Feast upon the Word - User contributions [en]

Matt 6:6-10

2006-10-20T04:51:51Z

71.115.234.190: wrapping up verse 6 for now, and a thought on verse 9's "Our"

[[The New Testament]] > [[Matthew]] > [[Matthew 6|Chapter 6]]
{|
| [[Matt 6:1-5|Previous (Matt 6:1-5)]] ||             || [[Matt 6:11-15|Next (Matt 6:11-15)]]
|}
== Questions ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add questions''

== Lexical notes ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add lexical notes''

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 6===
Building on the commentary at [[Matt 6:5|verse 5]], one must explore in this verse especially the radical subjectivity at work in the Spirit of Christian prayer. A counter-text from the Old Testament might well open the possibility of interpreting this radical subjectivity clearly: [[Ezra 9:5|Ezra 9:5-15]]. In that passage, Ezra has just learned of the intermarriage of the Judahites returning from captivity with the semi-Israelites who were left behind. In response, "having rent my garment and my mantle, I fell upon my knees, and spread out my hands unto the LORD my God" (verse 5). Preparing to pray in response to the situation, Ezra makes--and according to the Law of Moses--rather a show of things. But the show marks the point: the prayer that follows is not for God but for the listeners. He begins his prayer poetically: "O my God, I am ashamed and blush to lift up my face to thee, my God" (verse 6), after which he uses the language of court flattery, as in verse 8: "And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the LORD our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage." The prayer goes on and on in this same spirit, and Ezra never asks anything of the Lord, and certainly he never praises Him in the words of the Israelite liturgies (only in the language of court flattery--learned in Persia?). By the time Ezra concludes the prayer, all he seems to have accomplished is to make absolutely clear to his listeners that they cannot stand before God in their "sin": "O LORD God of Israel, thou art righteous: for we remain yet escaped, as it is this day: behold, we are before thee in our trespasses: for we cannot stand before thee because of this" (verse 15). As one reads this prayer carefully, it becomes quite obvious that the prayer is no prayer, that there is no ''praying'', no petition and no exultation. It is, rather, a tool to accomplish particular "political" ends (inter-human ends). And in fact, recent biblical scholarship has increasingly seen reason to criticize Ezra's political agenda (a topic that can only be discussed at length in the commentary at the books of [[Ezra 1:1|Ezra]] and [[Neh 1:1|Nehemiah]]).

What Jesus commands the people to do in this sermon stands in stark contrast to what Ezra does in his prayer: Jesus teaches the people to pray in a radically secret way: "enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray." It may well be that Jesus had Ezra's prayer (but certainly prayers just like it) in mind when He spoke the words of [[Matt 6:5|verse 5]]. The Spirit of Christian prayer is, over and against Ezra's prayer, one of radical subjectivity, of an incredibly individual relation to God. This individuality is heralded in the word "Father," which appears twice in this verse, and becomes focal at the beginning of the "Pater Noster" Jesus provides a few verses later. Of central significance is this radically subjective and individual relation to the Father in prayer, and it deserves some careful attention. Perhaps what most needs attention is how this radically subjective characterization of prayer, as taught by the Savior, changes all prayers, even those to be offered in public and "before the world" (see commentary at [[Matt 6:5|verse 5]]): if Jesus is not here offering "rules" for prayer, He ''is'' offering a radical reinterpretation (or restoring the true interpretation, as it shall be seen) of prayer, one that recasts prayer as a work to be done within the Christian logic of superabundance.

Hence, of radical subjectivity: the theme is not unique--and this must be noticed from the very start--to the New Testament. The radical subjectivity of secret prayer is a theme that runs through the texts of the Old Testament prophets. Perhaps it is most explicitly explored in the Book of [[Jonah 1:1|Jonah]], but it is implicitly present in a number of the prophet books ([[Hab 1:1|Habakkuk]] is also a good place to explore the meaning of radically subjective prayer). The starting point, of course, for any question of radical subjectivity is its origin, that is, how it is that a radical subjectivity comes into being in the first place. Two answers immediately present themselves, two answers that are, in the end, closely tied: there must be a naming of the subject, and the subject must be called. The two are closely tied in an obvious way: the naming is the calling, for the subject is called into radical subjectivity by a name. If Christian prayer, then, is marked by a radical subjectivity, it can only be understood as a response to a call, as a counter-naming: precisely because one is to "pray to thy Father which is in secret" (one must notice that He, too, is radically subjective--and that because of His name: Father), one has been called by the name of the Son, has been called as a son in the name of the Son.

Obviously these comments are quickly becoming an excursus, and it would be best to locate any further detail in commentary on a verse that more specifically deals with these themes. But it is necessary to recognize the underpinnings of the radical subjectivity which characterizes Christian prayer: as the Son to the Father, and hence, called by the name of the Son, as a son, one prays without hypocrisy.

===Verse 9===
There is an obvious difficulty if this verse is read as following verse 6: if one is to pray entirely on one's own, apart from everyone else, and in one's very closet, why on earth is one to begin prayer with the word "Our"? The point should be obvious: prayer is at once a question of radical subjectivity and a question of community. There are at least two undeniable consequences of this juxtaposition: one's prayer, offered at a remove from all other individuals, is a sort of intercessory prayer on behalf of all sons, of all Israel; moreover, prayer is inevitably communal, but communal prayer should be so profoundly subjective, so profoundly personal, that even when it is spoken in community it is spoken as if one were in one's closet.

== Related links ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add related links''

----
{|
| [[Matt 6:1-5|Previous (Matt 6:1-5)]] ||             || [[Matt 6:11-15|Next (Matt 6:11-15)]]
|}

3 Ne 16:11-15

2006-10-20T04:51:51Z

71.115.234.190: a start on verse 11

[[The Book of Mormon]] > [[Third Nephi]] > [[Third Nephi 16|Chapter 16]]
{|
| [[3 Ne 16:6-10|Previous (3 Ne 16:6-10)]] ||             || [[3 Ne 16:16-20|Next (3 Ne 16:16-20)]]
|}
== Questions ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add questions''

== Lexical notes ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add lexical notes''

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 11===
The reversal of the Gentiles' belief (see the commentary for [[3 Ne 16:8|verses 8-10]]) reverses the reversal of the covenant (mentioned in the commentary for [[3 Ne 16:7|verse 7]]). The earlier Gentile belief in the manifestation (from a distance) of God, opposed to the earlier Israelite unbelief in the manifestation (much more direct) of God, had resulted in a reversal of the Abrahamic covenant: the fulness of the gospel, when brought again on the earth, was brought to those without the covenant, was brought to the once-believing regardless of the covenant. Verse 7 reads, in fact, as if the covenant itself were being abrogated. But with this verse, it becomes quite clear that the Gentile intermission was a step along the way to the Israelite reception of the fulness of the gospel. Here it is clear that the Lord's remembrance of "my covenant" is equivalent to "bring[ing] my gospel unto them."

