In this series of articles, we’ve been refuting the numerous false claims that FSIPs [Flat/Stationary Interpretation Proponents] make about the Bible. These proponents cite several verses, alleging that these Scriptures indicate a flat and/or stationary earth.
In this final article, we’ll address their citations of passages that incorporate the phrases “the pillars of the earth” (1 Sam 2:8; Job 9:6; 26:7; Ps 75:3), “the corners of the earth” (Isa 11:12; Ezk 7:2; Rev 7:1; 20:8), and “the circle of the earth” (Isa 40:22; Pr 8:22; Job 26:10).
A cursory examination of these verses reveals that they all appear in poetic/prophetic passages. That is, they are literature, rich in metaphorical symbology. We know this because each passage exhibits parallelism, Hebrew poetry’s defining characteristic.
Since these passages are poetic/prophetic, we need to read, interpret, and understand that they use figurative language extensively to communicate abstract concepts and truths.
Dr. Jason Lisle writes, “Poems make generous use of metaphors, and verbal imagery. Therefore, we should not press the details beyond the verbal imagery that the author intended to convey… Our tendency to hyper-literalize poetic literature may partly stem from an overreaction to liberal interpretations of the historical-literal sections of Scripture. It is morally wrong and unscholarly to interpret the historical sections of Scripture as poetic or non-literal because this is contrary to the intention of the authors. However, it is equally morally wrong and unscholarly to interpret poetic or prophetic sections in a hyper-literal way, for exactly the same reason — it is contrary to the intention of the authors.”[1]
As we examine these passages, we’ll see that FSIPs are doing just that, immorally supplanting the authors’ meaning with their own by interpreting these poetic/prophetic texts in a hyper-literal way.
In previous articles, we’ve seen how the intended meanings of phrases like “shall never be moved” and “ends of the earth” cannot be rightly derived by combining the individual meanings of their words. That is, the author’s intended meaning of these phrases has nothing to do with geographical edges or physical motion.
Some additional examples of biblical figures of speech are the terms “rock” and “throne.” Both rocks and thrones are, in and of themselves, literal material things. They’re both used in concrete, literal senses multiple times in Scripture. And yet, they are also frequently used as metaphors in Hebrew poetry. A metaphor “carries over” certain qualities or characteristics of one thing to something else (in a non-literal way). It’s essential to realize that only some characteristics are intended to carry over.
For instance, a rock is used to refer to a refuge, shelter, salvation, and God. “The Lord lives, and blessed be my rock, and exalted be my God, the rock of my salvation” (2 Sam 22:47). “They remembered that God was their rock” (Ps 78:35). Rocks are used because they symbolize strength, stability, and/or permanence. [2]
If we were to carry every attribute or characteristic of rocks over to any of these things, it would result in a gross misunderstanding. Is God an actual rock? A physical, hard, stone-like mineral substance? Is He inert? Non-living? Of course not! We all understand that when Scripture refers to God as a “rock,” it refers to certain distinct qualities of rocks (strength, stability, permanence) and not others.
Or take a throne. Thrones are literally chairs. Yet they symbolize far more than chairs because they are chairs that kings, sovereigns, rulers, and authorities sit upon. Therefore, when a throne is used metaphorically, it conveys the ideas of dignity, honor, sovereignty, and/or rule.
When Proverbs says, “It is an abomination to kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness” (Pr 16:12), it’s referring to the abstract concept of rule, not the physical characteristics of a chair.
In Psalm 103:19, David says, “The Lord has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all.” David is not here envisioning some enormous, golden seat that God sits on. David knew that God is an immaterial spirit. Rather, God’s “throne” symbolized the abstract concept of God’s sovereign rule over all.
Similarly, footstools were real pieces of furniture that often accompanied a throne (2 Chr 9:18). The ruler who sat on the throne rested his feet on the footstool, which gave the imagery of a footstool tremendous metaphorical usefulness. The “footstool” symbolized being under one’s authority or dominion. It’s practically synonymous with the idiom “under your feet.”
For instance, in Psalm 110:1, we read, “The Lord says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’” We see this phrase used repeatedly in the NT (Ac 2:35; Heb 1:13; 10:13). Are we to understand that these “enemies” become pieces of furniture? Of course not.
Interestingly, both Matthew and Mark render this passage, “Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet” (Mt 22:44). The meaning of the metaphor is clear in every instance: the enemies are placed in subservience to/under the dominion of “my Lord.”
In the same way, the earth is pictured as God’s footstool. “Thus says the Lord: ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool’” (Isa 66:1).
Now, a number of FSIPs would say that Isaiah 66:1 contains a physical description of the earth. Like a footstool, the earth is a flat surface with legs (pillars) underneath.
Is the shape of the earth what Isaiah intended to communicate here? If so, then to be consistent, we’d also have to believe that God is a tangible being who sits on a material throne and rests His feet on the earth.
Such an interpretation is utterly incredulous. It’s the opposite of Isaiah’s intended message. We see in the rest of the verse that this passage is about the rebuilding of the temple.
“What is the house that you would build for me, and what is the place of my rest? All these things my hand has made, and so all these things came to be, declares the Lord” (Isa 66.1-2).
The Lord is saying through Isaiah is that He cannot be contained in any physical location or structure. As Solomon acknowledged when he built the first temple, “Who is able to build him a house, since heaven, even highest heaven, cannot contain him?” (2 Chr 2:6).
This is exactly what Stephen was arguing when he quoted this passage in Acts 7. He says, “Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool’” (7:48-49).
As commentator Edward Young explains, “With the figure of heaven as God’s throne and the earth as His footstool, the prophet is asserting that God is King of all and rules over all, and that all creation (heaven and earth; cf. Gen. 1:1) is subject to Him.”[3]
The point of Isaiah 66 is the transcendence of the Lord above the earthly realm. The metaphorical use of a footstool is intended to convey that the earth is under God’s feet, under His authority and dominion.
