How Immeasurable Is God? A Vision Of The Greatness Of God In Isaiah 40:9-20 Examined

By Kenneth R. Cooper, Ph.D., D.D.

[Senior Editor, Tyndale Seminary Press]

In his magnificent song exalting the victory of Yahweh over Pharaoh and the gods of Egypt, Moses cried, “Who is like You among the gods, O LORD? Who is like You, majestic in holiness, Awesome in praises, working wonders?” (Exod 15:11, NASB). The question is at best rhetorical, since among all the gods of the earth in all the ages of time, there is none like the God of Moses. He is incomparable! He is indescribable! He is incomprehensible! Along these lines, C. J. Labuschagne noted, “The distinctiveness of Old Testament religion can be explained solely by the distinctiveness of the God of the Old Testament.”[1] However, in spite of man’s inability to comprehend God, He has revealed Himself in the pages of Scripture and in the Person of His Son. Had He not offered such a revelation, one would have no knowledge of God except scrawny images conjured in the imaginations of men. And these images invariably have resulted in the grossest forms of idolatry.

Still, in spite of all that God has done to reveal Himself, men have failed to apprehend that revelation. In the preface to The Knowledge of the Holy, for instance, A. W. Tozer wrote regarding what he called, “the loss of the concept of majesty” in the minds of men. Tozer added, “The Church has surrendered her once lofty concept of God and has substituted for it one so low, so ignoble, as to be utterly unworthy of thinking, worshiping men.”[2] Tozer explained this loss as a gradual diminishing of the concept of God as the concerns of the world and its culture encroach upon the church. The affairs of life amalgamate until “With our loss of the sense of majesty has come the further loss of religious awe and consciousness of the divine Presence. We have lost our spirit of worship and our ability to withdraw inwardly to meet God in adoring silence.”[3] More and more the influence of the world has overtaken believers and drawn them from the spiritual realm, as mankind in general has turned its attention to the natural world. Francis Schaeffer described the situation succinctly.

The vital principle to notice is that, as nature was made autonomous [by educated men of the past], nature began to “eat up” grace. Through the Renaissance, from the time of Dante to Michelangelo, nature became more gradually autonomous. It was set free from God as the humanistic philosophers began to operate ever more freely. By the time the Renaissance reached its climax, nature had eaten up grace.[4]

In the three hundred fifty plus years since the Renaissance, nature has continued to encroach upon the minds of men. As a result, religion and Christianity have become more and more materialistic and humanistic in their outlook. More and more churches are shifting their focus from the things of God to address the “felt needs” of men. If the church does not develop a “seeker friendly” attitude, she may lose whatever impact she may have had on the surrounding community. Conversely, if the church adopts a “seeker friendly” attitude, she often turns God into the servant of men, a kind of cosmic bellhop. “Left to ourselves,” Tozer noted, “we tend immediately to reduce God to manageable terms. We want to get Him where we can use Him, or at least know where He is when we need Him. We want a God we can in some measure control.”[5] Such a God is not the God of the Bible. Nor is He, nor should He be, the God of the church.

Tozer wrote these words nearly half a century ago. More recently, John Piper noted very little has changed, unless one understands the situation as having worsened. Piper noted, “In the church, our view of God is so small instead of huge, so marginal instead of central, so vague instead of clear, so impotent instead of all-determining, and so uninspiring instead of ravishing that the responsibility to live life to the glory of God is a thought without content.” Piper added, “Until you share a passion for the supremacy of God, your life will not be lived for the glory of God.”[6] Most would agree that the primary purpose of man is to live for the glory of God.

How is this possible? How can one regain that sense of the majesty and glory of God? If God truly is incomparable and indescribable, how can one even catch the slightest glimpse of His glory? Where would one even begin?

The best place to begin, of course, is with the revelation of God that He Himself has given us. From Genesis to Revelation, God unfolds His person, His character, and His activities. In confronting this revelation of God, man not only needs to regain a sense of God’s glory, but also His majesty in its truest and most basic sense. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the earliest usage of this word majesty in English, used as early as A.D. 1300, also meant “The greatness and glory of God.”[7] So, since God is a sovereign, who rules over His creation, His majesty alone reveals Him to be a God one cannot manage. Nor is He a God over whom one can in any measure exercise control. Instead, one needs to submit to His control, and one need to turn to the Scriptures wherein, by reading them, one can begin to regain a full sense of the majesty, of the greatness, of the sovereignty, and of the glory of God.

A good place to begin this renewed quest is Isaiah 40. Although Isaiah devotes the entire chapter and more to expressing in various ways God’s greatness, this article will limit its scope to verses 9 through 20. These verses not only reflect the infinite greatness of God in power and wisdom and knowledge, but also express His infinite incomparability. Moses had asked, “Who is like You, among the gods, O LORD?” The obvious answer is, “No one!” However, Isaiah lived eight hundred years after Moses’ and in the context of worldwide devastation, first by the Assyrians and then by the Babylonians. God’s people needed a reminder of the distinctiveness of their God.

Yahweh Is A God Who Relates To His People Isaiah 40:9-11

Isaiah 40:9 instructed the people of Zion, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, to lift their voices and cry to all the cities of Judah, “Behold your God!” This expression along with the next two verses indicates that this great God nevertheless condescends to establish a relationship with His people. Indeed, His very greatness is reflected in establishing that relationship. It was more than a territorial thing as with all the pagan gods of the ancient world, because Yahweh is God of the entire world. Furthermore, rather than establishing one person, such as Pharaoh in Egypt or King Keret in Canaan, to be identified as the son of the gods, Yahweh identified the entire nation of Israel as His son, saying, “Israel is my son, even my firstborn” (Exodus 4:22, KJV).

Isaiah prophesied to future captives in exile that God had not forgotten that relationship, but was calling them to deliverance as His people. He would accomplish their deliverance. By using Hebrew parallel structure, Isaiah stressed that in proclaiming the coming of the Lord, Zion is the “bearer of good news.” This section of the book looks into the future to the time when Judah has long since been taken into the Babylonian captivity. Partly for this reason, many scholars believe that Isaiah 40 through 66 was written by an anonymous prophet who himself lived during the post-exilic period. Robert B. Chisholm Jr. explained, “Because of the obvious exilic setting of chapters 40—66, most scholars deny Isaianic authorship of these chapters and attribute them instead to an unnamed individual (called ‘Second Isaiah’ or ‘Deutero-Isaiah’) who lived during the exile.”[8] Chisholm added that while these chapters assume that the exile had already occurred and Jerusalem already lay in ruins, this does not mean that the eighth century prophet Isaiah did not write this section of the book.

It is granted that the style is somewhat different and the text contains different subjects and issues. However, a major theme of this entire section of the book focuses on the sovereignty of Israel’s God, who controls all of history, a theme not exactly absent from the first part of Isaiah. For instance, in the vision during which God called him, Isaiah saw “the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up” (Isa 6:1b). In the same vision, he heard the seraphim calling to each other that “the whole earth is full of His glory” (6:3b). Commenting on God’s sovereignty, B. F. Huey noted, “God’s ultimate purpose in history is to establish His sovereignty over all mankind, but it will be brought about by love and not by compulsion (43:4). Such love invokes a response of faith and obedience.”[9] From the beginning, God has been declaring His sovereignty. Therefore, because God is clearly sovereign over all the earth, Chisholm noted, “He can decree and announce events long before they happen.”[10] This is true predictive prophecy, and it flows from the greatness of God in creation and in history.

