Isaiah 13:1

DIVISION II (Isaiah 13-23)

This division contains Isaiah's prophecies against the nations, some twelve in all, the first one being contained in Isaiah 13 and all of Isaiah 14 (except the last five verses).

THE PROPHECY AGAINST BABYLON

Here is contained one of the most glorious predictive prophecies in all the Word of God; and, of course, critical enemies of God's word shout their denials as convincingly as they can; but to no avail. There is no evidence of any kind whatever, either external or internal, that casts the slightest doubt on the authenticity and integrity of this great prophecy. For that matter, critics offer no proof of their arrogant denials. Kelley stated that, "This is one of the sections in the articles against the nations that must be dated later than the prophet Isaiah."[1] Peake supposed that, "The prophecy must have been written near the close of the Exile."[2] Why do such scholars "suppose" or "allege" such things? O, they say, "The historical situation presupposed in this chapter is much later than Isaiah." So what? When Micah predicted the birth of Christ in Bethlehem seven centuries before the event, were not the historical conditions when Christ was born different to those when Micah prophesied?

The only thing we have here, then, is the knee-jerk reaction of critics to one of their satanic rules that "There is no such thing as predictive prophecy !" Therefore we reject such arrogant denials for what they are, merely the glib, unsupported falsehoods of unbelievers, unworthy of belief on the part of any Christian.

We are very grateful for the emergence of many young scholars today, among whom are Homer Hailey and John Willis, whose writings we are quoting in this commentary, who have rejected the fulminations of Bible enemies against such passages as this 13th chapter. Willis, for example, approvingly quoted Albert Barnes' immortal words regarding this prophecy against Babylon. We give the same quotation here:

"This is one of the clearest predictions of a future event that can anywhere be found, and the exact, minute fulfillment of it furnishes the highest possible evidence that "Isaiah spake as he was moved by the Holy Ghost."[3] How will the infidel account for this prophecy and its fulfillment? It will not do to say that it was an accident. It is too minute and too particular. It is not due to human sagacity. No human sagacity could have foretold it. It is not fancied fulfillment. It is real in the most minute particulars. And if so, then Isaiah was commissioned by Jehovah as he claimed to be. And, if this prophecy was inspired by God, by the same train of reasoning it can be proved that the whole Bible is a revelation from heaven.[4]

The truth which confounds the critics here is seen in the fact that Isaiah here looks far beyond the event of Israel's captivity which lay far in the future when Isaiah wrote this to the fall of Babylon to the Medes and the deliverance for God's people which would follow, indicating at the same time the awful punishment laid up for Babylon. The critical theory, of course, denies that the captivity itself was prophesied in advance, the absurdity of which critical allegation is seen in the fact that from the date of Isaiah's first-born son, the captivity as well as the return of a remnant were symbolically prophesied in the name Shear-Jashub. Was that also done "after the exile"? Of course not!

Also, let it be noted that the Medes were never the dominant portion of the Medo-Persian power that destroyed Babylon; and as Cheyne pointed out, it is absolutely ridiculous to suppose that anyone writing "after the exile" would have ignored the part of Persia in Babylon's punishment; but God, revealing the punishment at least 175 years before it was executed introduced the name of the Medes as having a part in it. Did they have a part? Certainly. The Scriptures reveal that when Babylon fell, "It was Darius the Mede who took the kingdom at age 62" (Daniel 5:30-31). However, nobody writing "after the exile" would have paid any attention whatever to the Medes. The allegation of Peake to the effect that the post-exilic writer made a mistake by attributing the fall of Babylon to the Medes is preposterous![5]

Summarizing this chapter, we have: God commands the assembly of the armies destined to be his instrument in the destruction of Babylon (Isaiah 13:1-3); a prophetic vision of the armies advancing to destroy Babylon (Isaiah 13:4,5); Isaiah gradually shifted from his own words to those of God as the awful consequences of God's wrath were described (Isaiah 13:6-10); a description of the dreadful destruction destined to befall Babylon (Isaiah 13:11-16); the everlasting desolation to which the city was doomed (Isaiah 13:17-22).

Isaiah 13:1-3

"The burden of Babylon, which Isaiah the son of Amoz did see. Set ye up an ensign upon the bare mountain, lift up the voice unto them, wave the hand that they may go into the gates of the nobles. I have commanded my consecrated ones, yea, I have called my mighty men for mine anger, even my proudly exulting ones."

"The burden of Babylon ..." The word here rendered "burden" is also translated oracle, or prophecy; but, the Hebrew word carries the ordinary meaning of 'burden.' "Generally in the Old Testament, and always in Isaiah, it refers to a Divine denunciation."[6] Surely the prophecy concerning Babylon carried a "burden" of woe to that city.

The mustering of the great mass of armies was to be accomplished by a triple signal (all of them metaphorical) of an ensign lifted high on a bare mountain, a loud call, and the waving of a hand.

The Babylonians called the gates of their city the "gates of the gods"; but Isaiah here put that in its proper perspective.

The picture that emerges here is that of God Himself in absolute control and command of all the powers on earth, which powers are summonsed here to execute the wrath of God upon Babylon.