Part 2 of The Woman in Travail: How Birth Became the Bible’s Most Powerful End-Times Metaphor
Isaiah's Birth Pangs-From Babylon’s Terror to Zion’s Miraculous Delivery
Hello brothers and sisters.
In Part 1, we established the Hebrew terminology and ancient Near Eastern context for the birth pang metaphor. We saw how חוּל (chul, “to writhe”), יָלַד (yalad, “to bring forth”), and חֶבֶל (chevel, “birth pangs”) formed the lexical foundation for one of Scripture’s most powerful images of inescapable judgment and inevitable transformation.
Now we turn to Isaiah, who uses this metaphor more extensively and more creatively than any other prophet. Across Isaiah’s 66 chapters, birth pangs appear in at least four major passages, each with a different focus and revealing another dimension of the metaphor’s power.
We’ll examine how Isaiah deploys this imagery to describe Gentile judgment (Isaiah 13), prophetic anguish (Isaiah 21), Israel’s futile labor (Isaiah 26), and most remarkably, Zion’s painless, miraculous delivery (Isaiah 66).
As we work through these texts, we’ll compare how the Masoretic Text and Septuagint render key phrases, noting where the Greek translation sharpens, softens, or interprets the Hebrew in theologically significant ways.
If you’re reading this in email, be aware that the text is likely to cut off without warning. For a smoother reading experience and all the features Substack has to offer (including audio voiceovers of my posts), you can go HERE or download the app.
Isaiah 13:6-8 — Babylon’s Day of the LORD
We begin with Isaiah’s oracle against Babylon, which opens the “Burden” section of his prophecy (chapters 13-23). This is judgment literature at its most visceral.
The Masoretic Text (Isaiah 13:6-8)
הֵילִילוּ כִּי קָרוֹב יוֹם יְהוָה כְּשֹׁד מִשַּׁדַּי יָבוֹא׃
עַל־כֵּן כָּל־יָדַיִם תִּרְפֶּינָה וְכָל־לְבַב אֱנוֹשׁ יִמָּס׃
וְנִבְהָלוּ צִירִים וַחֲבָלִים יֹאחֵזוּן כַּיּוֹלֵדָה יְחִילוּן אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ יִתְמָהוּ פְּנֵי לְהָבִים פְּנֵיהֶם׃“Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; as destruction from the Almighty it will come. Therefore all hands will drop, and every heart of man will melt. And they will be horrified. Pangs [tsirim] and pains [chevalim] will seize them. Like a woman in labor [ka-yoledah] they will writhe [yechilun]. A man will look at his companion—they will be dumbfounded; faces of flames, their faces.”
The Septuagint (LXX Isaiah 13:6-8)
ὀλολύζετε ἐγγὺς γὰρ ἡ ἡμέρα κυρίου καὶ συντριβὴ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἥξει
διὰ τοῦτο πᾶσα χεὶρ ἐκλυθήσεται καὶ πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἀνθρώπου δειλιάσει
καὶ οἱ πρέσβεις ταραχθήσονται καὶ ὠδῖνες αὐτοὺς ἕξουσιν ὡς γυναικὸς τικτούσης καὶ συμφορήσουσιν ἕτερος πρὸς τὸν ἕτερον καὶ ἐκστήσονται καὶ τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτῶν ὡς φλὸξ μεταβαλοῦσιν“Wail, for the day of the LORD is near, and destruction from God will come. Therefore every hand will become slack, and every soul of man will be afraid. And the elders will be disturbed, and pains [ōdines] will seize them like a woman giving birth [hōs gynaikos tiktousēs], and they will wail one to the other and be beside themselves, and they will change their face like a flame.”
