{"id":579,"date":"2014-10-24T15:25:18","date_gmt":"2014-10-24T22:25:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/corbanblogs.wpengine.com\/ministry\/?p=579"},"modified":"2014-10-24T15:32:21","modified_gmt":"2014-10-24T22:32:21","slug":"god-the-fall-and-prison-opportunities-for-engagement-in-a-sin-struck-world","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/2014\/10\/god-the-fall-and-prison-opportunities-for-engagement-in-a-sin-struck-world\/","title":{"rendered":"God, the Fall, and Prison: Opportunities for Engagement in a Sin Struck World"},"content":{"rendered":"

I.\u00a0 Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

If we were to claim that America\u2019s prison system is fraught with problems and plagued by difficulties, it is likely that no one would object.\u00a0 Public opinion has come to associate prisons with overcrowding, racial disparity, human debasement, and with an inability to accomplish a core purpose \u2013 the reduction and prevention of criminal activity.\u00a0 Whether one operates from a Christian worldview, one that hopes in the idea of human redemption, or from a secular-humanistic perspective, there is broad agreement that our prison system is failing to do what we intend for it.[1]\u00a0 Yet, despite our general cynicism toward the prison system, there is also a partial antipathy ascribed, at times fairly, to persons with conservative leanings, many of whom come from evangelical Christianity.\u00a0 On a practical level, we want state and federal systems to keep us safe from harm and injustice by removing violent and malicious criminals from society.\u00a0 If this swells our prison population, so be it.\u00a0 After all, the criminal is the person who chose to commit a crime.\u00a0 Further, on an ideological level, there is a sense that it is liberals, both secular and Christian, who would push for prison reform.\u00a0 Efforts to shorten prison sentences, to introduce treatment plans, or to use diversion programs must stem from a belief in human perfectibility and evolutionary progression that does not give credence to depravity and sin.\u00a0 To be soft on crime is to lessen the gravity of sin, both at the level of specific infractions and at the higher level of humanity\u2019s sin nature.<\/p>\n

Clearly, these are complicated and thorny issues with which to deal, and it would be wrong for us to claim that the solutions are simple.\u00a0 Our world does not need more trite answers.\u00a0 However, as persons living under the call of God in Jesus Christ by the power of the Spirit, we do recognize our cultural mandate.\u00a0 Jesus calls us to be salt and light in the world (Matt 5:13-16), and one way to do this is by facing the problem of sin, particularly as it relates to our practice of dealing with sin by incarcerating offenders.\u00a0 Thus, in this essay, we will proceed by examining the idea of imprisonment from two perspectives: from a modern perspective by considering the history of prisons and current practices in the state of Oregon, and from a biblical perspective.\u00a0 To close, we will offer our thoughts on how a biblical perspective can engage the reality of prison as it stands in our community.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

II. Imprisonment: Development and Current Practices<\/strong><\/p>\n

While it may come as a surprise to most, the practice of imprisonment has undergone drastic reformation over the past 200-300 years.\u00a0 Humans have imprisoned other humans since ancient times, but in each era religion, sociology, psychology, political policy, and matters of practicality combine in various ways to influence what a community means to accomplish through its detention system.\u00a0 In what follows, we will briefly outline the evolution of imprisonment practices, and then we will discuss what the state of Oregon is currently doing with its correctional facilities.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

A. Prison: A Short Modern History<\/p>\n

Scholars in the field of Criminal Justice trace the concept of prison or imprisonment as far back as the 5th<\/sup> cent. B.C., but it is important to recognize that the original purpose of imprisonment was not to punish criminals.[2]\u00a0 Rather, prisons existed to detain an alleged perpetrator until the community could determine their guilt or innocence. \u00a0If a person was cleared, they went free.\u00a0 If they were found guilty, the actual punishment would follow.[3]\u00a0 Imprisonment provided a practical means of keeping the accused on hand for trial and to receive the prescribed punishment.\u00a0 This ancient system of justice is quite similar to certain aspects of our modern criminal justice system.\u00a0 People who are arrested for serious crimes must wait in custody at county jails until the adjudication of their case.<\/p>\n

Through the centuries, societies and individuals have developed various theoretical concepts of laws, of crime, and of punishment.\u00a0\u00a0However, it is not until the 17th<\/sup> and 18th<\/sup> cents. A.D., the Colonial Era, that incarceration began to stand as a form of punishment in its own right.\u00a0 In this period, the Anglican code provided the legal framework for the western world and allowed for capital punishment, corporal punishment, fines, and exile to designated penal colonies for offenders.\u00a0 Thus, the British government established prison colonies in America, Australia, and Tasmania.[4]\u00a0 In this way, there was a wedding of religious and social law where we begin to see the early structures of our modern corrections system.[5]\u00a0 Popular sentiment at this time saw the death penalty as too severe for anything but serious offenses. \u00a0Hard labor was a better fit for minor crimes, and proponents of the penal colony system saw it as an effective tool to deal with crime for two reasons; a) it removed the criminal from society, and b) it acted as a deterrent to future criminal behavior.<\/p>\n

Toward the later part of the 18th<\/sup> cent., known as the Penitentiary Era in the field of Criminal Justice, penal reformers like John Howard and Jeremy Bentham began to argue for changes in society\u2019s detention practices.\u00a0 These men were on the cutting edge of penal reform by suggesting that prisons should rely on paid employees, that each prisoner should receive an appropriate diet of food, that inspectors ought to evaluate facilities, and that men and women should stay in separate facilities.\u00a0 These efforts resulted in a more equitable system of punishment for offenders, in better living conditions inside prison facilities, and in better treatment of inmates by their wardens.\u00a0 At this time, Bentham also designed a new style of prison house, which we know as the Panopticon.\u00a0 His structure \u201callowed a centrally placed observer to survey all the inmates.\u201d[6]\u00a0 It featured cell blocks radiating out from a central point where a single guard could monitor inmate behavior.\u00a0 Bentham\u2019s design became the standard for prison construction over the next 50 years.[7]\u00a0 It was during this period that the United States opened its first prison, the Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia, designed to incarcerate \u201csentenced offenders\u201d with the purpose of reformation as its \u201cprimary objective.\u201d[8]\u00a0 Richard Seiter explains that \u201cinmates were expected to read the Bible, reflect on their wrongdoing, and do penance for their crimes.\u201d[9]\u00a0 For these reasons, such centers came to be known as penitentiaries.<\/p>\n

In the first half of the 19th<\/sup> cent., capital punishment continued to decline in use, and the so called shaming sanctions, such as the medieval stockade, also fell out of favor.[10]\u00a0 Throughout the rest of the 19th<\/sup> cent. and early 20th<\/sup> cent., the Reformatory Era, religious groups such as the Evangelicals and Quakers were responsible for moving prison policy away from the notion of punitive punishment and toward rehabilitation through \u201cpersonal redemption.\u201d[11]\u00a0 Other aspects of the Reformatory Era featured a greater awareness of social, economic, psychological and political influences affecting crime.[12]\u00a0 Reformers pushed for education and vocational programs to prepare inmates for life after prison.[13]<\/p>\n