Of Isaiah 66:1 Matthew Henry writes, “Heaven is the throne of his glory and government; there he sits, infinitely exalted in the highest dignity and dominion, above all blessing and praise. The earth is his footstool, on which he stands, over-ruling all the affairs of it according to his will.”[4]
John Gill notes, “The earth is my foot-stool [sic]; on which he treads, is below him, subject to him, and at his dispose; and therefore is not limited to any part of it, or included in any place in it.”[5]
The ascription of the earth as “God’s footstool” means that it’s under His transcendent, sovereign dominion. The metaphor has literally nothing to do with the physical properties of a footstool or the earth.
Pillars of the Earth
Another fairly common argument of FSIPs is that the Bible depicts pillars supporting a flat earth, like architectural pillars or columns supported the temple (or legs supporting a table). Leland Ryken notes, “The architectural function of pillars also entered ancient cosmological pictures. Just as large buildings required pillars to support them, so the earth and the heavens were envisaged as supported by pillars.”[6] In defense of this assertion, FSIPs typically cite 1 Samuel 2:8; Job 9:6, 26:7; and Psalm 75:3.
Pillars are used frequently in Scripture, both in literal and figurative ways. As Ryken writes, “With over a hundred biblical references (NRSV 120), pillars were obviously a conspicuous feature in the biblical world. The overwhelming number of references are to pillars in extraordinary rather than routine settings, and their main importance in the Bible is more symbolic than architectural.”[7]
It’s precisely because pillars were such “a conspicuous feature in the biblical world” that they made such great metaphors. They symbolized strength, support, and stability.
As Dr. Jason Lisle writes, “In biblical literature, ‘pillars’ are used as a word-picture to denote stability. Consider Proverbs 9:1 where ‘Wisdom’ is said to rest on seven pillars — but this can’t mean physical pillars since wisdom is non-physical.”[8]
Lisle proceeds to cite Galatians 2:8-9, where Paul says that James, Cephas, and John “seemed to be pillars”; 1 Timothy 3:15, where he calls the church “a pillar and buttress of the truth”; and Revelation 3:12, where Jesus says that “the one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God.” The metaphorical meaning in each of these passages is clear.
So, what about the “pillars” in the four passages that FSIPs cite? Are they intended to be understood in a literal or figurative sense? Are the authors attempting to convey concrete, physical characteristics of the earth or nonliteral, abstract concepts?
Let’s briefly examine each.
1 Samuel 2:8
For the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, and on them he has set the world.
Now, although 1 Samuel is historical narrative, the passage in which these verses occur is poetic. It’s a record of Hannah’s prayer to the Lord. The passage is filled with Hebrew parallelism.
As Hannah prays, she talks about the Lord’s wondrous power and providence. He kills and brings to life, brings down and raises up (v.6), makes poor and rich, brings low and exalts (v.7), raises up the poor and lifts the needy “to make them sit with princes and inherit a seat of honor” (v.8). She then uses the conjunction “for,” connecting what was said before to what she now says.
For the pillars of the earth are the LORD’s, and on them he has set the world.
In the midst of this prayer about God’s providential faithfulness among His people, would it make sense for Hannah to abruptly break from her prayer to wax eloquent about the geological substructure of the earth? Of course not!
Clearly, the “pillars” of which she speaks are figurative. That is the only interpretation that makes any sense here. As Dr. Danny Faulkner observes, “Every commentary on 1 Samuel and the notes of all reference Bibles indicate that the use of the phrase ‘pillars of the earth’ here is figurative.”[9]
Matthew Henry notes, “For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s. (1.) If we understand this literally, it intimates God’s almighty power, which cannot be controlled. He upholds the whole creation, founded the earth, and still sustains it by the word of his power. What cannot he do in the affairs of families and kingdoms, far beyond our conception and expectation, who hangs the earth upon nothing? Job 26:7. But, (2.) If we understand it figuratively, it intimates his incontestable sovereignty, which cannot be disputed. The princes and great ones of the earth, the directors of states and governments, are the pillars of the earth, Ps. 75:3.”[10]
Even Henry’s “literal” translation of the pillars is that they figuratively symbolize “God’s almighty power.”
Similarly, John Gill says of the pillars, “These are no other than the power and providence of God… Figuratively, the pillars of the earth may design the princes of the world, the supreme rulers of it, and civil magistrates, who are sometimes called corner-stones, and the shields of the earth.”[11]
Whether the pillars are the Lord’s sovereign providence and power directly, or His providence and power exercised in and through earthly governors, Hannah is confident that the course of the earth is steady under His rule. As David F. Payne writes, “Life and death, wealth and poverty, are wholly within his control; so too are the rise and fall of nations, for God’s authority and power reach to the ends of the earth (10).”[12]
The hyper-literal interpretation of the pillars of which Hannah prays being geologic fixtures under the earth is nonsensical.
Job 9:6
4 He is wise in heart and mighty in strength
—who has hardened himself against him, and succeeded?—
5 he who removes mountains, and they know it not,
when he overturns them in his anger,
6 who shakes the earth out of its place,
and its pillars tremble
In these verses, Job poetically describes God’s power as He causes earthquakes. Job paints the word picture of God removing mountains, shaking the earth from its place, and making its pillars tremble.
D.J. Clines comments, “Job focuses upon the more negative aspects of God’s power—he moves mountains, shakes the earth, seals off the light of the stars (5–7)—not in order to picture him as a God of chaos but to emphasize his freedom to act, whether for good or ill.” [13]
In describing this passage, Roy B Zuck says, “God can move mountains (9:5), cause earthquakes (v. 6), and cloud over the sun and stars (v. 7).” [14]
Now, the good news for FSIPs is that Job is actually talking about the earth’s physical and geological characteristics. In his explanatory notes, John Wesley writes, “Pillars—The deep and inward parts of it, which like pillars supported those parts that appear to our view.”[15]
And yet, it’s clear that Job here intends the land/ground when he uses the word “earth” (ʾě·rěṣ). The picture is of the Lord shaking the land that rests on foundations, not shaking the entire planet that sits on columns.
