Yesaya 10:11

10:11 As I have done to Samaria and its idols,

so I will do to Jerusalem and its idols.” ¹ 

Yesaya 19:13

19:13 The officials of Zoan are fools,

the officials of Memphis ²  are misled;

the rulers ³  of her tribes lead Egypt astray.

Yesaya 23:8

23:8 Who planned this for royal Tyre, ⁴ 

whose merchants are princes,

whose traders are the dignitaries ⁵  of the earth?

Yesaya 36:9

36:9 Certainly you will not refuse one of my master’s minor officials and trust in Egypt for chariots and horsemen. ⁶ 

Yesaya 37:11

37:11 Certainly you have heard how the kings of Assyria have annihilated all lands. ⁷  Do you really think you will be rescued? ⁸ 

Yesaya 37:25

37:25 I dug wells

and drank water. ⁹ 

With the soles of my feet I dried up

all the rivers of Egypt.’

Yesaya 62:12

62:12 They will be called, “The Holy People,

the Ones Protected ¹⁰  by the Lord.”

You will be called, “Sought After,

City Not Abandoned.”

Yesaya 63:8

63:8 He said, “Certainly they will be my people,

children who are not disloyal.” ¹¹ 

He became their deliverer.

Yesaya 63:19

63:19 We existed from ancient times, ¹² 

but you did not rule over them,

they were not your subjects. ¹³ 

[10:11]  ¹ tn The statement is constructed as a rhetorical question in the Hebrew text: “Is it not [true that] just as I have done to Samaria and its idols, so I will do to Jerusalem and its idols?”

[10:11]  sn This statement indicates that the prophecy dates sometime between 722-701 b.c.

[19:13]  ² tn Heb “Noph” (so KJV); most recent English versions substitute the more familiar “Memphis.”

[19:13]  ³ tn Heb “the cornerstone.” The singular form should be emended to a plural.

[23:8]  ⁴ tn The precise meaning of הַמַּעֲטִירָה (hamma’atirah) is uncertain. The form is a Hiphil participle from עָטַר (’atar), a denominative verb derived from עֲטָרָה (’atarah, “crown, wreath”). The participle may mean “one who wears a crown” or “one who distributes crowns.” In either case, Tyre’s prominence in the international political arena is in view.

[23:8]  ⁵ tn Heb “the honored” (so NASB, NRSV); NIV “renowned.”

[36:9]  ⁶ tn Heb “How can you turn back the face of an official [from among] the least of my master’s servants and trust in Egypt for chariots and horsemen?” In vv. 8-9 the chief adviser develops further the argument begun in v. 6. His reasoning seems to be as follows: “In your weakened condition you obviously need military strength. Agree to the king’s terms and I will personally give you more horses than you are capable of outfitting. If I, a mere minor official, am capable of giving you such military might, just think what power the king has. There is no way the Egyptians can match our strength. It makes much better sense to deal with us.”

[37:11]  ⁷ tn Heb “Look, you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all the lands, annihilating them.”

[37:11]  ⁸ tn Heb “and will you be rescued?” The rhetorical question expects the answer, “No, of course not!”

[37:25]  ⁹ tc The Hebrew text has simply, “I dug and drank water.” But the parallel text in 2 Kgs 19:24 has “foreign waters.” זָרִים (zarim, “foreign”) may have accidentally dropped out of the Isaianic text by homoioteleuton (cf. NCV, NIV, NLT). Note that the preceding word, מַיִם (mayim, “water) also ends in mem (ם). The Qumran scroll 1QIsa^a has “foreign waters” for this line. However, in several other passages the 1QIsa^a scroll harmonizes with 2 Kgs 19 against the MT (Isa 36:5; 37:9, 20). Since the addition of “foreign” to this text in Isaiah by a later scribe would be more likely than its deletion, the MT reading should be accepted.

[62:12]  ¹⁰ tn Or “the redeemed of the Lord” (KJV, NAB).

[63:8]  ¹¹ tn Heb “children [who] do not act deceitfully.” Here the verb refers to covenantal loyalty.

[63:19]  ¹² tn Heb “we were from antiquity” (see v. 16). The collocation עוֹלָם + מִן + הָיָה (hayah + min + ’olam) occurs only here.

[63:19]  ¹³ tn Heb “you did not rule them, your name was not called over them.” The expression “the name is called over” indicates ownership; see the note at 4:1. As these two lines stand they are very difficult to interpret. They appear to be stating that the adversaries just mentioned in v. 18 have not been subject to the Lord’s rule in the past, perhaps explaining why they could commit the atrocity described in v. 18b.