== Related links ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add related links''

----
{|
| [[3 Ne 16:6-10|Previous (3 Ne 16:6-10)]] ||             || [[3 Ne 16:16-20|Next (3 Ne 16:16-20)]]
|}

Talk:Isa 2:6-10

2006-09-25T01:54:24Z

71.115.234.190: 1830 and "not"

===Bowing===
The 1830 Book of Mormon does not add the "not" to this phrase, though it does to the following ("humbleth himself not"). I am working out a trade to acquire the three-volume critical edition, so I don't know which is the better reading yet for the "original" Book of Mormon. As I've been working through the 1830 text I've been noticing quite a lot of these sorts of issues in the Isaiah chapters specifically. I wonder what to make of it. --[[User:71.115.234.190|71.115.234.190]] 01:54, 25 Sep 2006 (UTC)

3 Ne 16:6-10

2006-08-24T13:18:06Z

71.115.234.190: /* Verse 7 */

{| width="20%"
| [[3 Ne 16:1-5|Previous]] || [[3 Ne 16:11-15|Next]]
|}
== Questions ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add questions''

== Lexical notes ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add lexical notes''

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 6===
As the theme of the Gentiles really opens up in this verse (see [[3 Ne 16:4|the preceding two verses]]), the context in which this theme opens must be stated. And the context is rather clear: the Gentiles, marked here by their "belief..., in and of the Holy Ghost," are clearly--though perhaps only in the first place--those preached to and converted in the earliest Christian era. If verses 4-5 set up the possibility of exploring the role of the Gentiles in the history of the Abrahamic covenant, this verse begins to undertake that exploration from the very earliest moment of the Gentile involvement in that history.

As [[3 Ne 15:23|before]], the Gentiles are only to experience God through the manifestation of the Holy Ghost, but now the nature of that visitation is implicitly different. Whereas before it appeared that the limited visitation of the Gentiles was due simply to their being outside the original boundaries of the covenant, it now appears that there is a sort of test or trial at work in the visitation: the Gentiles are "blessed" because they are filled with "belief," though it is ''only'' "in and of the Holy Ghost." Since the verse goes on quite explicitly to state that that same Holy Ghost has witnessed to the Gentiles of both the Son and the Father, it seems clear that the Gentiles are blessed for overcoming a sort of distancing performed by God Himself. In other words, though they are ministered to from afar at first, they respond faithfully and move quickly toward the center, for which responsiveness they are blessed.

Key to this faithful movement is the Trinitarian theme that again arises here (as [[3 Ne 16:4|before). The Gentile conversion is marked by their full involvement with the Trinity, with the three members of the Godhead at work. If verse 5 establishes the role of the Father in this Trinitarian, covenantal history as the One who covenants specifically with Israel, then this verse's admission that the Gentiles, through the Holy Ghost, have some access to--or, at the very least, witness of--the Father is rather significant: there is already a hint of a Gentile adoption at work in these verses. The blessing spoken by the Christ upon the Gentiles must be read in that light.

===Verse 7===
The belief of the Gentiles, initially explored in verse 6, is now set against the unbelief of Israel. If the Gentiles in question seem to be those of the earliest Christian era, then the Israelites in question seem also to be of the same time. The unbelief of Israel, then, seems to be the broad rejection of the Christian proclamation in the first few centuries of the common era. The paucity of good historical documentation from the era in question makes any detailed historical study of the subject rather difficult, but what Christ Himself says here seems rather clear: at the moment of first proclamation, the Gentiles receive the Holy Ghost, while Israel rejects the very presence of the Son. In other words, while the Gentiles receive only the most distant experience of God (the Holy Ghost), they receive it happily and so receive the witness of the Son and Father through the Holy Ghost; at the same time, the House of Israel (and the Nephites/Lamanites present on the occasion, along with the "other sheep" to be visited soon, seem to be the ones implied here), receiving more directly the undeniable visitation of the Son, will go on to leave off Son, Father, and ultimately the Holy Ghost.

This broad scheme is interesting for a number of reasons. Perhaps most obvious is the complete lack of reference to the Jews in this comparison: this is not at all a question of the Gentiles and Jews, of the Jews who rejected Jesus versus the Gentiles who humbled themselves before the word of Saint Paul. Rather, the role of Jews is entirely left off until later, while the Gentiles and the lost (but not yet scattered?) tribes of Israel are compared as to their reception of the Christian dispensation. While Israel, as the covenant promised them, receive the presence of the Son in person, the Gentiles receive only the distant manifestation of the Holy Ghost; but the believing Gentiles maintain what they can of their visitation, while Israel broadly rejects theirs.

The result of this discrepency is a sort of reversal of the covenant (though with the aim, in the end, of fulfilling perfectly the covenant; see [[3 Ne 16:11|verse 11]]). Because Israel rejects and the Gentiles receive, the last day will be marked by a revelation to the Gentiles, and "the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them." The Gentiles are privileged, still believing, over the Israelites, who will have long since fallen away. The reversal, then: Israel, promised to be gathered together in the covenant, are only to receive their part in the covenant knowledge derivatively, second-hand. The ramifications of this reversal of sorts are the real subject matter of all of the following.

===Verses 8-10===
Suddenly, however, the spirit of this entire discourse changes with a turn of events introduced across three verses (though in the end the spirit of the discourse will have remained precisely the same). The subject shifts from the believing Gentiles to the unbelieving Gentiles, and a negative tone arises. But this shift from a happier theme to a more depressing one dissociate the present three verses from the preceding two: the last phrase of verse 10 ("I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them") can only be read as tied to the last phrase of verse 7 ("the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them"). Some sort of continuity between the believing and unbelieving Gentiles is implied: the continuity is undeniably not a question of two opposing groups of Gentiles, one believing and one unbelieving, but it is rather a question of just one Gentile group passing through two phases, a time of belief and a time of unbelief. In other words, verses 8-10 follow verses 6-7 not to draw a distinction between those (one group of Gentiles) who believe and those (another group of Gentiles) who do not, but between the Gentiles at the first (believing) and the same Gentiles later (unbelieving): the continuity is meant to explain the rejection of a later grace offered in the name of an earlier Gentile belief.

