius ) that the universe might cognize God ( v.6 ) . Furthermore, human failure to assent to these truths subjects it to a rhythm of human haughtiness, subjugation and inhuman treatment.[ 29 ]
Notably, the prophet is non addressed to Cyrus, but to the despondent Israelites, who fail to see how God ‘s glowing promises of Restoration can perchance be kept. The issue is hence persuading God ‘s people that God can present, and in God ‘s ain manner.[ 30 ]A dramatic disparity from the ‘Cyrus Cylinder ‘ is that whereas Cyrus ‘s virtuousnesss, strength, and leading accomplishments are put frontward as the grounds for Marduk ‘s taking him, here in Second Isaiah they are non credited.[ 31 ]The three grounds given ( vv.3, 4, and 6 ) are merely related to the nature and character of God. Thus redemption stands upon God ‘s grace and the Providence and non human perfectibility.
The afore mentioned ‘Cyrus Cylinder ‘ virtues elucidation as a record of these events. This record considered to hold been produced in Cyrus ‘ first twelvemonth, claims Cyrus was chosen to govern by the Babylonian God Marduk. Furthermore, how Cyrus returned the statues of the Gods brought into Babylon and allowed some of the people to return to their ain places.[ 32 ]Importantly, in reasoning the instance for an expanded apprehension of God through Cyrus and foreign civilizations, Andre Lemaire remarks ‘the Israelite expatriates survived culturally in expatriate likely in portion because their apprehension of God changed from the worship of a national divinity to be served in a specific temple to a cosmopolitan God who was present everyplace, even in expatriate. ‘[ 33 ]
Similarly, Second Isaiah ( v.12-13 ) closes with a reassertion that it is Yahweh raising Cyrus ensuing in Israel ‘s release being gratuitous and profiting neither God nor Cyrus, so that God may be acknowledged for what God is. Historically the damages of the Jewish community in Palestine had a more abiding consequence than all of Cyrus ‘s other accomplishments, mindful that this is a king history has titled ‘The Great. ‘[ 34 ]In the visible radiation of attendant events, the prophesier does non show constricted vision but instead considerable penetration into the significance of history.
In decision, this essay has argued the positive and purposeful function of Cyrus in Second Isaiah by demoing how Cyrus ‘s function relates to Israel ‘s spread outing apprehension of God, approached through an assessment of the chief transition events, textual commentary utilizing relevant exegetical tools, with the add-on of theological and hermeneutic considerations.
It has been illustrated how God calls Cyrus, God ‘s ‘servant, ‘ let go ofing God ‘s people from the restraint of the Babylonian imprisonment, and with God naming Cyrus the Lord ‘s ‘messiah ‘ who would oppress Israel ‘s oppressors. On the one manus, Yahweh ‘s Cyrus brings peace for God ‘s people and on the other manus Cyrus brings devastation on Israel ‘s enemies. Therefore, Cyrus is the writer of both peace and catastrophe with the 1 who has called Cyrus to this undertaking shown to be none other than Yahweh, God ‘s ego.
Ultimately, there is a audacious biddings for Israel to waive lassitude and weaknesss, and concern for the endurance and the saving of heritage. It is an chance to see in the global religious crisis of the clip and the cosmopolitan anxiousness and insecurity created by the rise of Cyrus, Israel ‘s at hand opportunity to dispatch her historic fate. Rather than keening a distressing destiny and complaining of quandary, allow Israel grok that as a state it is a retainer of God and therefore God ‘s embassador to all states of the universe, hungering and thirsting for cognition of God ‘s will.[ 35 ]