From the early 1900s to around 1935, the United States experienced a 170% growth in its prison population.\u00a0 This sparked the Industrial Era of prison practice, where prison organizations would use inmates to produce goods which the prison could sell on the open market. \u00a0This practice mirrored the contemporary context with the growth of factory labor, but officials quickly ran afoul of labor unions who objected to the free inmate labor that prisons could utilize.[14]\u00a0 After the unions successfully lobbied for new laws restricting competition with prison-made products, thousands of inmates were suddenly idle, leaving prison administrators with a dilemma.\u00a0 Prisons that had been built for manufacturing abruptly lost the demand for their products.[15]\u00a0 Thus, prisons in the U.S. went through major transitions from 1935-1960. \u00a0With overcrowding, an unoccupied workforce of inmates, and a lack of programs to keep them engaged, frequent riots broke out in prisons across the country.\u00a0 This period also marked the end of the \u201chands-off doctrine\u201d which \u201crestricted judicial intervention in the operations of prison.\u201d[16]\u00a0 This opened the floodgates of legal cases filed by inmates in federal and lower courts demanding better living conditions and an end to cruel and unusual punishment.[17]<\/p>\n

In the 1970s and 1980s, the crime rate in the United States rose to historic levels, changing the political landscape.\u00a0 Public officials felt pressure to find new solutions to age old problems of crime control and prison overcrowding. During this time, corrections began to move away from a rehabilitation model of imprisonment to, as Todd Clear and George Cole say, \u201ccrime control through incarceration and risk containment.\u201d[18]\u00a0 New tough on crime laws were passed with \u201cdeterminate sentencing\u201d intended to \u201cincarcerate offenders for longer periods of time.\u201d[19]\u00a0 Judges were less likely to grant bail to offenders accused of serious crimes and were mandated to impose maximum penalties on career criminals convicted of certain crimes.\u00a0 Many states also reinstituted capital punishment at this time.\u00a0 In Oregon, the rise in crime manifested itself, in part, by the migration of criminal street gangs from California into Oregon\u2019s larger cities.\u00a0 Oregon responded by implementing policies and laws specifically targeting gang activity, which they followed with aggressive prosecution at the federal, state, and local levels.\u00a0 On a national scale, the more punitive philosophy of crime and punishment that arose in the 1970s and which has carried through to the present day, has led to an explosion in prison populations and in prison construction.\u00a0 However, faced with the unsustainable price tag of the tough on crime policies, officials are once again looking for ways to better manage our criminal justice system.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

B.\u00a0 Current Practice in the State of Oregon<\/p>\n

Oregon\u2019s solution to the perplexing dilemma of crime and punishment in an era of crime control is the Oregon Accountability Model (OAM).\u00a0 The OAM is designed to reduce recidivism by incorporating new policies, programs, and community partnerships prioritizing the use of empirical research and measurable results.\u00a0 The OAM, according to the state\u2019s site, has six components, which, when woven together \u201cstrengthens [its] ability to hold inmates\/offenders accountable for their actions.\u201d[20]\u00a0 The components are Criminal Risk Factor Assessment and Case Planning, Staff\/Inmate Interactions, Work and Programing, Children and Families, Re-entry, and Community Supervision and Programming.[21]<\/p>\n

Criminal Risk Factor Assessment and Case Planning<\/em> assesses each individual who enters Department of Corrections (DOC) custody for risks and needs.\u00a0 After meeting with an offender, a social worker creates a customized plan of programs and services, which provides a roadmap to success.\u00a0 Persons with substance abuse issues will receive drug and alcohol treatment.\u00a0 Persons with anger problems can receive anger management counseling.<\/p>\n

Emerging research in criminal recidivism is suggesting that Staff\/Inmate Interactions<\/em> are also key to assisting inmates in learning pro-social behaviors.\u00a0 Thus, prison staff receive training in using the 3 R\u2019s: Role Modeling \u2013 create a pro-social learning environment for inmates; Reinforcement \u2013 reinforce pro-social behavior; Redirection \u2013 intervene and redirect anti-social behavior.[22]<\/p>\n

Oregon\u2019s Ballot Measure 17, the Prison Reform and Inmate Work Act of 1994, mandated that all inmates work full-time or be engaged in programs such as education, alcohol and drug treatment, mental health services, religious services, and\/or cognitive classes.\u00a0 This constitutes the Work and Programming<\/em> aspect of the OAM.\u00a0 Work opportunities include employment with Oregon Corrections Enterprises (OCE). The OCE is a prison industries organization, affiliated with the Oregon DOC, where inmates manufacture select products that other agencies then use in their programs around the state.\u00a0 Other work opportunities include institution-based small businesses, community work crews, and community service projects.[23]<\/p>\n

Research has also shown that keeping inmates connected with their children and families helps decrease the number of behavioral problems within the institutions, makes re-entry into the community easier, and reduces recidivism dramatically after release.[24]\u00a0 Thus, an inmate can receive regular visits from family members, and prison facilities incorporate equipment for play and interaction.<\/p>\n

The goal of the OAM\u2019s Re-entry<\/em> component is to create a \u201cbridge or link\u201d for an inmate with their new community outside of prison.\u00a0 This begins with a \u201creach in\u201d by parole and probation, presently called Community Corrections Officers, working with inmates on a release plan which may address needs like housing, employment and education.[25]<\/p>\n

Finally, Community Supervision and Programming<\/em> works to keep the community safe by monitoring the conditions of a former inmate\u2019s supervision and by holding them accountable for violations.\u00a0 Post prison programming includes, alcohol and drug treatment, mental health and sex offender treatment, domestic violence treatment, drug courts, cognitive restructuring, and anger management training.[26]<\/p>\n

Although the OAM is a secular-based program, it clearly has high ideals that are in step with religious and moral principles.\u00a0 Repentance and redemption are key concepts in the model\u2019s efforts to change anti-social behavior and to help rebuild the individual and their community. Oregon\u2019s low rate of recidivism and proven success with the OAM suggest that this approach to prison practice is an effective way to address crime and its effects in our society.<\/p>\n

The modern history of imprisonment reveals that imprisonment as a means of punishment has been a relatively late introduction, within the last three hundred years. Early imprisonment served to hold a prisoner until just punishment could be administered. Current trends in the penal system reveal a priority in reforming and restoring criminals as a part of imprisonment.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

III. Imprisonment: Biblical Data<\/strong><\/p>\n

As we transition from current practices of imprisonment to the Scriptures, our study will proceed in two steps.\u00a0 First, we will briefly describe a few of the prototypical cases of imprisonment in the Bible.\u00a0 This will include both why humans imprison other humans, as well as why God may imprison humans.\u00a0 Second, we will consider in depth how God uses imprisonment in Isa 40-55 as a tool for redemption.<\/p>\n

A. Exemplary Cases<\/p>\n

As one might expect, the imprisonment practices that we observe in the Bible largely accord with a pre-modern perspective on prisons.\u00a0 Typically, authorities held a person in prison only until they can determine the subject\u2019s innocence or guilt.\u00a0 Perhaps the most commonly known examples of such detention come from the Joseph narratives in Genesis.\u00a0 By the time we reach ch. 40, Joseph\u2019s brothers have already sold him into slavery in Egypt, and Potiphar\u2019s wife has arranged for his unjust imprisonment.[27]\u00a0 At the beginning of the chapter, the narrator explains that two of Pharaoh\u2019s attendants \u2013 his cupbearer and his baker \u2013 have offended him, and so they land in prison with Joseph (vv. 1-3).[28]\u00a0 These three remain incarcerated for an undisclosed amount of time (\u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d9\u05d5 \u05d9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd) (v. 4), after which, Pharaoh metes out his justice.\u00a0 The text does not reveal the reasoning behind Pharaoh\u2019s decisions, but, in accordance with Joseph\u2019s predictions (vv. 12-13, 18-19), Pharaoh clears and reinstates his cupbearer, and he executes his baker (vv. 21-22).<\/p>\n