Textual Comparison: MT vs. LXX
Several differences emerge:
“Every heart of man will melt” (MT) vs. “every soul of man will be afraid” (LXX)
The Hebrew לְבַב (levav, “heart”) becomes ψυχή (psychē, “soul”) in Greek. The MT emphasizes the visceral, internal collapse of courage (”melt” suggests the heart turning to liquid), while the LXX emphasizes the psychological state of terror (”be afraid”). Both capture fear, but the Hebrew is more physical.“Pangs [tsirim] and pains [chevalim] will seize them” (MT) vs. “pains [ōdines] will seize them” (LXX)
The MT uses two different Hebrew words for birth pangs: צִירִים (tsirim, from צָרַר, “to bind, press, be in distress”) and חֲבָלִים (chevalim, from חֶבֶל, “cord, rope, birth pang”). The LXX consolidates these into a single Greek term: ὠδῖνες (ōdines, “birth pangs”). The Greek is simpler, losing the Hebrew’s doubled emphasis on constricting, binding pain.“Like a woman in labor [ka-yoledah] they will writhe [yechilun]” (MT) vs. “like a woman giving birth [hōs gynaikos tiktousēs]” (LXX)
Both versions use the birth metaphor clearly. The Hebrew יְחִילוּן (yechilun, from חוּל, “to writhe, twist”) emphasizes the physical contortions of labor. The LXX ὡς γυναικὸς τικτούσης (hōs gynaikos tiktousēs) uses the standard Greek verb τίκτω (tiktō, “to give birth”), which is more neutral; it describes the act without emphasizing the twisting, writhing motion.“The elders” (LXX) vs. MT’s ambiguous subject
The LXX adds οἱ πρέσβεις (hoi presbyeis, “the elders”), specifying that it is Babylon’s leadership who will be terrified. The MT doesn’t specify this. Rather, it simply says “they will be horrified.” The LXX’s addition makes the judgment more pointed: the rulers will lose their composure.
Theological Implications
This is Gentile judgment. Babylon, the great oppressor of God’s people, experiencing the terror of the Day of the LORD. Isaiah reaches for birth pangs to convey several truths:
Inevitability: Once labor begins, there’s no stopping it. Babylon’s doom is certain.
Inescapability: You cannot flee from birth pangs. They seize you. The Hebrew verb אָחַז (‘achaz, “to seize, grasp, take hold”) appears here: “pangs will seize them” (יֹאחֵזוּן, yo’chezun). They have no control.
Public Shame: Warriors writhing like women in labor is a shaming image. In ancient masculinity, loss of composure was disgraceful. Isaiah is describing the complete breakdown of Babylonian military might.
Faces like flames: Whether from anger, shame, or terror, the Babylonians’ faces will be distorted. Some interpret this as the reddening of exertion; others as the pallor of fear.
Notice what Isaiah doesn’t say: he doesn’t say Babylon will give birth to anything. The labor is unproductive. The pain has no purpose. There’s no child (or other reward) at the end; only destruction.
This establishes a pattern we’ll see again: futile labor is one of the worst curses imaginable.
Isaiah 21:2-4 — The Prophet’s Personal Anguish
Isaiah 21 presents a different use of the birth pang imagery. Here, it’s not the judged nation that writhes, it’s the prophet himself.
The Masoretic Text (Isaiah 21:2-3)
חָזוּת קָשָׁה הֻגַּד־לִי הַבּוֹגֵד בּוֹגֵד וְהַשּׁוֹדֵד שׁוֹדֵד עֲלִי עֵילָם צוּרִי מָדָי כָּל־אַנְחָתָהּ הִשְׁבַּתִּי׃
עַל־כֵּן מָלְאוּ מָתְנַי חַלְחָלָה צִירִים אֲחָזֻנִי כְּצִירֵי יוֹלֵדָה נַעֲוֵיתִי מִשְּׁמֹעַ נִבְהַלְתִּי מֵרְאוֹת׃“A hard vision has been told to me: ‘The treacherous one deals treacherously, and the destroyer destroys. Go up, O Elam; lay siege, O Media. All her sighing I will end.’ Therefore my loins are filled with anguish [chalchalah]; pangs [tsirim] have seized me [achazuni] like the pangs of a woman in labor [ke-tsirei yoledah]. I am bowed down [na’aveiti] from hearing; I am dismayed from seeing.”
The Septuagint (LXX Isaiah 21:2-3)
καὶ σκληρὸν καὶ ἀνομον ὅραμα ἀνηγγέλη μοι ὁ ἀθετῶν ἀθετεῖ ὁ ἀνομῶν ἀνομεῖ ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ οἱ ἐξ Αιλαμ καὶ οἱ πρέσβεις τῶν Περσῶν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ ἔρχονται νῦν στενάξω καὶ παρακαλέσω ἐμαυτόν
διὰ τοῦτο ἐνεπλήσθη ἡ ὀσφύς μου ἐκλύσεως καὶ ὠδῖνες ἔλαβόν με ὡς τὴν τίκτουσαν ἠδίκησα τοῦ μὴ ἀκοῦσαι ἔσπευσα τοῦ μὴ βλέπειν“And a hard and lawless vision was announced to me. The one who is faithless is being faithless; the lawless one is acting lawlessly. Against me are those from Elam, and the envoys of the Persians are coming against me. Now I will groan and comfort myself. Therefore my loin was filled with feebleness, and pangs [ōdines] seized [elabon] me like one giving birth [hōs tēn tiktousan]. I did injury so as not to hear; I hastened so as not to see.”