Granted also that these chapters are significantly different in content from the first part of the book, rhetorically they link with the first part to form a coherent whole. Isaiah is predominantly a prophet of salvation. For this reason, he opened this section of his prophecy with a command to comfort God’s people, an announcement that their sovereign God is coming to them as victor over all their enemies, and the declaration that Zion/Jerusalem is the “bearer of good news” to the captives. Thomas Constable graphically portrayed the relationship between the two parts of Isaiah in a chart that reflects the relationship between them by comparison and contrast.

Isaiah 1—39	Isaiah 40—66
Focus upon Assyria	Focus upon Babylon
Primary theme is judgment	Primary theme is deliverance
Historical details are present	Historical details are absent
Messiah is “shoot from Jesse.”	Messiah is “Servant of the Lord.”
Life of Isaiah is prominent	Life of Isaiah is absent[11]

The primary theme of this section of Isaiah, therefore, is the deliverance of God’s people from their exile by the mighty hand of their sovereign God (this is the “good news”).

Zion was to announce, “Behold your God!” Following this announcement, in rapid succession, the prophet added two significant statements introduced with the exclamatory word, “Behold!” Isaiah 40:10 declares:

Behold, the Lord GOD will come with might,
With His arm ruling for Him.
Behold, His reward is with Him
And His recompense before Him [emphasis added].

The brief phrase at the end of verse nine establishes that God is personal: “Behold your God!” Moreover, as previously indicated, if Israel as a whole is God’s firstborn son, the nature of the relationship is also established. Furthermore, Isaiah told Zion to announce the good news that God would not abandon His people. In the two additional expressions “behold” in verse 10, Isaiah mentioned a second relationship between God and His people. First, He is not only their king, but He is also a conquering king. J. Alec Motyer noted how Isaiah emphasized this coming of God as king and its intended effect on Israel: “The same word [introduces God’s coming] on all three occasions, ‘Behold/Look!’ It is all happening before their very eyes: the divine coming of One who is God, the mighty coming of One who is with power (lit. ‘as a strong One’) and the successful coming of One who brings with Him what He has achieved.”[12] Isaiah stressed first God’s divinity: “The Lord GOD will come.” He did not use the basic word for God, אֵל or אֱלֹהִים, but rather the covenant name of God (יְהֹוָה) that further emphasizes the strength and nature of God’s relationship. He is Lord—אֲדֹנֵי, master, commander; and He is God—יהֹוָה, the One who has committed Himself by an unconditional contract to protect, defend, and deliver His people. He is bound to them by a covenant relationship, which for Him is a personal relationship, established with their fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Hence, Isaiah stressed God’s commitment to them. Subsequently, in the same passage, he stressed God’s mighty power to encourage Israel with His ability to deliver them from captivity.

God Himself returns to the city of Jerusalem, to the Temple that will be rebuilt, and to the land of Judah He had promised to His people. He comes to deliver, to redeem, and to save His people. “His arm” amplifies the picture of God’s strength, because in the Bible, the arm often symbolizes strength or power. Albert Barnes, for instance, explained, “it is by [the arm] that we accomplish our purposes; by that a conqueror slays his enemies in battle, etc.”[13] Isaiah encouraged Judah to depend upon God’s mighty power since time and history have shown that they could not depend on their own strength to save them. John Oswalt noted, “Jerusalem informs the hearers that God comes as a mighty man, who depends on His own strong arm to achieve the victory. . . . With the blows of His sword and battleaxe, He will gain dominion over His enemies for Himself (see also 59:15-21b; 63:1-6).”[14]

This brief vignette of God as conquering king should be encouraging, but it is not complete. Not only did Isaiah describe the king’s coming in power but he also described the king’s coming as if the battle is over and the victory already won. “Behold, his reward is with Him. . . .” Yahweh comes in a triumphal march bringing the booty of His conquest with Him. Christopher R. Seitz remarked on how striking is this portrayal of Yahweh.

The victor typically comes home with spoils of war, with booty, with “reward and recompense” (v. 10). In the days of holy war, this booty, “man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey,” was to be given over to God, whose victory it was (see 1 Sam 15:1-35). But here the booty is of a different order, appropriate to this unconventional victory and victor. Driven like a flock before a careful shepherd, and even carried on the arm of battle, are the spoils of war, God’s own children, returned to mother Zion under the image of lambs and nursing mothers.[15]

God’s own children—whether He relates as God, King, Ruler, or Conqueror—possess Him as theirs and they are His in a binding relationship.

Before moving to a picture of God’s incomparable majesty, Isaiah added yet another picture to stress that God relates to His people in a personal manner.

Like a shepherd He will tend His flock,
In His arm He will gather the lambs
And carry them in His bosom;
He will gently lead the nursing ewes (Isa 40:11).

In this passage, Isaiah revealed something of the greatness of God’s heart. Yahweh condescended to care for His people in the gentle, loving way that a shepherd cares for his sheep. This picture of God’s return to His people after the long exile adds color and detail to the previous picture of the victorious king. Page H. Kelley noted, “What is emphasized here is God’s strength and His gentleness. The two are not contradictory but complementary.”[16] From the time Israel had a king, God has stressed the need for His rulers to care for His people as shepherds care for their sheep.

Indeed, the first king of Israel who received God’s approval, the king whose dynasty God established forever (2 Sam 7:8-17), was anointed king in his father house almost immediately after he had come from “tending the sheep” (1 Sam 16:11-13). Furthermore, earlier Samuel told Saul, “But now your kingdom shall not endure. The LORD has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart, and the LORD has appointed him as a ruler over His people, because you have not kept what the LORD commanded you” (13:14; see also Acts 13:22). As a shepherd, David learned what Saul did not; he learned to be God’s king. He cared for God’s people as a shepherd cares for his sheep.

In Isaiah 40:11, the prophet described the manner of God’s care for His people. The first line contains an interesting “play on words” in the Hebrew text. It reads, “like a shepherd He will shepherd His sheep.” The New American Standard Bible reads, “Like a shepherd He will tend His sheep.” The word translated “tend” in the NASB and “feed” in the King James Version significantly covers the whole area of responsibility of the shepherd. J. A. Alexander noted, for instance, “The word correctly rendered feed denotes the whole care of a shepherd for his flock, and has therefore no exact equivalent in English.”[17] Albert Barnes agreed but indicated a more comprehensive meaning, noting that the word translated “feeds”

denotes more than our word feed at present. It refers to all the care of a shepherd over his flock; and means to tend, to guard, to govern, to provide pasture, to defend from danger, as a shepherd does his flock. It is often applied in the Scriptures to God, represented as the tender shepherd, and especially to the Redeemer (Ps 23:1; Ezek. 34:23; John 10:14; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 2:25; v.4).[18]

In this one word lies the comprehensive description of the greatness of God in His tender, shepherding care of the people of Judah.