In the wilderness narratives of the Pentateuch, we find two more cases that are similar to what we see in the Joseph stories.\u00a0 On separate occasions, two men, for whom the text does not give names, transgress laws that Yahweh has given to Moses.\u00a0 In the first case, a man uses God\u2019s name in a curse (Lev 24:10-11), which violates Exod 22:27.[29]\u00a0 In the second case, a man chooses to gather wood on the Sabbath (Num 15:32), which violates Exod 31:13-17.\u00a0 In both cases, the community is not sure of what to do with the offender, and so they detain each (\u05d5\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05d7\u05d4\u05d5 \u05d1\u05de\u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05e8 Lev 24:12; \u05d5\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05d7\u05d5 \u05d0\u05ea\u05d5 \u05d1\u05de\u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05e8 Num 15:34) until they can hear from Yahweh.\u00a0 He deems that each man is guilty of a capital offense, but for our purposes it is sufficient to note that the actual imprisonment is simply a necessary step in determining guilt.\u00a0 It is not a form of punishment in its own right.[30]\u00a0 Had the community known how to act in these situations, there would have been no need to hold these men.[31]<\/p>\n

Whereas the preceding examples deal with humans detaining other humans, there is also a case of God incarcerating persons for the purpose of deciding their punishment.[32]\u00a0 Isaiah 24:21 describes a day in which Yahweh will bring judgment on \u201cthe high host in the height, and on the kings of the ground.\u201d[33]\u00a0 Verse 22 goes on to explain that these parties, \u201care gathered as a collection of prisoners into a pit \u2013 they are shut up in a dungeon,\u201d and \u201cafter many days, they will be judged.\u201d[34]\u00a0 Calvin suggests that this imprisonment is intended to, \u201cplunge [the host and kings] into darkness and filth, and gradually wear them out, in order to subdue their obstinacy,\u201d but this fails to account for the temporal clause at the end of the verse.[35]\u00a0 Yahweh will first detain his enemies, and then he will come at an undisclosed time following their detention to judge them.[36]\u00a0 Walter Brueggemann appears closer to the sense of the verse when he sees incarceration for Yahweh\u2019s enemies, \u201cand then an even more ominous unspecified punishment.\u201d[37]\u00a0 Yahweh\u2019s enemies may have to wait \u201cmany days\u201d (\u05de\u05e8\u05d1 \u05d9\u05de\u05d9\u05dd), but they can expect a separate dispensation of judgment when Yahweh decides.[38] \u00a0Thus, again, we find the distinction between imprisonment and punishment.[39]<\/p>\n

Before moving on to the concept of imprisonment in Isa 40-55, there is one, puzzling passage in Ezra to consider.\u00a0 In ch. 7, the narrative introduces Ezra and describes his relationship to the restoration community.\u00a0 Ezra is a descendant of Aaron, Israel\u2019s first high priest (vv. 1-5), and a skilled scribe himself (v. 6).\u00a0 Further to our point, the narrator also explains that Yahweh has influenced king Artaxerxes so that he would support Ezra\u2019s work in rebuilding Judah (v. 6).\u00a0 This cooperation leads the king to give Ezra a charge in vv. 25-26 before he sets out for Jerusalem:<\/p>\n

And you, Ezra, by the wisdom of your god that is in your hand, appoint leaders and judges who are to be judges for all the people who are beyond the river, that they may know the laws of your god, and if one does not know them<\/em>, you may teach him<\/em>.\u00a0 Any who does not do the law of your god or the law of the king \u2013 diligently, let judgment be done to him because of it, if death, if corporal punishment, if confiscation of property, or if imprisonment.[40]<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In the closing list of authorized punishments, we are familiar with capital punishment, corporal punishment, and confiscation of property (cf. Exod 21:12, 15-17, 29; Deut 25:1-3; Exod 22:1-15), but the use of imprisonment to induce law-keeping is surprising.[41]\u00a0 Sensing this irregularity, a number of commentators have referred this stipulation to Persian law.\u00a0 Joseph Blenkinsopp is representative of this solution when he says, \u201cimprisonment was not part of Israelite penal law\u2026it seems that the Persian penal code was invoked even for infractions of traditional Jewish law.\u201d[42]\u00a0 However, Blenkinsopp et al. do not give any evidence of this practice in ancient Persia.[43]\u00a0 Surely this indicates the need for further research, but at this point it is sufficient to see that, at least during the Restoration period, the ancient Judeans did see imprisonment as a possible form of discipline.\u00a0 It is unclear, though, if the community ever actually maintained a prison population.\u00a0 In the Ezra story, we only see Ezra threaten the loss of property for those who refuse to follow his reforms (Ezra 10:7-8).[44]<\/p>\n

We can see that while the ancient Israelites did have practices and policies for imprisonment, they do not appear to have used prison as a primary form of punishment.\u00a0 Generally, prisons held accused persons so the authorities could decide their fate.\u00a0 Where Ezra appears to offer a counter example, it is unclear if this is a novelty that came from Persian culture, or if the Restoration community ever actually followed the practice.<\/p>\n

B. Prison, The Servant, and Redemption<\/p>\n

As we turn to the book of Isaiah, we will proceed in two steps.\u00a0 First, we will consider the function of chs. 40-55 in relation to the material that precedes it.\u00a0 Second, we will discuss those passages in chs. 40-55 that deal with prison\/imprisonment.\u00a0 This will also entail significant discussion of the Servant of the Lord, as this figure plays a prominent role in all three passages dealing with prison\/imprisonment.<\/p>\n

1.\u00a0 Isaiah 40-55<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In the past century, there has been much discussion over how Isaiah came to exist in the form that we have it today, but we will not enter into that debate at this time.\u00a0 Rather, we will only review a few of the literary features from Isa 40-55 in relation to the wider book, as this is what is relevant to our current study.\u00a0 For those who are interested in the literary history of Isaiah, we suggest the literature below.[45]<\/p>\n

In Isa 1-35, there is a clear perspective describing God\u2019s judgment as a future reality.\u00a0 If Israel will engage with Yahweh and acknowledge its sin problem, he is willing to forgive and start anew (Isa 1:18).[46]\u00a0 If, however, Israel continues to sin and reject the prophetic message, then Yahweh will bring judgment in the form of an Assyrian invasion (Isa 8:6-8).\u00a0 Thus, in ch. 32, Yahweh\u2019s warning sounds an ominous note for the nation when he foresees an abandoned city and the cessation of rejoicing (vv. 9-14).\u00a0 Judging by chs. 1-35, it appears that the nation will not repent.\u00a0 It is destined for military defeat.<\/p>\n

This is in stark contrast to a number of features in Isa 40-55.\u00a0 First, while Assyria is the military threat in chs. 1-35 (cf. chs. 8, 36), Babylon assumes the role of the adversary in chs. 40-55 (cf. Isa 43:14; 47:1; 48:14, 20).[47]\u00a0 Second, it seems as if God\u2019s judgment has already come on the nation, and now it is the time for restoration.\u00a0 In ch. 47, Yahweh castigates Babylon for its harsh treatment of his people (v. 6) and warns of their coming judgment (v. 9).\u00a0 This, however, assumes that Judah has already gone into exile in Babylon and that it is time for the return to Jerusalem (cf. Ezra 1-2).\u00a0 Third, in conjunction with the previous point, there is a marked turn toward comforting the people in chs. 40-55 as compared with chs. 1-35.\u00a0 God still has to correct his people at times (cf. Isa 42:18-25; 43:22-24), but he also tells them to forget the former things (i.e. judgment) because he is doing a new thing (i.e. bringing restoration) (cf. Isa 42:9; 43:18-19; 48:3-14).[48]<\/p>\n