Textual Comparison
“My loins are filled with anguish [chalchalah]” (MT) vs. “my loin was filled with feebleness [eklyseōs]” (LXX)
The Hebrew חַלְחָלָה (chalchalah) comes from a root meaning “writhing, anguish, trembling.” This is a physical, visceral response. The LXX’s ἔκλυσις (eklysis) means “loosening, feebleness, weakness.” The MT emphasizes pain and writhing; the LXX emphasizes loss of strength. Both convey incapacitation, but from different angles.“I am bowed down [na’aveiti] from hearing” (MT) vs. “I did injury [ēdikēsa] so as not to hear” (LXX)
This is fascinating. The Hebrew נַעֲוֵיתִי (na’aveiti) comes from עָוָה (‘avah, “to bend, twist, distort”), suggesting Isaiah is physically bent over or contorted by what he hears; he can’t even sit up straight. The LXX renders this as ἠδίκησα (ēdikēsa, “I did wrong/injury”), which some scholars think reflects a different Hebrew Vorlage or an interpretive rendering. The sense seems to be that Isaiah tried to block out what he was hearing because it was too horrific: he “injured himself” (violently covered his ears, perhaps?) to avoid it.“Pangs have seized me like the pangs of a woman in labor” (both MT and LXX agree)
Here the Hebrew and Greek align well. צִירִים אֲחָזֻנִי כְּצִירֵי יוֹלֵדָה (tsirim achazuni ke-tsirei yoledah) becomes ὠδῖνες ἔλαβόν με ὡς τὴν τίκτουσαν (ōdines elabon me hōs tēn tiktousan). Both use the standard “seize/take hold” verb (אָחַז / λαμβάνω) and the birth metaphor.
Theological Implications
This is a first-person prophetic experience. Isaiah himself is writhing like a woman in labor, not because he’s under judgment, but because the vision of judgment is so horrific that it physically incapacitates him.
Think about what this means: the prophet who announces God’s judgment is himself undone by it. He cannot stand. He cannot hear. He cannot see. The vision of Babylon’s fall (Isaiah 21 is about “the wilderness of the sea,” so likely Babylon) leaves him in a torment that he likens to birth pangs.
Why birth pangs? Because what Isaiah is witnessing is not just destruction but transformation. An empire is about to die. A new order is being born. And Isaiah, caught in the prophetic moment, feels the labor pains of history in his own body.
This is profoundly important: the birth pang metaphor applies not just to those being judged, but also to those who see and feel the weight of God’s judgments. The prophet becomes a kind of midwife, enduring the pains alongside the mother (history) who is giving birth.
Isaiah 26:16-18 — Israel’s Futile Labor
Now we arrive at one of the most devastating uses of the metaphor in all of Scripture. Isaiah 26 is part of the “Isaiah Apocalypse” (chapters 24-27), and verses 17-18 describe Israel’s own failed labor.
The Masoretic Text (Isaiah 26:17-18)
כְּמוֹ הָרָה תַּקְרִיב לָלֶדֶת תָּחִיל תִּזְעַק בַּחֲבָלֶיהָ כֵּן הָיִינוּ מִפָּנֶיךָ יְהוָה׃
הָרִינוּ חַלְנוּ כְּמוֹ יָלַדְנוּ רוּחַ יְשׁוּעֹת בַּל־נַעֲשֶׂה אֶרֶץ וּבַל־יִפְּלוּ יֹשְׁבֵי תֵבֵל׃“Like a pregnant woman who draws near to give birth, who writhes [tachil] and cries out in her pangs [ba-chavaleiha], so we have been before you, O LORD. We were pregnant, we writhed [chalnu], but we gave birth to [yaladnu] wind [ruach]. We have not accomplished deliverance [yeshu’ot] for the earth, and the inhabitants of the world have not fallen [yippelu].”