When earthquakes occur, the ground moves (not the whole planet). Being originally from California, I’ve experienced numerous earthquakes, and yet they were all localized. People in Africa didn’t feel the earthquake because the foundations that shook were under a certain landmass.
Robinson notes in The Preacher’s Complete Homiletic Commentary, “Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof (or, its foundations,—the earth represented as a fabric or building) tremble.”[16]
In Job 9:6, “pillars” are a metaphor for the earth’s foundations.
Keil and Delitzsch write, “Its pillars tremble, i.e., its internal foundations (Ps. 104:5), which are removed from human perception (Job 38:6).” [17]
Of course, everyone believes there are foundations beneath the earth’s surface. There are copious amounts of bedrock that support the ground under our feet, just like pillars supporting a building.
Several other poetic passages also speak of the earth’s foundations (Job 38:4; Ps 102:25; Pr 8:29; Isa 48:13; 51:13,16). There, we see that God created (laid) the earth’s foundations at the beginning. Apart from this, we’re not given any information regarding these foundations such as shape, size, or substance.
Just like the rāqîa‘, the description of the earth’s pillars/foundations is equivocal and lacking in detail. The only way one can read a table-with-legs concept into Job 9:6 is by assuming that it’s already there (eisegesis).
Job 26:11
The pillars of heaven tremble
and are astounded at his rebuke.
In this poetic passage, Job uses the phrase “pillars of heaven.” Commentators almost universally agree, based on the Hebrew structure, that “the pillars of the heavens figuratively refer to mountains that seem to support the sky.” [18]
Stephen J Lawson writes, “The pillars of heaven is a figurative expression for towering mountains, those peaks that appear to be holding up the skies.” [19]
This is primarily due to the multiple other passages that give an almost identical description.
Then the earth reeled and rocked;
the foundations also of the mountains trembled
and quaked, because he was angry. (Ps 18:7)
Therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against his people,
and he stretched out his hand against them and struck them,
and the mountains quaked. (Isa 5:25)
In The Pulpit Commentary, H.D.M. Spence-Jones observes, “The ‘pillars of heaven’ are the mountains, on which the sky seems to rest. These ‘tremble, ‘ or seem to tremble, at the presence of God.”[20]
Matthew Henry comments, “By mighty storms and tempests he shakes the mountains, which are here called the pillars of heaven.” [21]
Once again, “pillars” are metaphorical.
As Keil and Delitzsch state in their Commentary on the Old Testament, “The mountains towering up to the sky, which seem to support the vault of the sky, are called poetically ‘the pillars of heaven. ‘”[22]
I don’t know of any FSIPs that believe the mountains in and around Israel are physically holding up the sky. This is yet another passage that has nothing to do with geological columns supporting the earth or sky.
Psalm 75:3
2 “At the set time that I appoint
I will judge with equity.
3 When the earth totters, and all its inhabitants,
it is I who keep steady its pillars. Selah
4 I say to the boastful, ‘Do not boast,’
and to the wicked, ‘Do not lift up your horn;
5 do not lift up your horn on high,
or speak with haughty neck.’ ”
As we read this passage, it’s immediately apparent that Asaph is not speaking about the earth’s physical status. It’s not as if the material planet is tottering precariously on physical columns, about to fall. Rather, he’s using figures of speech to convey Israel’s grave condition.
As Richard D. Phillips explains, “This statement assumes that there are times when it seems as though the world is tottering and God’s moral order is being overthrown so that wickedness is taking over.”[23]
Amid such turmoil, God’s people need assurance that they will not fall.
Phillips continues, “Whether the situation involves foreign invasion, internal revolt, government breakdown, or simply a time of moral and spiritual collapse, God’s faithful people need to know that he is always sovereign over all. Although the foundations of society and culture seem to be shaking, God is keeping steady the pillars of his reign.”[24]
The “pillars” are once again a metaphor for stability.
Alexander Maclaren observes, “At such a supreme moment, when the solid framework of society and of the world itself seems to be on the point of dissolution, the mighty Divine Personality intervenes; that strong hand is thrust forth to grasp the tottering pillars and stay their fall; or, in plain words, God Himself then intervenes to re-establish the moral order of society, and thus to save the sufferers. (Comp. Hannah’s song in 1 Sam. 2:8.)”[25]
As Alec J. Motyer says, “The voice speaks from God: when everything seems unstable he remains the ground of stability.”[26]
Motyer’s words remind us that “pillars” symbolize stability. The Israelites’ lives were being shaken, and so they needed to be stabilized by the Lord’s stabilizing power.
Of God keeping steady the pillars, H.D.M. Spence-Jones writes, “Meanwhile God upholds, and will uphold, both the moral and physical order of things. He will neither suffer the earth to be moved, nor the supports on which society depends to fail and crumble away.”[27]
Yet again, the use of “pillars” in this passage has nothing to do with geological structural columns underneath the earth.
The FSIPs’ contention that the whole earth is set on pillars or columns like a tabletop set on legs remains completely unsupported by Scripture (pun intended).
Corners of the Earth
Another common allegation of FSIPs is that the Bible says the earth has corners and must, therefore, be flat.
Now, you might be confused. Don’t the FSIPs allege that the earth is a flat circle? How can a circle have corners? How can a circle be a square? I remember asking this question of a friend of mine, to which he responded by pulling out a square napkin and drawing a circle on the face of it. “That’s how!” he exclaimed.
I have often seen images like the one below circulated by FSIPs.
They cite Isaiah 11:12, Ezekiel 7:2, and Revelation 7:1 and 20:7-8 as alleged “proof” of their claim. Let’s once again examine these passages within their literary context.