With this brief review in mind, we need also to give attention to the literary function of Isa 40:1-2 with regard to the rest of chs. 40-55.\u00a0 In a close reading of the verses, we see the command go out from God to comfort his people and for his messengers to speak tenderly to Jerusalem (Isa 40:1-2a\u03b1), for the nation\u2019s striving is completed and its penalty for iniquity is concluded (Isa 40:2a\u03b2).[49]\u00a0 This change in God\u2019s disposition toward the nation has come about because the people have received their punishment from Yahweh (Isa 40:2b).\u00a0 In this way, vv. 1-2 provide a global perspective on what comes in the following chapters.[50]\u00a0 Isaiah 40-55 is God\u2019s argument to his people for why they should be obedient and trust that he has their best interests in mind, particularly by leading them out of exile and back to their home land.\u00a0 God is working to restore their covenant relationship, and Isa 40:1-2 encapsulates what his prophetic message will accomplish.\u00a0 The nation has languished in exile for long enough, and now chs. 40-55 \u2013 God\u2019s statement of release from exile \u2013 are his comforting words to his people.\u00a0 Thus, it is the nation\u2019s experience in exile that sets the context for chs. 40-55, and which helps us to understand any of the text\u2019s references to prison\/imprisonment.<\/p>\n

2.\u00a0 Imprisonment and the Servant in Isaiah 40-55<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In Isa 40-55, there are three passages that have vocabulary related to detention and incarceration.\u00a0 Coincidentally, each of these passages also deals with the enigmatic Servant of the Lord, so, in each of the following three sections, we will examine what the text has to say about prison\/imprisonment and how the Servant interacts with these matters.<\/p>\n

a.\u00a0 Isaiah 42:7<\/p>\n

Our first case appears in Isa 42:7, where Yahweh says that he has appointed his servant, \u201cto lead out the prisoner from the dungeon \u2013 those dwelling in darkness from the prison house.\u201d\u00a0 However, we must set this passage in the context of its chapter to grasp its full sense.\u00a0 In Isa 42:1, Yahweh sets forth his servant (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9), whom he has chosen (\u05d1\u05d7\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9).\u00a0 This reference recalls similar vocabulary in Isa 41:8-9 where God identifies Israel as his servant (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9), the one whom he has chosen (\u05d1\u05d7\u05e8\u05ea\u05d9\u05da).[51]\u00a0 Assuming that Israel continues to be the referent in this passage, we see that Yahweh has called the nation to bring justice to the gentile nations (Isa 42:1b) and even to be a light to them (Isa 42:6).[52]\u00a0 Verse 7, then, goes on to describe what this ministry will be like: Israel is to reach out to the nations, making the blind to see and setting the captives free.<\/p>\n

The chapter moves on from this point to discuss Yahweh\u2019s preeminence, but we can draw two conclusions for our study.\u00a0 First, we should note that vv. 6-7 employ multiple metaphors to describe a greater reality.\u00a0 Yahweh is not saying that Israel will take on bioluminescence for the sake of the nations, and in this way they will enable them to see.\u00a0 Rather, the idea of being a light evokes images both of salvation and instruction.[53]\u00a0 If this is the case, then we should likely consider the prison language in v. 7 to be metaphoric as well.\u00a0 The appositional equation of those in the prison house with those who sit in darkness in the closing hemistich shows that imprisonment is a figural condition.\u00a0 Second, it is also important to note that it is the gentile nations that are imprisoned in this passage, not Judah.\u00a0 This is significant for our study because Isa 40-55 has Judah\u2019s punishment and exile in view.\u00a0 If the gentile nations are in prison, it raises questions about how they got there and the purpose of their imprisonment.\u00a0 If this were a typical case of imprisonment, we would expect Israel to arrive as a judge to decide the gentiles\u2019 innocence or guilt.\u00a0 This would accord with our understanding of imprisonment in ancient Israel, but this is not Israel\u2019s role.\u00a0 Instead, they are to enlighten and save the nations.\u00a0 If, however, we consider this imprisonment as a metaphoric reality, perhaps we should understand it in relation to the paired metaphor of blindness.\u00a0 As Claus Westermann suggests, blindness and imprisonment are examples of human suffering, which Israel comes to relieve.[54]\u00a0 Rather than being a place of decision, in this passage prison is a condition that highlights the need for salvation.\u00a0 Like blindness, its woeful state directs a person to the possibility of relief in God\u2019s mission.<\/p>\n

b.\u00a0 Isaiah 42:22<\/p>\n

If Israel is Yahweh\u2019s chosen servant, sent to liberate gentile nations from their suffering in Isa 42:7, we find a dramatic reversal by the time we reach Isa 42:22.\u00a0 In v. 18, Yahweh addresses the deaf (\u05d4\u05d7\u05e8\u05e9\u05c1\u05d9\u05dd) and the blind (\u05d4\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd) commanding them to hear and to see, and we might assume that he is referring to the gentile nations.\u00a0 This would pick up their earlier description as blind and in need of light (vv. 6-7; see also v. 16) and would seem to add deafness to their list of maladies.\u00a0 However, in the following verse, a series of rhetorical questions reveal that it is Israel that is in view.\u00a0 Yahweh asks, \u201cwho is blind (\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8), but my servant (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9), and who is deaf (\u05d7\u05e8\u05e9\u05c1) but my messenger that I send?\u00a0 Who is blind (\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8) like the one who is made at peace, blind (\u05e2\u05d5\u05e8) like the servant (\u05e2\u05d1\u05d3) of Yahweh?\u201d[55] (Isa 42:19)\u00a0 Apparently, though Yahweh had intended for Israel to heal and release the nations, they are in an even worse physical state.\u00a0 They are blind and deaf.[56]\u00a0 This serves as an explanation of the nation\u2019s current condition which comes in v. 22.\u00a0 On account of their sins, Israel is a nation, \u201cspoiled and plundered \u2013 all of them trapped in holes and hidden away in prison houses\u201d (Isa 42:22a).\u00a0 Furthermore, the text says, \u201cthey are spoil with no one to deliver, plunder with none to say, \u2018Go back!\u2019\u201d (Isa 42:22b).\u00a0 Israel was supposed to be an agent of release and deliverance, but now, the same fate that they came to relieve has befallen them.[57]<\/p>\n

Considering the importance of this exchange for our study, we should begin yet again by acknowledging the metaphoric nature of these images. \u00a0J. Alec Motyer and Westermann both note that Judah\u2019s experience in exile was, to the extent that we are aware, less severe than these images describe.[58]\u00a0 The Judeans were able to settle together in communities in Babylon, and they engaged in a range of economic activities while in exile.[59]\u00a0 This does not, however, undermine the power of the images.\u00a0 By referring to Judah\u2019s exile as an imprisonment, this passage makes the concept abstract and continues to push the reader to understand prison in new terms.\u00a0 It directs our attention to broader questions related to the circumstances and purpose of Judah\u2019s time in exile.\u00a0 In this light, it is interesting that vv. 24-25 expressly ground Judah\u2019s exile \u2013 their metaphoric imprisonment \u2013 in Yahweh.\u00a0 Verse 24 opens with a rhetorical question, \u201cWho gave Jacob up to be plunder and Israel to despoilers?\u201d and then answers, \u201cWas it not Yahweh?\u201d\u00a0 On account of their sins, Yahweh had, \u201cpoured out the heat of his anger,\u201d on the people (Isa 42:25).[60]\u00a0 We should not, though, categorize this passage with Isa 24:22 as a case of detention awaiting decision.[61]\u00a0 Judah\u2019s violations of God\u2019s laws were numerous and evident to all (cf. Isa 42:24b\u03b1; 2 Kgs 24:19-20).\u00a0 Rather, we would do better to compare Judah\u2019s experience with exile to the gentiles\u2019 experience earlier in the passage.\u00a0 Israel was intended to relieve suffering like one would find in prisoners, but now they find themselves in the same situation.\u00a0 In the same way, then, their suffering ought to direct them toward their need for salvation.\u00a0 Like the gentiles who were helpless to remedy their condition, so Judah is also in need of a savior, one who can release them from their bondage.<\/p>\n

c.\u00a0 Isaiah 49:9<\/p>\n

The final occurrence of prison language in Isa 40-55 appears in Isa 49:9a.\u00a0 Yahweh is addressing his servant and explains that he has commissioned him, \u201cto say to the imprisoned ones \u2018Come out!\u2019 \u2013 to those in the darkness, \u2018Be revealed!\u2019\u201d\u00a0 Yet, as has been the case in the previous two passages, we must set this verse within the growing concept of the servant in these chapters.\u00a0 Only then can we understand the scope and significance of the servant\u2019s actions.<\/p>\n