The Septuagint (LXX Isaiah 26:17-18)
ὡς ἡ ὠδίνουσα ἐγγίζει τοῦ τεκεῖν καὶ ἐπὶ τῇ ὠδῖνι αὐτῆς ἔκραξεν οὕτως ἐγενήθημεν τῷ ἀγαπητῷ σου
ἐν γαστρὶ ἐλάβομεν καὶ ὠδινήσαμεν καὶ ἐτέκομεν πνεῦμα σωτηρίας σου ἐποιήσαμεν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς“As the woman in labor [hē ōdinouσα] draws near to give birth and in her labor pain [ōdini] cried out, so we became before your beloved. We received in the womb [en gastri elabomen], and we labored [ōdinēsamen], and we gave birth to [etekomen] spirit [pneuma]. We accomplished your salvation [sōtērias] on the earth.”
CRITICAL TEXTUAL DIFFERENCE
Wait—what?
The Masoretic Text says: “We gave birth to wind. We have not accomplished deliverance.”
The Septuagint says: “We gave birth to spirit. We accomplished your salvation on the earth.”
This is an enormous divergence, and it’s one of the most significant LXX/MT differences in Isaiah.
Let’s break it down:
Hebrew (MT):
יָלַדְנוּ רוּחַ (yaladnu ruach) = “we gave birth to wind/breath”
יְשׁוּעֹת בַּל־נַעֲשֶׂה (yeshu’ot bal-na’aseh) = “deliverance we have not accomplished”
Greek (LXX):
ἐτέκομεν πνεῦμα (etekomen pneuma) = “we gave birth to spirit”
σωτηρίας σου ἐποιήσαμεν (sōtērias sou epoiēsamen) = “we accomplished your salvation”
The key is the word רוּחַ (ruach), which can mean:
Wind (as in “we gave birth to nothing but wind,” which is a metaphor for futility)
Spirit (as in “we gave birth to the Spirit,” which is possibly referring to spiritual fruit or even the Holy Spirit)
Breath (as in “we gave birth to mere breath,” which, again, suggests futility)
The Masoretic tradition clearly interprets רוּחַ as wind, emphasizing futility: all that labor, all that suffering, and Israel produced nothing but wind. No deliverance. No victory. No baby. Just emptiness.
The Septuagint tradition interprets רוּחַ as spirit/Spirit (πνεῦμα), and reads the verse positively: Israel labored and gave birth to something: namely, the Spirit or spiritual fruit, and accomplished salvation.
Which reading is original?
Scholarly Consensus
Most scholars believe the MT preserves the original here, and that the LXX has either:
Mistranslated or misread the Hebrew, or
Intentionally reinterpreted the verse to avoid the negative theology of “birthing wind.”
The main scholarly view** is that the context strongly favors the MT. Isaiah 26:16-18 is about Israel’s failure. They suffered under discipline, they writhed in pain, but they accomplished nothing. The metaphor works perfectly: futile labor. You go through all the agony of childbirth, but at the end, there’s no result, no reward. Nothing but wind.
The parallelism of verse 18 confirms this:
“We gave birth to wind” // “We have not accomplished deliverance”
“Deliverance we did not make for the earth” // “the inhabitants of the world have not fallen”
Both halves are negative. Israel’s labor was in vain.
The LXX’s positive reading (”we accomplished your salvation”) contradicts the entire tenor of the passage.
**Note**
I feel it’s important to say here that I don’t actually agree with the scholarly consensus. I know that’s an audacious statement, so I hope you’ll indulge me while we go on a side-trek into my interpretation of the text. But first, let’s address the theological aspects of the scholarly consensus.
Theological Implications: The Horror of Futile Labor
This is one of the most devastating images in all of Scripture. Isaiah is saying: we labored, we writhed, we endured the pain, but we gave birth to nothing.
In the ancient world, this was a nightmare scenario. A woman could labor for hours, endure excruciating pain, risk her life… and at the end, deliver a stillborn child. Or worse, labor without producing anything at all, which ancient medicine would have attributed to demonic interference or divine curse.
Isaiah uses this to describe Israel’s spiritual impotence: for all their religious activity, for all their suffering under God’s discipline, they produced no deliverance, no salvation, no transformation of the world. They were pregnant with promise but gave birth to wind.
This sets up the contrast with what comes next in verse 19:
“Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy!”
God will accomplish what Israel could not. God will bring forth life. Where Israel’s labor was futile, God’s labor will be fruitful: he will raise the dead.
