What version is that Carrier ? the KJV renders it as:
Isa 26:19 Thy dead men shall live, togetherwith my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew isas the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
Which is a less obvious connection to what Paul said.
Further, the presybyterian theologian Barnes says:
But the objections to this are obvious and conclusive.
(1) this is not a quotation of that place, nor has it a "resemblance" to it, except in the word "awake."
(2) the passage in Isaiah refers to a different matter, and has a different sense altogether; see the notes on the passage.
To make it refer to those to whom the gospel comes, is most forced and unnatural.
I used Isaiah 60:1 as that is the old testament reference given with the far majority of new testament commentary I have read on that verse of Paul's. Isaiah 9:2 is another one.
Barnes himself has objections to Isaiah 60:1. I've highlighed in bold the parts where it is admitted the discrepency between the old testament quotation and new testament useage:
(1) it is "not" a quotation of that passage, and the resemblance is very remote, if it can be seen at all.
(2) "that" is addressed to the church, calling on her to let her light shine; "this," to awake and arise from the dead, with the assurance that Christ would give them light. The exhortation here is to Christians, to "avoid the vices of the pagan around them;" the exhortation in Isaiah is to the church, to "rejoice and exult" in view of the fact that the day of triumph had come, and that the pagan were to be converted, and to come in multitudes and devote themselves to God. In the "design" of the two passages there is no resemblance. Some have supposed that the words are taken from some book among the Hebrews which is now lost. Epiphanius supposed that it was a quotation from a prophecy of Elijah; Syncellus and Euthalius, from some writing of Jeremiah; Hippolytus, from the writing of some now unknown prophet. Jerome supposed it was taken from some apocryphal writings. Grotius supposes that it refers to the word "light" in Eph_5:13, and that the sense is," That light says; that is, that a man who is pervaded by that light, let him so say to another." Heumann, and after him Storr, Michaelis, and Jennings (Jewish Ant. 2:252), suppose that the reference is to a song or hymn that was sung by the early Christians, beginning in this manner, arid that the meaning is, "Wherefore, as it is said in the hymns which we sing,
‘Awake, thou that sleepest;
Arise from the dead;
Christ shall give thee light.’
Others have supposed that there is an allusion to a sentiment which prevailed among the Jews, respecting the significancy of blowing the trumpet on the first day of the month, or the feast of the new moon. Maimonides conjectures that that call of the trumpet, especially in the month Tisri, in which the great day of atonement occurred, was designed to signify a special call to repentance; meaning, "You who sleep, arouse from your slumbers; search and try yourselves; think on your Creator, repent, and attend to the salvation of the soul." "Burder," in Ros. Alt. u. neu. Morgenland, in loc. But all this is evidently conjecture. I see no evidence that Paul meant to make a quotation at all. Why may we not suppose that he speaks as an inspired man, and that he means to say, simply, that God now gives this command, or that God now speaks in this way? The sense then would be, "Be separate from sinners. Come out from among the pagan. Do not mingle with their abominations; do not name them. You are the children of light; and God says to you, awake from false security, rouse from the death of sin, and Christ shall enlighten you." Whatever be the origin of the sentiment in this verse, it is worthy of inspiration, and accords with all that is elsewhere said in the Scriptures.
(The grand objection to this view of our author is, that the apostle evidently introduces a citation. In the writings of Paul, the form διὸ λέγειdio legei is never used in any other sense. Whence then is the quotation taken? There is nothing absurd in supposing, with Scott and Guyse, that the apostle gives the general sense of the Old Testament prophecies con cerning the calling of the Gentiles. But Isa_60:1-3, bears a sufficiently close resemblance to the passage in Ephesians, to vindicate the very commonly received opinion, that the apostle quotes that prophecy, in which the subject is the increase of the Church by the accession of the pagan nations. The church is called to arise and shine, and the apostle reminds the converted Ephesians of their lofty vocation. It forms no very serious objection, that between the place in Isaiah and that in Ephesians, there are certain verbal discrepancies. No one will make much of this, who remembers, nat in a multitude of cases similar variations occur, the apostles contenting themselves with giving the sense of the places to which they refer. "Accordingly," says Dr. Dodridge, "the sense of tire passage before us is so fairly deducible from the words of Isaiah, that I do not see any necessity of having recourse to this supposition," namely, that the quotation was from an apocryphal book ascribed to Jeremiah.)
So Barnes is basically saying, "why can't Paul say what he likes, he's an inspired man!!", although Isaiah 60:1 is the closest old testament scripture we can get.
I personally believe it is inspired by the old testament scripture. If so, then this is a good example of Paul loosely quoting from old testament scripture - or perhaps not using scripture at all! Whether from old testament scripture or personal revelation as given by the Holy Spirit or otherwise, Paul declares it to be from God as he says "Wherefore he saith".
What it shows is divinely inspired men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (or otherwise) are not bound to comply with the usual contextual readings of the old testament scripture.
So , I see nothing wrong with the same being done as Joyce Meyer or other inspired people may do. Often a passage is taken out of context to prove a point, eg how to be happier, or how to have more peace etc. Sunday church pastors do it all the time as well, but I don't see anything explicitly wrong with it. I'd feel like a bit of a hypocrite if I pointed out the "out of context" flaws of inspired preachers (provided it is not clearly erroneous), while also believing the new testament to be true - which was written mostly under divine inspiration from God rather than from proper and rigid contextual interpretation of the old testament.