Isaiah included additional activities of God to further extend the image of His shepherding of His people. He gathers the lambs, He carries the lambs, and leads the nursing ewes. These various verbs reflect the concern of Yahweh for the needs of His people, beginning with the arm that gathers them to Himself. James Muilenburg observed, “The arm raised in triumph is lowered in compassion. The shepherd gathers to His bosom the young lambs unable to follow where He leads. . . .”[19] Edward J. Young added, “The arm is the symbol of His might and power and is sufficiently strong to gather up the sheep for protection and care. When they are in the Shepherd’s arm, nothing can harm or come near to separate them from Him.”[20] In a footnote on this statement, Young noted, “According to the punctuation the text should read, With His arm He will gather the lambs, and in His bosom He will lift (them) up.”[21] Not only does He gather the lambs in His arm, but He also “gently lead[s] those that are with young.” In the character of Psalm 23, this great Shepherd leads the nursing ewes to a place of rest and refreshment. Muilenburg described the scene as follows: “ . . . He guides to quiet waters the mother ewe which requires special care and is solicitous for her offspring.” He also noted, “Thus the closing lines strike the note of comfort of the beginning (cf. vss. 28-31).” Muilenburg offered an excellent summary of these three verses (9-11) in Isaiah’s prophecy of the greatness of God: “behold your God!—He comes, He rules, He feeds, He gathers, He carries, He gently leads.”[22]

Yahweh Is A God Who Possesses Infinite Power Isaiah 40:12-17

In discussing the overall thrust of Isaiah 40, Page H. Kelley noted:

This has continuing significance for us all, for all our questions about God could be reduced to two: ‘Is He able?’ and ‘Does He care?’ To believe in a God who is loving and compassionate, yet powerless to act on our behalf, would leave us with a feeling of utter helplessness. On the other hand, to believe that God’s power and might were absolute, but that he was unloving and unmoved by our hurts, would plunge us into despair. He does care, and he is able![23]

Isaiah 40:9-11 indicates that God does care, and He showed His care by coming to Judah’s rescue not only with the arm of a ruler, but also especially with the arm of a shepherd. Isaiah answered the second question: Is God able? Isaiah’s answer was a definite Yes! Beginning with verse 12, the prophet focused on God’s ability to rescue His people.

God’s Omnipotence

Immediately, the prophet refreshed the Jewish memory of the great Creator whose omnipotence Moses had taught them in the first book of the Torah, Genesis 1—2. Having exhausted four hundred years in Egypt, Israel knew only of Egypt’s theology of creation. Moses led them to see that not the gods of Egypt, but their God, Yahweh, created all things. In Egypt, creation stories played a large part in both the theology and the religion of the people. These stories were developed from Egypt’s view of the world as static and of creation as the prime source of change. The Egyptians, however, credited different gods with creating the world, depending on what section of the country in which one lived. Henri Frankfort noted, for instance, “Several gods were named as the primary source of existence. At Memphis, Ptah, the power in the earth, was the creator. At Heliopolis and Hermopolis it was the power in the sun, and at Elephantine it was said that Khnum, who appeared as a ram, had made all living beings on a potter’s wheel, a detail which remains an enigma.”[24] Frankfort noted that the Egyptians did not concern themselves with discrepancies in the creation stories nor did they consider them completely incompatible. Nevertheless, the existences of the gods were filled with vagueness of character and power, not like the holy and powerful God of Israel.

To counter the polytheism, not to mention the materialism of Egypt’s gods, Moses penned the sublime words of the Genesis prologue, beginning, “In the beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth” (1:1). In many of the stories, Egypt’s gods produced the world through some form of procreation. Israel’s God merely spoke and it was done (Ps 33:6, 9). Egypt’s gods exist within various natural phenomena. Israel’s God lives above them and apart from them. Egypt’s gods are, in this sense, wholly immanent; whereas, Israel’s God is both immanent and transcendent. For forty years in the wilderness, Moses prepared Israel to do what he had told Pharaoh to let them go into the wilderness to do: worship the one true and living God, Yahweh.

In this section of his prophecy, Isaiah looked to the time when his people will be returning from or will have already returned from the seventy years of exile in Babylon. There they were exposed to the pagan worship of Babylon’s gods along with various other creation myths new to Israel, among them the most popular, Enuma Elish. In this famous Babylonian epic of creation, the world, if not the entire universe, resulted from a conflict between the gods Marduk and Tiamat.[25] Therefore, to effectively answer the question whether Yahweh is able to deliver His people from Babylonian exile, Isaiah recollected the creation story, reintroducing Yahweh as the God of creation, reflecting upon His great power and might as revealed in all that He created.

The prophet accomplished his task by introducing a series of rhetorical questions to which the only answer can be God. In Isaiah 40:12, he emphasized Yahweh’s limitless power.

Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand,
And marked off the heavens by the span,
And calculated the dust of the earth by the measure,
And weighed the mountains in a balance
And the hills in a pair of scales?

J. J. M. Roberts, although taking the liberal stance that Isaiah 40—66 was written by a later prophet during the exile, did note that this second part of Isaiah

continues this emphasis on Yahweh’s sole exaltation and gives it new depth by his use of the doctrine of creation. No power among gods or men can be compared to Him, for He alone created all that exists (40:25-26). His power exhibited in creation remains the power which has directed and will continue to direct history, as is demonstrated by His fulfillment of His ancient prophecies (41:21-29).[26]

Adding to this note, Oswalt declared, “In the strongest of terms, [Isaiah] asserts that there is none like the Lord, either in the cosmos (vv. 12-14, 22, 25-26) or in history (vv. 15-17, 23-24). He is utterly without compare (vv. 18, 25), especially to the gods (vv. 19-20, 25-26). Thus it is plain that such a being is able to do whatever He wishes to do.”[27] Yahweh is unique in His Person and He is unique in His power. In asserting both these facts, by his question, Isaiah challenged the imagination.

Approximately the time A. W. Tozer wrote The Knowledge of the Holy, J. B. Phillips wrote a book about God’s greatness; however, he called his book, Your God is Too Small.[28] In his work, Phillips challenged evangelical Christianity to evaluate again their views of God (indicating as did Tozer that evangelicals have indeed lost the sense of the majesty of God). Some time before the publication of either of these books, Princeton astronomer, Henry Norris Russell delivered a lecture on the Milky Way. Following the lecture, a woman came to Russell and asked, “If our world is so little, and the universe is so great, can we believe God really pays any attention to us?” Dr. Russell replied, “That depends, madam, entirely on how big a God you believe in.”[29]

Isaiah said God is so “big” that He “measured the waters in the hollow of His hand.” While this is an anthropomorphic statement—since God is spirit and as such has no hands—the statement still challenges the imagination to grasp a God so vast He measures all the waters of the earth in the hollow of one hand. The hollow is the cuplike indention formed when the hand is partially closed, so it does not even involve the whole hand. One may wonder how much water would this actually be. Although Isaiah did not say, it is reasonable to assume he meant all the waters in the world. Young noted, “Isaiah uses the term water to designate the waters of the seas generally.”[30] Motyer seemed to think the term is more inclusive, referring to the totality of water and more.[31] Therefore, it is not just all the seas, but all the seas, all the rivers, all the streams, all the lakes, all the ponds, and all the oceans. Marva Sedore stated this more poetically. Moving from the smallest drop of moisture to the largest body of water, she noted,