The birth pang metaphor thus becomes a way of talking about who can actually accomplish salvation.
And it’s not us. Our best efforts produce only wind. Only God produces life.
Now, to get back to my views on these verses.
In all fairness, do be aware that this interpretation has been developed specifically from the Septuagint, but it still allows for by both/and view of Scripture.
First, let’s talk about the following verses as translated in the N.E.T.S. (New English Translation of the Septuagint, published in 2007):
12 O Lord, our God, give us peace, for you have granted us all things. 13 O Lord, our God, take possession of us; O Lord, we know no other besides you; we name your name. 14 But the dead will not see life, nor will the physicians raise them up; because of this you have brought them and destroyed them and taken away all their males.
15 Increase evils upon them, O Lord; increase evils on the glorious ones of the earth. 16 O Lord, in affliction I remembered you; with small affliction your chastening was on us. 17 And as a woman in travail is about to give birth and cries out in her pangs, so were we to your beloved because of the fear of you, O Lord.
18 We conceived and travailed and gave birth, we produced a wind of your salvation on the earth, but those who dwell on the earth will fall. 19 The dead shall rise, and those who are in the tombs shall be raised, and those who are in the earth shall rejoice; for the dew from you is healing to them, but the land of the impious shall fall.
20 Go, my people, enter your chambers; shut the door; hide yourselves for a little while until the wrath of the Lord has passed. 21 For look, the Lord from his holy place brings his wrath upon those who dwell on the earth; the earth will disclose its blood and will not cover the slain.
Chapter 27, verse 1: On that day God will bring his holy and great and strong dagger against the dragon, a fleeing snake—against the dragon, a fleeing snake—and he will kill the dragon.
So let’s break this down, verse by verse.
Verses 12 and 13 are clearly an expression of gratitude from a faithful Israel. And then verse 14 shifts to the judgement visited upon Babylon (and possibly other enemies as well). This is made explicit with the final line, “because of this you have brought them and destroyed them and taken away all their males.”
Verse 15 continues that theme and introduces this curious phrase, “the glorious ones of the earth.” I see this as a continuation of language that Isaiah uses elsewhere (and is echoed in Revelation) to identify those people who are of the world (those who aren’t believers in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). Although this verse takes it a bit further in referring to them as “glorious ones.” Almost as though these earth-dwellers are glorying in what they perceive to be their own greatness.
But of course, Revelation further clarifies the term “earth-dwellers” as applying to those who have completely forsaken God and chosen to worship the Beast in the Great Tribulation.
While verse 16 might at first appear to be an indictment, it is much softened by the phrase, “with small affliction your chastening was on us.” I think this clarifies the point that although Israel (and maybe Isaiah himself) were afflicted by the Lord, it caused them to remember Him and to return to him. And more importantly, that it required only a small affliction in order for Israel to get the point and turn back to Him.
Verses 17 and 18 give us that familiar idiom of a woman in travail, but express it as Israel being the ones in travail but adds that curious phrase, “so were we to your beloved because of the fear of you,” which begs the question, who is the Lord’s “beloved” that Isaiah is referring to?
Among the scholars who take the text of the Septuagint seriously, there are a few competing theories about who the “beloved” is. But there’s only one that makes sense.
The Greek word translated as “beloved” here (τῷ ἀγαπητῷ, tō agapētō) is the same word that will later be used in the New Testament to refer to Jesus as the “beloved son” (ὁ ἀγαπητός, ho agapētos). The only real difference in these two expressions are that in Isaiah it is used in the dative case to indicate that the beloved is the target of Israel’s labor, while in Matthew it is used in the nominative case to indicate the identity of the Son.
The Blue Letter Bible Lexicon notes that despite the different endings (the "inflection"), both come from the exact same root word.
So, what these two verses establish is that Israel is going into birth pangs for the Messiah, because of their fear of the Lord. And then that they travailed and gave birth.
Although this translation says they gave birth to the “wind” of the Lord’s salvation, we have established elsewhere that in both Greek and Hebrew the words for wind, breath, and spirit are all the same word. So this could just as easily be (and I would suggest that contextually it would be better) translated as, “We conceived and travailed and gave birth, we produced a Spirit of your salvation on the earth.”