In Isa 42, we saw the unraveling of Israel\u2019s mission to proclaim release for the gentiles (v. 7) to the point that they too are bound and held in prisons (v. 22).\u00a0 Not only did this turn of events link Israel\u2019s experience to that of the gentiles, but it also began to raise doubts about the nation\u2019s effectiveness in the role of God\u2019s servant.\u00a0 This theme resurfaces in Isa 48, where the text accuses the nation of false devotion (v. 1).\u00a0 In the past Israel was unfaithful to God (v. 4), and even under exile, they have neither heard nor understood what God was doing (v. 8a).\u00a0 All of this comes about because, as God accuses, \u201cI have known that you would be treacherous, and that you have been called a rebel from the womb\u201d (v. 8b).\u00a0 To borrow Brevard Childs\u2019 words, \u201cThe whole chapter now functions in a homiletic style to confront Israel\u2019s unbelief in relation to the divine prophecies made on its behalf.\u201d[62]\u00a0 However, an individual does emerge at this point in the text who appears to take on the role of the servant.\u00a0 The first hint of this individual comes in Isa 48:16b \u2013 \u201cBut now, lord Yahweh has sent me and his Spirit\u201d \u2013 but he waits for ch. 49 to step into full view.[63]\u00a0 The opening four verses describe the special relationship that exists between Yahweh and the servant, and then, in Isa 49:5-6, we get a clear picture of the servant as an individual.\u00a0 He relates what Yahweh has said to him, that his role is, \u201cto turn Jacob back to him [Yahweh], that Israel may be gathered to him [Yahweh]\u201d (v. 5a).[64]\u00a0 Yet, Yahweh did not stop there.\u00a0 The servant continues, \u201cHe said, \u2018It is too small for you to be a servant for me who upholds the tribes of Jacob and who turns back the preserved ones in Israel.\u00a0 I give you as a light of the nations, to be my salvation to the ends of the earth\u201d (v. 6).\u00a0 In this way, the servant presents himself as a person from within the nation, who now has a mission to the nation and to the world at large.[65]<\/p>\n

Noting the transition of the servant from the entire nation of Israel to an individual from within the nation provides context for our understanding of the prison language in Isa 49:9.\u00a0 The vocabulary of the verse is most closely related to the wording in Isa 42:7, wherein Israel is to free the nations.\u00a0 In ch. 49, Yahweh sends the servant to give the command \u201cCome out (\u05e6\u05d0\u05d5)!\u201d to the \u201cimprisoned ones (\u05d0\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd),\u201d and in ch. 42, Yahweh commissions the servant to \u201cbring out [lit. cause to come out] (\u05d4\u05d5\u05e6\u05d9\u05d0)\u201d the \u201cprisoner (\u05d0\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8)\u201d.[66]\u00a0 Further, the servant will say to, \u201cthose in the darkness (\u05d1\u05d7\u05e9\u05c1\u05da), \u2018Be revealed!\u2019\u201d (Isa 49:9a\u03b2), which picks up the idea of prisoners, \u201cdwelling in darkness (\u05d7\u05e9\u05c1\u05da)\u201d in Isa 42:7b\u03b2.\u00a0 Apparently, the individual servant is to carry on the service that Yahweh originally gave to Israel with respect to the nations.[67]\u00a0 This does not mean, though, that the individual servant will not serve the nation of Israel as well.\u00a0 We have already noted that the individual servant will bring the nation back to Yahweh (Isa 49:5), and we know that the nation, too, is bound and suffering in prison (Isa 42:22).\u00a0 Thus, when Isa 49:9b-12 pictures a new exodus and a return to the land, we see that Judah will also partake in this release.[68]\u00a0 As Yahweh has said, the individual servant will serve both Israel and the nations (Isa 49:5-6).<\/p>\n

We can divide into two categories the implications of this passage for our understanding of prison\/imprisonment.\u00a0 On the one hand, we have the formal aspects of the text.\u00a0 As we saw in the previous cases, Isa 49:9 clearly uses prison as a metaphor.\u00a0 The first half of the verse views the servant\u2019s subjects as humans, but the second line pictures them as livestock.[69]\u00a0 The passage describes the human condition with known categories.\u00a0 We can also say that this is not a case of an imprisonment awaiting a ruling.\u00a0 The fact that v. 9 intentionally recalls Isa 42:7, along with Isa 42:22 by extension, shows that the servant is still dealing with the imprisonments from earlier in the section, and neither of these detentions are for the purpose of decision.\u00a0 These points are both apparent, but also repetitive of what we have learned from Isa 42:7, 22.\u00a0 On the other hand, the theological statement of the passage is fresh and profound.\u00a0 In taking over the nation\u2019s job as the servant, the entire thrust of Isa 49:1-9 is for the individual servant to bring redemption to all of humanity.\u00a0 Like the gentiles, God has shut up Judah in prison.\u00a0 All people suffer under his judgment, but Yahweh\u2019s focus in ch. 49 is to find an instrument to bring release and renewal.\u00a0 In Isa 40-55, prison is simply a means to a restored and repaired relationship.\u00a0 The incarceration of the peoples has anticipated their release and return to God.\u00a0 Thus, Isa 49:13 sees all of creation rejoicing because, \u201cYahweh has comforted (\u05e0\u05d7\u05dd) his people.\u201d\u00a0 The resonance between this verse and Isa 40:1 \u2013 \u201cComfort (\u05e0\u05d7\u05de\u05d5), comfort (\u05e0\u05d7\u05de\u05d5) my people\u201d \u2013 brings us full circle.\u00a0 In Isa 40, comfort is a command and is, therefore, potential.\u00a0 Someone must comfort God\u2019s people.\u00a0 In Isa 49, comfort is a completed action.\u00a0 Now that God has found a servant willing to proclaim the nation\u2019s release from prison, their release from exile, along with the gentiles, this is Yahweh comforting his people.[70]\u00a0 The metaphor of imprisonment and release from prison in Isa 40-55 gives a vivid picture of God\u2019s grace and redemption for all of humanity.<\/p>\n