This shift from belief (in the Holy Ghost) to unbelief (qualified in a number of ways) is traced over the course of these three verses. In verse 8, the Gentiles function as the Lord's tool to scatter the Nephite/Lamanite remnant on the American continent, even to cast the remnant out of their midst, and to trod the same under their feet. This functioning is introduced with the word "notwithstanding," implying that the scattering performed is a work of great grace for the Gentiles, a manifestation of divine favor on their behalf. The same disposition on the Lord's part opens verse 9, where the "mercies" for the Gentiles are opposed to the "judgments" upon the house of Israel. In verse 9, much the same functioning is described again, though in stronger words: "smitten," "afflicted," even "slain," then "cast out," "hated," and becoming "a hiss and a byword among them." But this disposition of grace suddenly falls away in verse 10, where the wickedness of the Gentiles is put on display: they "sin against my gospel," "reject the fulness of my gospel," are "lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations," are "filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations...." Key in the list seems to be that the Gentiles are "lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth." The passage may have reference to Isaiah 10 (where Assyria is one of the Gentile nations already), where Assyria is subject to much the same transfer: there, in [[Isa 10:5|verses 5 and 6]], Assyria is explicitly named an instrument in the hand of the Lord to punish His people, but Assyria goes on to exalt himself above all nations in [[Isa 10:12|verses 12-13]], for which he is punished--perhaps more harshly than the Gentiles here.

In fact, it must be admitted, in the end, that the punishment of the Gentiles is rather mild here: though it is no small thing to lose "the fulness of my gospel," it is something less than the absolute destruction one would expect from the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, the verses still to come will bring in questions of thorough destruction. Preparatory to that destruction--or really, grounding that destruction--is this loss of the gospel (a prevalent theme in the Book of Mormon: a people first loses the truth, and then the same people is destroyed).

== Related links ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add related links''

----
{| width="20%"
| [[3 Ne 16:1-5|Previous]] || [[3 Ne 16:11-15|Next]]
|}

3 Ne 16:6-10

2006-08-24T13:14:35Z

71.115.234.190: /* Verses 8-10 */

{| width="20%"
| [[3 Ne 16:1-5|Previous]] || [[3 Ne 16:11-15|Next]]
|}
== Questions ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add questions''

== Lexical notes ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add lexical notes''

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 6===
As the theme of the Gentiles really opens up in this verse (see [[3 Ne 16:4|the preceding two verses]]), the context in which this theme opens must be stated. And the context is rather clear: the Gentiles, marked here by their "belief..., in and of the Holy Ghost," are clearly--though perhaps only in the first place--those preached to and converted in the earliest Christian era. If verses 4-5 set up the possibility of exploring the role of the Gentiles in the history of the Abrahamic covenant, this verse begins to undertake that exploration from the very earliest moment of the Gentile involvement in that history.

As [[3 Ne 15:23|before]], the Gentiles are only to experience God through the manifestation of the Holy Ghost, but now the nature of that visitation is implicitly different. Whereas before it appeared that the limited visitation of the Gentiles was due simply to their being outside the original boundaries of the covenant, it now appears that there is a sort of test or trial at work in the visitation: the Gentiles are "blessed" because they are filled with "belief," though it is ''only'' "in and of the Holy Ghost." Since the verse goes on quite explicitly to state that that same Holy Ghost has witnessed to the Gentiles of both the Son and the Father, it seems clear that the Gentiles are blessed for overcoming a sort of distancing performed by God Himself. In other words, though they are ministered to from afar at first, they respond faithfully and move quickly toward the center, for which responsiveness they are blessed.

Key to this faithful movement is the Trinitarian theme that again arises here (as [[3 Ne 16:4|before). The Gentile conversion is marked by their full involvement with the Trinity, with the three members of the Godhead at work. If verse 5 establishes the role of the Father in this Trinitarian, covenantal history as the One who covenants specifically with Israel, then this verse's admission that the Gentiles, through the Holy Ghost, have some access to--or, at the very least, witness of--the Father is rather significant: there is already a hint of a Gentile adoption at work in these verses. The blessing spoken by the Christ upon the Gentiles must be read in that light.

===Verse 7===
The belief of the Gentiles, initially explored in verse 6, is now set against the unbelief of Israel. If the Gentiles in question seem to be those of the earliest Christian era, then the Israelites in question seem also to be of the same time. The unbelief of Israel, then, seems to be the broad rejection of the Christian proclamation in the first few centuries of the common era. The paucity of good historical documentation from the era in question makes any detailed historical study of the subject rather difficult, but what Christ Himself says here seems rather clear: at the moment of first proclamation, the Gentiles receive the Holy Ghost, while Israel rejects the very presence of the Son. In other words, while the Gentiles receive only the most distant experience of God (the Holy Ghost), they receive it happily and so receive the witness of the Son and Father through the Holy Ghost; at the same time, the House of Israel (and the Nephites/Lamanites present on the occasion, along with the "other sheep" to be visited soon, seem to be the ones implied here), receiving more directly the undeniable visitation of the Son, will go on to leave off Son, Father, and ultimately the Holy Ghost.

This broad scheme is interesting for a number of reasons. Perhaps most obvious is the complete lack of reference to the Jews in this comparison: this is not at all a question of the Gentiles and Jews, of the Jews who rejected Jesus versus the Gentiles who humbled themselves before the word of Saint Paul. Rather, the role of Jews is entirely left off until later, while the Gentiles and the lost (but not yet scattered?) tribes of Israel are compared as to their reception of the Christian dispensation. While Israel, as the covenant promised them, receive the presence of the Son in person, the Gentiles receive only the distant manifestation of the Holy Ghost; but the believing Gentiles maintain what they can of their visitation, while Israel broadly rejects theirs.

The result of this discrepency is a sort of reversal of the covenant (though with the aim, in the end, of fulfilling perfectly the covenant). Because Israel rejects and the Gentiles receive, the last day will be marked by a revelation to the Gentiles, and "the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them." The Gentiles are privileged, still believing, over the Israelites, who will have long since fallen away. The reversal, then: Israel, promised to be gathered together in the covenant, are only to receive their part in the covenant knowledge derivatively, second-hand. The ramifications of this reversal of sorts are the real subject matter of all of the following.

===Verses 8-10===
Suddenly, however, the spirit of this entire discourse changes with a turn of events introduced across three verses (though in the end the spirit of the discourse will have remained precisely the same). The subject shifts from the believing Gentiles to the unbelieving Gentiles, and a negative tone arises. But this shift from a happier theme to a more depressing one dissociate the present three verses from the preceding two: the last phrase of verse 10 ("I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them") can only be read as tied to the last phrase of verse 7 ("the fulness of these things shall be made known unto them"). Some sort of continuity between the believing and unbelieving Gentiles is implied: the continuity is undeniably not a question of two opposing groups of Gentiles, one believing and one unbelieving, but it is rather a question of just one Gentile group passing through two phases, a time of belief and a time of unbelief. In other words, verses 8-10 follow verses 6-7 not to draw a distinction between those (one group of Gentiles) who believe and those (another group of Gentiles) who do not, but between the Gentiles at the first (believing) and the same Gentiles later (unbelieving): the continuity is meant to explain the rejection of a later grace offered in the name of an earlier Gentile belief.