But the second half of that verse is where this gets truly interesting. “but those who dwell on the earth will fall.” Again, we have this reference to “those who dwell on the earth,” or “earth-dwellers.” The same phrase used in Revelation for those who are of the world and choose to worship the Beast in the final days. So what we’re seeing here is basically a reference to those who are of the world (in this context, I think it’s clear that it’s talking about Babylon and possibly Israel’s other enemies as well).
But notice what it’s not saying. That phrase doesn’t say that Israel will fall. It doesn’t say that Israel has failed and needs to be broken down. It says that Israel has given birth to the spirit of the Lord’s salvation and that the earth-dwellers will fall. I would contend that this outcome is exactly the point. That in effecting the Lord’s salvation for Israel, the fall of the earth-dwellers is exactly what was intended.
Let’s let that sink in for a minute, especially when we compare that to the scholarly consensus about what these verses are saying.
But it doesn’t end there. In the next verse we move into a clear eschatological statement dealing with the resurrection. Verse 19 says, “The dead shall rise, and those who are in the tombs shall be raised, and those who are in the earth shall rejoice; for the dew from you is healing to them, but the land of the impious shall fall.”
Since it’s right here I have to believe that it ties in with the previous verses, which tells me that it’s directly controverting the interpretation that it has been talking about a judgement upon Israel for their failures. In particular, we have the statement that, “those who are in the earth shall rejoice; for the dew from you is healing to them,” which isn’t the imagery we would associate with having faced judgement for their failures. To me, this speaks of the joy of being rewarded for good service.
And just to dig into this a little bit, let’s compare to verse 14 where it says the physicians cannot raise the dead. Whether this is referring to human effort or demonic power it amounts to the same thing: it fails to raise them. But then in verse 19 the Dew of God (the Holy Spirit) is able to effect resurrection for the faithful. And that’s the point. It’s the source of the resurrection that makes the difference.
With brings us to the end of verse 19, “but the land of the impious shall fall.” Which is yet another clear eschatological image. After the resurrection, all those who were not faithful to God will tremble and fall.
And with the final verses of Chapter 26, along with the beginning of Chapter 27, we continue with the eschatological language that continues with what comes after the resurrection of the faithful.
In a world that believed in only one universal resurrection that included all the faithful and unfaithful, I can imagine the flow of these verses would have been confusing. I could see it being interpreted as verse 20 taking a step back to talk about what comes just before the resurrection.
But now, having Paul’s letters and the Book of Revelation, we know that there are two resurrections; one when Christ calls his church to Himself and another after the millennial reign. And since the resurrection discussed here in Isaiah 26 is clearly a cause for joy, we can interpret that it is talking about the first resurrection that involves only the faithful. So discussing the Day of the Lord’s Wrath and the destruction of the Dragon (presumably Satan) following the resurrection makes perfect sense.
And one of the most interesting facts about the way these verses are presented is that whether you believe in a pre-tribulation, pre-wrath, or even post-tribulation Rapture theology, these final verses work and make perfect sense (although, I admit, taking the post-trib Rapture position requires separating the resurrection language from what follows and viewing the two sections as non-sequential).
But if you take a pre-trib or pre-wrath position, the imagery of faithful Israel hiding in their chambers until the Lord’s wrath against the earth-dwellers passes makes perfect sense. After all, we know that most (if not all) of Israel will remain after the Rapture, where they will be persecuted and eventually come to faith and be protected in Bozrah (which many believe to be the ancient city of Petra in Jordan).
Thank you for taking this exploratory journey with me. I would love to hear your thoughts on my interpretation!
Now, moving on…
Isaiah 66:7-9 — Zion’s Painless, Miraculous Delivery
We conclude our survey of Isaiah with the most extraordinary use of the birth metaphor in the entire book; and possibly in all of Scripture. Isaiah 66 describes labor without pain and birth before travail.