First, imagine all the raindrops in the world. Then add all the snowflakes and hailstones, the fog and the mists. Next, bring in all the creeks and ponds and puddles. Finally, add all the glaciers and snowpacks, the streams and rivers, the wells and underground rivers and springs, and even all the lakes and the mammoth oceans. All the waters of the earth, added together—and God holds them in a single handful! Incredible![32]

Isaiah had to be astounded himself by the image. For the modern reader, the volume of water can be even more accurately measured. According to the United States Geological Survey Office, “The total water supply of the world is 326 million cubic miles. . . . A cubic mile of water equals more than one trillion gallons.”[33] God holds it all in the hollow of one hand! In this one phrase, “Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand,” Isaiah offered a brief glimpse of the awe-inspiring majesty of God.

The next line states that Yahweh “marked off heavens with a span.” The expression is also an anthropomorphic representation, which is another awe-inspiring expression. A span is the distance between the tip of the little finger and the tip of the thumb when the fingers are spread like a fan, approximately nine inches. What is a span for God? How big is God’s span?

Astronomers measure the heavens, or rather distances in space in terms of light years, a term that many have trouble envisioning. For example, one light year is the distance light travels in one year’s time. At 186,000 miles per second, that calculates to 5,865,696,000,000 miles in one year, or, rounded to six trillion (6,000,000,000,000). The nearest star after the sun is four light years away or twenty-four trillion miles. To Isaiah, the heavens likely meant all the stars and black sky he could see at night from horizon to horizon, which even that would encompass a lot of heaven. If however, as is also likely, he meant everything contained in that heaven, the picture is more awe-inspiring. The Boy Scout troop with whom this author worked for twelve years held a family camp one night at Sid Richardson Scout Ranch in Bridgeport, Texas. For the first night of the campout not a cloud filled the sky. After sunset, the troop could see virtually every star in the night sky. Since there was no air pollution or man-made lights to interfere with the visibility, the troop could see virtually the entire Milky Way Galaxy, perhaps everything Isaiah could see on a clear night at the time he penned his words. If one limits the heavens to just the Milky Way Galaxy, the idea that God measured the whole thing with just a span is still mind-boggling.

Scientists have determined that the Milky Way Galaxy is one hundred thousand light years in diameter, which is one hundred thousand times six trillion miles. The Milky Way is spread like a disk, but at its center, it bulges to a thickness of approximately one thousand light years. The sun, and the entire solar system, moves at a distance of approximately twenty-six to thirty thousand light years from the center of the galaxy.[34] God measures it all with merely a span.

It is possible to know that there is more to the universe than the one galaxy, more than what one can see with the naked eye in the night sky. Indeed, in December 1995, Robert Williams, made a discovery that impacted astronomy for many years to come, a discovery that should intensify the awe of Christians as they read Isaiah 40 and contemplate Isaiah’s God. Robert Williams is director of the Space Telescope Science Institute that operates the Hubble Space Telescope. According to Newsweek Magazine, Williams utilized his director’s discretionary time to focus the telescope on the farthest edge of the known universe for ten days that December in 1995. As a result, Newsweek reported,

In 342 shots, the telescope spied at least 1,500 galaxies, Williams announced at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society in San Antonio, Texas last week [one week prior to the publication of the Newsweek article in January 1996]. Extrapolating from the number, he calculated that the universe is stuffed with 50 billion galaxies, not the 10 billion that astronomers previously thought.”[35]

If we consider the Milky Way as an average galaxy in size, and consider fifty billion galaxies at roughly the same size, one will have a known universe in its breadth of fifty billion times one hundred thousand times six trillion miles. God measures the whole thing between the tip of His little finger and the tip of His thumb. What a great, omnipotent God!

After noting these facts, the next two lines seem almost anti-climactic. However, they, too, emphasize the majestic omnipotence of God. For instance, the standard in the third phrase—“comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure”—is literally “in a third.” Scholars, if they refer to it at all, seem in agreement that the measure is a third of something already rather small, generally an ephah.[36] As a contemporary comparison, Young suggested the fourth part of a gallon (a quart to give some idea of the smallness of the measure). Marva Sedore described it beautifully: “All the sands of the ocean beaches, all the dust in your house and mine, all the dirt that all kids everywhere bring home from their play—all the dust of the earth God can hold, or measure, in His quart-sized bucket.”[37] God is so great that He can measure even something so insignificant as dust as easily as a man can measure a small quantity of grain in a pouch. Furthermore, is it possible that Isaiah was picturesquely commenting at the same time on the insignificance of man when compared to the majesty of God? When he spoke of “the dust of the earth,” could he have had in mind the psalmist’s observation?

For He Himself knows our frame;
He is mindful that we are but dust (Ps 103:14).

Was Isaiah saying that God measures man in a small, quart-sized bucket? Or is this merely stretching the image? One thing is certain: Isaiah was declaring the greatness of God as compared to the insignificance of man, especially the “man” who has taken captive the people of God in Isaiah’s day.

In the last phrase of verse 12, it is as if Isaiah is saying that God is taking all the mountains of the earth, or perhaps mountain ranges of the earth (e.g. Mount McKinley, Mount Rainier, Mount Everest, all the Himalayas, the Rockies, the Appalachians, and the Alps) and assessing their value in a pair of laboratory scales or the balances of a merchant. Sedore noted, “Isaiah says, the Lord GOD can easily pick up that mountain [or those mountains] and, with a flick of the wrist toss [them] on the scale!”[38] How small and powerless are the enemies of God’s people when measured against the omnipotence of God Himself!

The fact that God is not only powerful enough to have created everything, but also intelligent enough to have “measured” everything adds another significant dimension to the prophet’s portrayal of Yahweh’s majesty, and another dimension to his encouragement of God’s people that Yahweh is able to deliver them in their distress. There is nothing in creation that should not be there, and nothing missing that should be there. God designed the balance of nature, and “measured” every component to make it all complete. There is just enough water on the planet, just enough stars in the sky, just enough sands on the beaches, just enough dirt on the earth, and just enough mountains and hills for God’s world to be what He intended it to be. He has measured them all. Barnes summarized as follows: “Throughout this entire passage, there is not only the idea of majesty and power in God, but there is also the idea that He has fitted or adjusted everything by His wisdom and power, and adapted it to the conditions and wants of His people.”[39] God is infinitely greater than anything man can imagine. Isaiah portrayed God’s omnipotence first, demonstrating He is able to deliver His people because He possesses infinite power, so much power that everything in creation that appears great to the human eye—the oceans, the mountains, etc. —pales in insignificance by comparison to the Creator.