This shift from belief (in the Holy Ghost) to unbelief (qualified in a number of ways) is traced over the course of these three verses. In verse 8, the Gentiles function as the Lord's tool to scatter the Nephite/Lamanite remnant on the American continent, even to cast the remnant out of their midst, and to trod the same under their feet. This functioning is introduced with the word "notwithstanding," implying that the scattering performed is a work of great grace for the Gentiles, a manifestation of divine favor on their behalf. The same disposition on the Lord's part opens verse 9, where the "mercies" for the Gentiles are opposed to the "judgments" upon the house of Israel. In verse 9, much the same functioning is described again, though in stronger words: "smitten," "afflicted," even "slain," then "cast out," "hated," and becoming "a hiss and a byword among them." But this disposition of grace suddenly falls away in verse 10, where the wickedness of the Gentiles is put on display: they "sin against my gospel," "reject the fulness of my gospel," are "lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations," are "filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations...." Key in the list seems to be that the Gentiles are "lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth." The passage may have reference to Isaiah 10 (where Assyria is one of the Gentile nations already), where Assyria is subject to much the same transfer: there, in [[Isa 10:5|verses 5 and 6]], Assyria is explicitly named an instrument in the hand of the Lord to punish His people, but Assyria goes on to exalt himself above all nations in [[Isa 10:12|verses 12-13]], for which he is punished--perhaps more harshly than the Gentiles here.

In fact, it must be admitted, in the end, that the punishment of the Gentiles is rather mild here: though it is no small thing to lose "the fulness of my gospel," it is something less than the absolute destruction one would expect from the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, the verses still to come will bring in questions of thorough destruction. Preparatory to that destruction--or really, grounding that destruction--is this loss of the gospel (a prevalent theme in the Book of Mormon: a people first loses the truth, and then the same people is destroyed).

== Related links ==
* ''Click the edit link above and to the right to add related links''

----
{| width="20%"
| [[3 Ne 16:1-5|Previous]] || [[3 Ne 16:11-15|Next]]
|}

Isa 6:1-4

2006-07-24T15:21:31Z

71.115.234.190: a start I'll have to finish later--got called suddenly to get to an eagle project!

{| width="20%"
| [[Isa 5:26-30|Previous]] || [[Isa 6:6-10|Next]]
|}
== Questions ==
* What do we know about the heavenly beings identified here as seraphims?

== Lexical notes ==
* Seraphims are described here as heavenly beings with six wings. The same Hebrew word ([http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=08314&version=kjv saraph]) is used in [[Num 21:6]], [[Num 21:8]], and [[Deut 8:15]] in reference to the "fiery serpents" that bit the Children of Israel as they wandered in the desert.

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 1===
This chapter undeniably explores Isaiah's prophetic call (read: call to prophesy). That such a call is issued upon the event of a king's death is most significant: Isaiah is given the gift of prophecy at the very time a new king is to be enthroned. That Isaiah is in the temple--apparently in the Holy of Holies--at the time of enthronement is likewise suggestive: only a high priest (''the'' high priest) should (could) have been in such a location on such an event. The prophetic call narrative is immediately cast as a question of kingship and priesthood: at the time Isaiah was called to prophesy, he was functioning as the high priest of the Israelite cultus, performing the preparatory rites (the Day of Atonement) for the cultic enthronement of the new king. This complex context is an unrelenting theme throughout the chapter, and it is one that--if kept constantly in mind--opens up interpretive possibilities for many of the details at work in the narrative.

That the temple is the location of the event is clear: the Lord's "train filled the temple." The Hebrew ''hychal'', here translated temple, is an ambiguous term (as far as moderns are concerned) used to describe what are modernly called temples as well as what are modernly called palaces. The Hebrews do not seem to have made such a distinction. In other words, one should (universally in the Old Testament, particularly in this passage) regard the temple as the palace of the Lord: the Lord is seen in this vision to be sitting upon a throne, yet clearly in the temple standing in Jerusalem. Working with such an undifferentiated concept of palace/temple, the meaning of the "throne" mentioned is clear: Isaiah sees YHWH sitting on the "mercy seat" (''kprt'', better translated the "throne of atonement") atop the ark of the covenant.

In other words, Isaiah's prophetic call begins with a vision of YHWH sitting atop the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem temple, and specifically on the occasion of the enthronement of a new king. Even as the rites of earthly enthronement (of Jotham, the son of Uzziah) are preparing, Isaiah is given to see a far surer enthronement, that of the very God of heaven. His exaltation in enthronement is clear (He is "high and lifted up"), and He is clearly, as He is enthroned, clothed in a royal robe of some type ("his train [the hem of His garment] filled the temple").

All of this suggests that one read this chapter with an eye to the Day of Atonement, as just these first details suggest that Isaiah was about the duties of this holy day when his encounter occurred. Further, one is pointed toward reading Isaiah's call to the prophesy as a sort of distraction from his office as high priest: his duties for an "earthly" cult are interrupted by the ritual proceeding in the "heavenly" cult. Perhaps most important of all, this prophetic call narrative grounds the entirety of Isaiah's writings: the prophet should be understood as one abundantly familiar with the high priesthood and the temple liturgies, yet with the prophetic gift (as above and beyond the ritual duties of the priesthood) and the overwhelming reality of a direct relation to God, and hence with the distance between earthly proceedings and heavenly proceedings. This narrative must be understood as the moment of recognizing for the first time (or at least for the first time in so radical a manner) that distance: this narrative marks Isaiah's distance from God (but marks distance itself as, inevitably, a ''relation'').

===Verse 2===
If the first verse is marked by a suddenness, this second verse is marked by an immediate retreat from the blinding reality of the vision of God (John will follow a similar logic of suddenness and subsequent retreat in [[Rev 4:2]]ff.). The two verses together suggest a sort of radical disorientation effected by the shocking appearance of God, following which Isaiah scrambles to gather together his--perhaps still shocking--surroundings. The "seraphims" (better would be "seraphim" or "seraphs") are described as "above" the throne, gathered about the Lord in a sort of throng (the same beings are described in [[D&C 109:79]] as "around thy [God's] throne"). Translating the Hebrew ''seraph'' is difficult, as it means properly a "burning thing," used in [[Num 21:6]] to describe the "fiery" serpents that afflicted the children of Israel in the desert. John the Revelator seems to have seen similar beings in his vision (beings with features reflecting Ezekiel's first vision as well--cf. [[Ezek 1:1]]ff.), describing them further has being "full of eyes before and behind" ([[Rev 4:6]]). [[D&C 77:3]] suggests that these creatures were "actual" beasts, "actually" seen in vision--not merely prophetic attempts to figure an overwhelming experience. [[D&C 38:1]], the first verse of a revelation the temple themes of which are readily apparent, connects seraphim to the "hosts of heaven," the angels gathered in council with God "before the world was made."