Isaiah 11:12
He will raise a signal for the nations
and will assemble the banished of Israel,
and gather the dispersed of Judah
from the four corners of the earth.
This passage is a wonderful example of the importance of context. We need only read the previous two verses to understand what verse 12 means.
10 In that day the root of Jesse, who shall stand as a signal for the peoples—of him shall the nations inquire, and his resting place shall be glorious. In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people, from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the coastlands of the sea.
12 He will raise a signal for the nations
and will assemble the banished of Israel,
and gather the dispersed of Judah
from the four corners of the earth.
As John Oswalt writes, “This verse seems to say in poetic form what the preceding verses say in prose. Returnees will come from the entire earth.” [28]
We can clearly see the parallels.
12a He will raise a signal for the nations → 10a In that day the root of Jesse, who shall stand as a signal for the peoples
12b and gather the dispersed of Judah → 11a In that day the Lord will extend his hand yet a second time to recover the remnant that remains of his people
12c from the four corners of the earth → 11b from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the coastlands of the sea..
The phrase “the four corners of the earth” is the poetic expression for the nations listed in verse 11 that were in every direction.
Commentator Ron Teed explains, “The remnant will be drawn by God from the north (Hamath), south (Egypt), east (Assyria, Elam) and west (coastlands of the sea); from the four quarters of the earth. Both Israel and Judah will be restored as one nation.”[29]
The phrase “the four corners of the earth” is an idiomatic expression meaning nations from every direction: from all over the world.
Edward Young comments, “To the four corners of the earth the people have been scattered. Isaiah does not intend us to understand that the earth actually has four corners. He is merely employing a manner of speaking taken over from the idea of referring to the four corners of a garment as indicating the entirety of the garment. Our Lord was reflecting upon this passage when He said, ‘And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other’ (Matt. 24:31).”[30]
The meaning of v.12 couldn’t be clearer.
Calvin writes, “It means the Jews scattered in all directions; and he appears to allude, as he often does elsewhere, to similar passages in the writings of Moses, in which the Lord promises that he will gather the people, though they were scattered to the farthest parts of the world, and to the four winds of heaven (Deut. 30:3, 4).”[31]
The phrase “the four corners of the earth” is idiomatic for “in all directions.” It has nothing to do with the physical geographical contours of the “edges” of the planet. That is simply a ridiculous interpretation and allegation.
Ezekiel 7:2
And you, O son of man, thus says the Lord GOD to the land of Israel: An end! The end has come upon the four corners of the land.
Where, you may ask, does this verse indicate that the earth has corners? The FSIPs render ʾě·rěṣ as meaning the geographical planet Earth. The context rules out their interpretation. This is clearly a prophetic pronouncement against all of Israel. The Lord God will bring judgment on the entirety of Israel.
Barker and Kohlenberger write, “The first prophetic speech (vv.1–4) emphasizes the extent—’the four corners of the land’—of the judgment.”[32]
As it says in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, “‘The four corners of the land’ indicate that no portion would escape God’s judgment.”[33]
The phrase “the four corners of the ʾě·rěṣ” is clearly an idiomatic expression.
Keil and Delitzsch note, “אַרְבַּעַת כַּנְפֹות הָאָרֶץ is limited by the parallelism to the four extremities of the land of Israel. It is used elsewhere for the whole earth (Isa. 11:12).”[34]
H.D.M. Spence-Jones comments, “The four corners (Hebrew, ‘wings’) were probably, as with us, the north, east, south, and west. The phrase had been used before in Isa. 11:12, and the thought meets us again, in the form of the ‘four winds, ‘ in Dan. 11:4; Zech. 2:6; Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27.”[35]
Stuart and Ogilvie state, “The expression ‘four corners of the land‘ is an idiomatic way of saying ‘the whole land’ and is not intended to say anything literal about the geography.”[36]
Ezekiel incorporates this common idiom to express the entirety of the kingdom.
As Matthew Henry summarizes, “This end comes upon the four corners of the land. The ruin, as it shall be final, so it shall be total; no part of the land shall escape; no, not that which lies most remote.” [37]
Revelation 7:1
After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth, that no wind might blow on earth or sea or against any tree.
First, we need to recognize that this is a prophetic vision. By definition, it contains symbolic images that need interpretation.
It does not intend to communicate concrete geographical truths but abstract images of future events. So, what does the image of “four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds” symbolize?
Notice the repetition of the number “four.”
Dr. Danny Faulkner notes, “In this one verse, the number four appears three times. In each usage, the things mentioned are intimately tied together, so there is a one-to-one correspondence between each of the three groups of four.”[38]
He continues, “The four winds refer to the four directions from which winds can come: north, south, east, and west. We often use this nomenclature today, such as saying that the wind is ‘out of the west. ‘ The repetition of the number four (‘four angels . . . four corners . . . four winds’) ties each angel and each corner with one of the four compass directions.”
In his commentary on Revelation, Paul Gardner notes, “The figure four is a symbol for the whole world or for universality. It probably originally comes from the phrase used here: the four corners of the earth. We often refer to the four points of the compass: north, south, east and west… These four angels who watch over the whole earth (its four corners) are holding back the four winds.”[39]
Notice also the figurative use of “winds.”
Commentator Thomas Schreiner writes, “The ‘winds’ are the symbols of judgment; and, being in number ‘four’ and held by ‘four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, ‘ they indicate that the judgment, when inflicted, will be universal. There is no place to which the ungodly can escape, none where they shall not be overtaken by the wrath of God.”[40]
Richard Phillips observes, “The four winds are a metaphor for the entirety of the earth. Here, the four angels are ‘holding back’ the winds, that is, restraining God’s judgments from utterly destroying the earth.”[41]
Evans and Bubeck note, “Four corners of the earth is a common expression referring to the entire world (Rev. 20:8; cf. Job 37:3; Isa. 11:12; Jer. 49:36…). The four winds in the ancient world represented the four cardinal points of the compass and included all winds (Ezek. 37:9; Jer. 49:36; Dan. 7:2; 8:8; Zech. 6:5; 4 Ezra 13:5…).”[42]
Once again, the idiomatic meaning of the phrase is obvious, and the interpretation of the vision is evident.