IV. Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

We would like to offer three concluding thoughts related to our relationship with our prison system.\u00a0 First, considering what we have learned about the development of imprisonment as a form of punishment, perhaps it would be helpful to reexamine our assumptions about proper forms of criminal discipline.\u00a0 The cult of the present can lead us to believe that \u201cthis is how it\u2019s always been done\u201d \u2013 that is, we imprison offenders \u2013 but it fails to see that humanity has made due without long-term incarcerations for millennia.\u00a0 This, of course, does not mean that any use of prison for punishment is necessarily wrong.\u00a0 The references to prison in Isa 40-55 give precedent for the use of prison in this manner when coming from a biblical worldview.\u00a0 We only mean to point out that our attempts to deal with crime through detention is a historical anomaly.\u00a0 Second, while the Bible does have room for the use of prison as a punishment, it offers a much wider scope of punishments to deal with criminal behavior than just imprisonment.\u00a0 In fact, God, in all of his wisdom, did not see fit to institute a standing prison system when he promulgated his laws to the nation of Israel.\u00a0 This, again, does not mean that we feel all of our legal punishments should mirror punishments found in the Law.\u00a0 We mean only to say that the idea of alternative consequences for criminal behavior also finds precedent within the Bible.\u00a0 Should a political or civil figure suggest a mandatory treatment plan, a restitution arrangement, or a diversion program, this is not necessarily a rejection of a biblical perspective on how to confront sin.\u00a0 Finally, inasmuch as the prison system seems to be an entrenched part of our society, we would hold out the Servant in Isaiah as a model for our actions.\u00a0 God, who is just, used prison for his own ends, even if only metaphorically, but we must also recognize God\u2019s call on the Servant\u2019s life and his service to what appear to be intractable criminals.\u00a0 It is only through his sacrifice of his own person that others were able to find release and redemption \u2013 He was crushed for our iniquities, oppressed and afflicted, for the transgression of my people (Isa 53:5, 7-8).\u00a0 His heart of compassion, his unselfish sacrifice and his yearning for repentance and restoration light a righteous path for His followers as they minister to those who have fallen short of the standard.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[1] For an informational report on recidivism rates in America, see Caitlin Dickson, \u201cAmerica\u2019s Recidivism Nightmare,\u201d The Daily Beast<\/em>, n.p. [cited August 21, 2014].<\/p>\n

Online: http:\/\/www.thedailybeast.com\/articles\/2014\/04\/22\/america-s-recidivism-nightmare.html<\/a>.\u00a0 For a stinging critique, see David Haglund\u2019s re-posting of John Oliver\u2019s segment (\u201cWatch John Oliver Explain How Broken America\u2019s Prison System Is,\u201d Slate<\/em>, n.p. [cited August 21, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/www.slate.com\/blogs\/browbeat\/2014\/07\/21\/john_oliver_prison_segment_on_last_week_tonight_is_one_you_should_watch.html<\/a>. CAUTION: This clip includes coarse language and mature topics.<\/p>\n

[2] \u201cA History of Prison in the World,\u201d Laws<\/em>, n.p. [cited Aug. 6, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/prison.laws.com\/prison\/prison-history<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[3] Punishment, as defined here, could take two forms.\u00a0 Capital punishment sought to remove a threat from the community permanently.\u00a0 For non-capital offences, corporal punishment was the most common penalty. \u00a0Such punishments included, but were not limited to, beatings, whippings, and\/or bodily mutilation (Deut 25:11-12) (\u201cHistory of Imprisonment,\u201d Crime Museum<\/em>, n.p. [cited Aug. 6, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/www.crimemuseum.org\/crime-library\/history-of-imprisonment.).<\/p>\n

[4] The British government also experimented with housing prisoners at night on large ships \u2013 hulks \u2013 that were anchored just off a shoreline, but this practice did not become widespread (\u201cHistory of the Prison System,\u201d The Howard League for Penal Reform<\/em>, n.p. [cited Aug. 6, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/www.howardleague.org\/history-of-prison-system\/.).<\/p>\n

[5] History of World Criminal Justice<\/em>, directed by Banning Lary (2008; New York: Insight Media\/Promedion Productions, 2008), DVD.\u00a0 Todd Clear and George Cole, American Corrections<\/em> (6th<\/sup> ed.; Belmont: Wadsworth\/Thomas Learning, 2003), 58.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[6] \u201cHistory of the Prison System.\u201d<\/p>\n

[7] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[8] Ibid.<\/p>\n

[9] Richard Seiter, Corrections: An Introduction<\/em> (4th<\/sup> ed.; Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2014), 3.<\/p>\n

[10] \u201cHistory of the Prison System.\u201d<\/p>\n

[11] This was also part of an increasing sense of compassion or humanity on the part of society (Ibid.).<\/p>\n

[12] Clear and Cole, American Corrections,<\/em> 48.<\/p>\n

[13] Seiter, Corrections<\/em>, 22.<\/p>\n

[14] Ibid., 22.<\/p>\n

[15] Ibid., 22.<\/p>\n

[16] Ibid., 22.<\/p>\n

[17] The U.S. Supreme Court decision ending the \u201chands-off doctrine\u201d is found in Cooper v. Pate <\/em>(1964) (Ibid., 22).<\/p>\n

[18] Clear and Cole, American Corrections,<\/em> 57.<\/p>\n

[19] Ibid., 57.<\/p>\n

[20] \u201cThe Oregon Accountability Model,\u201d Department of Corrections<\/em>, n.p. [cited Sept. 12, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/www.oregon.gov\/doc\/GECO\/pages\/oam_welcome.aspx.<\/p>\n

[21] Each of these components began as a stand-alone program in the Oregon Corrections system, and, technically, they still stand on their own as discreet projects (Ibid.).<\/p>\n

[22] The DOC implemented the 3 R\u2019s in 2003 and has \u201creceived national recognition\u201d for this concept.\u00a0 Research shows that the principles employed in the 3 R\u2019s contribute significantly to a reduction in recidivism (Ibid.).<\/p>\n

[23] Institution-based businesses include \u201cmattress repair, boot repair, wood products, sewing, mending and embroidery.\u201d Inmate work crews include firefighting, planting trees and maintaining trails in parks and campgrounds (\u201cThe Oregon Accountability Model \u2013 Work Programs Component,\u201d Department of Corrections<\/em>, n.p. [cited Sept. 12, 2014].\u00a0 Online: http:\/\/www.oregon.gov\/doc\/GECO\/Pages\/oam_work.aspx.).<\/p>\n

[24] The DOC\u2019s initiative, The Children of Incarcerated Parents Project, \u201cprovide[s] inmates with tools for successful parenting and allows opportunities for inmates to practice those pro-social behaviors\u201d (\u201cThe Oregon Accountability Model\u201d).<\/p>\n

[25] The DOC coordinates the release of around 4,500 offenders per year. The Governor\u2019s Re-Entry Council is a statewide leadership group that works collaboratively to improve success and safety in an inmate\u2019s transition back into our communities (Ibid.).<\/p>\n

[26] Offenders typically have many restrictions and conditions placed upon them when released from prison.\u00a0 Community Corrections Officers are the offender\u2019s primary point of contact upon release, and they must adhere to all conditions of their release or possibly face being sent back to prison (Ibid.).<\/p>\n

[27] While this section focuses on the detention of Pharaoh\u2019s cupbearer and baker, it is still worthwhile to discuss Joseph\u2019s imprisonment.\u00a0 Potiphar places him in prison for his supposed infraction (Gen 39:11-20), but we should be surprised when the authorities do not determine his guilt or innocence in the following scene.\u00a0 Instead, Joseph remains in prison for more than two years (Gen 40:4; 41:1).\u00a0 This novelty, though, plays a literary role in the development of the Joseph narratives. \u00a0God has been clear about his future (cf. Gen 37:2-11), but circumstances appear to frustrate God\u2019s plan.\u00a0 From the reader\u2019s perspective, it seems that Joseph will remain in prison without trial.<\/p>\n