All of this suggests that Isaiah's passage into the Holy of Holies was a passage into the angelic council of God. In other words, this text seems to understand the "council in heaven" to be an event always at work beyond the veil (creation and council concerning creation being, apparently, an on-going work). This would accord well with other similar visions found in scripture: besides John's vision, already mentioned, Lehi's vision with which the Book of Mormon opens (in [[1 Ne 1:8]]) is perhaps the most explicit, describing "God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God." Isaiah's (and others') understanding of the Holy of Holies (or even of heaven) as the locus of an on-going angelic council that is dedicated entirely to the proceedings on the earth establishes more fully the context in which the remainder of this chapter must be read. Isaiah, suddenly thrust into the midst of a chorus of heavenly beings, is to be invited--albeit in an odd manner--to join them ''as an angel''. It should also be mentioned that this context doubles the context already suggested above: the Day of Atonement was apparently understood--at least among those with the prophetic gifts--as the day upon which the high priest had the opportunity to be among the angelic chorus, privy to the council and the counsels of God.

The seraphim are further described as having six wings, three pairs each separately dedicated to a different task. If these "wings are a representation of power, to move, to act, etc." ([[D&C 77:4]]), then Isaiah's description of the scene is doubly significant: only with two of six wings does each demonstrate its "power." Rather, in fact, each dedicates its other four wings--uses its "power" to act--to cover itself (doubly) in complete humility. Covering their faces, the seraphim apparently gather to their praise with a sort of veil. More difficult to interpret is the fact that they cover their "feet." While a more literal interpretation is possible, it is nonetheless obviously the case in the Hebrew bible that the word for "feet" is often used as a euphemism. In other words, this act of covering might well be parallel to Adam and Eve's apron's of fig leaves, made to cover their nakedness (see [[Gen 3:7]]). Covering their faces as if with a veil, covering their nakedness as if with fig leaves, the remaining two wings apparently represent their "power," even their power "to act." Collectively, it might be suggested, the six wings function as the seraphs' double presentation before God: in authority, yet in humility; with, perhaps, a priesthood, but always in subjection to their Lord.

===Verse 3===
The "action" finally gets underway with Isaiah's third verse. The angels/seraphim are described as crying to each other, rather than to the Lord enthroned in their midst. The word translated "cried" makes some sense of this: ''qr''' means to summon, to invite, or to call. It is the verb used throughout the Old Testament for the summons to ritual occasions (from which situation it developed another meaning in later Hebrew, "to read," since public readings were a part of the festal gatherings). The angels, then, are summoning each other, apparently to the ritual occasion, inviting each other to contemplate the enthroned Lord in the midst in ritual praise, calling each other's attention to the glory of their King. The communal cry at once confirms and overturns the logical shift of verse 2: the angels, turned from the Lord Himself to each other, confirm Isaiah's growing distance from the shocking first instance of theophany; however, the angels turn from the Lord precisely to issue a summons to others to consider Him, to turn to Him.

This communal praise, turned as it is from the Lord so as to call one to turn to Him, marks at this early point in this chapter the nature and character of language, which is to play a major part in the unfolding narrative of Isaiah's prophetic call. The exalted appearance described in verse 1 is surrounded by an aura of silence, noise and talk only entering the picture when Isaiah retreats to the surrounding gathering of angels. Though this central--even focal--silence will be overturned (in at least one sense) later on in the chapter, at this early point, the silence is overbearing and unmistakable. The silence of the enthroned One, over against the loud, even demanding voices of the angels, sets up the role that language plays in the text: the cry (call, summons, invitation) is at once a cancellation of the silence imposed by the appearance of the enthroned Lord and a summons to the most silent (silent because overawed) worship. In other words, the duplicity of the angels already mentioned is doubled in the motif of language.

The role of language in these first three verses ought immediately to be felt at another level of Isaiah's text: Isaiah himself only communicates (on this very page!) the theophany he experienced by doing something very similar to what the angels are here reported as doing. It is only by retreating, as it were, from the theophany itself that Isaiah can point others toward the same experience. In order to turn others toward that exalted vision, Isaiah must himself turn, for a moment, from it. Hence, even as the appearance of the Lord in verse 1 is shrouded in silence, it is proclaimed in as loud a voice as can be, the very voice of Isaiah. It is to a significant extent this very paradox of language that is in question throughout the rest of this chapter (where Isaiah will exchange an earthly language for a heavenly one, will hear the voice of God, will be given a specific message to preach when he turns from the Lord, etc.).

The exact words of exclamation on the angels' part is significant in a number of ways. The ''trisagion'', or "thrice-holy" prayer, has a significant place in liturgical history, perhaps the most important moment of which for present considerations is to be found in the Book of Revelation. When John describes the "beasts" apparently similar or identical to the seraphim Isaiah describes, he reports their words as "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come" ([[Rev 4:8]]). The triple mention of holiness at the beginning of the hymn John records is matched by the triple mention of God's being at the close of the same, apparently linking the two (in an "inverted parallelism" or chiasm): the three mentions of God's holiness correspond to God's omnipresence, etc. Without getting here into the difficulties presented by John's revelation experience, it might simply be stated that the tradition understands Isaiah's three mentions of holiness to be tied to other aspects of God's nature. (Oddly the Isaiah scroll from Qumran has holy only twice. What that would mean for interpretation is not clear.)

Probing more deeply, however, the first phrase of the angelic prayer might be understood as paradoxical. The Hebrew for holy, ''qadowsh'', means something set at a distance, something removed from other things, perhaps even something "transcendent" (though using this last word only loosely). The angels praise YHWH as the One who is removed to some distance from all else. On the other hand, they call Him the "LORD of hosts," or, in more contemporary language, "YHWH of armies" or "YHWH of the angelic contingents." Even as the angels set Him at some remove from things--from themselves--they describe Him as intimately acquainted with them. In short, the first part of their praise regards YHWH as both distant and yet accessible at once, a paradox, but one not unfamiliar (distance always implies relation). This paradox is best embodied elsewhere in Old Testament tradition in the Day of Atonement, which has already been seen to have some of its themes present in this chapter. The ritual of the Day of Atonement at once accomplished the distance of God from Israel (only the high priest was to see God, and that only in a cloud of incense) and the nearness (through the ritual, the covenant of Abraham--and so of Moses--was renewed in a direct relation that made YHWH Israel's God and Israel YHWH's people). It has been suggested (especially by Margaret Barker) that on the Day of Atonement those involved directly with the ritual proceedings understood themselves to be angels, God's very hosts.