God’s Omniscience

God can have great power and still be an arrogant, self-serving despot. Isaiah wanted God’s people to know He is not. The prophet wanted God’s people to know that along with His infinite power, their God also possesses infinite knowledge and wisdom. Therefore, in Isaiah 40:13-14 the prophet wrote:

Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD,
Or as His counselor has informed Him?
With whom did He consult and who gave Him understanding?
And who taught Him in the path of justice and taught Him knowledge
And informed Him of the way of understanding?

In the first phrase, Isaiah uses the same verb that he used in the second line of verse 12, תִכֵּן, to “measure” the heavens. It is as if he was saying, if none but God can measure the heavens with a span, who can measure the Spirit of God, or God Himself? Since God is greater than the heavens, greater than His creation, how can any part of His creation even think of measuring Him?

Oswalt noted, “The sense of the first phrase, who has taken the measure of the Spirit of the Lord, is well illustrated by the parallel phrase in Prov. 16.2, which speaks of God’s mastery of, and evaluation of, the human spirit in its choices and actions. Thus Isaiah asks, if we cannot even take the measure of the physical world, how can we take God’s measure?”[40] He who has measured all of creation cannot be measured by any of creation.

Indeed, the focus here is interestingly on the Spirit of God who was quite instrumental in the original creation. Many scholars, however, seem to agree that Isaiah did not refer to the third Person of the Trinity, but rather to the “Spirit of intelligence and understanding who hovered above the waters at the creation (cf. Isa 34:16; Gen 1:2; Job 33:4, etc.). It is the Spirit that brings life and makes alive, who brought order out of chaos.”[41] Oswalt noted that “spirit here is not precisely the Holy Spirit or the third person of the Trinity, but neither is it merely ‘mind’ (as per LXX, quoted in Rom. 11:34 and 1 Cor. 2:16) in the sense of intelligence. Rather, it is the sum total of the interior life, including the volitional, affective, and cognitive aspects.” Therefore, he adds, “Who can accurately comprehend that aspect of God and so tell Him what to do?”[42]

What these scholars say is all true, and the Hebrew word for “spirit,” רוּחַ is fairly inclusive so that, along with breath, wind, and spirit, it also covers mind, will, and understanding. Indeed, John D. W. Watts noted the word spirit “includes mind, purpose, and plans, but moves beyond them to include motivation and implementation.”[43] However, if one is to take Young at face value and reasonably evaluate Oswalt, one would have to conclude that Isaiah did refer to the Holy Spirit and the observations of these other scholars merely enhance the personality of the Spirit in this context. Over a century ago, for example, Franz Delitzsch noted, “’The Spirit of Jehovah’ is the Spirit which moved upon the waters at the creation, and by which chaos was reduced to order. ‘Who,’ inquires this prophet,—‘who furnished this Spirit with the standard, according to which all this was to be done?’”[44] More recently, Geoffrey W. Grogan noted that in this passage, God was asserting His exclusive Godhood. Grogan stressed that the anthropomorphic phrases the prophet used throughout this discourse do not “reduce God to man’s level. They simply give vividness to the theological truth of His personality. The prophet’s rhetorical questions do not demean God in any way. Rather they magnify Him in the eyes of the hearer.” In the light of this Grogan challenged those who limit “spirit” to mind, intelligence, and motivation, etc. He argued, “Against this, however, must be set the fact that this passage is about God’s creative power, and Genesis 1.2 gives the Spirit a place in this work.”[45] So the question is valid and personal: Who has measured God’s Holy Spirit? Who has advised Him or given Him instructions?

The next three phrases merely amplify the message of these questions. Isaiah continued asking, “With whom did He consult and who gave Him understanding? And who taught Him in the path of justice and taught Him knowledge And informed Him of the way of understanding?” (Isa 40:14). The obvious answer again is, No one! Because no one among God’s entire creation has the wisdom or the understanding to advise the Creator. Centuries later, the Apostle Paul expressed the same unfathomable mystery of the inscrutable God, when he summarized the sovereignty of God’s wisdom and understanding in relation to Israel’s history. The Apostle asked, “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the LORD, or who became His counselor?” (Rom 11:33-34). In Isaiah 40:12, Isaiah stressed God’s omnipotence. In verses 13-14, he recalled God’s omniscience and infinite wisdom. The God of Israel—the God who would deliver Judah from her enemies, return her from exile, and restore her to her land—is a God who possesses such absolute wisdom that no one can advise Him and no one can even understand Him, much less His ways, particularly since His ways are far above man’s ways (Isa 55:9). He is the God who can guide the lives of His people through any difficulty and overcome any obstacle they may encounter along the way.

God’s Total Sovereignty

Isaiah has not yet completed his picture of the greatness of God. It is almost as if he were laying a foundation to this point. Since this section of his prophecy seems to be addressing the returning exiles many years future to the prophet, the greatness of Babylon would still linger in their memories. These future Israelites might also remember the mighty Assyrians who had threatened them in the days of Hezekiah and devastated the northern kingdom of Israel. Therefore, the prophet now reflected on God’s sovereignty as it compares with all the nations. Everything about the mighty nations with which Israel is most certainly familiar shrinks into insignificance when compared to Yahweh. With a couple more declarations beginning with “behold!” the prophet diminished the value of the nations of the earth. He proclaimed,

Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket,
And are regarded as a speck of dust on the scales;
Behold, He lifts up the islands like fine dust.
Even Lebanon is not enough to burn,
Nor its beasts enough for a burnt offering.
All the nations are as nothing before Him,
They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless (Isa 40:15-17).

When He announced the coming of Yahweh as victorious ruler and as a gentle shepherd, Isaiah used the word, הֵן, “Behold!” Now, he was announcing the majesty of Yahweh when compared with all the nations of the earth, at least all the nations the prophet knows. Twice he used this word, “Behold!” “Behold the nations!” “Behold He taketh up the isles. . . .” The Hebrew noun used in this passage means much the same as the Greek word ethnos from which the word “ethnic” is derived. It means “the people,” and, as used by the Israelites, it carries the connotation of peoples separate from the chosen people (i.e. Gentiles). Sedore noted, “It can signify political entities, but it does not necessarily stress governments as does our modern word nations.”[46] Isaiah stressed the smallness of the nations in his image by the choice of a rare word to describe the nations. They are as a מַר, that is, a drop from a bucket. This word occurs only here in the Bible and it describes “the minute water drop in a measuring bucket,”[47] or, according to Oswalt, “They are the drop of water falling back into the cistern as the bucket is pulled up. . . .”[48] Huey expressed a different but similar idea. He substituted rain cloud for bucket, as he noted, “The power of all the nations is no more to Him than a drop of water in a rain cloud (40:15).” In a footnote on this comment, Huey explained that “Ugaritic studies have shown ‘rain cloud’ to be the more likely translation of the word ordinarily rendered ‘bucket’ in 40.15. . . .”[49] This and the next metaphor—“a speck of dust on the scales”—are powerful images reflecting the inconsequential status of the nations. They are small, meaningless, and not worth a first notice, much less a second glance, when measured against the majesty of a sovereign God. “To begin with,” Watts noted, “He is not awed by them. They are miniscule elements in His creation.”[50]

The second metaphor reduces the nations in significance to an even smaller value when measured against Yahweh. More than just a drop on the rim of a bucket perhaps flowing around the rim or a drop in a rain cloud, the nations are also no more than the dust that collects on the plate of a scale when not in use. The nations, like that dust, leave the scale virtually unaffected. Consequently, the person using the scale may ignore the dust or merely blow it away. Compared with Yahweh, the nations are mere dust. Finally, the islands of the sea are even smaller in God’s sight; they are fine dust that God can grasp between thumb and finger as if they had been pulverized into the finest of dust. The idea is, as Sedore noted, “that nations and peoples who think they are important are really of no account in relation to the sovereignty of the Lord GOD.”[51] In the eyes of God, the nations are insignificant, for He created them; and, therefore, He has the right to do with them as He wills.

