"... The Septuagint rendered the Servant's 'law' (Torah) with His 'name.' This is followed by Matthew. There is no substantial difference of meaning between Servant's 'law' (Torah) and His 'name' since both of them ultimately point to the Servant Himself. The Septuagint has gOvn for tInt. In this way, the Septuagint clarifies the connotation of the term 1:3 ('islands' or 'coast lands'). B. Lindars incorrectly understands gevn of 12:21 as the result of the apologetic use of the term in the early Church. The word, according to Lindars, reflects the development of the early Church in relation to the question of the admission of the Gentiles. Lindars' view is not convincing for two reasons. First, the term in the Isaiah passage is parallel and both terms have the same connotation in the context ... In verse 21 Matthew's is a natural translation which matches well with verse 18. Secondly, the Gentile motif is expressed in the Isaiah passage in connection with the mission of Yahweh's Servant. Matthew's use in verse 21 echoes the Gentile motif of the Isaiah passage. It does not reflect the view of the early Church on the Gentile mission. R. T. France aptly remarks on the intent of Matthew's quotation of the Isaiah passage: 'the role of the Servant of Yahweh is the model for the mission of Jesus.' ..."