The second half of the angelic hymn also draws out themes from the Day of Atonement. The angels claim that "the whole earth is full of his glory." Just as the land (Hebrew: ''aretz'') was promised to Abraham through his covenant, it was promised anew to Israel through the rites of the Day of Atonement, as the covenant was renewed. The earth (Hebrew: ''aretz''), as mentioned here by the angels, returns on that holy day to the people claimed by YHWH. That it is filled with the glory of the LORD of hosts suggests that He Himself is claiming the land, preparing Himself to emerge from His temple to dwell with His people (as the ancient Israelites expected to see at the Day of Atonement when the Messiah came). In [[Lev 9:23]], when Aaron performs for the first time the rites of the Day of Atonement, "the glory of the LORD apeared unto all the people," exactly as the text here seems to describe. This appearance seems even to function as a sort of consecration of things: the Hebrew idiom for consecration (of priests, say) is to "fill the hand" (''ml' yd''), even as the whole earth is here "full [or filled] of his glory."

In short, the first words of Isaiah concerning the words of the angels (in turn concerning the Word as He sits on a throne) provide the reader with a two-part hymn that seems to confirm the Day of Atonement themes already present in the first two verses. The angels, in turning from the Lord to turn others toward Him, summon each other to a sort of Day of Atonement ritual at work in heaven, even as Isaiah attends to the Day of Atonement rites on earth. Perhaps most important in this verse, however, is the fact that the heavens themselves (or perhaps rather the Holy of Holies) are a silence surrounded by verbal invitations to contemplate that silence in silence. This interplay between silence and praise/invitation will be extended in verse 4 and then explored at great length in verses 5-8.

===Verse 4===
While the first part of this verse is rather obscure, the last phrase seems rather clear, and it might be best to begin there. The filling up of the "house" (''bayt'', another word used both for the temple and a palace) with smoke is perhaps the most explicit reference to the Day of Atonement in the whole of this chapter. [[Lev 16:12]]-13 seems to be the reference: "And he [Aaron] shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the vail: And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony, that he die not." So that the high priest can, as part of the ceremony, enter into the Holy of Holies and converse with the appearing Lord, the Holy of Holies must first be filled with a cloud of smoke, so that the appearance of the Lord is obscured and so that the high priest "die not." (This smoke, covering the appearance of the Lord, might explain the odd language at, for example, [[1 Ne 1:8]], to which the present vision has already been compared: "he ''thought'' he saw....") That Isaiah here describes the temple as "filled with smoke" suggests that one can nail down the precise moment of the ritual during which this theophany occurs, and hence why it is so absolutely astounding.

Apparently, Isaiah, as high priest, is performing the word described in Leviticus 16:12-13 when the Lord appears. The appearance would therefore be premature: the placing of the incense so as to fill the Holy of Holies with smoke is early in the ritual, so that when the high priest ''later'' enters into the presence of God, there will be no chance of him seeing the Lord directly and so dying. Isaiah, performing the standard work of the Day of Atonement, seems to have been at work on this earlier part of the ritual--a point at which the Lord would not yet appear--when the Lord suddenly shows himself ''before the smoke has filled the Holy of Holies''. In other words, Isaiah parts the veil just enough to let the smoke through, and the Lord is already visible, thus shocking Isaiah and filling him with the fear of death (the concern at the end of Leviticus 16:13 is echoed by verse 5). Only then does the smoke cover over the presence Isaiah has already seen, and it is for that reason too late for him, he is "undone," as he says in verse 5. The clear reference, then, at the end of this verse does a great deal for clarifying this chapter: ''the Lord, not Isaiah, breaks the rules of the ritual, appearing to the soon-to-be-called prophet out of order, ultimately threatening him with utter destruction''.

This much clear, the first part of this verse might be approached. To begin with, the translation is problematic (although, see [[2 Ne 16:4]], where Joseph Smith translates this verse identically in the Book of Mormon "Isaiah chapters"; it should also be noted, however, that where the translations of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon match up with the KJV might be variously explained: there are certainly other explanations for this than simply that the KJV is a flawless translation). The word "posts" is a good example. The word translated "posts" here is ''`mwt'', not ''mzwzwt'' (which means "posts"). Translators are generally baffled with what to do with this word in the Hebrew text. If taken literally, then it either should be translated "mothers," "cubits," or (last and least likely) "tribes."

As on the Day of Atonement, smoke fills the throneroom of God, the Holy of Holies. If this is what Isaiah has reference to, then the odd phrase, "the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried," might be understood as having reference to the parting of the veil. More simply, it might make reference to an earthquake caused by the shock of the heavenly voice. It should be noted that Isaiah reports here something out of order according to standard procedure on the Day of Atonement. During the ritual, incense was extended into the Holy of Holies to cover the ark of the covenant so that Jehovah would appear in the cloud. Here, however, Isaiah sees the Lord on the throne (the ark's mercy seat) before the smoke does its work. In other words, Isaiah is ushered unexpectedly into the presence of God.

===Verse 5===
Isaiah's reaction is predictable, given the Day of Atonement setting: the cloud was to surround the ark of the covenant precisely so that the high priest was not struck dead by the appearance of the Lord. As Isaiah has come directly into the presence of God before the atonement rituals have been completed, and especially because he has seen the Lord without the protective cloud of smoke, he expects utter destruction (the Hebrew for "undone" is much stronger than this translation). Isaiah explicitly bases this concern on the status of his lips. The Hebrew for "lip" (''shafa''), while meaning literally the lip, is often translated language (it is one of two Hebrew words thus translated). This passage might then be translated "because I am a man of unclean language," one who, in other words, does not speak the language one ought to speak in the presence of God. Fundamentally, Isaiah seems to believe that there is a certain form of speaking that is to accompany the vision of God, that eyes and lips are to function together when standing in the presence of God. Isaiah vocalizes this concern, which thus functions as a call upon the Lord, as a summons for help.

== Related links ==
* For a poetic exploration of the sacramental and temple themes implicit in this experience, see [[User: Joe Spencer/eucharistic vision]].

----
{| width="20%"
| [[Isa 5:26-30|Previous]] || [[Isa 6:6-10|Next]]
|}

Isa 6:1-4

2006-07-24T14:54:27Z

71.115.234.190: /* Verse 3 */

{| width="20%"
| [[Isa 5:26-30|Previous]] || [[Isa 6:6-10|Next]]
|}
== Questions ==
* What do we know about the heavenly beings identified here as seraphims?

== Lexical notes ==
* Seraphims are described here as heavenly beings with six wings. The same Hebrew word ([http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=08314&version=kjv saraph]) is used in [[Num 21:6]], [[Num 21:8]], and [[Deut 8:15]] in reference to the "fiery serpents" that bit the Children of Israel as they wandered in the desert.

== Exegesis ==
===Verse 1===
This chapter undeniably explores Isaiah's prophetic call (read: call to prophesy). That such a call is issued upon the event of a king's death is most significant: Isaiah is given the gift of prophecy at the very time a new king is to be enthroned. That Isaiah is in the temple--apparently in the Holy of Holies--at the time of enthronement is likewise suggestive: only a high priest (''the'' high priest) should (could) have been in such a location on such an event. The prophetic call narrative is immediately cast as a question of kingship and priesthood: at the time Isaiah was called to prophesy, he was functioning as the high priest of the Israelite cultus, performing the preparatory rites (the Day of Atonement) for the cultic enthronement of the new king. This complex context is an unrelenting theme throughout the chapter, and it is one that--if kept constantly in mind--opens up interpretive possibilities for many of the details at work in the narrative.