[28] The text at this point is quite expressive, using three distinct descriptors for the prison account: [Pharaoh] gave them into the watch (\u05de\u05e9\u05c1\u05de\u05e8) of the chief of the house of the bodyguards (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05e9\u05c2\u05e8 \u05d4\u05d8\u05d1\u05d7\u05d9\u05dd), to the round house (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05d4\u05e1\u05d4\u05e8).<\/p>\n

[29] Lev 24:11 is, admittedly, difficult to understand, and interpreters are divided over whether the man cursed his opponent using Yahweh\u2019s name (this seems to be the position of Baruch A. Levine, Leviticus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation<\/em> [JPS Torah Commentary; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989], 166), or if he directed his curse toward Yahweh (cf. Dennis H. Livingston, \u201cThe Crime of Leviticus XXIV 11,\u201d VT<\/em> 36, no. 3 [1986]: 352-54).\u00a0 Erhard S. Gerstenberger gives support for both views without deciding either way (Das dritte Buch Mose: Leviticus<\/em> [v\u00f6llig neubearbeitet Auflage; ATD 6; G\u00f6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993], 330-31).\u00a0 However, one\u2019s choice on this matter does not affect the point that we make here.<\/p>\n

[30] It is surprising that the Israelites did not know what to do with the man in Num 15, as Exod 31:14-15 clearly dictates that he should die.\u00a0 For a discussion of this point see Philip J. Budd, Numbers<\/em> (WBC 5; Colombia: Thomas Nelson, 1984), 175-76.<\/p>\n

[31] Exod 32:2-6, 21-28; 1 Kgs 21:9-13.<\/p>\n

[32] One might point out that vocabulary related to prison is common in Jer 32-33, 37-39, where authorities imprison Jeremiah for extended periods of time, but it is best to view Jeremiah as a kind of political prisoner.\u00a0 His experience is not indicative of how prison relates to guilt and punishment.\u00a0 For similar examples in the HB, see 1 Kgs 22:27; 2 Kgs 17:4; 23:33, and in the NT, see the gospel stories of John the Baptist (Matt 14:3-5; Mark 6:17-20;) and Peter and Paul in Acts 12:1-4; 16:16-24; 24:24-27.<\/p>\n

[33] All translations come from Dr. Jones, unless noted.<\/p>\n

[34] A number of scholars suggest that the NT authors may draw their ideas of God\u2019s eschatological judgment from this passage (cf. George Buchanan Gray, The Book of Isaiah: I-XXXIX<\/em> [vol. 1; ICC; New York: Charles Scribner\u2019s Sons, 1912], 423; and Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: The English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes<\/em> [3 vols.; NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965-1972], 1:179-81).<\/p>\n

[35] John Calvin, Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah<\/em> (4 vols.; trans. William Pringle; Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1850-53; repr. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2009), 1:185.<\/p>\n

[36] For similar comments, see Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1-39<\/em> (NAC 15a; Nashville: B&H Publishing, 2007), 425.<\/p>\n

[37] Walter Brueggemann, Isaiah 1-39<\/em> (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 195.<\/p>\n

[38] If 2 Pet 2:4 is re-using Isa 24:22, 2 Pet 3:8 \u2013 \u201ca day is like a thousand years to the Lord, and a thousand years are like a day\u201d \u2013 may suggest that God does not count the \u201cmany days\u201d before his judgment like humans do.<\/p>\n

[39] For additional examples, the interested reader can consider Gen 42; Judg 15; Job 12, 36.<\/p>\n

[40] For a discussion on translating \u05dc\u05e9\u05c1\u05e8\u05e9\u05c1\u05d5\/\u05dc\u05e9\u05c1\u05e8\u05e9\u05c1\u05d9 as corporal punishment, see Frithiof Rundgren, \u201cZur Bedeutung von \u0160R<\/em>\u0160W<\/em> \u2013 Esra VII 26,\u201d VT<\/em> 7, no. 4 (1957): 400-404.<\/p>\n

[41] See Jean Louis Ska, \u201c\u2018Persian Imperial Authorization\u2019: Some Question Marks,\u201d in Persia and Torah: The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch<\/em> (ed. James W. Watts; SBLSymS 17; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001), 167.<\/p>\n

[42] Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah: A Commentary<\/em> (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988), 152.\u00a0 See also F. Charles Fensham, The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah<\/em> (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 108; and H.G.M. Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah<\/em> (WBC 16; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1985), 105.<\/p>\n

[43] The ancient Sumerian \u201cNungal-Hymn\u201d does discuss imprisonment and possibly imprisonment for correction, but it is difficult to link this text to Ezra for two reasons (for a translation and commentary on the hymn, see Tikva Simone Frymer, \u201cThe Nungal-Hymn and the Ekur-Prison,\u201d Journal of the Econoic and Social History of the Orient<\/em> 20 [1977]: 78-89).\u00a0 First, it is possible that the hymn uses prison as a metaphor for the afterlife.\u00a0 Second, there is little evidence of Sumerian influence in Ezra elsewhere.<\/p>\n

[44] Nehemiah uses corporal punishment in Neh 13:25, but it is unclear if he does so under Persian authorization.<\/p>\n

[45] Bernhard Duhm, Das Buch Jesaia<\/em> (G\u00f6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892); John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39<\/em> (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 17-23; andH.G.M. Williamson, The Book Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiah\u2019s Role in Composition and Redaction<\/em> (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994).<\/p>\n

[46] In this paper, we follow Isaiah\u2019s relatively lax approach to naming the audience.\u00a0 Though the biblical narrative pictures a political divide between Israel and Judah (cf. 1 Kgs 12), Isaiah seems to use the names Israel and Judah, among other names, to address the Judean audience (cf. Isa 1:1, 3).\u00a0 This device continues even into chs. 40-55, when we would expect only Judah to be in view (cf. Isa 41:8; 48:1).<\/p>\n

[47] Yahweh does mention Assyria in Isa 52:4, but this is in retrospection.\u00a0 Outside of this verse, Assyria does not appear in chs. 40-66.<\/p>\n

[48] Interpreters have accounted for these contrasts in Isa in various ways.\u00a0 Scholars who tend toward critical methods argue that an anonymous prophet penned Isa 40-55 during the exile, whereas scholars who tend toward a conservative stance hold that the historical prophet Isaiah has simply projected himself into the future and speaks as if he is standing in the exile.<\/p>\n

[49] There is a long standing debate as to whom God addresses with his commands (cf. Christopher R. Seitz, \u201cThe Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah,\u201d JBL<\/em> 109, no. 2 [1990]: 229-38), but how one decides the matter does not affect our discussion.<\/p>\n

[50] On this point, see Young, Isaiah<\/em>, 3:26; and Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary<\/em> (vol. 3; AB 19A; New York: Doubleday, 2000-2003), 179.<\/p>\n

[51] Cf. Shalom M. Paul, Isaiah 40-66: Translation and Commentary<\/em> (ECC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012), 184.\u00a0 Others argue that the referent has shifted away from the nation and onto an individual \u2013 Christ (Young, Isaiah<\/em>, 3:108-11; Fraz Delitzsch, Biblischer Commentar \u00fcber den Prophet Jesaia<\/em> [Leipzig: D\u00f6rffling und Franke, 1866], 414-15), but we see this shift coming in ch. 49.<\/p>\n

[52] There has been much discussion over what \u05dc\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea \u05e2\u05dd (a covenant to the people, NRS) may mean in Isa 42:6 (Delitzsch, Jesaia<\/em>, 417-18; R. N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66<\/em> [NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975], 74-75; Mark S. Smith, \u201cB<\/em>\u0114R\u00ceT \u2018AM \/ B\u0114R\u00ceT \u2018\u00d4L\u1fb9M<\/em>: A New Proposal for the Crux of Isa 42:6,\u201d JBL<\/em> 100, no. 2 [1981]:241-43), but how one decides on this matter does not necessarily affect our discussion.\u00a0 The closing reference to bringing light to the gentiles suggests that they continue to be in view in Isa 42:7.<\/p>\n