Schreiner concludes, “The ‘four corners’ of the earth aren’t intended to teach that the world is flat. Instead, the four corners stand for the entire world (cf. Isa. 11:12; Rev. 20:8), just as ‘four corners’ of a house stand for the entire house (Job 1:19), and ‘four corners of the land’ stand for the entire land of Israel (Ezek. 7:2). The four angels, then, superintend the world for God’s sake. The ‘four winds’ stand for the judgment to come, the final judgment, which will engulf the entire world. We see precedent for this in the OT (cf. also Ezek. 5:10, 12) where ‘four winds from the four quarters of heaven’ will be inflicted on the entire land of Elam (Jer. 49:36; cf. Ezek. 37:9; Dan. 7:2; 8:8; 11:4; Zech. 2:6; 6:5; Matt. 24:31; Mark 13:27), but here the four winds encompass the whole world.”[43]
Revelation 20:7-8
And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison and will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle; their number is like the sand of the sea.
In this part of John’s prophetic vision, Satan is released to “deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog.” Even a cursory reading of this passage would cause us to realize that John is not speaking of four nations that are geographically located beyond the seas and Antarctica at four remote physical corners of the earth.
The expression “the four corners of the earth” is once again idiomatic.
This time, we see the added image of “Gog and Magog,” taken from chapters 38 and 39 of the Book of Ezekiel. What are Gog and Magog? Are they literal nations beyond the Antarctic ring waiting to attack?
Richard Phillips explains, “From the perspective of Westerners caught up in the Cold War of the late twentieth century, the uttermost north would be Russia or China, but from Ezekiel’s it would be the kingdoms beyond Assyria, that is, the Scythian lands of Gog and Magog. G. B. Caird points out that this symbolism was picked up in rabbinic writings, which used the names Gog and Magog for the entire rebellious nations of Psalm 2.” [44]
Ben Witherington writes, “Gog and Magog are symbols of evil in the nations of the earth, and this evil comes from all directions.”[45]
Robert Mulholland comments of Gog and Magog, “John used these images of the archetypal enemies of God from Ezek 39 to portray the entirety of fallen Babylon being gathered for the final act in the drama.” [46]
In his commentary on Revelation, Robert Mounce explains, “In Revelation, Gog and Magog are symbolic of all nations that join in the final assault upon God and his people.” [47]
This is clearly another passage using figurative language to convey the idea of entirety.
Mulholland also points out other figures of speech in this text, “As numberless as sand along the seashore. This is used regularly in the OT to describe an immense number (see Jer 33:22 for its use for anything that cannot be enumerated; also Gen 22:17; 32:12; 41:49; Josh 11:4; Judg 7:12; 1 Sam 13:5).
“The broad plain of the earth. Lit., ‘the breadth (platos [4114, 4424]) of the earth, ‘ indicating that the entire realm of fallen Babylon (“the earth”) is involved in this action.” [48]
All of this makes it plain that the expression “the four corners of the earth” has the same idiomatic meaning as it does elsewhere.
Mark Strauss notes, “The picture in verse 7 is that of an innumerable army gathered from all over the earth.” [49] (emphasis mine)
Paul Gardner explains the passage, “They are ready now to follow Satan where he will lead and so he gathers them together for battle. Sadly they are very great in number and they come from all over the breadth of the earth.” [50]
Mounce concludes, “The nations that fall prey to Satan’s propaganda are said to be in ‘the four corners of the earth. ‘ This figure of speech is not intended to stress some ancient cosmology but to emphasize universality (cf. Isa 11:12; Ezek 7:2; Rev 7:1)… Gog and Magog are symbolic figures representing the nations of the world that band together for a final assault upon God and his people. No specific geographical designations are intended. They are simply hostile nations from all across the world.” [51] (emphasis mine)
The FSIPs’ assertion that the expression “the four corners of the earth” is a geographical or geological reference to the physical shape of the earth is exegetically untenable and another clear example of quote mining.
Isaiah 40:22
It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in.
Now, you might be familiar with this verse. Over the past three decades I’ve heard it referred to hundreds of times by Christian apologists claiming that the Scriptures contained a reference to a spherical earth hundreds of years before it became the accepted cosmology of scientists.
So, it might come as a surprise that FSIPs would appeal to this verse as “biblical justification” for believing in a flat earth. Their understanding of this verse is that Isaiah is depicting God physically sitting above a flat, circular, disc-shaped earth.
Is this what Isaiah is depicting here? Let’s examine it.
First, what is the purpose of Isaiah 40? Isaiah’s purpose is to portray the Lord’s exalted, sovereign status over all other rulers and nations. You see, Israel would soon fall into captivity and so needed to be encouraged to remember and trust in God’s sovereign power, that He is in control (and not these other nations nor their leaders).
Behold, the Lord God comes with might, and his arm rules for him (v.10)… He will tend his flock… he will gather his lambs… he will carry them (v.11)… the nations are like a drop in the bucket (v.15)… They are as nothing before him (v.16)… To whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him? (v.18)… who brings princes to nothing (v.23)… To whom then will you compare me, that I should be like him? says the Holy One (v.25).
Of this passage, Llyod Ogilvie says, “From His exalted position, God controls, as well as sees, human affairs. The princes and rulers whom the children of Judah fear can be brought down to nothing or rendered useless by the power of His will… The exiles, then, are asked to remember what they have known, heard, and understood. All rulers are under God’s control; He will determine how long they rule and when they die.”[52]
This is a prophetic poem allegorizing the Lord’s preeminent, sovereign oversight. So, when Isaiah says, “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,” we must read it with this context in mind. He’s portraying God’s sovereign oversight of the earth through metaphorical imagery.