That the temple is the location of the event is clear: the Lord's "train filled the temple." The Hebrew ''hychal'', here translated temple, is an ambiguous term (as far as moderns are concerned) used to describe what are modernly called temples as well as what are modernly called palaces. The Hebrews do not seem to have made such a distinction. In other words, one should (universally in the Old Testament, particularly in this passage) regard the temple as the palace of the Lord: the Lord is seen in this vision to be sitting upon a throne, yet clearly in the temple standing in Jerusalem. Working with such an undifferentiated concept of palace/temple, the meaning of the "throne" mentioned is clear: Isaiah sees YHWH sitting on the "mercy seat" (''kprt'', better translated the "throne of atonement") atop the ark of the covenant.

In other words, Isaiah's prophetic call begins with a vision of YHWH sitting atop the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem temple, and specifically on the occasion of the enthronement of a new king. Even as the rites of earthly enthronement (of Jotham, the son of Uzziah) are preparing, Isaiah is given to see a far surer enthronement, that of the very God of heaven. His exaltation in enthronement is clear (He is "high and lifted up"), and He is clearly, as He is enthroned, clothed in a royal robe of some type ("his train [the hem of His garment] filled the temple").

All of this suggests that one read this chapter with an eye to the Day of Atonement, as just these first details suggest that Isaiah was about the duties of this holy day when his encounter occurred. Further, one is pointed toward reading Isaiah's call to the prophesy as a sort of distraction from his office as high priest: his duties for an "earthly" cult are interrupted by the ritual proceeding in the "heavenly" cult. Perhaps most important of all, this prophetic call narrative grounds the entirety of Isaiah's writings: the prophet should be understood as one abundantly familiar with the high priesthood and the temple liturgies, yet with the prophetic gift (as above and beyond the ritual duties of the priesthood) and the overwhelming reality of a direct relation to God, and hence with the distance between earthly proceedings and heavenly proceedings. This narrative must be understood as the moment of recognizing for the first time (or at least for the first time in so radical a manner) that distance: this narrative marks Isaiah's distance from God (but marks distance itself as, inevitably, a ''relation'').

===Verse 2===
If the first verse is marked by a suddenness, this second verse is marked by an immediate retreat from the blinding reality of the vision of God (John will follow a similar logic of suddenness and subsequent retreat in [[Rev 4:2]]ff.). The two verses together suggest a sort of radical disorientation effected by the shocking appearance of God, following which Isaiah scrambles to gather together his--perhaps still shocking--surroundings. The "seraphims" (better would be "seraphim" or "seraphs") are described as "above" the throne, gathered about the Lord in a sort of throng (the same beings are described in [[D&C 109:79]] as "around thy [God's] throne"). Translating the Hebrew ''seraph'' is difficult, as it means properly a "burning thing," used in [[Num 21:6]] to describe the "fiery" serpents that afflicted the children of Israel in the desert. John the Revelator seems to have seen similar beings in his vision (beings with features reflecting Ezekiel's first vision as well--cf. [[Ezek 1:1]]ff.), describing them further has being "full of eyes before and behind" ([[Rev 4:6]]). [[D&C 77:3]] suggests that these creatures were "actual" beasts, "actually" seen in vision--not merely prophetic attempts to figure an overwhelming experience. [[D&C 38:1]], the first verse of a revelation the temple themes of which are readily apparent, connects seraphim to the "hosts of heaven," the angels gathered in council with God "before the world was made."

All of this suggests that Isaiah's passage into the Holy of Holies was a passage into the angelic council of God. In other words, this text seems to understand the "council in heaven" to be an event always at work beyond the veil (creation and council concerning creation being, apparently, an on-going work). This would accord well with other similar visions found in scripture: besides John's vision, already mentioned, Lehi's vision with which the Book of Mormon opens (in [[1 Ne 1:8]]) is perhaps the most explicit, describing "God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God." Isaiah's (and others') understanding of the Holy of Holies (or even of heaven) as the locus of an on-going angelic council that is dedicated entirely to the proceedings on the earth establishes more fully the context in which the remainder of this chapter must be read. Isaiah, suddenly thrust into the midst of a chorus of heavenly beings, is to be invited--albeit in an odd manner--to join them ''as an angel''. It should also be mentioned that this context doubles the context already suggested above: the Day of Atonement was apparently understood--at least among those with the prophetic gifts--as the day upon which the high priest had the opportunity to be among the angelic chorus, privy to the council and the counsels of God.

The seraphim are further described as having six wings, three pairs each separately dedicated to a different task. If these "wings are a representation of power, to move, to act, etc." ([[D&C 77:4]]), then Isaiah's description of the scene is doubly significant: only with two of six wings does each demonstrate its "power." Rather, in fact, each dedicates its other four wings--uses its "power" to act--to cover itself (doubly) in complete humility. Covering their faces, the seraphim apparently gather to their praise with a sort of veil. More difficult to interpret is the fact that they cover their "feet." While a more literal interpretation is possible, it is nonetheless obviously the case in the Hebrew bible that the word for "feet" is often used as a euphemism. In other words, this act of covering might well be parallel to Adam and Eve's apron's of fig leaves, made to cover their nakedness (see [[Gen 3:7]]). Covering their faces as if with a veil, covering their nakedness as if with fig leaves, the remaining two wings apparently represent their "power," even their power "to act." Collectively, it might be suggested, the six wings function as the seraphs' double presentation before God: in authority, yet in humility; with, perhaps, a priesthood, but always in subjection to their Lord.

===Verse 3===
The "action" finally gets underway with Isaiah's third verse. The angels/seraphim are described as crying to each other, rather than to the Lord enthroned in their midst. The word translated "cried" makes some sense of this: ''qr''' means to summon, to invite, or to call. It is the verb used throughout the Old Testament for the summons to ritual occasions (from which situation it developed another meaning in later Hebrew, "to read," since public readings were a part of the festal gatherings). The angels, then, are summoning each other, apparently to the ritual occasion, inviting each other to contemplate the enthroned Lord in the midst in ritual praise, calling each other's attention to the glory of their King. The communal cry at once confirms and overturns the logical shift of verse 2: the angels, turned from the Lord Himself to each other, confirm Isaiah's growing distance from the shocking first instance of theophany; however, the angels turn from the Lord precisely to issue a summons to others to consider Him, to turn to Him.