The Masoretic Text (Isaiah 66:7-9)
בְּטֶרֶם תָּחִיל יָלָדָה בְּטֶרֶם יָבוֹא חֵבֶל לָהּ וְהִמְלִיטָה זָכָר׃
מִי־שָׁמַע כָּזֹאת מִי רָאָה כָּאֵלֶּה הֲיוּחַל אֶרֶץ בְּיוֹם אֶחָד אִם־יִוָּלֵד גּוֹי פַּעַם אֶחָת כִּי־חָלָה גַם־יָלְדָה צִיּוֹן אֶת־בָּנֶיהָ׃
הַאֲנִי אַשְׁבִּיר וְלֹא אוֹלִיד יֹאמַר יְהוָה אִם־אֲנִי הַמּוֹלִיד וְעָצַרְתִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהָיִךְ׃“Before she was in labor [terem tachil] she gave birth [yaladah]; before the pang [chevel] came to her, she delivered [vehimlitah] a male [zakhar]. Who has heard such a thing? Who has seen such things? Can a land be born [hayuchal erets] in one day? Or can a nation be brought forth [yiwwaled goy] at once? For as soon as [ki-chalah] Zion was in labor, she also brought forth [gam-yaledah] her children. Shall I bring to the point of birth and not cause to bring forth [lo olid]? says the LORD. Shall I, who cause to bring forth [ha-molid], shut the womb [ve-’atsarti]? says your God.”
The Septuagint (LXX Isaiah 66:7-9)
πρὶν ἢ τὴν ὠδίνουσαν τεκεῖν πρὶν ἐλθεῖν τὸν πόνον τῶν ὠδίνων ἐξέφυγεν καὶ ἔτεκεν ἄρσεν
τίς ἤκουσεν τοιοῦτο καὶ τίς ἑώρακεν οὕτως εἰ ὤδινεν γῆ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ μιᾷ ἢ καὶ ἐτέχθη ἔθνος εἰς ἅπαξ ὅτι ὤδινεν καὶ ἔτεκεν Σιων τὰ παιδία αὐτῆς
ἐγὼ δὲ ἔδωκα τὴν προσδοκίαν ταύτην καὶ οὐκ ἐμνήσθης μου εἶπεν κύριος οὐκ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ τικτούσης καὶ στειρὰν ἐποίησα εἶπεν ὁ θεός σου“Before the woman in labor [tēn ōdinousan] gave birth, before the pain [ponon] of the labor pains [tōn ōdinōn] came, she escaped it and gave birth to a male [arsen]. Who has heard such a thing? And who has seen thus? If the earth [gē] travailed in one day? Or was even a nation [ethnos] born at once? Because Zion travailed and gave birth to her children. But I gave this expectation and you did not remember me, says the LORD. Behold, am I not making the woman giving birth barren [steira]? said your God.”
Textual Comparison
“Before she was in labor, she gave birth” (MT) vs. “Before the woman in labor gave birth” (LXX)
The MT is more dramatic: before labor even began, she gave birth. The LXX softens this slightly by saying “before the woman in labor” (implying she was in labor, but the birth happened before the pain intensified). Most English translations follow the MT here, emphasizing the miraculous, painless delivery.“Before the pang came to her, she delivered a male” (MT and LXX agree)
Both traditions emphasize that the birth happened before the pain. This is the reversal of the normal order: usually, pain comes first, then the baby. Here, the baby comes first, and the pain never arrives (or is bypassed entirely).“Can a land be born in one day?” (MT) vs. “If the earth travailed in one day?” (LXX)
The MT uses אֶרֶץ (erets, “land/earth”) with the verb יוּחַל (yuchal, Hophal of חוּל, “to be brought forth in travail”). The LXX uses γῆ (gē, “earth”) with ὤδινεν (ōdinen, “travailed”). Both emphasize the impossibility and suddenness of this birth.“Shall I bring to the point of birth and not cause to bring forth?” (MT) vs. “Am I not making the woman giving birth barren?” (LXX)
This is confusing in the LXX. The MT is clear: God is saying, “Would I open the womb (bring labor to the point of delivery) and then not allow the birth to happen?” The answer is no—God always finishes what he starts. The LXX’s rendering is more obscure, seemingly asking if God would make a woman in labor suddenly barren (unable to deliver). Scholars generally prefer the MT here for clarity, but if we dig a little deeper this gets more interesting.If we look at the N.E.T.S. translation of the Septuagint, the text is rendered as “Was it not I who made the woman who gives birth and the one who is barren?”
See, that’s a very different image. Here, it becomes an expression of God naturally having been the one to bring about this miraculous, painless birth just as he is the one who creates barrenness in other women (or nations, as the context here seems to suggest).
Theological Implications: The Eschatological Reversal
Isaiah 66:7-9 is the climax of Isaiah’s use of the birth pang metaphor, and it inverts every element we’ve seen so far:
Isaiah 13 (Babylon): Painful labor → no birth, only destruction.
Isaiah 21 (Prophet): Painful labor → vision of judgment.