It would then seem obvious that v.22 is not intended to be a physical description of God nor of His physical proximity to the earth. Isaiah knows that the Lord is not a material entity. He does not want the reader to imagine a physical being sitting on his physical posterior somewhere above a physical planet. If he were, he’d be promoting idolatry.
Rather, he’s using figurative language to convey abstract reality. John Calvin writes that here Isaiah “extols the glory and power of God… Formerly he spoke of the creation of the world, but now he comes to the continual government of it; for God did not only for a single moment exert his power for creating the world, but he manifests his power not less efficaciously in preserving it.”[53]
When Isaiah says that the Lord “sits above” the earth, he’s conveying the abstract concept of His position of authority.
As Calvin notes, “’Sitting’ is a metaphorical term which denotes ‘government.’”
About this phrase Edward J. Young says, “The participle refers to God’s being seated upon a throne. Seated as a king, He constantly upholds His creation, and governs it.”[54]
In the same way, the phrase ‘the circle of the earth’ [ḥûḡ hā ā’·rěṣ] is a figure of speech conveying the idea of the entirety of the earthly realm. Isaiah is saying that everything on earth is under the Lord’s sovereign oversight.
As Young explains, “The phrase sitting upon the circle of the earth is a figurative expression for God’s providential upholding and maintaining of creation.” [55]
Lloyd Ogilvie comments, “From His exalted position, God controls, as well as sees, human affairs.”[56]
The phrase, “It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,” isn’t intended to depict the geographical locus of a material God but is a figure of speech alluding to the Lord’s kingship, that He’s sitting on His throne, exalted and ruling over the entirety of the earthly realm.
John Gill writes, “Here Jehovah sits as the Lord and Sovereign; being the Maker of it, he is above it, orders and directs its motion, and governs all things in it.”[57]
Now, even though the phrase is metaphorical, it’s perfectly legitimate to ask what the metaphor refers to. Is “the circle of the earth” referring to a certain physical characteristic of the earth to convey the abstract concept of “the entirety of the earthly realm”? It would seem so.
What is that “circular” characteristic? The Hebrew word here used for “circle” is ḥûḡ. This term and its derivatives occur five times in Scripture and are variously understood to mean “circle,” “encircle,” “vault,” “horizon,” “compass,” or “circuit.”
Therefore, Isaiah’s metaphor could be referring to 1) a flat, (sort of) two-dimensional circular earth; 2) the appearance of a circle from a single vantage point beyond the earth; 3) a three-dimensional circular (spherical) earth; 4) some circular aspect of the earth (such as the horizon or sky); or 5) the circuit or course of all the events on the earth (no physical reference).
Each of these possibilities fits the metaphorical concept of the entirety of the earthly realm that Isaiah attempts to convey. So, which option is it? The text is equivocal here. It’s unclear what exactly it’s alluding to, yet the metaphor’s meaning is clear: the Lord rules and reigns over everything in the earthly realm.
With that said, are any of these possibilities more or less likely interpretations?
FSIPs argue that it cannot be the spherical conception based upon Isaiah’s use of the Hebrew term ḥûḡ rather than dūr. They say this because Isaiah uses the term kǎd·dûr for “ball” in Isaiah 22:18.
Behold, the Lord will hurl you away violently, O you strong man. He will seize firm hold on you and whirl you around and around, and throw you like a ball [kǎd·dûr] into a wide land. (Isa 22:17-18)
They argue that if Isaiah used kǎd·dûr for ball/sphere there, then if he intended ball/sphere in 40:22, he would’ve used kǎd·dûr there.
Implicit in their argument is the assumption that kǎ·dûr is the only correct Hebrew word for “ball” or “sphere.” How do they know that ḥûḡ isn’t also a Hebrew word for “ball” or “sphere”? They don’t. They simply arbitrarily assert that Isaiah cannot use more than one word to communicate any concept.
It’s like telling someone that once they use the word “house” to communicate the idea of “a structure that serves as an abode of human beings,” they are restricted to using that word alone. That person isn’t allowed to use “home,” “residence,” “dwelling,” “household,” or “abode,” even though they can mean exactly the same thing. This is the fallacy of the unwarranted semantic restriction.
Let’s apply the FSIPs’ exegetical reasoning to other words in Isaiah. For instance, in 5:1 Isaiah uses the word dôḏi’ for “love.”
Let me sing for my beloved
my love [dôḏi’] song concerning his vineyard:
My beloved had a vineyard
on a very fertile
Therefore, according to their logic, when Isaiah uses ḥā·šǎq in 38:17, he cannot mean “love.”
Behold, it was for my welfare
that I had great bitterness;
but in love [ḥā·šǎq] you have delivered my life
from the pit of destruction
Nor can Isaiah mean “love” when he uses ʾā·hǎḇ-tî in 43:4.
Because you are precious in my eyes,
and honored, and I love [ʾā·hǎḇ-tî] you.
Not even the treasured Hebrew word ḥě·sěḏ is allowed to be used for “love” according to this reasoning (16:5; 54:8; 55:3; 63:7).
Further, even if ḥûḡ weren’t a valid term for a sphere, how would that in any way establish that Isaiah intended to depict the earth as FSIPs conceive of it? Why didn’t Isaiah use a more accurate word like “cylinder” (galíl) if the earth is like a flat disc? If he were really striving to depict a correct physical picture of the earth with corners and three dimensions, why didn’t Isaiah use the Hebrew word for “quadrilateral” (m’ruba)? If Isaiah knew the earth was only circular in one aspect, why did he use “circle” instead of one of the other shapes?
(It’s at least consistent to use “circle” if the earth is spherical because it appears to be a circle from every vantage point.)
The truth is that any interpretation suggesting the physical shape of the whole planet is extremely unlikely because, as explained in a previous article, the Bible’s writers wrote from their vantage point on the earth’s surface.