In this stanza of Isaiah’s poetic prophecy, the reader has now moved from the work and wisdom of creation to the product of creation. Isaiah turned to application, applying the greatness of the Creator that he revealed in the first two stanzas already considered (9-11, 12-14): first to human strength or the “might” of the nations, and then to the fabric of creation itself (v. 15). In verse 16, the prophet moves to the religious exercises of mankind. Every civilization in the Ancient Near East offered sacrifices to their gods. To demonstrate that Judah’s God is greater than all these gods of the nations, Isaiah noted that all of the magnificent trees in Lebanon, famous for its cedars, would not begin to provide a sacrificial fire for Yahweh. If that is not enough, all the finest of lambs or bulls in Lebanon put together would not begin to make a legitimate burnt offering. Motyer noted, “even the largest religious endeavor would fall short of His dignity. . . .”[52] Young added, “The forests of mountainous Lebanon teemed with roaring wild animals; but all of these would not provide a sacrifice, for they were not sufficient. Yahweh, the God of Israel, is so high and exalted above man that man is in no way able to present unto Him a sacrifice or offering worthy of Him.”[53] God is not only great in power and great in wisdom, He is great in authority and great in worth. He is the sovereign ruler of His creation, and the implication here is that He is so great in value that the best man can offer falls short of His worthiness.

Speaking of the trees and beasts of Lebanon, Albert Barnes offered a beautiful summary of Isaiah’s evaluation of man’s religious efforts.

All these ranges of mountains, abounding in magnificent trees and forests, would not furnish fuel sufficient to burn the sacrifices which would be an appropriate offering to the majesty and glory of God . . . all those animals, if offered in sacrifice, would not be an appropriate expression of what was due to God. . . . The image employed here by Isaiah is one of great poetic beauty; and nothing, perhaps, could give a deeper impression of the majesty and honour of the great JEHOVAH.[54]

Of all the efforts of man to curry God’s favor, to gain God’s blessing, to acquire a measure of God’s grace, Isaiah simply responded, “Not enough!”

The final lines in this stanza again reflect on God’s greatness and man’s insufficiency.

All the nations are as nothing before Him,
They are regarded by Him as less than nothing and meaningless (Isa 40:17).

It is important to note what Isaiah did not say. He did not say that God counts mankind as nothing, but they are as nothing before God. In other words, in comparison with or in relation to, God, the nations are nothing. They are even less than nothing. They are as the chaos at the beginning of creation (“vanity,” תֹּהוּ; see Gen 1:2). At this point, Isaiah has essentially ceased employing metaphors and figures of speech or poetic imagery, but has turned to direct statements. “With these powerful negative words,” noted Oswalt, “(’ayin, ‘that which is not’; ’epes, ‘that which does not exist’; and tōhû, ‘chaos, emptiness), Isaiah asserts that beside God the earthly nations do not exist.” Oswalt explained in greater detail.

He is not merely greater than they, as the gods were considered to be. Rather the nations are not on the same plane of existence as He is. This radical discontinuity between the human and divine is the central concept that distinguishes OT religion and its daughters—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—from all others. It is at the heart of the Western worldview, and if surrendered, will plunge us back into the darkest of dark ages.[55]

It is important to notice also a slight shift in subject from the first line in this stanza to the last two lines in the stanza. Isaiah shifted from “the nations” in a general sense to “all nations” in a more specific and an all-inclusive sense. Not only a few nations, known to those in Israel or the ancient Near East, but all nations collectively have no substance in the eyes of Yahweh. He is the fullest of substance because He is eternal and unchanging and because He is the Creator of all else. The nations are of no substance at all because they are temporal and changing, and created by the Creator.

Nationalism was an important thing to many of the ancient Near Eastern civilizations; and this author is not attempting to denigrate nationalism in itself. There may be some value if only temporal in declaring love for country and in some form of patriotism, again if only temporal. For example, as an American and raised not far from where America first declared its independence from England, this author has climbed the Statue of Liberty, toured Valley Forge, and Brandywine Battlefields. Having touched the Liberty Bell and walked through Independence Hall, having taken a picture of the desk and pen upon which the Declaration of Independence was signed, and having even visited the National Archives in Washington, D.C. and seen the original document, he must acknowledge that heritage here on earth is not his primary heritage. For instance, all Christians are residing as strangers and aliens in whatever land they reside. All Christians are ambassadors from another “land.” While one may be proud to be an American, and while living in a particular country demonstrate respect and honor both the country and its flag, at the same time, one must acknowledge that when compared to God, even great countries are no better than the chaos that first inhabited the earth before the Spirit of God and the Word of God began their work of shaping creation at the beginning. To summarize this stanza, Motyer noted, “Less than nothing is the ‘formless’ of Genesis 1.2, meaning ‘lacking evident purpose and meaning’: ‘compared to Him they are to be reckoned as pointless.’”[56] God is a powerful ruler and a gentle shepherd. He is omnipotent in His might, omniscient in His wisdom, and sovereign in His relation to all creation. He is a great God! Who can compare with Him?

Yahweh Is A God Who Possesses Distinct Prestige Isaiah 40:18-20

At this juncture in his proclamation, Isaiah asked the question to which he had been hinting not so subtly from the beginning, that is, his own version of Moses’ question: “To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare with Him?” (Isa 40:18). Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, translated the second phrase, “or what counterpart will you put forward to match him.”[57] Mettinger explained the term “match” by noting, “It . . . seems natural to presume that the expression ‛arăk dᵉmût implies something more than a mere comparison: a challenge to the listeners to advance a counterpart to God, that could claim to be His equal, that could match Him in a competition.”[58] According to Mettinger, the prophet was looking for more than just a comparison; he was looking for a rival. The prophet used the personal pronoun מִי, “who,” to introduce the question or to classify the question, indicating immediately that he intended for his readers to understand that God is a person. Therefore, the rival god that can compare to Him must also be a living person. Since the question implies from the start that no one is like Him, it also indicates He is a Person of unique prestige, so prestigious that He falls into a class all His own. Young stated the strength of Isaiah’s comparison here, in addition to its personal focus.

