Hello Handy,
I have thoroughly read this chapter now and the following chapter (ch. 66) and have seen the simplicity and directness in which it was lain out, and what seems to be its immediate intent and context. However I am not about to get holy on you with some masterful interpretation, but rather
humble on you, and say that the interpretation of the end part of Isaiah is not a simple one in light of what we know from the NT. Of course you already have sensed that, and many commentators and scholars have the same issue of having to explain the suggestion of mortality after the creation of the new Heaven and new Earth.
The first thing of importance to note, though, is the close terminology relationship between
Isaiah 65 and
Revelation 21. There, of course, is first the mention in both passages about the new Heaven and Earth, then there is the mention of the New Jerusalem in both, there is a parallel of "His people"
(Rev. 21:3) and "My people"
(Isa. 65:19), and also the promise of no more weeping is in both. So we see then that in John's vision it is pulling strongly on imagery of this passage in Isaiah 65 and it is possibly suggestive that John also sees the remainder of Isaiah 65 in a positive light, for it clearly says "there will no longer be any death"
(Rev 21:4) which has a certain level of parallelization to Isaiah's decription of greatly expanded lifespans. It is perhaps then the
intent of what is being said and conveyed in Isaiah that stands
of the most importance regardless of what we may infer from the literal wording. Since Isaiah actually says there will be no more weeping, death (which is traditionally mourned for) must not be the major issue here.
In my "The Expositors Bible Commentary" for Proverbs-Isaiah (vol. 6 in the set) published by Zondervan, Geoffrey W. Grogan who wrote the Isaiah section of commentary writes on this issue:
Grogan on Isaiah 65 said:
"The picture given in v.20, taken literally, promises greatly extended but not infinite life; yet v.19 declares that weeping will be banished! This suggests that we are meant to dwell on the positive blessings outlined in v.20 and not on their negative implications. Nevertheless, if we take the references to death seriously, we have here a blessed but not ideal state, not quite parallel, therefore, to the whole of Revelation 21:4 (for fuller comment, see the Introduction, pp. 450-53)."
So then we have a consideration to make of whether this is to be interpreted literally or not. If not then it is meant only to be illustrative of incalculably long lives, which could be seen as a sort of description and metaphor for eternal life. If, however, our hermenutic presses us to understand it as literally as possible we are faced with the possibility that something slightly different is being described here than in
Rev. 21:4. Mr. Grogan in the refered-to introduction gives a broader discussion of interpretive possibilities concerning (correctly balanced) mixed applications of spiritual and literal understandings of passages in Isaiah as a whole:
Grogan - Introduction to Isaiah said:
"In many cases the NT gives clear guidance. As suggested above, Acts 13:46-48; 26:19-23 interpret Isaiah 42:6-7; 49:6-7 spiritually; and in Galatians 4:25-27 Paul clearly applies Isaiah 54:1 to "the Jerusalem that is above," the mother of all who by faith are children of Abraham. Isaiah 59:20-21, however, is taken literally, though it should be noted that Romans 11, where the latter is quoted, simply tells us that "all Israel" will be converted and saved, without specifying the mode of its existance as a saved people.
We can of course be sure that when a promise is made of conditions that fall short of perfection - as, for instance, when life is lengthened but death is not abolished (65:20) - this does not apply to the perfected Church but is best related to millenial conditions. Also, pictures of judgment - even universal judgment - that threaten death to most, but not to all unbelievers (24:6-13), must relate not to the ultimate judgment of the second death but to a great judgment on earth. On the other hand, references to 'new heavens and a new earth' (65:17; 66:22) presuppose the advent of God's new order, where all will be perfect and which, according to Revelation 21-22, lies beyond the millenium.
There may be passages that present us with continuing problems of interpretation, where it is not plain whether we should understand them literally or spiritually. Perhaps that is what we should expect. We are never promised complete understanding of biblical prophecies before fulfillment. Their main purpose is to keep us expectant, obedient, and trustful and to provide, in their fulfillment, evidence of the faithfulness of God to his Word. In the fulfilled events themselves, God will be seen to be true."