Commentator J.A. Kitchen explains, “We who have been so trained to think in categories defined by the process of scientific investigation often try to press the language of the writers of Scripture beyond their intent. ‘The poets of the OT describe their universe phenomenologically, i.e. as it appears to them standing on the earth and looking above and about. This perspective differs from that of modern scientific thought, which assumes a perspective beyond the earth. Both are accurate and useful according to their own perspectives.’”[58]
As John Oswalt says, “Commentators agree that this probably does not refer to the circular nature of the earth, but they do not agree on what it does refer to. It might be the earth itself with its circular horizon (Prov. 8:27; Job 26:10), or it might be the vault of the heavens (Job 22:14), which seems to extend in a half-circle from horizon to horizon.”[59]
Oswalt references Proverbs 8:27 as another passage that indicates a “circular horizon.”
In Proverbs 8:27 we read, “When he established the heavens, I was there; when he drew a circle [ḥûḡ] on the face of the deep.”
The Hebrew word for circle is the same here (ḥûḡ). Most commentators believe that “circle” refers to the horizon here in Proverbs.
Kitchen comments, “The word can describe either that God established a boundary for the waters far in the distance, at some indefinable point, or at the line of the horizon.” [60]
In their commentary on Proverbs, Hubbard and Ogilvie say it’s “the marking off of the horizon of the sea.” [61]
Bruce Waltke writes, “A circle (ḥûg—note the alliteration with ḥûq), drawn as it were with a compass, is an incomplete metaphor for creating the horizon.” [62]
Also frequently referred to as “the ends of the earth,” the horizon is a perfect metaphor for conveying the idea of the entirety of the earthly realm.
Given all the information, the horizon is most likely the referent of “the circle of the earth” metaphor in Isaiah 40:22.
Commentator Geoffrey W. Grogan writes, “The reference to the circle of the earth is unique, but see the somewhat similar phrases of Job 22:14; Prov 8:27. The expression probably refers to the horizon.”[63]
As J. A. Motyer remarks, “The circle is either the heavens or the horizon, both of which are circular to the observer’s eye.”[64]
This is by no means the definite interpretation. As I said before, this is an ambiguous metaphor, although its meaning is clear. Therefore, the best that the FSIP can say is that their allegation of this being a “flat earth depiction” is based upon an extremely unlikely referent for an ambiguous metaphor.
Conclusion
Throughout this series, we’ve demonstrated that, despite the allegations of Flat/Stationary Interpretation Proponents, the Bible does not contain even a hint of geostationary or flat-earth cosmology. Yes, there are a few passages the FSIPs cite (e.g., Genesis 1; Ezekiel 9:6; Isaiah 40:22; Joshua 10), where they can read their pre-existing cosmological views into the passage (eisegesis) without harming the passage’s meaning.
However, their citations and interpretations are generally unwarranted and distort the meaning of the text. They engage in several exegetical fallacies, such as contextomy and quote mining, deceiving not only themselves but also their hearers. Paul tells us that such foolishness “will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene” (2 Tim 2:14).
Rather than accurately handling “the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15), they, like many of the cults, immorally twist the Scriptures to suit their own ends. This is why this is such a dangerous movement.
I close with two encouragements:
1) If you are a Flat/Stationary Interpretation Proponent… repent of your Scripture twisting. Renounce your “disgraceful, underhanded ways” and “refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s Word” (2 Cor 4:2). Glorify God by rightly handling the Word of Truth.
2) If you know someone who is an FSIP, show them the truth of the Scriptures and call them to repent.
Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness (Gal 6:1).
As Paul exhorted, “Charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine, nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations” (1 Tim 1:3-4).
If they repent, “you’ve won a brother” (Mt 18:15). If they don’t repent, “after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned” (Titus 3:10-11).
As I’ve written this series of articles, what has stood out to me is that nearly every one of the passages the FSIPs distort has to do with the sovereignty of God. The Lord is in control of all things. The Lord reigns and because of that, everything on this earth is under his rule. It is with this assurance, that God is in control, that He reigns over the Earth, that He rules in majesty, and nothing is outside of His control (not even people who pervert passages about His sovereignty) that I leave you. Place your trust and confidence in the Lord for “it is he who sits above the circle of the earth.”
[1] Lisle, J. 2015. Understanding Genesis: How to Analyze, Interpret, and Defend Scripture (pp. 100-103). Green Forest, AR: Master Books.
[2] Manser, M. 2009. Dictionary of Bible Themes. London: Martin Manser.
[3] Young, E. J. 1972. The Book of Isaiah (vol. 3, p. 518). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[4] Henry, M. 1994. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete (p. 1214). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[5] Gill, J. 1810. An Exposition of the Old Testament (vol. 5, p. 388). London: Mathews and Leigh.
[6] Ryken, L., et al. 2000. Dictionary of Biblical Imagery (p. 645). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Lisle, J. 2017. Keeping Faith in an Age of Reason (pp. 154-155). Green Forest, AR: Master Books.
[9] Faulkner, D. 2019. Falling Flat: A Refutation of Flat Earth Claims (p. 308). Green Forest, AR: Master Books.
[10] Henry, M. 1994. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete (p. 384). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[11] Gill, J. 1810. An Exposition of the Old Testament (vol. 2, p. 420). London: Mathews and Leigh.
[12] Wenham, G. J., et al. 1994. New Bible Commentary, 21st Century Edition (p. 299). Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.
[13] Ibid, p. 467.
[14] Walvoord, J. F. and R. B. Zuck. 1985. The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Old Testament) (p. 731). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
[15] Wesley, J. 1765. Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (vol. 2, p. 1544). Bristol: William Pine.
[16] Robinson, T. 1892. The Preacher’s Complete Homiletic Commentary: Job (p. 60). New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.