[53] Cf. Mic 7:8; Rom 2:19.\u00a0 Consider, also, Yahweh\u2019s command to Isaiah to deafen and blind the people, which is closely related to their understanding and their salvation (Isa 6:9-10).<\/p>\n

[54] Claus Westermann, Das Buch Jesaja: Kapitel 40-66<\/em> (4. Erg\u00e4nzte Auflage; ATD 19; G\u00f6tingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981), 83-84.<\/p>\n

[55] The term \u05de\u05e9\u05c1\u05dc\u05dd (one who is made at peace) has troubled interpreters (cf. Paul, Isaiah<\/em>, 199-200), but the parallel reference to the \u201cservant of Yhwh\u201d makes clear who the referent is.<\/p>\n

[56] For a discussion of how this passage picks up themes of deafness and blindness in Isa 6, see R. E. Clements, \u201cBeyond Tradition History: Deutero-Isaianic Development of First Isaiah\u2019s Themes,\u201d JSOT<\/em> 31 (1985): 101-03.<\/p>\n

[57] Cf. Paul (Isaiah<\/em>, 201), who notes the similar imagery in vv. 7 and 22 \u2013 prison house(s) (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05db\u05dc\u05d0\/\u05d1\u05ea\u05d9 \u05db\u05dc\u05d0\u05d9\u05dd).\u00a0 See also Young, Isaiah<\/em>, 3:135.<\/p>\n

[58] J. Alec Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary<\/em> (TOTC 20; Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1999), 300; Westermann, Jesaja<\/em>, 92.<\/p>\n

[59] Cf. Laurie E. Pearce, \u201cNew Evidence for Judeans in Babylonia,\u201d in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period<\/em> (ed. Oded Lipschits and Manfred Oeming; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006), 401-02, 408.<\/p>\n

[60] For similar comments, see Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55<\/em>, 219; and Walter Brueggemann, Isaiah 40-66<\/em> (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 51.<\/p>\n

[61] Nor should we understand this passage as saying that the Judahites are simply prisoners of war.\u00a0 (For this, see Zech 9:11-15.)\u00a0 Terms such as spoiled\/spoil\/despoilers (\u05d1\u05d6\u05d5\u05d6\/\u05d1\u05d6\/\u05d1\u05d6\u05d6\u05d9\u05dd) and plundered\/plunder (\u05e9\u05c1\u05e1\u05d5\u05d9\/\u05de\u05e9\u05c1\u05e1\u05d4) (vv. 22, 24) could point in this direction, but our knowledge of Judah\u2019s time in exile suggests that at least the references to being trapped in holes and hidden in prison houses is metaphoric (see n. 33).\u00a0 Further, the other occurrences of prison house (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05db\u05dc\u05d0) in the HB suggest that it was a place of detention and confinement (1 Kgs 22:27; 2 Kgs 17:4; 25:27; Jer 37:4, 15, 18), which does not accord well with the purpose of taking prisoners of war.\u00a0 Conquering peoples did better to put their prisoners to work, rather than to detain and sustain them.<\/p>\n

[62] Brevard Childs, Isaiah<\/em> (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 372.<\/p>\n

[63] There is nothing in chs. 48 or 49 indicating that this person is a male, but if ch. 53 describes the same individual, a point that most assume, there are masculine pronouns that reveal his gender in that passage.<\/p>\n

[64] Reading the qere<\/em> \u05dc\u05d5 over the kethib<\/em> \u05dc\u05d0.<\/p>\n

[65] For similar readings of the passage, see Christopher R. Seitz, \u201c\u2018You are My Servant, You Are the Israel in Whom I Will Be Glorified\u2019: The Servant Songs and the Effect of Literary Context in Isaiah,\u201d CTJ<\/em> 39 (2004): 124-31; and Peter Wilcox and David Paton-Williams, \u201cThe Servant Songs in Deutero-Isaiah,\u201d JSOT<\/em> 42 (1988): 88-93.\u00a0 However, if the reader sides with those scholars who continue to see the servant as the nation (cf. Philip Stern, \u201cThe \u2018Blind Servant\u2019 Imagery of Deutero-Isaiah and Its Implications,\u201d Bib<\/em> 75, no. 2 [1994]: 224-32; Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, A Farewell to the Servant Songs: A Critical Examination of an Exegetical Axiom<\/em> [Scripta Minora; trans. Frederick H. Cryer; Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1983], 38), it should only have limited implications for this essay.\u00a0 One would simply need to reapply our conclusions related to prison\/release to the nation\u2019s service.\u00a0 We would, though, offer Childs\u2019 comments on the passage as an important stipulation in our view, \u201cwhat is crucial to observe is that one, bearing all the marks of an individual historical figure, has been named servant, not to replace corporate Israel \u2013 the servant in Second Isaiah remains inseparable from Israel \u2013 but as a faithful embodiment of the nation Israel who has not performed its chosen role\u201d (Isaiah<\/em>, 385).<\/p>\n

[66] The verbal component in each of the verses is a differing conjugation of the same verb \u05d9\u05e6\u05d0 (go\/come out), and the nominal components are adjectival and participial forms of the root \u05d0\u05e1\u05e8 (tie\/bind\/imprison).\u00a0 Similar vocabulary appears in Isa 61:1, where the speaker proclaims that Yahweh has appointed him, \u201cto proclaim an opening (\u05e4\u05e7\u05d7\u05be\u05e7\u05d5\u05d7) for the imprisoned ones (\u05d0\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd),\u201d but we have decided not to include this in our study for two reasons.\u00a0 First, references to \u201cthose taken captive\u201d and the \u201crelease\u201d of the Jubilee year in the verse suggest that it may be best to read \u05d0\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd as \u201cbound ones,\u201d i.e. captives of war or enslaved persons.\u00a0 Second, the noun \u05e4\u05e7\u05d7\u05be\u05e7\u05d5\u05d7 is a hapax legomenon<\/em>, which makes the entire phrase difficult to interpret.<\/p>\n

[67] Blenkinsopp (Isaiah 40-55<\/em>, 306) sees a similar re-appropriation of the servant\u2019s task, though he differs on which characters fill the various roles.<\/p>\n

[68] They will pasture along the roads, and on every open space they will have their pasturing.\u00a0 They will not hunger and they will not thirst, and the burning heat of the sun will not strike them, for the one who has compassion on them will lead them.\u00a0 He will guide them to streams of water.\u00a0 I will make all my mountains into a road, and all my highways will rise up.\u00a0 Look at these! \u2013 from afar they come.\u00a0 And look at these \u2013 from the north, and west and these from the land of Sinim.\u00a0 (Isa 49:9b-12)\u00a0 Calvin (Commentary<\/em>, 4:26-27) also sees a reference to the Exodus in this passage.<\/p>\n

[69] See Paul, Isaiah<\/em>, 329-30 for similar comments.<\/p>\n

[70] So Childs, Isaiah<\/em>, 387; and Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40-55<\/em>, 307.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I.\u00a0 Introduction If we were to claim that America\u2019s prison system is fraught with problems and plagued by difficulties, it is likely that no one would object.\u00a0 Public opinion has come to associate prisons with overcrowding, racial disparity, human debasement, … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":74,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-579","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5W8wu-9l","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/579","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/74"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=579"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/579\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=579"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=579"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.corban.edu\/ministry\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=579"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}