So I can only advocate a humble and cautious approach to understanding this Scripture, and I do especially like his final point of how "knowing in part" is perhaps as it is meant to be ("what we should expect") when it comes to understanding prophecy, and our real expected role is to be expectant of fulfillment and obedient to what is revealed. However that may still leave us with a paradox in our minds. Karl Barth once refered to a principle of faith in his
Commentary on The Epistle to the Romans of something he called "
Krisis" in which one realizes the essential paradoxes of the truths of what God has done and who He is, which in fact cannot not be "apprehended" outside of faith (and thus reverently forces us to exhibit faith in order to reckon with and acknowledge the amazing realization), and by faith alone one comes to the true realization that the paradox is essential to acknowledging all of God's truth (
see here for more). We could indeed leave it at that, to our faith (which we should have anyway), but others have yet sought to indeed see a more millenial description in the end part of Isaiah 65 despite the mention of the new Heavens and Earth.
Merrill F. Unger in his "Unger's Commentary on the Old Testament" sees in Isaiah 65 a kind of 'telescoping' of the millenium and eternity together, where the imagery in that chapter is describing an imminent anticipation of the eternal blessed state described in Revelation 21 (while not yet describing the full perfections seen then). He writes in his commentary:
Unger on Isaiah 65 said:
"A Prophetic Portrait of the Kingdom Age. 65:17-25
Ten features of the Millenium are given:
(1) 17a. the millenial earth will anticipate the earth in the eternal state (Rev. 21:1-22:5). For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth (Isaiah 66:22). Isaiah's vision, while glimpsing the Kingdom age, the last ordered age in time, is projected into enternity. He saw the Millenium merging into the final state of bliss and having an everlasting feature to it, according to the Davidic Covenant (2 sam. 7:13, 16). So the prophecy employs language that, although applicable to a degree to millenial conditions, will be fully realized on the regenerated earth, which will follow the post millenial renovation by fire (2 Pet. 3:10-13; Rev. 21:1; cf. Heb. 12:26-28).
(2) 17b. The millenial earth will witness an extensive, but not total, lifting of the curse. And the former (heaven and earth) shall not be remebered, nor come to mind. With the wicked purged out, both of Israel and the nations (Rev. 19:11-21), including Satan and demons (Zech. 13:2; Rev. 20;1-3), the satanic world system, both religious (17:1-18) and political (18:1-24), will be destroyed at Christ's second advent, and many features of pre-Fall Edenic bliss will result. Those things are so wonderful in the prophetic foreview that they blend in Isaiah's vision with eternal conditions, of which they are a thrilling harbinger.
[...skipping for space consideration...]
(4) 20. Antediluvian longevity will be restored in the Kingdom age. There shall be no more in it (from that time onward) an infant of days, who shall live only a short time. Nor an old man that hath not fulfilled his days. No one shall die without attaining a full old age. For the child (youth) shall die an hundred years old, that is, be accounted a mere youngster if he should die at the age of one hundred.
But (rather, "and") the sinner who dies at the age of one hundred shall be thought (deemed) accursed (NASB; lit. Heb.), shall be considered under the curse of sin, which is death (cf. Gen 3:19). This passage clearly reveals that the curse will not be completely removed, for death will not be destroyed or sin removed till after the Millenium (1 Cor. 15:26; Rev. 20:11-15), preluding the sinless, curseless eternal state (21:8, 27; 22:15).
Such an interpretive approach may not be without its problems, but I think Unger may be on to something about how we may see glimpses of the millenial state and the eternal state together here. However, as said before, it is best to let Scripture stand according to its own word, even if that means we must admit we do not fully understand it. Prophecy is for our anticipation and appropriate preparation and reaction to God's Word as we believe it by faith. What God says will come to pass
will come to pass, even if we do not always understand the means. Humbleness and fidelity to the Scripture (paradox or not) is always the best approach in situations like this.
God Bless,
~Josh