This single verse is part of a passage about the Persian king, Cyrus, who rebuilt Jerusalem, no charge. Isaiah goes on to say that the L-rd will make Cyrus way's straight -- another way of saying he will convert Cyrus, thus making Cyrus prosperous so that his former enemies will make peace and seek his patronage. (Isaiah 45:13-14). Cyrus will (probably in thanks for his new prosperity) rebuild Jerusalem for free, no charge, willingly. You can take it as either a miraculous prediction or as a historical explanation for why Cyrus rebuilt Jerusalem, no-charge.
To pretend to interpret Isaiah 47 verse 7 (by itself!) without bothering even to think about Deuteronomy and how it relates to the Pentateuch, and also not to even bother thinking about the story in context, it is pathetically irresponsible. Cyrus is converted. That is what the story is about partially. The prosperity and calamity is an allusion to the blessing and calamities central to the book Deuteronomy -- a book far more important than Isaiah -- listing the calamities that lawlessness brings. Isaiah was never expected to be read by someone ignorant of Deuteronomy. Why start a thread about an isolated verse without even considering the story its in?
Totally agree with those who said that the single, isolated, out of context verse being discussed is about 'calamity' not 'evil'.
To pretend to interpret Isaiah 47 verse 7 (by itself!) without bothering even to think about Deuteronomy and how it relates to the Pentateuch, and also not to even bother thinking about the story in context, it is pathetically irresponsible. Cyrus is converted. That is what the story is about partially. The prosperity and calamity is an allusion to the blessing and calamities central to the book Deuteronomy -- a book far more important than Isaiah -- listing the calamities that lawlessness brings. Isaiah was never expected to be read by someone ignorant of Deuteronomy. Why start a thread about an isolated verse without even considering the story its in?
Totally agree with those who said that the single, isolated, out of context verse being discussed is about 'calamity' not 'evil'.