This communal praise, turned as it is from the Lord so as to call one to turn to Him, marks at this early point in this chapter the nature and character of language, which is to play a major part in the unfolding narrative of Isaiah's prophetic call. The exalted appearance described in verse 1 is surrounded by an aura of silence, noise and talk only entering the picture when Isaiah retreats to the surrounding gathering of angels. Though this central--even focal--silence will be overturned (in at least one sense) later on in the chapter, at this early point, the silence is overbearing and unmistakable. The silence of the enthroned One, over against the loud, even demanding voices of the angels, sets up the role that language plays in the text: the cry (call, summons, invitation) is at once a cancellation of the silence imposed by the appearance of the enthroned Lord and a summons to the most silent (silent because overawed) worship. In other words, the duplicity of the angels already mentioned is doubled in the motif of language.

The role of language in these first three verses ought immediately to be felt at another level of Isaiah's text: Isaiah himself only communicates (on this very page!) the theophany he experienced by doing something very similar to what the angels are here reported as doing. It is only by retreating, as it were, from the theophany itself that Isaiah can point others toward the same experience. In order to turn others toward that exalted vision, Isaiah must himself turn, for a moment, from it. Hence, even as the appearance of the Lord in verse 1 is shrouded in silence, it is proclaimed in as loud a voice as can be, the very voice of Isaiah. It is to a significant extent this very paradox of language that is in question throughout the rest of this chapter (where Isaiah will exchange an earthly language for a heavenly one, will hear the voice of God, will be given a specific message to preach when he turns from the Lord, etc.).

The exact words of exclamation on the angels' part is significant in a number of ways. The ''trisagion'', or "thrice-holy" prayer, has a significant place in liturgical history, perhaps the most important moment of which for present considerations is to be found in the Book of Revelation. When John describes the "beasts" apparently similar or identical to the seraphim Isaiah describes, he reports their words as "Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come" ([[Rev 4:8]]). The triple mention of holiness at the beginning of the hymn John records is matched by the triple mention of God's being at the close of the same, apparently linking the two (in an "inverted parallelism" or chiasm): the three mentions of God's holiness correspond to God's omnipresence, etc. Without getting here into the difficulties presented by John's revelation experience, it might simply be stated that the tradition understands Isaiah's three mentions of holiness to be tied to other aspects of God's nature. (Oddly the Isaiah scroll from Qumran has holy only twice. What that would mean for interpretation is not clear.)

Probing more deeply, however, the first phrase of the angelic prayer might be understood as paradoxical. The Hebrew for holy, ''qadowsh'', means something set at a distance, something removed from other things, perhaps even something "transcendent" (though using this last word only loosely). The angels praise YHWH as the One who is removed to some distance from all else. On the other hand, they call Him the "LORD of hosts," or, in more contemporary language, "YHWH of armies" or "YHWH of the angelic contingents." Even as the angels set Him at some remove from things--from themselves--they describe Him as intimately acquainted with them. In short, the first part of their praise regards YHWH as both distant and yet accessible at once, a paradox, but one not unfamiliar (distance always implies relation). This paradox is best embodied elsewhere in Old Testament tradition in the Day of Atonement, which has already been seen to have some of its themes present in this chapter. The ritual of the Day of Atonement at once accomplished the distance of God from Israel (only the high priest was to see God, and that only in a cloud of incense) and the nearness (through the ritual, the covenant of Abraham--and so of Moses--was renewed in a direct relation that made YHWH Israel's God and Israel YHWH's people). It has been suggested (especially by Margaret Barker) that on the Day of Atonement those involved directly with the ritual proceedings understood themselves to be angels, God's very hosts.

The second half of the angelic hymn also draws out themes from the Day of Atonement. The angels claim that "the whole earth is full of his glory." Just as the land (Hebrew: ''aretz'') was promised to Abraham through his covenant, it was promised anew to Israel through the rites of the Day of Atonement, as the covenant was renewed. The earth (Hebrew: ''aretz''), as mentioned here by the angels, returns on that holy day to the people claimed by YHWH. That it is filled with the glory of the LORD of hosts suggests that He Himself is claiming the land, preparing Himself to emerge from His temple to dwell with His people (as the ancient Israelites expected to see at the Day of Atonement when the Messiah came). In [[Lev 9:23]], when Aaron performs for the first time the rites of the Day of Atonement, "the glory of the LORD apeared unto all the people," exactly as the text here seems to describe. This appearance seems even to function as a sort of consecration of things: the Hebrew idiom for consecration (of priests, say) is to "fill the hand" (''ml' yd''), even as the whole earth is here "full [or filled] of his glory."

In short, the first words of Isaiah concerning the words of the angels (in turn concerning the Word as He sits on a throne) provide the reader with a two-part hymn that seems to confirm the Day of Atonement themes already present in the first two verses. The angels, in turning from the Lord to turn others toward Him, summon each other to a sort of Day of Atonement ritual at work in heaven, even as Isaiah attends to the Day of Atonement rites on earth. Perhaps most important in this verse, however, is the fact that the heavens themselves (or perhaps rather the Holy of Holies) are a silence surrounded by verbal invitations to contemplate that silence in silence. This interplay between silence and praise/invitation will be extended in verse 4 and then explored at great length in verses 5-8.

===Verse 4===
As on the Day of Atonement, smoke fills the throneroom of God, the Holy of Holies. If this is what Isaiah has reference to, then the odd phrase, "the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried," might be understood as having reference to the parting of the veil. More simply, it might make reference to an earthquake caused by the shock of the heavenly voice. It should be noted that Isaiah reports here something out of order according to standard procedure on the Day of Atonement. During the ritual, incense was extended into the Holy of Holies to cover the ark of the covenant so that Jehovah would appear in the cloud. Here, however, Isaiah sees the Lord on the throne (the ark's mercy seat) before the smoke does its work. In other words, Isaiah is ushered unexpectedly into the presence of God.

===Verse 5===
Isaiah's reaction is predictable, given the Day of Atonement setting: the cloud was to surround the ark of the covenant precisely so that the high priest was not struck dead by the appearance of the Lord. As Isaiah has come directly into the presence of God before the atonement rituals have been completed, and especially because he has seen the Lord without the protective cloud of smoke, he expects utter destruction (the Hebrew for "undone" is much stronger than this translation). Isaiah explicitly bases this concern on the status of his lips. The Hebrew for "lip" (''shafa''), while meaning literally the lip, is often translated language (it is one of two Hebrew words thus translated). This passage might then be translated "because I am a man of unclean language," one who, in other words, does not speak the language one ought to speak in the presence of God. Fundamentally, Isaiah seems to believe that there is a certain form of speaking that is to accompany the vision of God, that eyes and lips are to function together when standing in the presence of God. Isaiah vocalizes this concern, which thus functions as a call upon the Lord, as a summons for help.

== Related links ==
* For a poetic exploration of the sacramental and temple themes implicit in this experience, see [[User: Joe Spencer/eucharistic vision]].

----
{| width="20%"
| [[Isa 5:26-30|Previous]] || [[Isa 6:6-10|Next]]
|}