Q: But looking at Isaiah 11, if we agree that the exodus out of Egypt was the historical antecedant (which seems at least likely) then does it not seem reasonable to say that the contemporary audience would have been anticipating an event of a similar nature? i.e. would they not have understood Isaiah to have been saying that...

- the prophecy was literally about the literal Jewish people - the Jews would be 'sown' (placed/taken) into the actual lands mentioned (the lands still exist even if some of the nations may not)

Also, would the orignal audience have understood Isaiah to have been predicting that...

- the literal Jews would literally be taken from out of these lands and then brough back into the literal land of Israel
- the literal Jews would enjoy military victory over literal Gentile nations (btw - About the extinction of these nations - don't forget that Herod was an edomite. But even if we allow that these historic enemies of Israel were being used symbolically - is it not reasonable to suggest that Isaiah was speaking about (literal) nations who would be enemies of Israel?

Or would you say that the language Isiah uses was deliberately written in such a way so the original audience would not understanding him?

A: It is not necessary to believe that the Jews to whom the prophets spoke would have understood the prophecies correctly. In fact, among the Jews, the rabbis had quite a variety of interpretations of most of the kingdom/messiah prophecies, so that they could not all have been right—though they could all be wrong.

The woman at the well, though a Samaritan, had the correct attitude: "I know that Messiah is coming. When He comes, He will tell us all things" (John 4:25). This is true. To the crowds of Jews, Jesus spoke only in parables that they could not understand—just as they did not understand the prophecies of the Old Testament (Acts 13:27). However, "when they were alone, He explained all things to His disciples" (Mark 4:34).

God was not obligated to give an understanding of His plan to the Jews who would reject His Messiah. However, to those who received the Messiah (which all were obligated to do, but most didn't), "He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the scriptures" (Luke 24:45). This special endowment would hardly have been necessary, had the Jews in general already understood the scriptures correctly. However, according to Paul, with those Jews who reject Messiah, "the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ" (2 Cor.3:14).

It should be remembered that everything God said through the prophets was in poetry, which, in itself, indicates the need for caution in applying a literal hermeneutic. So unclear were these predictions to the average Jew that even the prophets themselves did not understand their own meaning—as Peter tells us:

"Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering..." (1 Pet.1:10-12)

Therefore, the Jews, for example, understood the prophecy about Elijah (Mal.4:5-6) to be about the literal Elijah. Jesus, by contrast, told the people, "If you are willing to receive it," John is Elijah who was predicted to come (Matt.11:14). Why would they not be willing to receive it? Because it was a spiritual truth, and the natural man does not receive such things.

When we study the way in which the New Testament writers (spiritual men) interpreted Old Testament scriptures, we will find that they always spiritualized the kingdom texts that the Jews and the dispensationalists insist on taking literally. The disciples were "willing to receive" the spiritual fulfillment—most of the Jews (and the dispensationalists) clearly were not.

The spiritual deliverance of the Messiah, seen as the antitype of the original exodus, is not an uncommon theme of the prophets, nor of the New Testament. The sixth lecture inthe "Topical Look at Isaiah" series (available Here) covers this subject in more detail than I can do here.