The comparison has to do not merely with dumb idols but with all that is not God. Is there anything apart from God with which He may be compared? The answer is, ‘There is not.’ At the same time it should be noted that the question is unto whom and not unto what will ye liken God? Perhaps the thought is that there is no human creature to whom God may be likened. No man, be he ever so powerful and exalted, can be compared with God.[59]

In fact, Isaiah’s question contains a bit of irony. Instead of the usual name for God (אֱלֹהִים), with which he was certainly familiar since he used it over eighty times in reference to God, the prophet here used the singular form, אֵל. In reading the Old Testament, one usually associates this form of the name with other names with which it is occasionally used to indicate some special character or some special power or some blessing related to God in some way (e.g. names such as El Shaddai, or El Roi, or even El Elyon). Here, however, El stands alone, as if Isaiah intended to stress God’s sole deity over all other gods. John Oswalt reinforced this idea and explained the usage even further.

The word here translated God is ’ēl, not the most common term for God, which is ’ĕlōhîm. The difference between the two is that the latter speaks of the general qualities of deity. Isaiah uses the former, which is identical to that of the high god in the Canaanite pantheon, to indicate the absolute superiority of the Lord (so in 43:12; 45:14; 46:9; see also 31:3). If He alone is El, then there is nothing like Him in all the universe.[60]

Motyer focused on the purpose of the prophet to exalt the majesty of God. He noted, “’ēl (God) is the most transcendent of the God-words, connoting dominion over all (42:5), absolute deity (43:10, 12; 46:9), the unique God of Israel (45:14) and the God of inscrutable purposes (45:15).”[61] Since God is both unique and absolute, no one can compare to Him. The most prestigious of royalties, the most prestigious of the upper classes of society, the most prestigious of the ancient gods all turn invisible in the majestic light of the God who dwells in unapproachable light (1 Tim 6.16).

However, there is more. Isaiah was not content to merely ask the question or to singularly exalt God, he must also denigrate these other “gods.” Therefore, he declared,

As for the idol, a craftsman casts it,
A goldsmith plates it with gold,
And a silversmith fashions chains of silver.
He who is too impoverished for such an offering
Selects a tree that does not rot;
He seeks out for himself a skillful craftsman
To prepare an idol that will not totter (Isa 40:19-20).

Early in history, men tried to understand the phenomena of nature in terms of the activities of gods. It did not take many years before they were creating images of the gods, images that they could see and seek to relate. This only added to their depravity, because not only did God command them to make no graven image, but also commanded them that no one was to make an image of the supreme invisible God. Oswalt noted, for instance, “If God’s transcendence is the most fundamental truth of OT theology, its immediate corollary is the next most fundamental: one cannot make an image of God.”[62] Nevertheless, men tried, and men did make images, not of the true, living God, but of the god’s conjured by their imaginations, gods they could understand, gods they could manage and manipulate according to their own preconceived notions.

In some cases, however, even corrupt Israelite leaders created images that they associated directly with Yahweh. Aaron, for example, at the peoples’ bidding, formed a molten calf of gold, and the people associated it with Yahweh, saying, “This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt” (Exod 32:4b) When Jeroboam, son of Nebat rebelled against Solomon and Rehoboam and drew away the ten northern tribes of Israel, he performed a similar act. To prevent the people from returning to Judah and to Jerusalem to worship God (and possibly reunite the tribes), Jeroboam “made two golden calves, and he said to them, ‘It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold your gods, O Israel, that brought you up from the land of Egypt.’ He set one in Bethel, and the other he put in Dan” (1 Kgs 12:28b-29). It may be argued that neither Aaron nor Jeroboam was truly equating the idol with Yahweh. Whether or not they were, they created an image in opposition to the commands of God. Furthermore, these images were no less foolish and no less sinful than those created by unbelieving pagans. If anything, they were worse because God’s people have no excuse. Furthermore, commenting on Isaiah’s assessment, Harry Bultema noted, in these verses the prophet “shows us the foolish wastefulness of the rich person who squanders his gold and silver to obtain a metal idol.”[63] What kind of god must be chained down to prevent thieves from stealing it for its gold? Cannot such a god protect itself?

After ridiculing the wastefulness of the rich, Isaiah turned to the average man (v. 20). This passage offers a small difficulty because the opening phrase has resulted in several different translations. The issue seems to be why is the man so impoverished? The King James Version implies that he was poor to begin, and so cannot afford any oblations. Consequently, he cannot afford a rich, metal idol either. As a result, he chooses wood that will not easily decay and seeks a craftsman to make him an idol of this material. The New American Standard Bible says essentially the same thing. J. A. Alexander took issue with these translations, however. Alexander noted, “As the form is evidently that of a participle passive, the best translation seems to be impoverished, and the best construction that proposed by Gesenius in his Lehrgebäude (p. 821), impoverished by oblation or religious gifts.”[64] Alexander thought that the man was not too impoverished to make an offering, but rather the man gave so much to the god that he had nothing left with which to purchase an idol.

Most of the translations since Alexander, however, continue the idea of the King James Version. The man was poor in the first place, and the value of his idol depended on what he could afford to pay for it. Motyer stated clearly: “ . . . the point is not (as in the NIV) to make a contrast with verse 19 (such an offering). The MT simply has ‘one impoverished in respect of an offering,’ insisting that in idolatrous religion the ‘value’ of a god depends on the financial state of a devotee.”[65] Apparently Isaiah was less concerned with why the man was poor, and more concerned with how the poor man managed his devotion to his false god. The prophet expressed his sarcasm indiscriminately by focusing on the extreme ends of the economic/religious gamut of the ancient Near Eastern society. Each makes his own image of the gods; and in each case, the god reflects the economic status of the individual. More importantly for Isaiah, in each case, the god cannot compare in any way to the true, living, transcendent God of Judah. Young summarized Isaiah’s case when he noted,

There were actually those who bowed down to this [the manmade idol] rather than to the eternal and immutable God. Here the temporal would create the eternal, the weak the strong, the finite the infinite, the changeable the unchangeable. Man seeks to create God – and all in the image of man! Isaiah could not more clearly have placed in the open the utter folly and pointlessness of idolatry.[66]

Conclusion

All that Isaiah has demonstrated in this short passage should compel man to fall on his face before God as Isaiah himself did when he first encountered God at the death of King Uzziah (Isa 6:1-11), and to worship Him as the only God. He is to be worshipped as the true God, as the living God, and as distinctively God. Labuschagne noted,

Israel knew one thing, and that was that her religion was different from other religions exactly because her God was different from all other gods. The distinctiveness of her religion exhibits itself in the distinctiveness of Yahweh. Naturally this idea emerges from the whole of the witness of the O.T., but still in a most explicit way Israel spoke about the distinctiveness of her religion, whenever she proclaimed that her God, Yahweh, is incomparable.[67]

Isaiah, in just a few brief stanzas, revealed the distinctiveness of his God and has proclaimed the majesty and greatness of his God.