[17] Keil, C. F. and F. Delitzsch. 1996. Commentary on the Old Testament: Psalms (p. 325). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[18] Walvoord, J. F. and R. B. Zuck. 1985. The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Old Testament) (p. 749). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
[19] Lawson, S. J. 2005. Job: Holman Old Testament Commentary (M. Anders, Ed., p. 225). Nashville: B&H Publishing Group.
[20] Spence, H. D. M. and J. S. Excell. 1909. The Pulpit Commentary (Psalms Vol. I) (p. 430). New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.
[21] Henry, M. 1994. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete (p. 707). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[22] Keil, C. F. and F. Delitzsch. 1996. Commentary on the Old Testament: Psalms (p. 522). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[23] Phillips, R. D. 2020. Psalms 73–106 (Reformed Expository Commentary) (p. 28). Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing.
[24] Ibid., p. 29.
[25] Nicoll, W. R. and O. L. Joseph. 1903. The Expositor’s Bible (Vol. 3: Psalms to Isaiah) (p. 196). Hartford: S. S. Scranton Co.
[26] Wenham, G. J., et al. 1994. New Bible Commentary, 21st Century Edition (p. 534). Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press.
[27] Spence, H. D. M. and J. S. Excell. 1909. The Pulpit Commentary (Psalms Vol. I) (p. 91). New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.
[28] Oswalt, J. N. 1986. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 1–39 (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament) (p. 288). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[29] Teed, R. 2010. The Book of Isaiah (p. 67). Wheaton, IL: Ron and Betty Teed.
[30] Young, E. J. 1965. The Book of Isaiah (vol. 3, pp. 396-397). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[31] Calvin, J. and W. Pringle. 2010. Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah (p. 391). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
[32] Barker, K. L. and J. R. Kohlenberger III. 1994. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Abridged Edition: Old Testament (p. 1283). Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.
[33] Walvoord, J. F. and R. B. Zuck. 1985. The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Old Testament) (p. 1240). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
[34] Keil, C. F. and F. Delitzsch. 1996. Commentary on the Old Testament: Psalms (p. 59). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[35] Spence, H. D. M. and J. S. Excell. 1909. The Pulpit Commentary (Psalms Vol. I) (p. 118). New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company.
[36] Stuart, D. 1989. The Preacher’s Commentary – Vol. 20: Ezekiel (L. J. Ogilvie, Ed., p. 71). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc.
[37] Henry, M. 1994. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete (p. 1350). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.
[38] Faulkner, D. 2019. Falling Flat: A Refutation of Flat Earth Claims (p. 273). Green Forest, AR: Master Books.
[39] Gardner, P. 2002. Revelation: The Compassion and Protection of Christ (Focus on the Bible) (p. 106). Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus.
[40] Nicoll, W. R. and O. L. Joseph. 1903. The Expositor’s Bible (Vol. 6: Revelation) (p. 861). Hartford: S. S. Scranton Co.
[41] Phillips, R. D. 2017. Revelation (Reformed Expository Commentary) (p. 240). Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing.
[42] Evans, C. A. (Ed.). 2005. Bible Knowledge Background Commentary: Revelation (Bible Knowledge Series) (p. 369). Colorado Springs: David C Cook.
[43] Duguid, I. M., et al (Eds.). 2018. ESV Expository Commentary: Hebrews-Revelation (vol. 12, p. 621). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.
[44] Phillips, R. D. 2017. Revelation (Reformed Expository Commentary) (p. 591). Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing.
[45] Ibid.
[46] Mulholland, M. R., Jr., and G. R. Osborne. 2011. James, 1-2 Peter, Jude, Revelation (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (P. W. Comfort, Ed., p. 578). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.
[47] Mounce, R. H. 2004. What Are We Waiting For?: A Commentary on Revelation (p. 107). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers.
[48] Mulholland, M. R., Jr., and G. R. Osborne. 2011. James, 1-2 Peter, Jude, Revelation (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (P. W. Comfort, Ed., p. 578). Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers.
[49] Strauss, M., et al (Eds.). 2008. Layman’s Bible Commentary: Hebrews thru Revelation (vol. 12, p. 224). Uhrichsville, OH: Barbour Publishing.
[50] Gardner, P. 2002. Revelation: The Compassion and Protection of Christ (Focus on the Bible) (p. 278). Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus.
[51] Mounce, R. H. 1997. The Book of Revelation (The New International Commentary on the New Testament) (p. 372). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[52] McKenna, D. 1994. The Preacher’s Commentary – Vol. 18: Isaiah 40-66 (L. J. Ogilvie, Ed., p. 36). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc.
[53] Calvin, J. and W. Pringle. 2010. Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah (pp. 226-227). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
[54] Young, E. J. 1972. The Book of Isaiah (vol. 3, pp. 57-58). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[55] Ibid.
[56] McKenna, D. 1994. The Preacher’s Commentary – Vol. 18: Isaiah 40-66 (L. J. Ogilvie, Ed., p. 36). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc.
[57] Gill, J. 1810. An Exposition of the Old Testament (vol. 5, p. 227). London: Mathews and Leigh.
[58] Kitchen, J. A. 2006. Proverbs: A Mentor Commentary (p. 192). Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor.
[59] Oswalt, J. N. 1998. The Book of Isaiah, Chapters 40–66 (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament) (p. 67). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[60] Kitchen, J. A. 2006. Proverbs: A Mentor Commentary (p. 192). Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor.
[61] Hubbard, D. A. 1989. The Preacher’s Commentary – Vol. 15: Proverbs (L. J. Ogilvie, Ed., p. 126). Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc.
[62] Oswalt, J. N. 1986. The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1–15 (The New International Commentary on the Old Testament) (p. 415). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
[63] Gaebelein, F. E. (Ed.). 1986. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Vol. 6: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel) (p. 246). Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.
[64] Motyer, J. A. 1996. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary (pp. 305-306). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.