Isaiah 26 (Israel): Painful labor → wind (futility), be the traditional interpretation.
Isaiah 66 (Zion): No painful labor → miraculous birth of children, a nation, a new world.
This is the eschatological promise: when God finally acts to redeem Zion, the birth will be sudden, painless, and comprehensive. No prolonged agony. No uncertainty. Just instantaneous fruition.
What does this mean?
God’s deliverance is not like human effort. Israel labored and birthed wind (26:18). Zion, in contrast, doesn’t even labor; God causes the birth to happen effortlessly. This is grace. This is divine power. This is not earned; it’s given.
The birth of the new age will be sudden. “Can a nation be born in one day?” The answer, impossibly, is yes. When God acts, he doesn’t work incrementally. He transforms instantly. This prepares us for the New Testament idea of the Parousia: the sudden, apocalyptic arrival of God’s kingdom.
God finishes what he starts. Verse 9 is God’s rhetorical question: “Would I bring you to the point of birth and then not deliver?” The implied answer is absolutely not. If God has begun a work, he will complete it (cf. Philippians 1:6). The labor pains of history are not in vain. The birth is coming.
Zion becomes the mother of nations. The male child (זָכָר, zakhar) in verse 7 likely refers to the Messiah or to the people as a whole. But the emphasis is on Zion giving birth to children (בָּנֶיהָ, baneha, “her sons”). The restored Jerusalem becomes the mother-city from which God’s people— Jew and Gentile alike —emerge.
This is prophetic literature at its finest: the metaphor that began as a curse (Babylon writhing in terror) ends as a blessing (Zion delivering without pain). The labor pang imagery thus traces an arc from judgment → futility → eschatological hope.
Summary: Isaiah’s Trajectory
Across these four passages, Isaiah develops the birth pang metaphor with stunning sophistication:
Isaiah 13 — Gentile nations under judgment writhe like women in labor. Pain without purpose. Destruction without new life.
Isaiah 21 — The prophet himself experiences birth pangs as he sees the vision of coming judgment. He becomes a participant in history’s labor.
Isaiah 26 — Israel labors under God’s discipline but produces only wind. Futile effort. Failed labor. This is the low point. Or, in my interpretation, we could say that this is the prophetic precursor to the glory to come.
Isaiah 66 — Zion gives birth miraculously, suddenly, painlessly. God brings forth a nation in a day. The curse is reversed. The labor is over. The kingdom is born.
This is why Jesus could later say, “These are the beginning of birth pangs” (Matthew 24:8). He was invoking an entire prophetic tradition. A tradition that his disciples would have known intimately. They would have understood: if these are birth pangs, then something is being born. And if Isaiah 66 is the template, then the birth will be sudden, glorious, and divinely orchestrated.
The pain is real. But the pain has a purpose.
If you’ve found this helpful or insightful, please share it with a friend who loves Scripture as much as you do.
Coming Up Next
In Part 3 we’ll examine Jeremiah’s Intensive Use:
The Prophet of Anguish and the Saturation of Birth Pang Imagery
Jeremiah uses birth pang imagery more than any other prophet. We’ll examine how he deploys this metaphor for Judah’s judgment, for surrounding nations, and— most hauntingly —for his own prophetic experience. We’ll also begin to see how the metaphor shifts from describing national catastrophe to describing the birth of something new.
This is a paid subscriber exclusive series. By comparing the Masoretic Text and Septuagint, we’re not just studying translation differences; we’re watching how different communities of faith understood God’s word and passed it on. The LXX sometimes softens the Hebrew, sometimes sharpens it, and sometimes interprets it in ways that shaped early Christian theology. Understanding both traditions deepens our reading of Scripture and enriches our grasp of how God’s people have wrestled with these texts across millennia.
The LXX Scrolls is free to read and always will be. If this work has been worth something to you, there are a few ways to say so:
Buy the ebooks. Completed teaching series are available as polished ebooks under the Two Witnesses, One Truth series. Buying through Curios will support this work most directly but they’re also available on Amazon (and elsewhere) if you’re loyal to a particular ereader.
Become a supporter. A monthly or annual pledge through Substack helps me to bring the Septuagint to those who never knew they needed it.
Send a one-time tip. If this post has blessed you and you want to express that directly, you can Buy Me a Coffee.
Thank you for being part of this journey, your support makes this work possible.
© 2026 LXX Scrolls. All rights reserved.