God revealed His majesty in His power as the coming ruler with a mighty arm. He is truly King of kings (1 Tim 6:15) and Lord of lords (Deut 10:17). Indeed, Moses even declared Him to be God of gods (10:17). Who then can claim to be like Him? Who can come even close to Him in might? He revealed His majesty in His wisdom. Who then has been His counselor or could even presume to be? Since He created all things, and any god man forms from any material whether gold, silver, or wood, stands so inferior to the God of Israel that they cannot even stand before Him (see 1 Sam 5:1-6). Reading just Isaiah 40:9-20 should re-instill within the hearts of believers a new and lofty concept of God that they overcome A. W. Tozer’s sharp indictment. However, in the reading, they must see God, not just read about Him. Moreover, in seeing Him, they will look around as Elizabeth Barrett Browning once did and note:

Earth’s crammed with heaven,
And every common bush afire with God;
But only he who sees takes off his shoes,
The rest sit round it and pluck blackberries.[68]

Notes

1. C. J. Labuschagne, The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1966) 3.
2. A. W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1961) 1.
3. Ibid.
4. Francis A. Schaeffer, Escape from Reason (Chicago: InterVarsity Press, 1968) 13.
5. Tozer, Knowledge of the Holy, 8 (italics added).
6. John Piper, “A Passion for the Supremacy of God,” Spirit of Revival 33 (March 2002) 5.
7. The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, 2 vols. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971) 1:1699.
8. Robert B. Chisholm Jr., Handbook on the Prophets (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002) 14.
9. B. F. Huey, “Great Themes in Isaiah 40-66,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 11 (Fall 1968) 48.
10. Chisholm, Handbook on the Prophets, 14.
11. Thomas L. Constable, “Notes on Isaiah” [online] (Sonic Light, 2005, accessed 5 May 2009) available from http://www.soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/isaiah.pdf. Constable’s chart is an adaptation from Charles Dyer and Eugene Merrill, Nelson’s Old Testament Survey (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001) 561. Other works that discuss the unity of the book of Isaiah include: Oswald T. Allis, The Unity of Isaiah (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1950); Walter Brueggemann, “Unity and Dynamic in the Isaiah Tradition,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 29 (June 1984) 89-107; R. E. Clements, “The Unity of the Book of Isaiah,” Interpretation 36 (April 1982) 117-29; Robert Vasholz, “Isaiah Versus “The Gods”: A Case for Unity,” Westminster Theological Journal 42 (April 1980) 389-394; Eugene H. Merrill, “The Literary Character of Isaiah 40-55: Part 1,” Bibliotheca Sacra 144 (January 1987): 24-43; “The Literary Character of Isaiah 40-55: Part 2,” Bibliotheca Sacra 144 (April 1987) 144-56; and, William J. Dumbrell, “The Purpose of Isaiah,” Tyndale Bulletin 36 (1985) 111-28.
12. J. Alec Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999) 245-46.
13. Albert Barnes, Notes on the Old Testament: Isaiah, 2 vols. (Glasgow: Blackie & Son, 1851; reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, n.d.) 2:63.
14. John W. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40-66 (New International Commentary on the Old Testament) (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 54-55.
15. Christopher R. Seitz, “The Book of Isaiah 40-66: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible, ed. Leander E. Keck, 12 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001) 6:337.
16. Page H. Kelley, “Doing It God’s Way: Introduction to Isaiah 40-55,” Review and Expositor 88 (Spring 1991) 169.
17. J. A. Alexander, The Prophecies of Isaiah, rev. ed., 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985) 2:102.
18. Barnes, Isaiah, 64.
19. James Muilenburg, “The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40-66,” in The Interpreter’s Bible, ed. George A. Buttrick, 12 vols. (New York: Abingdon Press, 1956) 5:433-34.
20. Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972) 41.
21. Ibid. fn. 43.
22. Muilenburg, “The Book of Isaiah,” 434.
23. Kelley, “Doing It God’s Way,” 169.
24. Henri Frankfort, Ancient Egyptian Religion (New York: Harper & Row, 1948) 20.
25. See A. Leo Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia: Portrait of a Dead Civilization, rev. ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977):264.
26. J. J. M. Roberts, “Isaiah in Old Testament Theology,” Interpretation 36 (April 1982) 133-34.
27. Barnes, Isaiah, 58.
28. J. B. Phillips, Your God Is Too Small (New York: Macmillan, 1963).
29. “How Big Is Our God?” [online] (NET Bible, 2005-2009, accessed 5 May 2009) available from http://net.bible.org/illustration.php?id=7418.
30. Young, Book of Isaiah, 43.
31. See J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993) 303.
32. Marva Sedore, To Walk and Not Faint: God’s Comfort from Isaiah 40 (Chappaqua, NY: Christian Herald Books, 1980) 67.
33. U.S. Geological Survey, “How Much Water Is There On, In, and Above the Earth?” [online] (USGS Georgia Water Science Center, 2009, accessed 8 May 2009) available from http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html.
34. Elizabeth Hays, “The Quest for Gamma Rays: Exploring the Most Violent Places in the Universe, 65th Compton Lecture Series: Lecture 5: Journey to the Center of the Galaxy” [online] (University of Chicago, 28 April 2007, accessed 8 May 2009) available from http://uchicago.edu/~ehays.
35. Sharon Begley, “Science: A Heavenly Host,” Newsweek (29 January 1996) 52.
36. For instance, see Alexander, Prophecies of Isaiah, 104; Barnes, Isaiah, 65; Young, Book of Isaiah, 44.
37. Sedore, Walk and Not Faint, 69.
38. Ibid.
39. Barnes, Isaiah, 66.
40. Ibid. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 59, added, “This line of thinking is similar to the one found in Job 38-41.”
41. Young, Book of Isaiah, 44.
42. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 59. See also, R. N. Whybray, The Heavenly Counsellor in Isaiah XL.13-14 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971) 10-13.
43. John D. W. Watts, Ísaiah 34-66 (Word Biblical Commentary) (Waco: Word, 1987) 90-91.
44. Franz Delitzsch, The Prophecies of Isaiah, trans. James Martin, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969) 2:148.
45. Geoffrey W. Grogan, “Isaiah,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gæbelein, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986) 6:245.
46. Sedore, Walk and Not Faint, 83.
47. Grogan, “Isaiah,” 245.
48. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 61.
49. Huey, “Great Themes in Isaiah,” 49, fn. 17.
50. Watts, Ísaiah, 91.
51. Sedore, Walk and Not Faint, 84.
52. Motyer, Prophecy of Isaiah, 304.
53. Young, Book of Isaiah, 49.
54. Barnes, Isaiah, 67.
55. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 61-62.
56. Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary, 248.
57. Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, “The Elimination of a Crux? A Syntactic and Semantic Study of Isaiah XL 18-20,” in Studies on Prophecy: A Collection of Twelve Papers (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 26) (Leiden: Brill, 1974) 78 (italics added).
58. Ibid. 79.
59. Young, Book of Isaiah, 51.
60. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 62.
61. Motyer, Prophecy of Isaiah, 304.
62. Oswalt, Book of Isaiah, 62.
63. Harry Bultema, Commentary on Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1981) 383.
64. Alexander, Prophecies of Isaiah, 110.
65. Motyer, Prophecy of Isaiah, 305.
66. Young, Book of Isaiah, 55.
67. Labuschagne, Incomparability of Yahweh, 4.
68. Elizabeth Barrett Browning, as quoted in “Reflections,” Christianity Today (31 July 2000).