Although 7.14ff; 9.6-7; 11.1-9 have been hallowed by centuries of Christian usage, this must not blind us to the fact that they represent but three per cent of Isaiah, and we cannot assume that these passages carry a weight out of all proportion to their size. Here, as with 1 Enoch, we have a natural tendency to emphasize that is familiar to us and to grasp those parts of this mysterious prophet where we feel we can cope. I have suggested from the Psalms and 1 Enoch that the king may have been regarded as a son of God, an ‘unfallen angel’. If the presence of the divine son guaranteed the triumph of Jerusalem over her enemies, then the assurance of a further divine son to perpetuate the dynasty (7.14ff) would be a natural way of assuring the beleaguered city that the invading kings would suffer the fate of all who rebelled against the city and the Holy One. Not only is the continuation of the dynasty promised, but the king is also reminded of the very basis of his rule, the divine sonship and attendant triumph over the fallen sons. It is probably a royal prince who is to be called Immanuel (8.8), his name affirming the divine presence in the king. There is to be a great new beginning (9.1-6) described with pictures of warfare, darkness and light and the birth of a child. It is a fashionable to look for a particular occasion in the Assyrian crisis which would have prompted the oracle; but in view of the mythology underlying the other parts of the prophecy, it is likely that this oracle has similar roots.

9.1 describes light coming into darkness, perhaps the old solar imagery. 9.2 describes rejoicing before the Lord, i.e. in the Temple. The joy is that of victors and of harvesters, an association of ideas which points us to the autumn festival, and to the celebration of the triumph of Yahweh, which was enacted in the enthronement of the king. There follow three themes in parallel; each section begins ki, ‘for’: 9.4 describes the end of oppressors, 9.5 the relics of war, and 9.6 the birth of the child.

Several others texts have a similar pattern: Pss. 46 and 76 both describe the defeat of enemies and the exaltation of God in Zion, Isaiah 33 is entirely upon this theme, with enemies scattered, divine judgement, help coming with the new light of dawn, and the vision of the king in his glory. It is possible that all these are based upon memories of the Assyrian crisis, but it is more likely that an underlying mythology structured the perception of historical events, which, in their turn, informed the validity of the myths. To whom was the royal child born? If the first person in 9.1ff denotes the speakers, wen the son belongs to them, but who were they? The second person is God, and the third, the rejoicing people. For whom did Isaiah speak? An obvious choice would be the heavenly court, by whom he deemed himself commissioned. The angel figures proclaimed the birth of the royal son. The titles of the royal child confirm the supernatural element, and we must accept that these titles, strange though they be to us, reflected beliefs about the monarchy. The royal son had wisdom (‘Wonderful Counsellor’), permanent (‘Everlasting Father’), brought harmony (‘Prince of Peace’) and was divine (‘Everlasting God’). The fact that we are unable to translate any of these titles with confidence shows how little we know of the ancient monarchy and its claims. If the king was addressed as ‘mighty God’, then our reconstruction of the role of the monarchy must take this seriously, as must our reconstructions of the origin of Christian ideas. The king was probably seen as one of the ’elim of the heavenly court, as in Ps. 82, obliged to maintain justice on earth, or incur a fearful judgment. We glimpse a similar scene in Zech. 3.1-8, a corrupted text which describes the installation of Joshua as High Priest. He stands in the heavenly court before Yahweh, and is told that if he keeps the ways of Yahweh he will have rule over the house of Yahweh, and the right to stand among those of Yahweh’s presence. The LXX translation of the titles is confused, possibly due to Chrisitan interest and alteration, but the first appears as αγγελος, ‘angel’.

The third passage, Isa. 11.1-9, says that the spirit of Yahweh will rest on the royal figure to give him wisdom and knowledge, especially fear of the Lord. We have encountered this fear in the wisdom literature, where I suggested that if was the acceptable face of the ancient wisdom, distinguishing it from that of the other heavenly creatures who acted in pride. Such a meaning would be quite appropriate here if the royal figure had been seen as an unfallen son of God. The king was to be a just judge, in whose time harmony would return to the natural order and knowledge of Yahweh would ill the earth. Such a conception would explain the Son of Man figure, in the Similitudes, and the association there of the judgment of kings and mighty men with the restoration of creation and the revelation of true wisdom to the Elect.

The mountains of the gods played a major role in the mythology of Canaan. In 1 Enoch there are several mountains in the heavenly landscape; there is one whose summit reached to heaven, from which Enoch saw the wonders of the creation; and there were seven mountains which burned at the place of punishment (18.2, 13; 21.3). There is one mountain in the center of seven on which was the throne of God surrounded by trees, one of which was destined to be transplanted to the Temple (24.1-25.6). Several other mountains appear, possibly inspired by the geography of Palestine (26; 28; 29; 32.1), and there are seven mountains of metal destined to melt before the elect one, a description of the fate of the angels who were depicted as mountains. Thus the triumph of Yahweh and his king could be expressed as the triumph or superiority of his mountain, and in Isaiah the great mountain is part of the picture of the glorious future. Zion is to be the greatest mountain, the source of teaching and judgement for all nations. Zion will be the great holy place, the refuge for all who are written in the book of life (Isa. 2.3; cf. Ps. 87). Weapons have no power before the holy mountain, enemies are defeated (Isa. 33; Pss. 46, 48); cf. 1 En. 8.1ff, where the makers of weapons are destroyed. In the vision of 2.2-4 the weapons become the tools of agriculture. In the underlying mythology, the kings see something wonderful (Ps. 46.9; Ps. 48.6; cf. Lam. 4.12; Isa. 33.17; Ps. 2; 4 Ezra. 13). Isa. 2.2-4 envisages the conversion of the nations, as does 1 En. 90.30; but Zech. 14.16 limits the pilgrims to Jerusalem to those who survive the great battle. Jerusalem is to be purified (Isa. 4.4) by spirits of judgment and burning and the whole land will enjoy fertility in the time of the Messiah. Whether these two passages were part of the original text of Isaiha is not relevant. The ideas were certainly not original to him, as can be seen from the number of similar texts in the Old Testament, and the fact that the two passages were incorporated into the book indicates that they were appropriate to how it was understood. Both passages are aspects of the one future hope, lining judgement, fertility, a royal figure, a purified sanctuary and the triumph of Yahweh over defeated/converted enemies.